Hamas Says It Has Halted Rocket Strikes on Israel

[Fozzledick]

By TAGHREED EL-KHODARY and ETHAN BRONNER
Published: May 4, 2009

DAMASCUS, Syria — The leader of the militant Palestinian group Hamas said Monday that its fighters had stopped firing rockets at Israel for now. He also reached out in a limited way to the Obama administration and others in the West, saying the movement was seeking a state only in the areas Israel won in 1967.

“I promise the American administration and the international community that we will be part of the solution, period,” the leader, Khaled Meshal, said during a five-hour interview with The New York Times spread over two days in his home office here in the Syrian capital.

Speaking in Arabic in a house heavily guarded by Syrian and Palestinian security agents, Mr. Meshal, 53, gave off an air of serene self-confidence, having been re-elected a fourth time to four-year term as the leader of the Hamas political bureau, the top position in the movement. His conciliation went only so far, however. He repeated that he would not recognize Israel, saying to fellow Arab leaders, “There is only one enemy in the region, and that is Israel.”

But he urged outsiders to ignore the Hamas charter, which calls for the obliteration of Israel through jihad and cites as fact the infamous anti-Semitic forgery, “The Protocols of the Elders of Zion.” Mr. Meshal did not offer to revoke the charter, but said it was 20 years old, adding, “We are shaped by our experiences.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/05/world/middleeast/05meshal.html?em

Interesting assortment of mixed messages...

[Duckhunter935]

1. That is one step

Now Isreal and the other Arab states should allow more aid in. It would be nice if it lasts, but I have my doubts.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

2. Let see how long it last and how long before they change their charter

[ProgressiveMuslim]

4. In the interview Meshal is clear they don't view is as a working document.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

7. Then it should be a trivial exercise to change it

[ProgressiveMuslim]

9. I don't think Hamas is interested in jumping through hoops.

Anyway, what counts is actions. Israel has no charter per se, but they recently massacred 1400+ people, 900+ of whome were civilians.

Actions speak a lot louder than charters, don't you think?

[ProgressiveProfessor]

10. No they are not. The destruction of anything that does not meet their islamic world view is

much more important to them. Hamas has been putting pressure on non-muslims to leave Gaza, while torturing and killing its political opponents. Their actions make clear that they are living to their charter, Meshal's denials not withstanding.

Israel has a constitution and the rest of the legal niceties that make them a nation. Hamas is an illegal militia with no standing and is certainly not a national government.

In the NYT article Meshal basically states that Hamas promises not to attack Israel for decade if it retreats to 1967 borders and and is flooded itself with returning refugees. Not going to happen and Meshal knows it. The interview was a political event and expresses nothing new. Just more gamesmanship in a region plagued by it on both sides.

[ProgressiveMuslim]

15. Pressuring non-Muslims to leave Gaza? Really? Here's a newsflash: Gaza

is sealed up tighter than a drum.

[Idealism]

47. Professor, Israel does not have a constitution

They have Basic Laws, but they are not written down anywhere and are not called a constitution anywhere.

And for the record, "Islamic worldview" is not what Hamas has. Islam is a beautiful religion that, like every religion, has been perverted and twisted by man. They have a self-serving worldview with similarities to conservative Islamic law only when it suits them.

[Sezu]

11. But they won't. Cake and eat it too syndrome. n/t

[shaayecanaan]

27. Then it should be a trivial exercise to amend the Likud charter

which calls for the annexation of the West Bank and Gaza and the destruction of Palestine.

[Ken Burch]

99. There's no reason to obsess about the charter.

Israel isn't going to be destroyed anyway.

[shira]

111. "Israel isn't going to be destroyed anyway"

Right, and if Mexico and Canada lobbed "toy rockets" and firecrackers over the border, making life miserable for millions of Americans - that too would not destroy America. It would make life miserable and intolerable - very bad - but, oh well. :shrug:

[shira]

3. a 5 hour interview and this is it? wonder if the transcript is available

This was mildly interesting:

"On the two-state solution sought by the Americans, he said: “We are with a state on the 1967 borders, based on a long-term truce. This includes East Jerusalem, the dismantling of settlements and the right of return of the Palestinian refugees.” Asked what “long-term” meant, he said 10 years."

In other words, no deal.

[rateyes]

6. How about 1967 borders, including East Jerusalem,

the dismantling of settlements, and a right of return, FOREVER. Would that be a deal you would make?

[ProgressiveProfessor]

8. How about the original UN mandate? The ones before Arab armies launched an occupation?

[rateyes]

12. I asked first. And,

since the hell WHEN has Israel paid any attention to UN resolutions? And, Arabs aren't the occupiers.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

14. Israel has been holding the lands in the original mandate much longer than the Arab occupiers

They have a better claim than Jordan and Egypt

[rateyes]

17. Bullshit. nt

[ProgressiveProfessor]

19. How so? They were taken in the 1948 war and retaken in 1967.

Some of this is devils advocacy on my part, but the question is legitimate

[rateyes]

21. Israelos are the occupiers of Palestine, not the other way around. nt

[ProgressiveProfessor]

24. Based on the Post WWII mandate, its the other way around.

[Douglas Carpenter]

30. is this what you are referring to by the " post Word War II Mandate "?

I have never heard that expression before, but perhaps this might be what you construed others were talking about during some discussions.



http://www.mideastweb.org/unpartition.htm

[rateyes]

34. What the hell are you talking about?

The proposed areas to become an Israeli state and an Arab state? If so, how the hell can anyone look at that map and say Arabs are the occupiers? :wtf:

[Lithos]

26. Interesting

Your statement reads more like it would come from 1648 than post 1948. One of the major lacking points of the Westphalian notion of sovereignty is what to do with the idea of failed-nation states for which Afghanistan, Somalia and Palestine certainly qualify. Just because there was no sovereign Palestinian nation does not automatically create a vacuum which justifies absorption by an Israeli nation. The same reason why Israel is justified to have an existence separate from that of Palestine also protects Palestine's right to be separate from Israel. Might does not make right.

L-

[Douglas Carpenter]

16. I cannot even imagine what on earth you are talking about

I am certain that even the most strident but still legitimate and credible pro-Israeli scholars would find your statements absolutely bizarre.

First of all Transjordan was formed in 1922..under Emir Abdullah and had been only nominally under the British Mandate of Palestine for less than two years from 1920 when the Mandate was established by the League of Nations until 1922 when Tranjordan was established.

Only the area immediately around the East Bank of the Jordan river would have ever been considered by historians as part of ancient or biblical Palestine; certainly not the vast dessert region than makes up the vast majority of what become Transjordan and later Jordan. Although the majority of Jordanian citizens of today came from or descended from those who came from what now comprises Israel, and the Occupied Palestinian Territories of the West Bank ...within Jordan - Jordanians and Palestinians consider themselves and have always considered themselves a different people with pronounced differences in culture, identity and political perspective.



Even the 1916 Sykes-Picot agreement had Jordan/Transjordan totally separate from what now comprises Israel and the West Bank:



http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/spl/hi/middle_east/03/v3_israel_palestinians/maps/html/british_control.stm

==============================================================

Regarding the notion put forward by some that the British Mandate had already been partitioned in 1922...allow me to quote Professor Bernard Wasserstein, University of Chicago Professor of History specializing in Israeli history:

"Palestine, therefore, was not partitioned in 1921-2. Transjordan was not excised but, on the contrary added to the mandatory area. Zionism was barred from seeking to expand there -- but the Balfour Declaration had never previously applied to the area east of the Jordan. Why is this important? Because the myth of Palestine's "first partition" has become part of the concept of "Greater Israel" and the ideology of Jabotinsky's Revisionist Zionist movement. Long after the establishment of Israel, the Revisionists' political heirs, the Herut Party (core elements in what became Likud) led by Manahem Begin, still dreamed of a Jewish state the would include Transjordan. Their catch-phrase was "The Jordan has two banks: one is ours and the other too. Most Revisionist conveniently forgot that their ideological hero, Jabotinsky, had, as a member of the Zionist Executive, endorsed the arrangements in 1922 that explicitly prohibited settlement in Transjordan. More recently, advocates of Israeli annexation of the West Bank have asserted the proper home of Palestinian Arabs is in Transjordan: hence the slogan "Jordan is Palestine".

The creation of Transjordan, then has nothing to do with the partition, properly understood, save for the purposes of some propagandist."

from page 105 (bottom) to page 106 of "Israelis and Palestinians: Why Do They Fight? Can They Stop?"

Amazon link:

http://www.amazon.com/Israelis-Palestinians-They-Fight-Second/dp/0300105975/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/102-8701952-4352901?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1174895894&sr=1-1

=======================================================

from:

Fred M. Donner
Professor of Near Eastern History
The Oriental Institute
The University of Chicago
Chicago, Ill.

link:

http://www.princeton.edu/~paw/web_exclusives/more/more_letters/letters_doran.html

The population of Palestine (west of the Jordan river) in 1880 was under 590,000, of whom 96 percent were Arabs (Muslim or Christian); roughly 4 percent of the population was Jewish.

By 1914, the population of Palestine was about 650,000. Of this, the Jewish population was about 80,000, or a little over 12 percent. Of the 88 percent remaining, 570,000 people, Israeli and non-Israeli scholars estimate that at least 550,000 were Palestinians (Christian or Muslim) who were descendants of families in Palestine already in the 1840s — or almost 85 percent of the total 1914 populaton of Palestine. The great majority of them, in other words, were not recent immigrants.

There was a lot of immigration to Palestine between 1880 and 1948, of course, but most of it was by European Jews, who came in several well-defined aliyot ("waves"), drawn to Palestine by the Zionist dream or fleeing economic hardship and persecution in Europe. The first aliya (up to 1903) brought 25,000 new Jewish immigrants, roughly doubling the Jewish population of Palestine.

The second aliya (1904-1913) brought another 35,000 Jews. The third aliya (1919-1939) saw the arrival of 350,664 Jewish immigrants, according to British Mandate statistics.

In 1945, the Jewish population of Palestine stood at about 554,000, or about 30.6 percent of the total population of Palestine at that time, which was 1.8 million. Mr. Schell is absolutely right: Some Jewish communities have existed in Palestine for hundreds of years. But, as the figures above make clear, most Jews in Israel today are, in relative terms, newcomers — descendants of people who arrived during the past three or four generations; to call them "colonists," as Professor Doran did, is not inappropriate.

On the other hand, Mr. Schell is absolutely wrong to hint that Palestinians are generally newcomers: As we see, most Palestinians of today can trace their ancestry to families who have been resident in Palestine for hundreds of years. The debate over immigration figures is, of course, merely part of the broader effort by Palestinians and Israelis to delegitimize each other by claiming the other side to be interlopers. Mr. Schell's evident desire to cast doubt on the historical roots of the Palestinians' claim to their land suggests that he has been taken in, like many other people, by such works as Joan Peters's tract "From Time Immemorial," which popularized for obvious political purposes the myth that many Palestinians were descendants of recent immigrants.Such a view is simply not supported by the evidence. "

[shaayecanaan]

28. Moreover, he appears to indicate in his signature that he is some sort of academic...

Hopefully that means he is teaching hamburgerology at Ronald McDonald's university; if not academic standards have fallen further than I thought.

[Douglas Carpenter]

29. it would be hard to imagine even the most pro-Israeli true-believer who has

done any credible study on the subject from making such claims. Although, I have seen such things on the Internet but only on the absolute fringe - stuff that even that would make even the most gung-ho, but literate Zionist blush.

One thing about the Internet is that one can create almost any alter-ego they want and for a short time live the fantasy of what they have always dreamed of being instead of what they actually are down on planet earth. I've even thought of doing it myself. But, I'm just not a very good liar and as we see, almost all of those who try to play that game pretty much let their mask slip once they get in too deep.

[shaayecanaan]

46. I've learned to not care...

If someone posts something meritorious, then good on them, whether they're a garbage collector or the Archbishop of Canterbury (or pretending to be).

[ProgressiveMuslim]

22. What in the hell are you talking about? Is that like my saying when "The Jews" took over Palestine?

You need to clarify exactly what you mean. Who are the "Arabs" to whom you're referring?

It is so disengenuous and frustrating when posters like you put CHUM out there that is absurd and ridiculous.

You can chum all the shit you want. The bottom line is that YOUR leadership isn't the slightest bit interested in even talking about a solution to this problem. They aren't even the slightest bit bothered by the system of Apartheid they have erected to make virtual lords of the scum that are the West Bank settlers, or by the wanton massacre of civilians under their dominion.

Your leadership has been exposed. Anyone with 2 eyes can see it. Obama can see it. Rahm Emanuel can see it. It's actually pretty sadly pathetic.

We all know who wants peace and it sure as hell isn't Bibi Netanyahu, or the people who elected him.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

25. My leadership?

I am not Jewish nor Israeli.

[ProgressiveMuslim]

31. Care to address the substance?

The leaders of the nation you so clearly wholeheartedly support.

[shira]

13. no deal

the right of return is a dealbreaker in itself, creating what will clearly become a binational (not Jewish) state and therefore the end of Israel. Think Lebanon, but worse.

[rateyes]

18. That's what I figured. Israel stole Palestinian homes, built by Palestinian

hands, and Israel doesn't want to give back what they stole.

That's what I figured I would hear from you.

IOW, NO JUSTICE.

[shira]

23. you don't understand

It's not just about an exchange of land for peace. Palestinians must choose between right of return or 2 separate states. They can't have both, meaning that by eventually flooding Israel with millions of Palestinians they will get Gaza, the West Bank, and ultimately Israel as well.

[rateyes]

33. I do understand. Israel wants to keep the homes that it stole from Palestinians.

You forget that I'm not in favor of a "Jewish State of Israel." I'm in favor of a "Secular State of Israel." Neither am I in favor of a "Muslim State of Palestine." I'm in favor of a "Secular State of Palestine."

The best thing that could happen, IMO, is ONE STATE with Jews and Muslims and Christians and Atheists, etc. living together in peace in Israel-Palestine, or Palestine-Israel.

The pragmatist in me, however, realizes that will not happen. Therefore, I'm HOPING for a two-state solution where the secular state of Israel lives in peace with the secular state of Palestine. Justice requires, IMO, that SOME KIND of restitution/reparations be made by Israel for Palestinian refugees who were forced out of their homes prior to Israel's declaration of independence, and the war that followed. They should at least be free to meet up with their families in the new Palestine, and be given enough money to build homes in the new Palestine.

Israel needs to cede East Jerusalem to Palestine as a capital city, needs to rebuild the Palestinian homes they bulldozed there, tear down the wall, make reparations for destroying olive groves, etc. Leave the settlements in occupied Palestine, and give those homes to Palestinians (not tear them down, as part of reparations), leave Palestine, and end blockades.

Palestine needs, once Israel agrees to the plan above, put down their weapons and pick up their gardening tools.

I see Israel as the agressor in this fight, not the defenders. Israel needs to comply with UN resolutions, and the USA shouldn't lend financial aid to Israel until it does.

[pelsar]

37. sorry to disappoint..

national sucide isnt in the cards for israel...granted for some that would be "justice"....however for many israelis, its doesnt work that well.....btw, guess you dont know, but the PA is not about a secular state...its about a muslim state.


another fun fact....those Palestinians?.....many many are immigrants from the 1920's.....(psst after the jews starting developing the land, they came for work being offered)

another one?....attacking in 48 was a dumb idea, and the arabs that stayed, poll after poll has made it clear that there is no way they would move to a Palestine...and heres the kicker..its includes the arabs in East Jerusalem.

now are you going to claim that the arabs in E. Jerusalem should be forced to leave a democracy to live in a non democracy?, where civil rights are non existent? (very progressive of you)

[Douglas Carpenter]

38. no there is no evidence that a major portion of the Palestinians arrived only in the 1920's

that nonsense was dismissed by all credible scholars including Israeli scholars years ago. This outrageous claim appeared briefly in the mid 1980's when popularized by a book by Joan Peter's "From Time Immemorial" which is now acknowledged by even the most strident pro-Israeli scholars to have been pure fraud and fakery. It's shocking to see anyone bring that ludicrous crap up - in this day and age.

On the other hand, Mr. Schell is absolutely wrong to hint that Palestinians are generally newcomers: As we see, most Palestinians of today can trace their ancestry to families who have been resident in Palestine for hundreds of years. The debate over immigration figures is, of course, merely part of the broader effort by Palestinians and Israelis to delegitimize each other by claiming the other side to be interlopers. Mr. Schell's evident desire to cast doubt on the historical roots of the Palestinians' claim to their land suggests that he has been taken in, like many other people, by such works as Joan Peters's tract "From Time Immemorial," which popularized for obvious political purposes the myth that many Palestinians were descendants of recent immigrants.Such a view is simply not supported by the evidence. "
from:

Fred M. Donner
Professor of Near Eastern History
The Oriental Institute
The University of Chicago
Chicago, Ill.
http://www.princeton.edu/~paw/web_exclusives/more/more_letters/letters_doran.html

To call a PA state a Muslim state is simply nonsense.

There is not going to be a two-state peace settlement without East Jerusalem under Palestinian sovereignty. The Palestinians of East Jerusalem certainly don't believe that they have democratic rights under the current situation, they are being pushed out according to every credible human rights organization and I don't think there is any serious doubt how East Jerusalem Palestinians would vote on the issue if given a choice.

To insist on keeping East Jerusalem in Israel is to advocate for a single-state. Everyone knows this.

I do agree that if one supports a two-state solution a compromise on the Right of Return will be as necessary as Palestinian sovereignty over Arab East Jerusalem and a mutually-agreeable arrangement on the Old City.

[pelsar]

39. didnt say major...did i?

dont be shocked...just come and visit the arab village jessa el zarka (near zichron yaacov)....immigrants from sudan.....for one example (got more if you want)

as far as East Jerusalem goes...your right, there is little doubt that most would vote to stay in israel, where they have far more rights, health care etc then they would under the Pa...so the question that comes up:

why would a progressive go against the will of the "people"? (this question has nothing to do with the larger political question-its the principle that nationalism is far more important than individual civil rights)

[Douglas Carpenter]

40. I trust you realize that you are advocating for a single or binational state solution.

It is simply not true that the arrangement that the Palestinians of East Jerusalem are living under can be called democracy.

I certainly see no evidence that East Jerusalem Arabs don't want East Jerusalem as the capital of a Palestinian state in a two-state solution. This position is virtually universal among all Palestinians, all Arabs and All Muslims. There will not be a two-state solution without East Jerusalem as the capital of Palestine. That is absolutely impossible.

There might be a bi-national state solution that keeps Jerusalem under Israeli sovereignty - if certain assumptions about the nature of the state were to change.

Yes there are some Palestinians whose family came relatively recently, but they are not a major portion. Every one acknowledges this.

[pelsar]

41. i'm just arguing the concept first....

I wont argue that arab residents in E. Jersualem have the same rights as an arab israeli, druz israeli, etc Its obvious they dont...but they've got a lot more than a Palestinian living under the PA....And i do think that it should be acknowledged that the accepted solutions require that the arabs of E.Jerusalem, without even asking them, give up some of the most basic civil rights (like freedom of speech for one....) for the "greater good" of primitive nationalism.

its just strikes me as the very opposite of what a "progressive" is suppose to stand for.....you know, individual civil rights....

(and you know as well as i that the census of the 1920s was a real mess, with nothing being accurate, but that there was definitely arabs immigrating to work-who are now part of the "indigenous people".....)

[Douglas Carpenter]

42. primitive nationalism? Is Avigdor Lieberman representive of a more sophisticated nationalism?

He is after all the Israeli Foreign Minister.

Are we now dealing with the advanced nationalism of a country that just elected the most nationalistic government in its history - where more than half the Knesset seats were won by a combination of secular and religious ultra-nationalist? More thinly (or not so thinly) veiled racism?

Of course East Jerusalem Arabs want Jerusalem as the capital of a free and independent Palestine if the two-state solution were to be realized. No one seriously denies this anymore than anyone seriously believes a two-state solution is possible without Jerusalem.

If one is advocating a single or binational state solutions, then discussions about the political status of the city change.

I know Palestinians who are fighting desperately to stay and keep their families in the Gulf states. Not because the Gulf states give them democracy or human rights, but because they are dealing with economic survival.

[pelsar]

48. dp

[pelsar]

49. keep to the subject.....

i didnt mention Lieberman...back to the subject matter

at what cost for the arabs of e.jerusalem?

Of course East Jerusalem Arabs want Jerusalem as the capital of a free and independent Palestine

since all signs (historical and present) point to a independent Palestine NOT being one that respects civil rights, freedom of speech etc, but one of religion and "pseudo democracy" why should people be forced to live in such a place for "political expediency"

i am not advocating a single or binational state at this point, just the principle of removing peoples civil rights for a nationalistic cause.....you have no problem with this?

_____

people move/stay in places for reasons in the following order (forget where i read it, a couple of years ago)
personal security
economic security
nationalism
better living conditions
.....

E. Jerusalem under israel offers the residents the first 2 over the PA

[Douglas Carpenter]

53. you're the one that brought up the racist slur "primitive nationalism"

as if Israeli nationalism as evidenced by avowed racist winning elections and in charge of much of the leadership is somehow or other superior.

The Israeli state mechanism have not allowed the Palestinians to develop independent economic viability with unimpeded movement of personal, goods and services thus the political viability that goes along with it.

They have some work to do on developing their statecraft and appropriate respect for civil liberties - in spite of countless obstacles - but it is simply not true that and only a crass bigoted assumption that they cannot or will not do it. However, making the territories economically nonviable certainly makes a functioning civil society far less likely.

This is simple reality that you are supporting by default a single state solution by opposing any possibility of a two-state solution. 2-1=1.

[pelsar]

62. nationalism is now a racist slur?

i just think (and i thought it was part of the progressive ideal) that nationalism is a primitive form of identity. Which in fact i agree with. It doesnt matter who is being nationalistic: americans, russians, Palestinians, israelis, thais, etc

and its a shame when it shows its ugly face when peoples rights have to be restricted because of it.... reguardless of the nationality

and its worse when a group that has some of those rights has to then lose them to fill out some other dream of nationalism.....

[ProgressiveMuslim]

74. What's ugly is your use of the word "primitive."

I suppose one could have called shtetl communities primitive too. Do you mean it in that sense?

[pelsar]

80. pretty much....

i think the whole idea of nationalism, football game identities, local communities identities, religion is the core of so many conflicts.....i also think we're 'hard wired" for those identities so its impossible to escape them

but i still think its part of the primitive part of the human being make up...

[ProgressiveMuslim]

95. So you'd have no problem with a secular democratic nation for all?

Actually, it's weird that you have no group identification. How come?

While I don't have an american flag flying, I certainly love my Philadelphia sports teams and took great pleasure in celebrating our World Series victory this year. Similarly, I have groups of girl friends, HS friends, College Friends, grad school friends, etc...

Not every group is negative, and it's not primitive to be part of a community.

Were you outcast or something as a kid?

[pelsar]

117. i do have group identification...

and its pretty strong on multiple levels...i also recognize that human need for it as a major block in "world peace".

I have no problem at all in a secular democracy.....but reality says it wont be happening in the near future......and that should be obvious to those who are familiar with the "players"

All of those benign identities have within them a 'seed" for violence/fanaticism....soccer games fans? and those real loners who actually dont have some kind of group identity really are problematic and dangerous...hence the conclusion that we are hard wired for it-but it remains a primitive need that causes separation, competition (good) and lots of friction.

Nationalim is probably the worst, add to that religion and you get a very nasty combination as per your opinion that "any goes" in attacking israel-morality, any morality " goes out the door" with that combo.

[Ken Burch]

113. Palestinians do not HAVE to be restricted.

It's the restrictions they live under that provoke the violent resistance. Simply cause-and-effect.

[Vegasaurus]

118. Really?

Why then, the terrorism before there were walls and checkpoints?

Why the Palestinian violence towards Jews, before there was ever a state of Israel?

Your argument is just as specious as the "we'll all live happily ever after when Israel ends the occupation", when Hamas has clearly stated that there will be no end to violent resistance until there is no more Israel.

[Ken Burch]

123. There was violence before the state because there was a land war before the state

The Palestinians knew they were at risk of dispossession. They knew they were at risk of being driven out of their homes. Look at how the Vietcong fought to see how people fight in such circumstances.

And there was what you call terrorism(btw, what was done was not something I approved of, ever) because there was an occupation and because the illegal settlements were being built. Sharon knew he'd provoke terrorism by creating the settler movement, just as he knew the Falangist militia in Lebanon wanted permission to go into Sabra and Shatila because they intended to massacre innocent Palestinian refugees.

Your argument is "there can NEVER EVER be peace, so the world is obligated to support the Israelis in keeping the Palestinians powerless, and anyone who disagrees with this is the moral equivalent of a Nazi".

That is a life-hating point of view and it is a view that neither solves anything nor protects anyone.

The Palestinians are not soulless monsters. They don't live only to kill. They want a life and they want hope, like anyone else.
What's the harm in letting them have that? Israel has gained nothing by grinding them down in the dirt.

[shira]

119. Stop twisting this, Ken

Israel's enemy is not the Palestinian people.

You should type that out 1000 times.

Israel's enemies are state-sponsors of Jihad and oppression like Iran and Saudi Arabia, and their hateful Western backers who would have gladly assisted the Nazi SS troops in the camps. While there ARE many Palestinians who are also like the aforementioned haters and racists, most Palestinians are women and children who are NOT like that and who are victims of this regressive mentality.

The point being, violent resistance against Jews was a fact of life WAY before the Jewish state was declared in 1948. Also WAY before occupation in 1967.

Again, to Iran, Saudi Arabia, and like-minded local governments Israel is a religious blasphemy. There can be no happy 2-state solution for Hezbollah or Hamas. At best they'll agree to a 10 year truce after Israel makes itself basically defenseless. Before 1948, this same type of leadership wanted NO jewish state at all. This was the case in 1967. It's STILL the case and has NEVER changed, Ken. It won't change even AFTER Israel at some point in the future retreats behind 1967 lines. It won't change because stupid and/or hateful Westerners think that jihadi extremist groups like Hamas and Hezbollah are great organizations who only want to give peace a chance. Taliban, no. Hamas and Hezbollah, yes. It's insanity, Ken.

Oh yeah, you listen to what they say in ENGLISH, don't you? Do you realize what they say to their own people in ARABIC? If they all care so much for Palestinians, why is there still a refugee problem, Ken? What are Arab leaders doing to get ready for an eventual, peaceful 2-state solution? How will they absorb all the refugees? Not just Arab leaders. Palestinian leaders are in no hurry to end the refugee problem within their own borders.

Iranian, Syrian, and Saudi leadership is truly no different today than 60 years ago. Hamas and Hezbollah sure aren't. Pretend all you want that they are and keep telling yourself it's the Jews who are mostly to blame if that makes you sleep better at night. But realize most Israelis, even most liberal Israelis, cannot take people who have views like you seriously. Must be because they're not "decent" Jewish liberals, huh? Maybe they know some things you don't.

[Ken Burch]

121. Again, if the Palestinian people aren't you're enemy, stop oppressing THEM

Saudi Arabia and Iran wouldn't have any influence if the Occupation weren't still in place. Those you call terrorists can do everything now that they could do in an independent state, so maintaining the Occupation and maintaining the siege of Gaza don't help anything.

Your worldview is basically that peace can never happen and that the Palestinians, the people you say aren't the ones the Israeli government is fighting against, must eternally be punished for the actions of larger, outside forces. This, itself, is a death-loving and anti-humanist way of looking at things.

The truth is, the situation can only be resolved by letting the Palestinians have all the West Bank and Gaza, with East Jerusalem as the capital, with APOLOGIES and compensation to those driven out in 1948. This would give life a chance. There's no chance in simply keeping things as they are. And no one who calls for keeping things as they are has any right to say they want peace. There's nothing positive whatsoever in the status quo. It oppresses Palestinians(the ones you say Israel ISN'T fighting against)and it morally degrades Israelis. If Israel itself is going to go on on the path it it currently on, going ever more right-wing, ever more militarist, ever more paranoid and hate-driven, would it really be worth saving? A place like that couldn't even meet the standard of being a place of refuge, because a place like that can't offer safety.

[shira]

126. Palestinian leadership isn't likely to fall in line, Ken

History doesn't confirm your view that 'if only' Israel retreats behind 1967 lines, etc.

If you care for Palestinians like you say you do, then tell me how Israel retreating behind 1967 lines helps - when Hamas and Hezbollah will just use that opportunity to launch more attacks so that there will be more Lebanon 2006's and OCL 2009's in the future? Is that what you want for Palestinians? Is that BETTER than the status quo? Because if you think OCL 2009 was bad based on a few "firecrackers" touching down on Sderot, imagine the repurcussions based on Tel Aviv and Jerusalem taking similar hits. And you think this will be "good" for Palestinians?

[Ken Burch]

147. It's better because it gives the Palestinians the chance to have a life

It gives them the chance to breathe. There's the possibility of improving their conditions and changing the internal dynamic within Palestinian society. People with something to live for are much more likely to value life than death. People can't be expected to value life if they aren't allowed to have one, and no one can have a life under the Occupation. Dignity, creativity, fulfillment, all are impossible when there are soldiers patrolling your streets and you can't even count on being able to get to a hospital in time if you're sick or injured(or wounded).

It's always more effective, if the goal is to create a peace-and life-affirming climate to let a people around them live on their own terms rather than under rigid restriction. Only when people have self-determination can the world expect morality from them.

One of the most insulting things has been people raising the question of why there hasn't been a "Palestinian Gandhi". Look, I'd have liked to see a Palestinian Gandhi(to say nothing of an Irish Gandhi, an American Gandhi and as many other Gandhis as you could think of) as much as anyone else would. But the emergence of such a figure requires an oppressor that at least behaves with the decency of the British Empire, which shouldn't be saying much but in this case it is. A Gandhi can't emerge in a land of home demolitions, checkpoints, and the completely unjustified destruction of olive groves.

BTW, there was a guy who tried to lead nonviolent resistance in Palestine, His name is Mubarak al-Awad. THE Israeli government kicked him out of Palestine. Will you agree that there was no excuse for that to be done?

And, as I've repeatedly asked you but you've repeatedly not answered, why do you defend keeping the misery and oppression in place on the backs of Palestinians when you KNOW that there's no possible way that this can result in a change in "the Palestinian leadership"?
History has shown that subjugation never changes the Palestinians(and seldom if ever changes anyone else)for the better.

Why defend something that hasn't work and thus never can work?

What security is there in the status quo? What possible hope is there in delay? What sanity could there be in continuing to build settlements?

If you proceed(as the Israeli governnent does) from the assumption that the Palestinians must be treated inhumanely because they are, alone among the world's peoples, somehow constitutionally incapable of demonstrating humanity, you will guarantee that they DON'T demonstrate it. What's so hard to understand about that, shira?

[IndianaGreen]

122. If "Israel's enemy is not the Palestinian people," why does Israel oppress them?

Why demolish their homes in East Jerusalem? Why drive them out of their homes much as Jews were driven out of Spain during the Reconquista?

[ProgressiveMuslim]

44. Is the East Jerusalem huwiyya more valuable than the WB huwiyya?

For sure. Easier traveling. Less hassle. Some benefits like healthcare.

[pelsar]

50. you forgot..

free speech, right to protest, sell ones property to whomever they want, right to sue the govt, etc (and a few other "details" that you wont find within the PA or hama governments.....)

[Douglas Carpenter]

54. oh for crying out loud!!

Arabs in East Jerusalem do not have rights and freedom!! That is pure nonsense and you know it!! Can you even imagine the concept of honesty?

They are allowed by Israeli state greater freedom of movement than those in the West Bank or the Gaza.

[pelsar]

61. dont know a whole lot?

are you actually claiming that freedom of speech is the same for an arab of E. Jerusalem and that of Ramallah?
(of course you do know that arabs of E.Jerusalem have the right to choose or not choose israeli citizenship.....or perhaps you dont know such a basic fact of the conflict?)

lets start with that.....

[Douglas Carpenter]

66. anyone who thinks there is even a remote possibility of a two-state solution without a Palestinian

capital in East Jerusalem - certainly don't know anything whatsoever about the conflict.

Yes of course I know that the vast majority of East Jerusalem Arabs have chosen not to have Israeli citizenship.

If you are serious about what you appear to be arguing - then you know so little about the conflict, you really need to learn some basics.

But frankly I have trouble believing that you or anyone on this forum or anyone with even the most basic understanding of the issues doesn't know and know for an absolute certainty and beyond the faintest shadow of a doubt that attempting to take Jerusalem off the table is a cynical attempt to torpedo any remote plausibility of a two-state solution.

It is absolutely impossible to even take a cursory glance at the issues involved and not understand the centrality of Jerusalem for both sides.

Who has more freedom, a Palestinian in East Jerusalem or a Palestinian in Ramallah? That would be hard to say, it depends. An East Jerusalem Palestinian certainly has more freedom of movement - because the Israeli state allows them more freedom of movement. They have access to better health care and a stronger economy. But there no reason to believe that with an East Jerusalem as the Palestinian capital with unimpeded access cannot and will bring an independent economic renaissance of its own.

But you seem to be supporting a single state solution, at least by default. In principle I agree. I just consider the two-state solution more pragmatic. Be careful what you wish for is all I would say.

BTW: with all do respect I have now put you on ignore. I find you obnoxious, offensive, ignorant and deeply - deeply bigoted - and by your own admission prone toward violence. You are only the third person I have ever done that for in all my years and thousands and thousands of post on DU.

[pelsar]

67. actually i just support civil rights....

i think the whole idea of taking away the civil rights of the arabs in E.Jerusalem so that a different color flag can fly over the city is absurd. As far as being pragmatic, i am very realistic and realize that the arabs of E.Jerusalem may simply become victims once again of the arabs and "progressives" lack of interest in civil rights etc......

and it should be recognized as such....civil rights of the individual taking a back seat to Palestinian nationalism.....

____

btw i hadnt realized that i have admitted to be "prone to violence"....nor that i am deeply deeply bigoted...i'm impressed that you got so much of my psychology so quickly..but it does point to your lack of tolerance.....but thats just an impression on my part.

[Douglas Carpenter]

69. for those who DO support peace between the Israelis and the Palestinians

here is a proposal that was part of the Geneva initiative on how the Jerusalem issue might be settled.

It is absolutely true that Jerusalem is one of the hardest areas to find compromise. To oppose a compromise on Jerusalem is to oppose the two-state solution; period! It is a simple reality that no Arab leader will ever in a thousand years agree to a settlement that does does not deal with Jerusalem and the Old City. Everyone knows this. Those who want to take Jerusalem and the Old City off the table are simply playing games and trying to find a cynical way to reject the two-state solution without directly saying so. I have no interest whatsoever in arguing with those on either side who are desparately trying to torpedo even the possibility of peace.

Still the Geneva Initiative has come up with something that sounds reasonably workable:

http://www.geneva-accord.org/mainmenu/english

Geneva Initiative - Article 6 – Jerusalem

Religious and Cultural Significance:

The Parties recognize the universal historic, religious, spiritual, and cultural significance of Jerusalem and its holiness enshrined in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. In recognition of this status, the Parties reaffirm their commitment to safeguard the character, holiness, and freedom of worship in the city and to respect the existing division of administrative functions and traditional practices between different denominations.

The Parties shall establish an inter-faith body consisting of representatives of the three monotheistic faiths, to act as a consultative body to the Parties on matters related to the city’s religious significance and to promote inter-religious understanding and dialogue. The composition, procedures, and modalities for this body are set forth in Annex X.

Capital of Two States

The Parties shall have their mutually recognized capitals in the areas of Jerusalem under their respective sovereignty.

Sovereignty

Sovereignty in Jerusalem shall be in accordance with attached Map 2. This shall not prejudice nor be prejudiced by the arrangements set forth below.

Border Regime:

The border regime shall be designed according to the provisions of Article 11, and taking into account the specific needs of Jerusalem (e.g., movement of tourists and intensity of border crossing use including provisions for Jerusalemites) and the provisions of this Article.

al-Haram al-Sharif/ Temple Mount (Compound)

International Group

An International Group, composed of the IVG and other parties to be agreed upon by the Parties, including members of the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), shall hereby be established to monitor, verify, and assist in the implementation of this clause.

For this purpose, the International Group shall establish a Multinational Presence on the Compound, the composition, structure, mandate and functions of which are set forth in Annex X.

The Multinational Presence shall have specialized detachments dealing with security and conservation. The Multinational Presence shall make periodic conservation and security reports to the International Group. These reports shall be made public.

The Multinational Presence shall strive to immediately resolve any problems arising and may refer any unresolved disputes to the International Group that will function in accordance with Article 16.

The Parties may at any time request clarifications or submit complaints to the International Group which shall be promptly investigated and acted upon.

The International Group shall draw up rules and regulations to maintain security on and conservation of the Compound. These shall include lists of the weapons and equipment permitted on the site.

Regulations Regarding the Compound

In view of the sanctity of the Compound, and in light of the unique religious and cultural significance of the site to the Jewish people, there shall be no digging, excavation, or construction on the Compound, unless approved by the two Parties. Procedures for regular maintenance and emergency repairs on the Compound shall be established by the IG after consultation with the Parties.

The state of Palestine shall be responsible for maintaining the security of the Compound and for ensuring that it will not be used for any hostile acts against Israelis or Israeli areas. The only arms permitted on the Compound shall be those carried by the Palestinian security personnel and the security detachment of the Multinational Presence.

In light of the universal significance of the Compound, and subject to security considerations and to the need not to disrupt religious worship or decorum on the site as determined by the Waqf, visitors shall be allowed access to the site. This shall be without any discrimination and generally be in accordance with past practice.

Transfer of Authority

At the end of the withdrawal period stipulated in Article 5/7, the state of Palestine shall assert sovereignty over the Compound.

The International Group and its subsidiary organs shall continue to exist and fulfill all the functions stipulated in this Article unless otherwise agreed by the two Parties.

The Wailing Wall

The Wailing Wall shall be under Israeli sovereignty.

The Old City:

Significance of the Old City

The Parties view the Old City as one whole enjoying a unique character. The Parties agree that the preservation of this unique character together with safeguarding and promoting the welfare of the inhabitants should guide the administration of the Old City.

The Parties shall act in accordance with the UNESCO World Cultural Heritage List regulations, in which the Old City is a registered site.

IVG Role in the Old City

Cultural Heritage

The IVG shall monitor and verify the preservation of cultural heritage in the Old City in accordance with the UNESCO World Cultural Heritage List rules. For this purpose, the IVG shall have free and unimpeded access to sites, documents, and information related to the performance of this function.

The IVG shall work in close coordination with the Old City Committee of the Jerusalem Coordination and Development Committee (JCDC), including in devising a restoration and preservation plan for the Old City.

Policing

The IVG shall establish an Old City Policing Unit (PU) to liaise with, coordinate between, and assist the Palestinian and Israeli police forces in the Old City, to defuse localized tensions and help resolve disputes, and to perform policing duties in locations specified in and according to operational procedures detailed in Annex X.

The PU shall periodically report to the IVG.

Either Party may submit complaints in relation to this clause to the IVG, which shall promptly act upon them in accordance with Article 16.


Free Movement within the Old City

Movement within the Old City shall be free and unimpeded subject to the provisions of this article and rules and regulations pertaining to the various holy sites.

Entry into and Exit from the Old City

Entry and exit points into and from the Old City will be staffed by the authorities of the state under whose sovereignty the point falls, with the presence of PU members, unless otherwise specified.

With a view to facilitating movement into the Old City, each Party shall take such measures at the entry points in its territory as to ensure the preservation of security in the Old City. The PU shall monitor the operation of the entry points.

Citizens of either Party may not exit the Old City into the territory of the other Party unless they are in possession of the relevant documentation that entitles them to. Tourists may only exit the Old City into the territory of the Party which they posses valid authorization to enter.

Suspension, Termination, and Expansion

Either Party may suspend the arrangements set forth in Article 6.7.iii in cases of emergency for one week. The extension of such suspension for longer than a week shall be pursuant to consultation with the other Party and the IVG at the Trilateral Committee established in Article 3/3.

This clause shall not apply to the arrangements set forth in Article 6/7/vi.

Three years after the transfer of authority over the Old City, the Parties shall review these arrangements. These arrangements may only be terminated by agreement of the Parties.

The Parties shall examine the possibility of expanding these arrangements beyond the Old City and may agree to such an expansion.

Special Arrangements

Along the way outlined in Map X (from the Jaffa Gate to the Zion Gate) there will be permanent and guaranteed arrangements for Israelis regarding access, freedom of movement, and security, as set forth in Annex X.

The IVG shall be responsible for the implementation of these arrangements

Without prejudice to Palestinian sovereignty, Israeli administration of the Citadel will be as outlined in Annex X.

Color-Coding of the Old City

A visible color-coding scheme shall be used in the Old City to denote the sovereign areas of the respective Parties.

Policing

An agreed number of Israeli police shall constitute the Israeli Old City police detachment and shall exercise responsibility for maintaining order and day-to-day policing functions in the area under Israeli sovereignty.

An agreed number of Palestinian police shall constitute the Palestinian Old City police detachment and shall exercise responsibility for maintaining order and day-to-day policing functions in the area under Palestinian sovereignty.

All members of the respective Israeli and Palestinian Old City police detachments shall undergo special training, including joint training exercises, to be administered by the PU.

A special Joint Situation Room, under the direction of the PU and incorporating members of the Israeli and Palestinian Old City police detachments, shall facilitate liaison on all relevant matters of policing and security in the Old City.

Arms

No person shall be allowed to carry or possess arms in the Old City, with the exception of the Police Forces provided for in this agreement. In addition, each Party may grant special written permission to carry or possess arms in areas under its sovereignty.

Intelligence and Security

The Parties shall establish intensive intelligence cooperation regarding the Old City, including the immediate sharing of threat information.

A trilateral committee composed of the two Parties and representatives of the United States shall be established to facilitate this cooperation.

Mount of Olives Cemetery:

The area outlined in Map X (the Jewish Cemetery on the Mount of Olives) shall be under Israeli administration; Israeli law shall apply to persons using and procedures appertaining to this area in accordance with Annex X.

There shall be a designated road to provide free, unlimited, and unimpeded access to the Cemetery.

The IVG shall monitor the implementation of this clause.

This arrangement may only be terminated by the agreement of both Parties.

Special Cemetery Arrangements

Arrangements shall be established in the two cemeteries designated in Map X (Mount Zion Cemetery and the German Colony Cemetery), to facilitate and ensure the continuation of the current burial and visitation practices, including the facilitation of access.

The Western Wall Tunnel.

The Western Wall Tunnel designated in Map X shall be under Israeli administration, including:

Unrestricted Israeli access and right to worship and conduct religious practices.

Responsibility for the preservation and maintenance of the site in accordance with this Agreement and without damaging structures above, under IVG supervision.

Israeli policing.

IVG monitoring

The Northern Exit of the Tunnel shall only be used for exit and may only be closed in case of emergency as stipulated in Article 6/7

This arrangement may only be terminated by the agreement of both Parties.

Municipal Coordination

The two Jerusalem municipalities shall form a Jerusalem Co-ordination and Development Committee (“JCDC”) to oversee the cooperation and coordination between the Palestinian Jerusalem municipality and the Israeli Jerusalem municipality. The JCDC and its sub-committees shall be composed of an equal number of representatives from Palestine and Israel. Each side will appoint members of the JCDC and its subcommittees in accordance with its own modalities.

The JCDC shall ensure that the coordination of infrastructure and services best serves the residents of Jerusalem, and shall promote the economic development of the city to the benefit of all. The JCDC will act to encourage cross-community dialogue and reconciliation.

The JCDC shall have the following subcommittees:

A Planning and Zoning Committee: to ensure agreed planning and zoning regulations in areas designated in Annex X.

A Hydro Infrastructure Committee: to handle matters relating to drinking water delivery, drainage, and wastewater collection and treatment.

A Transport Committee: to coordinate relevant connectedness and compatibility of the two road systems and other issues pertaining to transport.

An Environmental Committee: to deal with environmental issues affecting the quality of life in the city, including solid waste management.

An Economic and Development Committee: to formulate plans for economic development in areas of joint interest, including in the areas of transportation, seam line commercial cooperation, and tourism,

A Police and Emergency Services Committee: to coordinate measures for the maintenance of public order and crime prevention and the provision of emergency services;

An Old City Committee: to plan and closely coordinate the joint provision of the relevant municipal services, and other functions stipulated in Article 6/7.

Other Committees as agreed in the JCDC.

Israeli Residency of Palestinian Jerusalemites

Palestinian Jerusalemites who currently are permanent residents of Israel shall lose this status upon the transfer of authority to Palestine of those areas in which they reside.

Transfer of authority

The Parties will apply in certain socio-economic spheres interim measures to ensure the agreed, expeditious, and orderly transfer of powers and obligations from Israel to Palestine. This shall be done in a manner that preserves the accumulated socio-economic rights of the residents of East Jerusalem.

http://www.geneva-accord.org/mainmenu/english

[pelsar]

70. but what about the arabs of E. Jerusalem?

i'll make it as simple as i can:

do you believe under the PA will they will have civil rights equal to that or more than they have now as citizens/residents of israel?

(for those who dont know....there is no real freedom of press, speech, sexual orientation, govt oversight etc under the PA today)

[ProgressiveMuslim]

103. Can you describe the array of civil rights afforded Palestinians in East Jerusalem.

This should be interesting.

Pelsar, your gov't did everything in its power to cripple and render impotent the PA at every opportunity. Nothing serves their interests better than the ability to claim "but we have no partner for peace."

I certainly hope that you were a vocal opponent of your gov'ts many efforts.

Canada has a better standard of living and more "rights" than we do here. I still don't want to live there. The US probably has more opportunities for you, but you choose not to live here.

I only wish you had as much concern for say, children in Gaza, as you do for homosexual Palestinians in Jerusalem.

[ProgressiveMuslim]

68. You forgot... right ot have your home demolished... right to be separated from your family...

What nonsense. Palestinians in Jerusalem don't identify as Israelis. They are first and foremost JERUSALEMITES.

I do believe you are (surprise!!) trying to twist love of Jerusalem into allegiance with Israel. Do Jerusalemites want to move to the WB? No, of course not.

[pelsar]

71. yes i agree....they are "jerusalemites..."

its not a matter of "loving israel"...its a matter of where one will find personal security, economic security and civil rights....

are you actually going to claim that under the PA they will have more civil rights? security? than under israel?

___________

but you i understand, you've made it clear that religion and civil rights takes a "backseat" to nationalism and land ownership....i'm just wondering about the other "progressives here"...

i just "enjoy" the conflict of interest that they loath to admit....that in the I/P conflict civil rights are in fact not as important as the notions of nationalism, religious affiliation etc, things that i thought progressives were against.

_____________

PM you and i may disagree on many many things, but you have an honesty/knowledge/point of view that i definitely enjoy reading

[ProgressiveMuslim]

72. Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. They aren't proud Jerusalemiste because of the blue ID card.

It's because many of their families have lived on the same land for centuries. Many of their families have been in Quds for generations. It's a love of the place. It's a heritage.

It's fascinating to me -- and rather telling -- that you truly don't get this concept.

[pelsar]

75. i do get it....

i never said that their pride is because of the blue card.....i'm aware that they are also practical....and the ID gives them access to stuff they wouldnt get under the PA. I doesnt mean they are any less Palestinian..or any less attached to Jerusalem....heritage, culture etc

one can have a Palestinian identity and still prefer to live in a flawed jewish democracy as opposed to a muslim corrupt dictatorship.....there is no conflict in that....hell to me its a "no brainer"... nationalism only goes so far....


what would you prefer? stay in the US or move back to an independent Palestine run by the corrupt PA or religious Hamas? (limited options)

[ProgressiveMuslim]

77. Actually, we left because of the Israeli occupation, that forced my PhD holding professional husband

to live like a criminal... that made him sneak around checkpoints like a dirty criminal when he was on his way to his job as a university professor, or on his way to Jerusalem for meetings about international development issues. In the eyes of the IDF... once a piece of shit from Gaza, always a piece of shit from Gaza, right? Regardless of US passport, educaton level, ability to speak English or profession.

In addition, the Israeli ministry of interior would never give me a work permit. I had to either leave every 3 months, which I could ill=afford to do with my 2 american children, or live illegally. Since I had to pass the a-Ram checkpoint on my way to work every day as a school teacher in Beit Hanina (where I got to know many Jerusalem families, as a matter of fact), I was quite unprepared to live as a criminal.

So had the gov't of Israel allowed diaspora Palestinians to return, and contribute to buildilng up the country, I would probably still be living there, fighting along with my husand and other progressive Arabs for the rule of law.

Your line of thinking is sickening. You really think a crumb from Israel is something to value? Your question is akin to asking a slave? isn't it better in the house? you're still not free.

Pelsar, take a moment to digest what I'm saying. For all your sarcastic comments, please get this fact: WE WERE FORCED TO LEAVE BECAUSE OF THE POLICIES OF THE ISRAELI GOV'T.

[pelsar]

79. and the answer?

would you go back to live in the PA or gaza?

(guess you werent there before intifada I....no checkpoints, freedom of movement throughout israel and the westbank and gaza....)

i dont doubt your story for a second, the israeli govt is hardly a liberal forward thinking bunch of people...
_____

and my thinking isnt sickening....its just an explanation of why many arabs living in E.Jerusalem prefer israeli rule, maybe you think they're the sick ones, they're the ones who went for israeli citizenship....your anger is with those arab Palestenians not me and it might be noted that you chose to leave, while they stayed....i would think their choices should be respected.

[ProgressiveMuslim]

93. I was there before Intifadah I in fact. Your notion that Israel was a benign oppressor

is obscene.



Newsflash: The conditions in pre-Intifadah Palestine are what spurred the intifadah.

I'm still trying to figure out why you say Arabs in East Jerusalem prefer Israeli rule.

Does that notion help you sleep at night after your gov't massacred hundreds of civilians in Gaza, with the backing of most of your population?

[ProgressiveMuslim]

94. And Pelsar, we certainly intend to return, as soon as my husband is allowed in.

We'd love to see the in-laws, whom we haven't seen in 10 years.

[Douglas Carpenter]

96. I just asked a friend of mine who recently returned from East Jerusalem

When I gave him a call and told him about the suggestion I read on this forum from one person who claims to be from Israel that most Palestinians in East Jerusalem want to be part of Israel, he first gasped and then broke out laughing. He honestly could not imagine how anyone could possibly believe something so patently absurd. He said that there was absolutely no doubt in his mind that Jerusalem-Palestinians have just as much a feeling of oppression by the Israeli state as those in the West Bank - although they would of course acknowledge that they have more freedom of movement and access to better health care and more economic and educational opportunities then their kin in the West Bank or obviously the Gaza. Still they very much feel oppressed by the Israeli state. Everyone with any knowledge of the situation would of course already know this.

[ProgressiveMuslim]

97. There has been an incredible amount of chum of the forum lately, hasn't there?

[Douglas Carpenter]

107. "living in cloud cukoo land" as my friend described these kind of comments

[shira]

101. your friend lied

Some Palestinians Prefer Life in Israel:

East Jerusalem Residents Say They Would Fight Handover to PA - Mark MacKinnon

Nabil Gheit, the mayor of Ras Hamis, a Palestinian neighborhood on the eastern fringe of Jerusalem, says he can't think of a worse fate than being handed over to the Palestinian Authority. "If there was a referendum here, no one would vote to join the Palestinian Authority," Gheit said. "We will not accept it. There would be another intifada to defend ourselves from the PA." Many Palestinians dislike the idea of their neighborhoods, which are generally more prosperous than other parts of the West Bank, being absorbed into the chaotic Palestinian territories.

Gheit, 53, with two posters of "the martyr Saddam Hussein" hanging over his cash register, can hardly be called an admirer of the Jewish state. He says he'd be happy to one day live in a properly independent Palestinian state, but not one that looks anything like the corruption-racked and violence-prone areas that are split between the warring Hamas and Fatah factions. "At least in Israel, there's law," he says. (Globe and Mail-Canada)

[Violet_Crumble]

124. Just coz you don't agree with Doug's friend doesn't mean he's a liar...

You post some article with no link to where it came from where one person is quoted and use that to claim Doug's friend is lying. That's both ridiculous and incredibly illogical...

[shira]

127. Violet, that one person quoted is the mayor

http://www.dailyalert.org/archive/2007-10/2007-10-16.html

2nd article down, from Globe and Mail.

Doug's friend is full of shit. Either that, or Doug is.

[Violet_Crumble]

129. So fucking what? He's one person and he's not speaking for everybody...

All it takes is just a smidgen of common sense to realise that there's lots of Palestinians in East Jerusalem who feel as Doug's friend does. After all, they've got the option of applying for Israeli citizenship and many of them haven't done it.

You have a nasty habit of accusing other posters in this forum, including myself, of being liars. Would it be too much to ask that you go and read the DU rules and at least make some attempt to abide by them? Seriously, you calling Doug and his friend liars coz you don't like what's being said is really pathetic. Doug's a friend of mine who I've known for a long time and he's a very honest person. He's got no reason to lie about what his friend told him, nor does his friend have any reason to lie...

[shira]

130. edited: Violet, you don't think the mayor knows what he's talking about?

Doug makes it appear from the "gasp, and loud laugh" that the mayor's comment is unknown amongst all Arabs of E.Jerusalem. Or that Pelsar or the mayor's comment is so outlandish as to not be taken seriously. No Violet, from an honest person we should expect to read something along the lines of "yes, many here believe that but many others don't..." based on the mayor's comment in the Globe and Mail piece.

from the mayor:

"If there was a referendum here, no one would vote to join the Palestinian Authority," Gheit said. "We will not accept it. There would be another intifada to defend ourselves from the PA."

Either the mayor is full of shit or Doug's friend is full of shit. They can't both be right. Their 2 opinions are 180 degree opposites of one another.

And here's more (see posts 107-108)...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=124x255450#256492

Why deny it?

[Violet_Crumble]

131. He can talk for himself, not for everyone else...

I'll repeat it again, seeing you opted to ignore it. It's abunduntly clear that there are many Palestinians in East Jerusalem who do see things as Doug's friend does, as they can opt for applying for Israeli citizenship and many haven't....

btw, you also seem to have ignored my suggestion that you read the DU rules and try to abide by them. Don't know what makes you think yr so special that they don't apply to you, but it's against the rules to call other posters liars, which is something you do on a regular basis...

[shira]

132. right.....the mayor shouldn't talk for the people he represents b/c he disagrees with Violet's view

The question becomes, why do you wish for that view to be accurate, that few if any Arabs in E.Jerusalem would rather live under Israeli rule than PA? Does it help you sleep better at night?

I'll repeat it again, seeing you opted to ignore it. It's abunduntly clear that there are many Palestinians in East Jerusalem who do see things as Doug's friend does, as they can opt for applying for Israeli citizenship and many haven't....

And it is abundantly clear that Doug's friend either doesn't know what the hell he is talking about (see last post for even more quotes from Arabs who actually have to live there) or Doug's friend is full of shit.

btw, you also seem to have ignored...

Oh? Are we talking again? That means 2-way discussion, Violet. If you have questions you would like me to answer, I'll gladly reciprocate so long as you answer my questions too. Otherwise, find others you can interrogate.

[Violet_Crumble]

133. No, that's not what I said. I wish you'd stop putting words in people's mouths...

Oh, and clumsy job coming along after I'd replied to yr post where you yet again accused a DUer of being a liar, and editing it out...

This shouldn't be difficult for anyone with a bit of intelligence to understand, but it seems to be escaping you. It doesn't matter who that guy is, he doesn't speak for everyone (and given yr love of calling people liars, it's odd that you don't seem to notice that politicians by their very nature lie more than most). If he was speaking for everyone, then it's clear he's not a very accomplished liar, as any Palestinian in East Jerusalem can apply for Israeli citizenship if they feel the same way as him. The fact is that many don't because they don't feel that way...

If you have questions you would like me to answer, I'll gladly reciprocate so long as you answer my questions too. Otherwise, find others you can interrogate.

I didn't ask you a question. I was telling you that it's abunduntly clear that there are many Palestinians in East Jerusalem who do see things as Doug's friend does, as they can opt for applying for Israeli citizenship and many haven't.

[shira]

135. now you're falsely accusing me of editing out comments?

what do you claim I specifically wrote about Doug and then later edited out? this should be good.

[Violet_Crumble]

136. Not falsely...

You claimed yet again that either Doug or his friend were liars....

[shira]

137. what did I clumsily edit out, Violet?

calling someone full of shit isn't exactly the same as calling someone a liar. Someone who is lying is not necessarily a liar.

Words and semantics mean things here, so I'm told. Ergo, the difference between a zionist and a jew, between being a decent jew and decent jewish person, etc. Be careful with those accusations, Violet.

[Violet_Crumble]

139. I told you in the post yr replying to...try reading it...

Calling someone full of shit IS calling them a liar, no ifs and buts about it. btw, an apology for falsely accusing me of falsely accusing you of editing out a comment would be nice, but I won't hold my breath waiting...

[shira]

141. again, what exactly was clumsily edited out....what was there previously that does not exist now?

Still waiting for that one, Violet, because you have not made that clear.

And if calling someone full of shit IS calling them a liar, then being a decent jew IS the same as being a decent jewish person, right? Jew = Zionist = Israeli, at least to Arabs who don't distinguish between the two - and it's their opinion, not yours, that counts. According to your logic, that is.

[Violet_Crumble]

143. I told you in post #136. Not my problem that you can't read a simple sentence...

And I'm not interested in yr pathetic attempts to drag discussions I wasn't involved in into this. Calling someone full of shit IS calling them a liar...

Good thing I didn't hold my breath waiting for that apology. I didn't expect that yr the sort of person who would apologise when they're wrong...

[shira]

145. so you think I edited out something along the lines of...

"doug is a liar"?

I assure you I did not edit anything like that out. When I edit posts as I did recently here, it's either to clear things grammatically or add extra thoughts.

You owe me the apology for falsely claiming I edited out "doug is a liar" from my post.

[Violet_Crumble]

149. Seeing yr unwilling to actually read what I said..

Here's the link. Click on it http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=124&topic_id=273584&mesg_id=274351

I know what I read, and it wasn't there after you edited it, so cut the crap. When it comes to integrity, yr sorely lacking in that regard...

[Violet_Crumble]

134. That's a link to an archive where you have to purchase the article...

So is there a link to it where the article can actually be read?

on edit: don't worry. I found it on a Likud website when I googled.

[shira]

138. so what did you think of the article? disagree with it?

[Violet_Crumble]

140. He's entitled to his own opinion, he's not the opinion of Doug's friend or others n/t

[shira]

142. and you miss the point..........again

This "gasp" and loud laugh by Doug's friend, as if Pelsar's claim was so absurd and outlandish, either shows Doug's friend to be full of shit or completely clueless. What other way is there to see this, Violet?

[Violet_Crumble]

144. You asked me what I thought of the article. I told you. There's no point being missed..

You posted an article that was the opinion of ONE person to try to make out someone you've never ever met is a liar. That's incredibly illogical and stupid.

[shira]

146. so this "gasp" and "laugh" by Doug's friend regarding Pelsar's comment

either shows ignorance of the situation or it is bullshit.

What other option is there?

If you say there are plenty of Arabs who haven't applied for Israeli citizenship, what does that prove? That they don't mind the PA ruling them? That's like saying there were plenty of Jews who opted to stay in Germany, Russia, Iran, and Syria - so they don't mind, etc.

[Violet_Crumble]

150. You seem to have massive difficulty comprehending what's said to you...

You asked my opinion of the article. I gave it. Unlike you, I actually didn't resort to just yelling bullshit, but gave what is a common-sense response to some anonymous interneter insisting that someone they've never met is a liar...

[shira]

151. yes, in your make-believe-pretend world, both statements, by doug's friend and the mayor

really do not conflict with each other, so both are "credible".

The mayor shouldn't speak for all his people, but it's okay for Doug's friend to do so since that's what Violet wants to believe.

And I see you're still falsely accusing me of editing a post in which I called Doug a liar, when I did no such thing.

So let's recap, shall we?

Doug writes about his friend's claim. I reply citing contradictory statements that show Doug's friend is either ignorant or full of shit. You say this doesn't mean Doug's friend lied. Then when your "common sense" argument fails, because either Doug's friend is ignorant or lying (there is no other choice considering the other statements made by Israeli Arabs), you accuse me of violating forum rules and get all huffy because you realize your argument defending Doug's friend is crap.

Gotta hand it to you, Violet....you were right in ending our previous debates as they were just as big a waste of time as this current one. You don't like your very inconsistent views being challenged much, do you?

[Violet_Crumble]

154. There you go again, claiming I said things I never said...

I did not say both were credible. I pointed out why you calling Doug's friend a liar because they don't hold the same opinion as the one person you quoted is totally illogical. Bush claimed a lot of things on behalf of the American people, but only a complete fool would pretend that many Americans didn't agree with him at all. Same with this guy you quoted, but on a much smaller scale. The people you think he was a mindreader about would be his constituency, which is one neighbourhood in East Jerusalem. So you haven't proven anything at all, except for a talent in getting abusive when someone points out the lack of logic in what yr saying....

And you did call Doug a liar again in the post I replied to, which you then went back and edited it out. Unlike you, I can prove that you did say that about Doug again, because I posted this in reply before you edited you edited yr post: 'btw, you also seem to have ignored my suggestion that you read the DU rules and try to abide by them. Don't know what makes you think yr so special that they don't apply to you, but it's against the rules to call other posters liars, which is something you do on a regular basis...'


Gotta hand it to you, Violet....you were right in ending our previous debates as they were just as big a waste of time as this current one. You don't like your very inconsistent views being challenged much, do you?

You should really quit the mindreading routine as yr abysmal at it. I've said before why I don't waste my time with you and it looks like it needs repeating, as I've seen others say similar about you. The reason I don't waste my time on you is because unlike some others here who I disagree with, yr consistantly abusive, hold view which are extreme, constantly attribute things to posters who have replied to you that aren't what they said at all, and don't show any interest in civil or constructive discussions with other posters...

[shira]

155. so stop replying to my posts if you think I'm a waste of time

[Violet_Crumble]

156. No can do when you sat there and called a good friend of mine a liar n/t

[shira]

158. sorry, you're full of shit Violet....I wrote no such thing and you know it

cut the crap. I'm so sorry that your twisted logic was exposed, you took it personally, and then decided to falsely accuse me in order to change the topic.

But that's typical of you and other antizionist far-leftists. I understand, that's all you have in your arsenal when you're dealing in fantasy and fiction.

[Violet_Crumble]

159. More abuse from you . That's a great indication that you've lost an argument...

You not only accused Douglas of lying once, you did it twice and went back and edited it out the second time after I posted in reply: 'And you did call Doug a liar again in the post I replied to, which you then went back and edited it out. Unlike you, I can prove that you did say that about Doug again, because I posted this in reply before you edited you edited yr post: 'btw, you also seem to have ignored my suggestion that you read the DU rules and try to abide by them. Don't know what makes you think yr so special that they don't apply to you, but it's against the rules to call other posters liars, which is something you do on a regular basis...'

And yr on a real roll with getting everything wrong. I'm not an antizionist, nor am I a far-leftist. And I'm most certainly not dealing in fantasy and fiction...

[pelsar]

110. thats the second time......

didnt say most....did I?....i dont know the numbers, do know they exist and without a referendum (secret) it will not be known.....

did you ask him what he prefers?..under the PA or israel as of today?
(my claim is one of limited choices, neither being ideal for the residents of e. jerusalem)
___


i try to be as accurate as i can, i would appreciate it if you react to that accuracy as well.

[pelsar]

109. you left....they stayed...

whats difficult to understand about Palestinians of E.Jerusalem..some chose israeli citizenship and during olso there was a surge in applications...that is clear what their preferences are. Its not all, but there were more than enough interviews that make it clear what some preferred.

and you're the one who left...reminds me of all those nice american jews that want me and my kids to spill our blood for their dreams. You shouldnt be judging those who stayed and are making choices based on their day to day lives....

you should have the minimum of decency to respect their non violent choices....

and the Palestenians didnt like the benign oppression and revolted, proved their point and started on the rule to self rule...and with that comes restrictions and responsibilities....and one of them is dont do anything stupid....as in Intifada II and having stupid leaders.

as far a gaza goes....dumb idea to shoot rockets and mortars and try to kill us almost daily. (another example of stupid leadership)....the concept of consequences for ones actions really seems to be a problem with the Palestinians and their supporters no matter how many times history has shown it.

did you really believe that eventually israel would not react to the 6,000 kassams and mortars?...did you really believe that?

[Dick Dastardly]

102. There was a significant percentage of the increased Arab population that was due to immigration.

The standard of living in Palestine at the time was twice that of the surrounding areas which obviously will attract people. Much of this immigration was to areas where the Jews were because they were the reason for the increasing economic growth and opportunities. No one denies there was a lot of Jewish immigration but there was also a sinificant amount of Arab immigration which we many times see denied. Just because Joan Peters claimed something does not mean it is immediatly false as there are plenty of other sources including historical documents from the period.


The Jewish population increased by 470,000 between World War I and World War II, while the non-Jewish population rose by 588,000. In fact, the permanent Arab population increased 120 percent between 1922 and 1947.
This rapid growth was a result of several factors. One was immigration from neighboring states — constituting 37 percent of the total immigration to pre-state Israel — by Arabs who wanted to take advantage of the higher standard of living the Jews had made possible.15 The Arab population also grew because of the improved living conditions created by the Jews as they drained malarial swamps and brought improved sanitation and health care to the region. Thus, for example, the Muslim infant mortality rate fell from 201 per thousand in 1925 to 94 per thousand in 1945 and life expectancy rose from 37 years in 1926 to 49 in 1943.

The Arab population increased the most in cities where large Jewish populations had created new economic opportunities. From 1922-1947, the non-Jewish population increased 290 percent in Haifa, 131 percent in Jerusalem and 158 percent in Jaffa. The growth in Arab towns was more modest: 42 percent in Nablus, 78 percent in Jenin and 37 percent in Bethlehem.17




Arieh Avneri, The Claim of Dispossession p. 60. pp. 254-55.
http://www.amazon.com/Claim-Dispossession-Jewish-Settlement-1878-1948/dp/0878559647

Michael Curtis, et al., The Palestinians 38.
http://www.amazon.com/Palestinians-People-History-Politics/dp/0878551123


The British response to Jewish immigration set a precedent of appeasing the Arabs, which was followed for the duration of the Mandate. The British placed restrictions on Jewish immigration while allowing Arabs to enter the country freely. Apparently, London did not feel that a flood of Arab immigrants would affect the country's absorptive capacity.

During World War I, the Jewish population in Palestine declined because of the war, famine, disease and expulsion by the Turks. In 1915, approximately 83,000 Jews lived in Palestine among 590,000 Muslim and Christian Arabs. According to the 1922 census, the Jewish population was 84,000, while the Arabs numbered 643,000.4 Thus, the Arab population grew exponentially while that of the Jews stagnated.


clip
By contrast, throughout the Mandatory period, Arab immigration was unrestricted. In 1930, the Hope Simpson Commission, sent from London to investigate the 1929 Arab riots, said the British practice of ignoring the uncontrolled illegal Arab immigration from Egypt, Transjordan and Syria had the effect of displacing the prospective Jewish immigrants.8

The British Governor of the Sinai from 1922-36 observed: “This illegal immigration was not only going on from the Sinai, but also from Transjordan and Syria, and it is very difficult to make a case out for the misery of the Arabs if at the same time their compatriots from adjoining states could not be kept from going in to share that misery.”9



clip
The Peel Commission reported in 1937
"The shortage of land is due less to purchase by Jews than to the increase in the Arab population. The Arab claims that the Jews have obtained too large a proportion of good land cannot be maintained. Much of the land now carrying orange groves was sand dunes or swamps and uncultivated when it was bought."


"The Arab population shows a remarkable increase since 1920, and it has had some share in the increased prosperity of Palestine. Many Arab landowners have benefited from the sale of land and the profitable investment of the purchase money. The fellaheen are better off on the whole than they were in 1920. This Arab progress has been partly due to the import of Jewish capital into Palestine and other factors associated with the growth of the National Home. In particular, the Arabs have benefited from social services which could not have been provided on the existing scale without the revenue obtained from the Jews."


8John Hope Simpson, Palestine: Report on Immigration, Land Settlement and Development, (London, 1930), p. 126.

10Palestine Royal Commission Report, p. 242.


Link to-The Peel Commission Report
(July 1937)
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/peel1.html

Link to-Hope-Simpson Report
(October 1, 1930)
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/Hope_Simpson.html

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/myths/mf2.html



more info from a variety of sources and view points

The Smoking Gun: Arab Immigration into Palestine, 1922-1931
http://www.meforum.org/522/the-smoking-gun-arab-immigration-into-palestine

Israeli-Palestinian
ProCon.org
Population Statistics
http://israelipalestinian.procon.org/viewresource.asp?resourceID=000636

Population of Ottoman and Mandate Palestine
http://www.mideastweb.org/palpop.htm

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/439645/Palestine/45068/The-British-mandate

Palestine, Israel and the Arab-Israeli Conflict
http://www.merip.org/palestine-israel_primer/intro-pal-isr-primer.html

[Douglas Carpenter]

105. "There Were No Indians" by Anthony Lewis

There Were No Indians

By ANTHONY LEWIS (NYT)
Published: January 13, 1986

Has the life of the mind been so politicized in this country that intellectuals who welcome a book's political conclusion will shrug off challenges to its truth? That is the troubling question raised by the controversy over ''From Time Immemorial: The Origins of the Arab-Jewish Conflict Over Palestine,'' by Joan Peters.

The Peters book, published in 1984, makes dramatic assertions on the basis of what it calls fresh historical evidence. It says that Palestine was essentially ''uninhabited'' by Arabs before the Zionist movement began toward the end of the 19th century. The Arabs came in large numbers after that, from nearby countries, drawn by the economic effects of Jewish settlements.

Miss Peters concludes that those who call themselves ''Palestinian Arabs'' - she puts the words in quotes - are mostly recent arrivals and hence have no real moral or historical claim to the land. She argues this in 600 pages of text, footnotes and appendixes.

snip:For example, Miss Peters asserts that in 1893 the western area of Palestine, where Jewish settlement had begun, had a population of 59,431 Jews and 92,300 non-Jews. That shows, she says, that the Zionist settlers were hardly intruding into a land full of Arabs.
But an 1893-94 census by the Ottoman Empire, which then controlled the area, showed a total of 9,817 Jews in all of Palestine and 371,969 Moslems. How did Miss Peters get her results? She used the census only in part, relying also on an estimate by a French traveler of the time, regarded by experts as worthless.

For her claim that immigration from nearby countries greatly swelled the number of Arabs in Palestine, Miss Peters cites scattered statements -often leaving out key words or misrepresenting them. Thus she cites a 1930 British report's mention of ''pseudo-travelers'' who stayed in Palestine to live as if it were referring to Arabs, when the reference was evidently to Jewish travelers.

In small ways as well as large the book is slippery. Miss Peters says a report by the Institute for Palestine Studies found that 68 percent of the Arabs who became refugees in 1948 ''left without seeing an Israeli soldier.'' The report was actually about refugees in the 1967 war, and the percentage was of just 37 refugees who were studied.

It is impossible to detail the character of ''From Time Immemorial'' in a newspaper column. It has been fully explored in criticisms by, among others, Norman Finkelstein, a Princeton graduate student; Bill Farrell, a Columbia law student; Sir Ian Gilmour, a British M.P., and his son David, and Albert Hourani, an Oxford historian who called the book ''ludicrous and worthless.'
'
The criticisms are unanswerable, or at least they have not been answered. That is the extraordinary thing. So far as I know, neither Miss Peters nor any of her supporters has answered a single one of the charges of distortion and fraud made against it.

Instead, it is said that the critics are from the political left, as a few are, or have been identified with the Palestinian cause, as some have. In other words, only politics matters, not facts. That from intellectuals.

The latest criticism is going to be hard to dismiss even on such grounds: a piece by Prof. Yehoshua Porath of the Hebrew University, Jerusalem, in the current New York Review of Books. It is devastating on Miss Peters's methods. And it is moving on the courage and loneliness of the early Zionist settlers, surrounded as they were - and as they wrote - by Arabs.

Israelis have not gushed over the book as some Americans have. Perhaps that is because they know the reality of the Palestinians' existence, as great Zionists of the past knew. Perhaps it is because most understand the danger of trying to deny a people identity. As Professor Porath says, ''Neither historiography nor the Zionist cause itself gains anything from mythologizing history.''

From NYT: EDITORIAL DESK

ABROAD AT HOME; There Were No Indians
By ANTHONY LEWIS (NYT) 775 words
Published: January 13, 1986

=======================================================

from:

Fred M. Donner
Professor of Near Eastern History
The Oriental Institute
The University of Chicago
Chicago, Ill.

link:

http://www.princeton.edu/~paw/web_exclusives/more/more_...

The population of Palestine (west of the Jordan river) in 1880 was under 590,000, of whom 96 percent were Arabs (Muslim or Christian); roughly 4 percent of the population was Jewish.

By 1914, the population of Palestine was about 650,000. Of this, the Jewish population was about 80,000, or a little over 12 percent. Of the 88 percent remaining, 570,000 people, Israeli and non-Israeli scholars estimate that at least 550,000 were Palestinians (Christian or Muslim) who were descendants of families in Palestine already in the 1840s — or almost 85 percent of the total 1914 populaton of Palestine. The great majority of them, in other words, were not recent immigrants.

There was a lot of immigration to Palestine between 1880 and 1948, of course, but most of it was by European Jews, who came in several well-defined aliyot ("waves"), drawn to Palestine by the Zionist dream or fleeing economic hardship and persecution in Europe. The first aliya (up to 1903) brought 25,000 new Jewish immigrants, roughly doubling the Jewish population of Palestine.

The second aliya (1904-1913) brought another 35,000 Jews. The third aliya (1919-1939) saw the arrival of 350,664 Jewish immigrants, according to British Mandate statistics.

In 1945, the Jewish population of Palestine stood at about 554,000, or about 30.6 percent of the total population of Palestine at that time, which was 1.8 million. Mr. Schell is absolutely right: Some Jewish communities have existed in Palestine for hundreds of years. But, as the figures above make clear, most Jews in Israel today are, in relative terms, newcomers — descendants of people who arrived during the past three or four generations; to call them "colonists," as Professor Doran did, is not inappropriate.

On the other hand, Mr. Schell is absolutely wrong to hint that Palestinians are generally newcomers: As we see, most Palestinians of today can trace their ancestry to families who have been resident in Palestine for hundreds of years. The debate over immigration figures is, of course, merely part of the broader effort by Palestinians and Israelis to delegitimize each other by claiming the other side to be interlopers. Mr. Schell's evident desire to cast doubt on the historical roots of the Palestinians' claim to their land suggests that he has been taken in, like many other people, by such works as Joan Peters's tract "From Time Immemorial," which popularized for obvious political purposes the myth that many Palestinians were descendants of recent immigrants.Such a view is simply not supported by the evidence. "

Mrs. Peters's Palestine

By Yehoshua Porath ( of the Hebrew University, Jerusalem,)
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/5249

snip:" all the research by historians and geographers of modern Palestine shows, the Arab population began to grow again in the middle of the nineteenth century. That growth resulted from a new factor: the demographic revolution. Until the 1850s there was no "natural" increase of the population, but this began to change when modern medical treatment was introduced and modern hospitals were established, both by the the Ottoman authorities and by the foreign Christian missionaries. The number of births remained steady but infant mortality decreased. This was the main reason for Arab population growth, not incursions into the country by the wandering tribes who by then had become afraid of the much more efficient Ottoman troops. Toward the end of Ottoman rule the various contemporary sources no longer lament the outbreak of widespread epidemics. This contrasts with the Arabic chronicles of previous periods in which we find horrible descriptions of recurrent epidemics—typhoid, cholera, bubonic plague—decimating the population. Under the British Mandate, with still better sanitary conditions, more hospitals, and further improvements in medical treatment, the Arab population continued to grow.


The Jews were amazed. In spite of the Jewish immigration, the natural increase of the Arabs—at least twice the rate of the Jews'—slowed down the transformation of the Jews into a majority in Palestine. To account for the delay the theory, or myth, of large-scale immigration of Arabs from the neighboring countries was proposed by Zionist writers. Mrs. Peters accepts that theory completely; she has apparently searched through documents for any statement to the effect that Arabs entered Palestine. But even if we put together all the cases she cites, one cannot escape the conclusion that most of the growth of the Palestinian Arab community resulted from a process of natural increase .

The Mandatory authorities carried out two modern censuses, in 1922 and 1931. Except for some mistakes committed in 1922 in counting the Negev Bedouins, which were corrected in 1931, the returns showed the strength of the "natural process" of increase. The figures for the last years of the mandate are based on continuous collection of data by the department of statistics. These figures showed that in 1947 there were about 1.3 million Arabs living in Palestine.

The strength of the process of natural increase was finally proved not elsewhere but in Israel itself. In 1949 there were about 150,000 Arabs in Israel within the 1949 armistice lines. To that number, one has to add the 20,000-odd refugees who returned to the state as part of the government's scheme for the "reunion of families." The Israeli authorities cannot be blamed, as the British "imperialists" were, for helping the Arabs enter the country. And despite the strict control of Israel's borders, the number of Arabs living in Israel proper has more than trebled since. The rate of the Israeli Arabs' natural increase rose sharply (between 1964 and 1966 it reached the world record of 4.5 percent a year) and brought about the remarkable increase in the size of that community. No Egyptians, Bedouins, Syrians, Bosnians, etc. were needed.

No one would doubt that some migrant workers came to Palestine from Syria and Trans-Jordan and remained there. But one has to add to this that there were migrations in the opposite direction as well. For example, a tradition developed in Hebron to go to study and work in Cairo, with the result that a permanent community of Hebronites had been living in Cairo since the fifteenth century. Trans-Jordan exported unskilled casual labor to Palestine; but before 1948 its civil service attracted a good many educated Palestinian Arabs who did not find work in Palestine itself. Demographically speaking, however, neither movement of population was significant in comparison to the decisive factor of natural increase."

[rateyes]

43. I'd never make such a claim. Not nice of you to assume it either.

What I would prefer is Israel giving back the homes they stole from "those Palestinians" so that more of them could live in a democracy. But, as you say, justice isn't going to happen...so long as Israel gets its way, that is.

[pelsar]

51. justice is not going to happen period.....

i assume your version of justice is based on a western definition and not that of the Middle east or as the Palestinians or egyptian students see it.......or do you somehow believe that your version of justice is universal and everyone agrees to it (including hamas, hizballa, muslim brotherhood, islamic jiahad, etc)

or if they dont, then they must be "educated" to accept your defintion?

[rateyes]

76. I'll tell you what. Why don't you define "justice" for me. I mean, since

you seem to think I'm ignorant on the subject. As far as I can tell, if someone steals something from me, justice demands restitution. But, hey, that's just my silly "Western" definition. :eyes:

[pelsar]

81. justice is culturally defined..

just ask the saudis what justice is served for stealing......

ask hamas what is the just punishment for holding hands in public

so yes if you believe that there is some kind of universal justice, your being ethno centric at best.....just ask the taliban what is the best justice for teaching girls math...
__

hence your use of the word justice as part of the solution is the exact opposite, its impossible to define in a conflict of various non western cultures, but just the fact that you seem to believe that there is one "justice" in this conflict is very telling"

[rateyes]

82. I'm not asking them for their definition. I'm asking YOU for YOURS.

Do YOU think justice for stealing demands restitution? Your answer, or non-answer will be telling.

[pelsar]

83. i'm western educated.....

i believe in the american system of justice.......punishments for crimes committed to be related to the environment and circumstances surround the crime. Hence premeditated murder is far worse than accidental murder.

I also believe that following the law of the day that does not involve premeditated killing is legal, both morally and ethically

as far as the conflict goes....unarmed farmers buying land from the legal owners does not constitute stealing (1800's - 1948)...attacking and killing those farmers is a vicious crime and should be punished.

as far as the conflict solution, it will be based on compromises that each party will have to sell to its public....justice will not be part of the solution, just compromises that each can live with.

[rateyes]

84. Try again. Do you believe that for justice to occur when someone steals

that restitution has to be made? You gave a non-answer, and it is telling.

[pelsar]

85. yes...

restitution in my version of justice is called for when one is guilty of stealing

[rateyes]

86. Then, why not (you personally) be in favor of Israel returning

the homes they stole from people in places like Beth Shean in 1948 BEFORE the war??

[pelsar]

87. good idea....

that would be just....for those particular people.....it would not be just for others now would it?....would it be just for those people who are now living in those homes for two/three generations who bought them from the state, to be kicked out (what did they do, so their kids should now be homeless?

would it be just for only the immediate family to be allowed back..and not the grandkids, etc should their entire clan who never lived there be forbidden to immigrate? (split the family-is that just?)


....i assume your model of returning what was stolen refers to the Palestinians for stealing the jewish neighborhood of hebron in 36, gush etzion in 48, Jerusalem in 48 ...can we include the lands from the neighboring arab countries that stole the jews land after they kicked them out too....i'm sure they'll accept your version of justice.....

now how about murder....that sure is a crime and justice should be brought to bear on those that committed murder.....where shall we start?

____

i am against using "justice" as method of measuring, because ones person justice here, will be an injustice to someone else....its a foolish/simplistic road to go down.

[rateyes]

88. Well, if you want to go back to generations that have long since passed away

I guess we could go back before the biblical Joshua came with the Israeli army and stole it from the Caananites, Perrizites, Ammonites, etc. Jerusalem was built long before it was called Jerusalem. The city was built by people long before the Hebrew people arrived. They called it Jebus.

But, since the state of Modern Israel (which does not equate with ancient Israel) has only existed since 1948, (no other nation called Israel has existed since the year 70, until 1948), I find it only necessary to deal with the present realities. Those realities are that, prior to modern Israel becoming the state it is today, Zionists and other Jewish people (now known as Israel) stole Palestinian homes. You say that the current occupiers of those homes bought them from the state of Israel. The point I'm making is that those homes weren't Israel's to sell to anyone. Those living in them now purchased stolen property. I cannot help the fact that Israel defrauded its own people in selling that which did not belong to Israel. Israel should, therefore, now build those folk new homes in Israel to make restitution for the money they stole from their own people by selling property they did not own.

Israel should, then make restitution to the folks they stole the homes from by returning those homes to the ones from whom they stole them. If they are alive, let them come back and live in those homes. If they are not, then give them back to the heirs of those folk.

It's the just thing to do.

But, again, as you so eloquently pointed out, justice will never happen...thieves don't normally give up, willingly, that which they have taken. After all, they stole it "fair and square."

[pelsar]

89. and hebron...

since the Palestinians stole hebron and murder the jews there...i guess that should stay with the jews...gush etzion as well...corrrect?


and your simplistic answer is full of landmines....so just the heirs?...how many?....which kids?....and if they accept the house without their extended family all 350?..should they all be allowed to live there or are you going to cut their family in pieces?

and do you really think the arabs will accept the jews in hebron?
___

btw why does your version of justice just deal with stolen property?...what about murder....isnt that a crime that demands justice too?

[rateyes]

90. Yes. Murder requires justice. But, as you say, it won't happen.

For instance, Ariel Sharon was made Prime Minister. The heirs to whom I refer: the land should go to the closest one(s). Any land stolen should be returned to the rightful owners, regardless of the theives' or the victims' race or nationality.

[pelsar]

92. since your concept is impractical....what next?

you mentioned earlier that you are practical....well either your being blind by your own culture or your not being practical.....


the arabs of hebron will not be accepting jews in hebron....nor in the westbank (kfar etzion).....so what now happens to your version of justice?


and who are your going to indict for the arab invasion of 1948....attempted genocide i believe was the stated aim and attempt.....and many Palestenians joined in the the attempt...what in your opinion is the proper punishment for those who attempted to wipe out the jews in 48, including all of those concentration camp survivors.....

[rateyes]

112. You have a very subtle way of rewriting history.

The land that was stolen, of which we are speaking, was stolen in the weeks and DAYS before Israel ever declared itself a nation. Israel was the aggressor in the 1948 war, not the Arabs.

[pelsar]

116. stolen?

the jews living in hebron?.....pre 48.......explain when the jews stole that land

in gush etzion?.....


_______

i would say attempting to commit genocide..... especially on concentration camp survivors is a particularly heinous crime, one of the greatest crimes one can image....can you think of anything worse than telling someone that who actually managed to survive the camps, come out without any family, that they now have to fight for their lives, because they are still not accepted?

[rateyes]

91. Look at my reply to myself. I replied to the wrong post.

[pelsar]

106. me too....

wrong reply.....

[Ken Burch]

100. If the Palestinians and the Israelis lived as equals, there would be peace

and no one would suffer. The Palestinians aren't the Nazis, shira.

[ProgressiveMuslim]

5. Interesting analysis by Helena Cobban:

Today's NYT carries an important (though unfortunately severely truncated) account of an interview that Taghreed al-Khodary had with Khaled Meshaal in Damascus recently.

Meshaal spelled out more clearly than ever before that he does not consider the "Charter" promulgated by Hamas when it was founded in 1987 to be a currently operational document. He also specified the length of the term-- ten years-- that he judged a "long-term" hudna, or truce, with Israel should have.

When I interviewed Meshaal in January 2008 I asked him about the length of the hudna he envisaged. He said "We do not talk about the number of years. Sheikh Ahmad Yassin spoke about ten years."

This is an important question, because if there is a point of convergence between Hamas's 'hudna" proposal and the two-state outcome being promoted (in two slightly different forms) by the US and the Arab League, this would hinge on the term of the hudna being either extremely lengthy, or unspecified.

For Meshaal now to endorse Yassin's ten-year-term proposal is a small retreat from the "constructive ambiguity" on this issue that he expressed in January 2008.

Still, laying out a ten-year term for it could well be an opening position for Hamas that, in negotiations, they might be prepared to extend.

Anyway, the other conditions that he specified for a hudna will probably be even harder for Hamas and its future negotiating partners to reach agreement on than the hudna's term.

Worth noting from Khodary's account of the interview: her judgment that he "gave off an air of serene self-confidence. Also, this quote that she used:


“I promise the American administration and the international community that we will be part of the solution, period."

A little more on the NYT and the way the piece was presented, below.

Here is the points of substance in what he told her:

1. On the Hamas Charter:


e urged outsiders to ignore the Hamas charter, which calls for the obliteration of Israel through jihad and cites as fact the infamous anti-Semitic forgery, “The Protocols of the Elders of Zion.” Mr. Meshal did not offer to revoke the charter, but said it was 20 years old, adding, “We are shaped by our experiences.”

2. On the Obama administration:

Regarding President Obama, Mr. Meshal said, “His language is different and positive,” but he expressed unhappiness about Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, saying hers “is a language that reflects the old administration policies.”

3. On the two-state solution:

“We are with a state on the 1967 borders, based on a long-term truce. This includes East Jerusalem, the dismantling of settlements and the right of return of the Palestinian refugees.” Asked what “long-term” meant, he said 10 years.

4. On recognition of Israel, as demanded of Hamas by the US and the Quartet and requested of it by some pro-US Arab leaders:

He repeated that he would not recognize Israel, saying to fellow Arab leaders, “There is only one enemy in the region, and that is Israel.”

... Mr. Meshal said the Palestinian leader Yasir Arafat and Mr. Abbas had granted such recognition, but to no avail. “Did that recognition lead to an end of the occupation? It’s just a pretext by the United States and Israel to escape dealing with the real issue and to throw the ball into the Arab and Palestinian court,” he said.


5. On the firing of rockets against Israel from Gaza, as undertaken by Hamas and other Palestinian groups-- (the article notes that in April only six rockets and mortar rounds were fired at Israel, many fewer than over the previous three months)--

Mr. Meshal made an effort to show that Hamas was in control of its militants as well as those of other groups, saying: “Not firing the rockets currently is part of an evaluation from the movement which serves the Palestinians’ interest. After all, the firing is a method, not a goal. Resistance is a legitimate right, but practicing such a right comes under an evaluation by the movement’s leaders.”

He said his group was eager for a cease-fire with Israel and for a deal that would return an Israeli soldier it is holding captive, Cpl. Gilad Shalit, in exchange for many Palestinian prisoners.


6. On Hamas's relationship with Iran:

“Iran’s support to us is not conditioned. No one controls or affects our policies.”

7. On whether Hamas wants to bring strict Muslim law to Gaza and the West Bank:

e said no. “The priority is ending the occupation and achieving the national project,” Mr. Meshal said. “As for the nature of the state, it’s to be determined by the people. It will never be imposed upon them.”
more...
http://justworldnews.org/archives/003546.html

[IndianaGreen]

20. Is because of people like Khaled Meshal that Israelis are so paranoid about Hamas

It is really not paranoia when your fears that someone is out to get you are rooted in corroborated facts,

[ProgressiveMuslim]

32. Did you his the "post" button too soon?

What does that mean?

[IndianaGreen]

98. Sometimes in our zeal to defend the oppressed, we tend to overlook their uglier side

or worse yet, make excuses or rationalizations. Case in point, FARC is without doubt a movement of national liberation; however, FARC has made many tactical errors resulting in the deaths and kidnapping of non-combatants. No less than an authority of a Fidel Castro has criticized FARC harshly for its errors and has advocated a change in tactics and behaviour.

The problem with groups such as Hamas and Hizbollah is that despite their perceived "good deeds," they are in reality reactionary movements that have engaged in wanton acts of violence, not only against their "enemy" Israel, but against other Palestinians. Their intolerant theological agendas are also cause for concern to those that believe in full equal rights for women and LGBTs, not to mention for freedom of conscience and its public exercise thereof.

As we are approaching the day of reckoning for the 2-state peace settlement, or its total obliteration as an viable option, it is important to hold all the parties accountable for their deeds, and for their stated goals. A political charter that calls for the elimination of Israel is as unacceptable as one that calls for the permanent assimilation of the Jordan Valley into a Greater Israel.

[Vegasaurus]

35. Hamas is very clear in its goals

always has been.

Israel's "paranoia" is grounded in truth.

Hundreds of dead Israeli kids, due to Hamas suicide bombers, makes people a little "paranoid".

And the Hamas charter carries it a bit further.

Not just dead kids in pizza parlors, but the total annihilation of the nation of Israel.

That's why there is a wall and checkpoints.

Good thing, too.

[azurnoir]

45. Why is there a wall and checkpoints again?

B'Tselem gives these figures for the number of minors killed on each side the total for Israeli kids killed by Palestinians is 123 and for Palestinian kids killed by Israelis is 956 albeit I understand that there is a double standard as to just who is a kid if they are Israeli or if they are Palestinian, note also that these numbers do not include Cast Lead meaning that the number of Palestinian children killed by Israel is well over 1,000

http://www.btselem.org/english/statistics/Casualties.asp

[pelsar]

52. because they stop israelis from being killed...

as history shown...and its not that ancient:

prewall and checkpoints: israeli busses being blown up

post wall and checkpoints: zero

_____

for some its a mere coincidence, for others who live in the area, the change is obvious.

you should expand upon your stats, israelis have always had far less dead and wounded since 48......the numbers are very very lopsided in "favor" of israel.

[Douglas Carpenter]

55. then build the wall on Israeli land and have the checkpoint in Israeli territory

not on someone else's land in someone else's country

[pelsar]

56. that wasnt the objective of the wall....

it was to protect israeli lives..... (and grab some land)

the checkpoints however are far more complicated and takes a but of understanding of how the jihadnikim work...meaning simplistic, emotional 2sec answers dont work..and worse if one does understand how they work and how they are stopped it makes a problem for the anti checkpoint person"

if your really interested in how the checkpoints work, why they are set up and how they are used to stop the bombers I'll explain, but you'll also have to go back and (i'll also explain) as to the history of the checkpoints, when they didnt work and what was learned.....

[Ken Burch]

114. Why do you say "and grab some land" as if that is something almost amusing?

It is the grabbing of this land(including the restriction of some Palestinians from setting foot on parts of their own property) that leads to things like support for Hamas.

You can't subjugate people and not expect them to fight back.

And it isn't possible to use repression to make one side in a battle use different tactics. That's never worked anywhere.

The way to get them to stop fighting is to stop making their lives miserable. Is this so hard to understand?

[azurnoir]

58. The numbers would indicate

that the ones needing protection are the Palestinians

[pelsar]

60. and the Japanese/germans needed protection from the allies too

i thought the simplistic: more are dead, means they are "morally right" was shown to be a false argument long long time ago......

but then nothing like digging them up again, in attempts to show how morally wrong the israelis are.

____

so lets try again:
according to your argument the allies were morally wrong in WWII...(especially america and the UK since Germany in fact did not attack them.....) since they killed many more germans and japanese then were killed......

yes? no?
__

actually the Palestinians need protection from their own....directly and indirectly

[azurnoir]

63. Actually the allies did commit some atrocities in WW2

Dresden being the first that comes to mind, the Soviets too killed German civilians as this recent discovery shows

http://www.thelocal.de/national/20090116-16807.html

why did the public not know more at the time?
The answer is quite obvious news reporting and information availability is a bit more sophisticated these days is it not?

now as for this quote "actually the Palestinians need protection from their own....directly and indirectly"

Are you suggesting that IDF is on some level protecting the Palestinians?

[pelsar]

65. dont have to suggest....just have to listen to some of the Palestinians...

those in E.Jerusalem that dont really want to become part of the PA....the homosexuals and lesbians that run off to israel, the Gazans that tried to escape to israel while hamas gunned them down, other gazans who when interviewed before hamas took over, mentioned that life was better with the israelis.

doesnt make a difference whether one agrees or disagrees with the occupation, those are the voices from those who actually live under the occupation, be it israel or hamas......they should at least be listened to an accepted as to what they say. ... obviously some prefer israelis imperfect democracy and ruling occupation....(and some how your going to tell them that they are wrong?)

___

and you missed the point about the allies......they killed more japanese and germans, so by your general logic, they were morally wrong.......at least that is the logic your applying to the israelis.....isnt it?

[azurnoir]

108. Ah your still clarvoyant I see

"and you missed the point about the allies......they killed more japanese and germans, so by your general logic, they were morally wrong.......at least that is the logic your applying to the israelis.....isnt it?'

well if you really want to talk numbers and WW2 it goes like this

Axis military deaths 6,310,000 and civilian deaths 3,074,000

Allied military deaths 11,955,000 and civilian deaths 32,487,000

http://web.jjay.cuny.edu/~jobrien/reference/ob62.html

'nuf said about that

As to what the "Palestinians" say I think PM covered that one pretty well, anything I would have to say would be redundant

[Ken Burch]

115. You are throwing two things together that are unrelated

Yes, the Palestinians have human rights problems. Yes, women and gays are treated badly there. But this can't be changed through continued IDF oppression. You can't seriously believe that what the IDF is doing is going to democratize Palestinian life.

The Israeli government is fighting to hold land...not for the values of the Rainbow Coalition.

[Douglas Carpenter]

57. for more information about what goes on at the checkpoints

here is an organization of Israeli woman who monitor the checkpoints throughout the occupied territories:

http://www.machsomwatch.org/en

for videos about the realities of checkpoints - made by the heroic Israeli women of Machsom Watch:

http://www.machsomwatch.org/en/videos

[pelsar]

59. are you going to list..

the number of bombs that didnt go off?....the numbers of israelis that are not dead, living with amputations etc?

that is the "other side".....isnt it?

btw are you actually interested in the history of the checkpoints and how they evolved in to what they are today.....or are those things irrelevant?

[ProgressiveMuslim]

73. Pelsar, what is the equation for you? How many Palestinians have to live in abject

oppression so that Israelis like yourselves can live as though you don't have your boots on the necks of millions?

[pelsar]

78. interesting question.....the answer is simple

when the shooting/rockets/mortars/ sucide attempts stop........

when the PA/Hamas in gaza tell hamas in syria, tell the muslim brotherhood, tell the nice "progressive westerners who egg on their youth" to find some other people to poison with their BS philosophy that "anything goes" when it comes to attacking jews/Israelis......

its a pretty simple solution......but difficult to "swallow"...its means dumping 60+ years of culture of various hues that says the "jews" have to go.....

______

as long as we dont have confidence that the second we turn our backs we're going find a knife there (puny rockets on our major cities).....the oppression will continue.

and its not fair and its not just......

[Ken Burch]

125. Not sure it's worth it, PM, Pelsar doen't recognize Palestinians as human beings

n/t.

[shira]

128. no Ken, I'm not sure you recognize Palestinians as human beings actually

What assurances do you have that life will be better for them once Israel retreats from the W.Bank entirely? They'll still be under Hamas yoke (as though suffering immensely under one's own gene pool is a far superior solution). Hamas will still be at war against Israel and there will be more OCL's with far more Palestinian casualties. It doesn't seem you give a shit whether Palestinians suffer under Iran's proxy leadership - and you're indifferent to the inevitable results (more OCL's) that will occur once Israel retreats and Hamas is still in power and as belligerant as ever reigning down death on Tel Aviv and Jerusalem. Maybe you don't mind Israelis being bombed, but realize that 20% of Israelis are non-Jews (mostly Arabs). If you want Arab suffering to stop, your solution will just make things 10x worse.

For that matter, when PM ignores what Iran's proxy Hamas does to her own Palestinian people via sharia law, no civil rights, oppression, abuse of children, etc, I question whether even PM cares about Palestinians.

[Ken Burch]

148. I do oppose Hamas. It's just that I know that what Israel is doing

cannot result in Hamas being replaced as the sector of the Palestinian leadership it currently is. Why can't you understand that what the IDF is doing is only strengthening the support Hamas holds among Palestinians?

And I don't have assurances that life will be better for them when the occupation ends. But it is a certainty that keeping Israel IN the West Bank guarantees that life can't be better. Why is it that YOU still can't see that?

The Occupation prevents positive change and strengthens Hamas. Even if Hamas were to be discredited as a result of hardline Israeli policies, the only possible change would be the emergence of an even MORE extreme Palestinian leadership.

Current Israeli notions of what builds security have clearly met the definition of insanity: doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.

But then again from your vantage point on the West Bank of the Charles, you may not have the best view of the situation.

[shira]

152. one more time, Ken, because it's hard talking to someone who isn't realistic

Think Hezbollah.

According to your logic, if only Israel pulled out Lebanon that would make things better and end Hezbollah and make them weaker.

Israel pulled out completely from Lebanon (according to the UN) in 2000. Fast forward to 2006. Are Lebanese suffering less than before the 2000 pullout? Is Iranian backed Hezbollah stronger or weaker, Ken? Lebanon before 2000 vs. Lebanon after 2006. Which is better, Ken?

Why do you think things will be different in Gaza?

[Ken Burch]

153. What's realistic about expecting that continuing the occupation

will change the Palestinian leadership when continuing the Occupation has never had that effect before?

If a tactic has never previously worked, is it realistic to keep using that tactic?

And I didn't say that a pullout BY itself would create utopia. I said a pullout accompanied by several other steps. Please stop oversimplifying my position on this.

Things in Gaza and the West Bank would have the chance of improving because there's always going to be a greater possibility of getting a people NOT under military occupation of acting differently than there is of achieving that while maintaining the occupation.

What's not realistic is pretending that the Occupation actually improves Israeli security.

[shira]

157. PA leadership is not democratic, Ken....electing dictators does not a democracy make

so to answer your:

Things in Gaza and the West Bank would have the chance of improving because there's always going to be a greater possibility of getting a people NOT under military occupation of acting differently than there is of achieving that while maintaining the occupation.

Which people will act differently when not under occupation, Ken? Good moderate dissenters of Hamas who will be shot for wanting true peace with Israelis?

The leadership certainly won't act differently because the fanatical jihadis in charge only sense weakness (like Lebanon 2000 and Gaza 2005) when Israel tries to make peace with an entity sworn to Israel's destruction. When will you get it through your head that an entity like Hamas (or Hezbollah) which thinks so little of the civilian pawns they oppress will think in terms of peace when it comes to Israeli Jews who they hate infinitely more than the Arab women and children they abuse daily? What kind of miracle are you hoping for?

[azurnoir]

64. Thanks I remember a thread about one

of their members witnessing the shooting of a Palestinian youth at a checkpoint because a soldier thought he was carrying a bomb.

[Douglas Carpenter]

36. The former Israeli Foreign Minister, Colin Powell and countless others support dialogue with Hamas

Is this because they all want to destroy Israel? Or is it because they understand that there is a difference between pragmatic political realities and over the top political rhetoric, made both by some Hamas leaders and made by those who oppose talking with Hamas .

They understand that to not include Hamas in dialogue is to oppose peace between Israel and the Palestininians - since without Hamas at the table, peace is impossible

Interview with Former Israeli Foreign Minister and lead Israeli negotiator, Shlomo Ben-Ami:

SHLOMO BEN-AMI: Yes, Hamas. I think that in my view there is almost sort of poetic justice with this victory of Hamas. After all, what is the reason for this nostalgia for Arafat and for the P.L.O.? Did they run the affairs of the Palestinians in a clean way? You mentioned the corruption, the inefficiency. Of course, Israel has contributed a lot to the disintegration of the Palestinian system, no doubt about it, but their leaders failed them. Their leaders betrayed them, and the victory of Hamas is justice being made in many ways. So we cannot preach democracy and then say that those who won are not accepted by us. Either there is democracy or there is no democracy.

And with these people, I think they are much more pragmatic than is normally perceived. In the 1990s, they invented the concept of a temporary settlement with Israel. 1990s was the first time that Hamas spoke about a temporary settlement with Israel. In 2003, they declared unilaterally a truce, and the reason they declared the truce is this, that with Arafat, whose the system of government was one of divide and rule, they were discarded from the political system. Mahmoud Abbas has integrated them into the political system, and this is what brought them to the truce. They are interested in politicizing themselves, in becoming a politic entity. And we need to try and see ways where we can work with them.

Now, everybody says they need first to recognize the state of Israel and end terrorism. Believe me, I would like them to do so today, but they are not going to do that. They are eventually going to do that in the future, but only as part of a quid pro quo, just as the P.L.O. did it. The P.L.O., when Rabin came to negotiate with them, also didn't recognize the state of Israel, and they engaged in all kind of nasty practices. And therefore, we need to be much more realistic and abandon worn-out cliches and see whether we can reach something with these people. I believe that a long-term interim agreement between Israel and Hamas, even if it is not directly negotiated between the parties, but through a third party, is feasible and possible. "

from during debate with Norman Finkelstein on the T.V. program, "Democracy Now" with Amy Goodman. Full transcript:
http://www.normanfinkelstein.com/article.php?pg=11&ar=140

Collin Powell and several other prominent mainstream leaders support dialogue with Hamas
and signed a letter which includes a paragraph very clearly stating so - along with calling for real talks which covers substantial real issues.

Some of the signatories frankly surprised me:

"As to Hamas, we believe that a genuine dialogue with the organization is far preferable to its isolation; it could be conducted, for example, by the UN and Quartet Middle East envoys. Promoting a cease-fire between Israel and Gaza would be a good starting point."

Partial list of Signatories:


Zbigniew Brzezinski -Former National Security Adviser to President Jimmy Carter

Lee H. Hamilton - Former Congressman (D-IN) and Co-chair of the Iraq Study Group

Carla Hills - Former U.S. Trade Representative under President George H.W. Bush

Nancy Kassebaum-Baker - Former Senator (R-KS)

Thomas R. Pickering - Former Under Secretary of State under President Bill Clinton

Brent Scowcroft - Former National Security Adviser to President Gerald Ford and President George H.W. Bush

Theodore C. Sorensen - Former Special Counsel and Adviser to President John F. Kennedy

Paul Volcker - Former Chairman of the Board of Governors of the U.S. Federal Reserve System

Jodie Allen - Senior Editor, Pew Research Center; Former Editor of the Outlook Section, Washington Post

Harriet Babbitt - Former U.S. Ambassador to the Organization of American States; Former Director of the National Democratic Institute for International Affairs

Birch Bayh - Former U.S. Senator (D-IN)

Shlomo Ben-Ami - Former Foreign Minister of Israel

Lincoln Chafee - Distinguished Visiting Fellow at Brown University’s Watson Institute for International Studies; Former U.S. Senator (R-RI)

Harvey Cox - Hollis Professor of Divinity, Harvard Divinity School

Michael Cox - Professor, London School of Economics and Director of the Cold War Studies Centre

James Dobbins - Former Assistant Secretary of State

Joseph Duffey - Director, U.S. Information Agency, 1993-1999; Assistant Secretary of State for Education and Culture, 1977

Peter Edelman - Professor of Law and Co-Director of the Joint Degree in Law and Public Policy; Former Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation

Gareth Evans - President & CEO of International Crisis Group; Former Foreign Minister of Australia

Leon Fuerth -Former National Security Advisor to Vice President Al Gore

Gary Hart -Wirth Chair at the University of Colorado; Chair of the Council for a Livable World and the American Security Project; Former U.S. Senator (D-CO)

Robert E. Hunter - Senior Advisor, RAND Corporation; Former U.S. Ambassador to NATO

Robert Hutchings - Diplomat in Residence, Woodrow Wilson School at Princeton University; Former Chairman of the National Intelligence Council

Daniel Levy - Director, Middle East Policy Initiative, New America Foundation; Senior Fellow, Century Foundation; Lead Israeli Drafter, Geneva Initiative; Member of Israeli Delegation, Taba Negotiations

Anatol Lieven - Professor of War Studies, Kings College London; Senior Research Fellow, New America Foundation

John McLaughlin -Former Deputy Director, Central Intelligence Agency

Everett Mendelsohn -Professor Emeritus of the History of Science, Harvard University

Diana Villiers Negroponte - Foreign Policy Studies, Brookings Institution

William E. Odom - Lieutenant General, U.S. Army (Ret.); Senior Fellow, Hudson Institute; Professor of Political Science, Yale University; Former Director of the National Security Agency, 1985-1988

Christopher Patten - Co-Chair of International Crisis Group; Chancellor of the University of Oxford; Former EU Commissioner for Foreign Relations; Former Commander in Chief and British Governor of Hong Kong

Edward L. Peck - Former U.S. Chief of Mission to Iraq; Former Ambassador to Mauritania

Larry Pressler - Former U.S. Senator (R-SD) & Member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee; Member, Council on Foreign Relations

Theodore Roosevelt IV - Managing Director, Lehman Brothers

J. J. Sheehan - General, U.S. Marine Corps (Ret.)

Eric Shinseki - General, US Army (Ret.)

Former Chief of Staff, U.S. Army

Stephen J. Solarz - Former U.S. Congressman (D-NY)

Robert and Renee Belfer - Professor in International AffairsJohn F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University

Phil Wilcox - President, Foundation for Middle East Peace; Former U.S. Ambassador at Large; Former Special Assistant to the Undersecretary for Management at the U.S. Department of State; Former Director for Regional Affairs, Bureau for Middle Eastern and South Asian Affairs, U.S. Department of State

Lawrence B. Wilkerson - Colonel, U.S. Army (Ret.); Pamela C. Harriman Visiting Professor of Government, College of William Mary; Professorial Lecturer, George Washington University; Former Chief of Staff, U.S. Department of State; Former Director, U.S. Marine Corps War College

Joseph Wilson - Ambassador in President George H. W. Bush’s Administration; Special Assistant to President Clinton; Senior Director for African Affairs, National Security Council

Timothy Wirth - President, U.N. Foundation; Former U.S. Senator (D-CO)

Frank Wisner - Former U.S. Ambassador to Zambia, Egypt, the Philippines and India; Former Under Secretary of Defense for Policy; Former Under Secretary of State for International Security Affairs; Vice Chairman of External Affairs at American International Group

link to full letter and all the signatories:

http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/Annapolis%20Summit%20Statement.htm

.

[Fozzledick]

104. Gaza militants fire mortar, anti-tank missile at IDF troops

Gaza militants fired a mortar shell and an anti-tank missile at Israel Defense Forces troops south of the coastal territory on Thursday, Army Radio reported.

The incident, which was the latest incident in a series of cross-border attacks, caused neither damage nor casualties.

On Wednesday, Israel Air Force warplanes bombed three smuggling tunnels in southern Gaza, near its border with Egypt, wounding four people.

The IDF confirmed the attack, which it launched a few hours after militants in the Hamas-ruled Strip launched three mortar shells at the western Negev.

The mortar salvo came one day after the New York Times published an interview with Hamas political leader Khaled Meshal, whose Islamist group controls Gaza, in which he said gunmen in the coastal strip had unilaterally ceased cross border attacks.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1083803.html

So now we know what Meshal meant by "not firing the rockets". Just mortars.

[IndianaGreen]

120. Kick to the orginal story that quotes Khaled Meshal of Hamas

there is a rehash of the interview from Haaretz floating around.