Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * - - - 1 votes

Israel pushes plans for 3000 new settlements


  • Please log in to reply
254 replies to this topic

#121    Yamato

Yamato

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 10,360 posts
  • Joined:08 Aug 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 12 December 2012 - 06:35 AM

View PostErikl, on 12 December 2012 - 06:32 AM, said:

Wow... Ex. the South African treatment will be relevant when Israel will become an apartheid state. Are you adding to the list of the your moot accusations that Israel is an apartheid state?

WHO U KIDDIN - the Jewish Autonomous Oblast was a joke. It was in fact a way to send Soviet Jews to Siberia. If it was a serious well thought plan, then the Jews would have been offered a state in the Pale of Settlement, where the vast majority of Sivet Jews lived (that would be eastern Poland, Ukraine, Belarus etc.).
If your settlements are a part of Israel, and you sure act like they are, then you are an apartheid State, and quite a horrid one.

"To deny people their human rights is to challenge their very humanity.   To impose on them a wretched life of hunger and deprivation is to dehumanize them." ~ Nelson Mandela

#122    Erikl

Erikl

    Alien Abducter

  • Member
  • 4,520 posts
  • Joined:23 Feb 2004
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Israel

Posted 12 December 2012 - 06:49 AM

View PostYamato, on 12 December 2012 - 06:35 AM, said:

If your settlements are a part of Israel, and you sure act like they are, then you are an apartheid State, and quite a horrid one.

No we're not. We are a country in conflict with another nation. That's it.

Being that the motives of Israeli policies in the territories aren't racially motivated, or Israeli Palestinians, which are of the exact same ethnicity\nationality as non-Israeli Palestinians, would have treated the same way or harsher. They aren't.

Second, the territories exist in Area C alone, which has a Jewish majority of 87%. Only 50,000-70,000 Palestinians live there. The rest of the Palestinians, or 97% of them, live under self rule and no settlement exist in Area A and B.

How would Israel become an apartheid state?
Easily. Should Israel annex all of Gaza, West Bank, and repel citizenship from all it's Palestinian residents, and these residents will become a majority and will be kept out of Israeli politics, and different buses, different universities and different services will be given to Jews and Palestinians, then - this will be an apatheid state. None of the above happens currently in Israel and no serious, major political party has any plans to make this happen.

I mean, come on. In a country that a Palestinian high judge has tried and jailed an ex-Israeli president, how can you seriously claim apartheid?


P.S

An interesting fact is, that the is an apartheid against Palestinians right now in the middle east. Lebanon and Syria give no citizenship nor political rights to the Palestinians that have been living there for decades and for 3 generations now. They keep them away from many jobs, prevent them from accumulating any property, etc. These are hundreds of thousands of Palestinians, living that way.

Posted Image

"We live in a world where when Christians kill Muslims, it's a crusade; When Jews kill Muslims, it's a massacre; When Muslims kill Muslims, it's the weather channel. Nobody cares"

#123    Yamato

Yamato

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 10,360 posts
  • Joined:08 Aug 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 12 December 2012 - 08:19 AM

View PostErikl, on 12 December 2012 - 06:49 AM, said:

We are a country in conflict with another nation. That's it.
Palestine is a nation then?   Then it's time that Israel treated it as such.   Get your goons and dozers, your fences and settlers out of there and respect some sovereignty already.

You'd think that your neighbors would have cleaned up your Palestinian problem for you by now, eh?   That's too bad.

"To deny people their human rights is to challenge their very humanity.   To impose on them a wretched life of hunger and deprivation is to dehumanize them." ~ Nelson Mandela

#124    ExpandMyMind

ExpandMyMind

    Telekinetic

  • Closed
  • 6,628 posts
  • Joined:23 Jan 2009

Posted 12 December 2012 - 08:31 AM

View Postdocyabut2, on 12 December 2012 - 02:42 AM, said:

Where else would Briton and the UN  have offered land and a state to the Jews,except for the fact that is the land where they had originally came from?

First, they didn't offer them land, they offered them a 'home' in someone else's land. The British made it illegal for Jews to buy land in 90% of Palestine because this fact was recognised.

They offered the National Home to them for their help in WW1. Which is part of what led to their persecution in Germany up to and during WW2.

And a large part of the reason that they were offered land in Palestine, it should be noted, was because many Brits were religious Christian Zionists (Churchill was one).

Also, they looked at many places for a home, but Zionism and Zionist leaders had already been pushing for the Holy Land for decades.

Edited by ExpandMyMind, 12 December 2012 - 08:47 AM.


#125    ExpandMyMind

ExpandMyMind

    Telekinetic

  • Closed
  • 6,628 posts
  • Joined:23 Jan 2009

Posted 12 December 2012 - 08:46 AM

View PostErikl, on 12 December 2012 - 06:32 AM, said:

Wow... Ex. the South African treatment will be relevant when Israel will become an apartheid state. Are you adding to the list of the your moot accusations that Israel is an apartheid state?

The South African treatment does not necessitate a state being 'Apartheid'. It is for rogue nations and oppressive regimes.


And there is much about Israeli treatment of Palestinians in the Occupied Territories that does conform with Apartheid. You have different roads for Arabs and Jews, and I even read in B'tselem the other day there that there are to be different buses! One for Arabs and one for Jews (this is part of a larger policy of segregation). Many others have brought up the similarities between Israel and \South Africa, but personally, as I have stated to you before, I don't believe there is enough information on exactly what Apartheid is (as there has only been one case) to define Israel as such, and the lines are further blurred due to the fact that Israel is an illegal occupier in those territories - it is not part of their country. But no one can deny that there are many policies in the West Bank that are racially motivated.

Quote

Second, the territories exist in Area C alone, which has a Jewish majority of 87%. Only 50,000-70,000 Palestinians live there. The rest of the Palestinians, or 97% of them, live under self rule and no settlement exist in Area A and B.

This is part of why Israel think they can claim these areas. It would be like Irish invading Wales and sticking to the sparsely populated regions so that the Welsh were then outnumbered (only possible due to the Irish drawing their own lines lol), then the Irish claiming that they are majority so it is there's. I don't think this is what you were saying above, mind you, but you and others have claimed it before.

Quote

An interesting fact is, that the is an apartheid against Palestinians right now in the middle east. Lebanon and Syria give no citizenship nor political rights to the Palestinians that have been living there for decades and for 3 generations now. They keep them away from many jobs, prevent them from accumulating any property, etc. These are hundreds of thousands of Palestinians, living that way.

And yet you would have us believe the nonsense that 'all Arabs were the same';'there were no cultural differences';'therefore Palestinians didn't have a right to their own country, but 2000 years removed and watered down Jews do'. Doesn't really cut it when you consider just how their 'brothers' have treated them.

Edited by ExpandMyMind, 12 December 2012 - 09:17 AM.


#126    acidhead

acidhead

    Were Not Your Slaves!

  • Member
  • 10,346 posts
  • Joined:13 Feb 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Victoria, BC CANADA

Posted 12 December 2012 - 09:01 AM

View PostExpandMyMind, on 12 December 2012 - 08:31 AM, said:

First, they didn't offer them land, they offered them a 'home' in someone else's land. The British made it illegal for Jews to buy land in 90% of Palestine because this fact was recognised.

They offered the National Home to them for their help in WW1. Which is part of what led to their persecution in Germany up to and during WW2.

And a large part of the reason that they were offered land in Palestine, it should be noted, was because many Brits were religious Christian Zionists (Churchill was one).

Also, they looked at many places for a home, but Zionism and Zionist leaders had already been pushing for the Holy Land for decades.

View PostExpandMyMind, on 12 December 2012 - 08:31 AM, said:

First, they didn't offer them land, they offered them a 'home' in someone else's land. The British made it illegal for Jews to buy land in 90% of Palestine because this fact was recognised.

They offered the National Home to them for their help in WW1. Which is part of what led to their persecution in Germany up to and during WW2.

And a large part of the reason that they were offered land in Palestine, it should be noted, was because many Brits were religious Christian Zionists (Churchill was one).

Also, they looked at many places for a home, but Zionism and Zionist leaders had already been pushing for the Holy Land for decades.

NYC would have been a great place.

"there is no wrong or right - just popular opinion"

#127    Br Cornelius

Br Cornelius

    Omnipotent Entity

  • Member
  • 9,781 posts
  • Joined:13 Aug 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eire

  • Stupid Monkeys.

    Life Sucks.
    Get over it.

Posted 12 December 2012 - 09:10 AM

View Postacidhead, on 12 December 2012 - 09:01 AM, said:

NYC would have been a great place.
Indeed it would - far more appropriate than Palestine :tu:

Br Cornelius

I believe nothing, but I have my suspicions.

Robert Anton Wilson

#128    Erikl

Erikl

    Alien Abducter

  • Member
  • 4,520 posts
  • Joined:23 Feb 2004
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Israel

Posted 12 December 2012 - 10:01 AM

View PostYamato, on 12 December 2012 - 08:19 AM, said:

Palestine is a nation then?   Then it's time that Israel treated it as such.   Get your goons and dozers, your fences and settlers out of there and respect some sovereignty already.

ExpandMyMind said:

And yet you would have us believe the nonsense that 'all Arabs were the same';'there were no cultural differences';'therefore Palestinians didn't have a right to their own country, but 2000 years removed and watered down Jews do'. Doesn't really cut it when you consider just how their 'brothers' have treated them.

Yamato and Ex, Ofcourse today there is a Palestinian nation. Don't twist my words - I've never there aren't. I specifically said that denying this today is stupid.

I was, however, criticizing and attacking your attempt to claim that this newly created nation in fact existed for centuries and that what they consider as Palestine today, wasn't the creation of British colonialism, but was in it's form their ancient country which was somehow belonged to them more than to the Jews.

And the fact that Palestinian are treated that way by their brethren is repulsive, yet has nothing to do with the uniquness of the Palestinians, but more to the cynicism of the Arab states that have no problem using millions of thier own people as hostages in their conflict against Israel.

There is no real reason why these people shouldn't become Lebanese, Syrians, etc. Heck, they live in Lebanon or Syria more than they lived under British Mandate of Palestine. The only two countries in the region to give full citizenship to the Palestinians are Israel and Jordan.

Posted Image

"We live in a world where when Christians kill Muslims, it's a crusade; When Jews kill Muslims, it's a massacre; When Muslims kill Muslims, it's the weather channel. Nobody cares"

#129    Erikl

Erikl

    Alien Abducter

  • Member
  • 4,520 posts
  • Joined:23 Feb 2004
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Israel

Posted 12 December 2012 - 10:17 AM

Quote

they offered them a 'home' in someone else's land.

Rubbish. There was no Palestine. The sole entity to have claim to those lands was Turkey, and they relinquished them.

The UN and the League of Nations have both retified Jewish entitlements to the land. It's part of the international law mind you.

Quote

The British made it illegal for Jews to buy land in 90% of Palestine because this fact was recognised.

Again, more twisted "facts". The British chopped off 78% of Palestine when they created it and gave it to the Hashemite King as a gratitude to his affair with Mr Lawrance of Arabia in WW1. He should have had all of the Arabian peninsula but he was then kicked out by the Saudi clan.

That was their original intent - 78% of the land will go to the Arabs, and 22% will be for the Jews.

However, after a series of religious anti-Semitic pogrom, instigated by the Palestinian leader Haj Amin Al-Husseini (father of Palestinian nationalism and a Nazi general), during the 1920s and 1930s, the British issued an Arab-appeasing set of "White Papers" harshly limiting Jewish immigration and settlement. Every time the Arabs killed Jews, the British gave more and more onto the demands of the Arabs.

Quote

Which is part of what led to their persecution in Germany up to and during WW2.
Wow. Almost, just almost, Holocaust denial. Nazi anti-Semitism had nothing to do with Zionism nor Jewish help to the British in WW1, as many, many officers in the German army were Jewish. Don't try to blame Zionism for the Holocaust as well.

Quote

Also, they looked at many places for a home, but Zionism and Zionist leaders had already been pushing for the Holy Land for decades.
Jews have been living there for ages!

Also, I know this time you didn't say it, but let's make it clear - Zionism was a secular movement, dominated largely by socialists, and was opposed harshly by ultra-religious Jews (the very fact that they revived hebrew as a spoken language is for many religious Jews seen as blasphemy).

Posted Image

"We live in a world where when Christians kill Muslims, it's a crusade; When Jews kill Muslims, it's a massacre; When Muslims kill Muslims, it's the weather channel. Nobody cares"

#130    Saru

Saru

    Site Webmaster

  • 19,902 posts
  • Joined:06 Mar 2001
  • Gender:Male

  • "The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious." - Albert Einstein

Posted 12 December 2012 - 10:38 AM

View PostYamato, on 12 December 2012 - 06:35 AM, said:

If your settlements are a part of Israel, and you sure act like they are, then you are an apartheid State, and quite a horrid one.

View PostYamato, on 12 December 2012 - 08:19 AM, said:

Get your goons and dozers, your fences and settlers out of there and respect some sovereignty already. You'd think that your neighbors would have cleaned up your Palestinian problem for you by now, eh?   That's too bad.

Comments like this are not helping matters, making blatantly anti-Israeli comments when you are discussing a topic like this with someone who is from Israel is only going to lead to hostility, bickering and another closed thread.

Please keep your replies civil and respectful.


#131    Yamato

Yamato

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 10,360 posts
  • Joined:08 Aug 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 12 December 2012 - 10:39 AM

View PostErikl, on 12 December 2012 - 10:01 AM, said:

Yamato and Ex, Ofcourse today there is a Palestinian nation. Don't twist my words - I've never there aren't. I specifically said that denying this today is stupid.

I was, however, criticizing and attacking your attempt to claim that this newly created nation in fact existed for centuries and that what they consider as Palestine today, wasn't the creation of British colonialism, but was in it's form their ancient country which was somehow belonged to them more than to the Jews.
That wasn't my attempt.

Of whose course is there a Palestinian nation?   I don't think that history or governments are reasons to deny anyone their rights today, yesterday, or tomorrow.  I can't step into my time machine and undo the wrongs of the past, so I'll insist that such wrongs are righted in the present, and prevented in the future.

"To deny people their human rights is to challenge their very humanity.   To impose on them a wretched life of hunger and deprivation is to dehumanize them." ~ Nelson Mandela

#132    Yamato

Yamato

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 10,360 posts
  • Joined:08 Aug 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 12 December 2012 - 10:41 AM

View PostSaru, on 12 December 2012 - 10:38 AM, said:

Comments like this are not helping matters, making blatantly anti-Israeli comments when you are discussing a topic like this with someone who is from Israel is only going to lead to hostility, bickering and another closed thread.

Please keep your replies civil and respectful.
Asking someone if their illegal settlements are a part of their own nation and concluding they're a reprehensible Apartheid state is against the rules of this forum?   Why is being anti-Israel a ban-able offense?

"To deny people their human rights is to challenge their very humanity.   To impose on them a wretched life of hunger and deprivation is to dehumanize them." ~ Nelson Mandela

#133    ExpandMyMind

ExpandMyMind

    Telekinetic

  • Closed
  • 6,628 posts
  • Joined:23 Jan 2009

Posted 12 December 2012 - 10:41 AM

View PostErikl, on 12 December 2012 - 10:01 AM, said:

Yamato and Ex, Ofcourse today there is a Palestinian nation. Don't twist my words - I've never there aren't. I specifically said that denying this today is stupid.

I was, however, criticizing and attacking your attempt to claim that this newly created nation in fact existed for centuries and that what they consider as Palestine today, wasn't the creation of British colonialism, but was in it's form their ancient country which was somehow belonged to them more than to the Jews.

And the fact that Palestinian are treated that way by their brethren is repulsive, yet has nothing to do with the uniquness of the Palestinians, but more to the cynicism of the Arab states that have no problem using millions of thier own people as hostages in their conflict against Israel.

There is no real reason why these people shouldn't become Lebanese, Syrians, etc. Heck, they live in Lebanon or Syria more than they lived under British Mandate of Palestine. The only two countries in the region to give full citizenship to the Palestinians are Israel and Jordan.

1. I have been challenging your views that reflect the silly notion that, because they didn't have a 'country' before a certain point in time, somehow the Palestinians didn't have a right to the land. All the while you are trying to claim that somehow the immigrants of Israel did. You try to nullify Palestinian claim on the land by claiming there were no 'Palestinians'. You are completely incorrect in your views.

2. I have never claimed that the nation of Palestine had existed for centuries. What I know is that the people who lived there had lived there for centuries (and some, most even, for far longer). It is the people, not the way they identify themselves, that matter. You are applying the faulty logic that because a group of people had not become a nation in the eyes of the World, they are somehow relinquished of their human right to claim that land. This is nonsense. When they claimed their identity as a nation of people in Palestine does not have any reflection on whether or not the land is theirs to claim.

Your theory is defunct anyway, as they gained their national identity decades before Israelis gained theirs - 'Israelis' didn't even live there, and before the end result for Jews of WW2, Zionism would not have been considered by most Jews as a realistic aspiration. If the events concerning Jews in WW2 had not happened, there would have been no mass immigration to Palestine (this can be seen clearly when we consider the fact that 2/3 of the World's Jews do not reside in Israel), therefore one cannot try to claim that simply because Zionism existed before Palestinian Nationalism (which can be argued, as some form of Palestinian Nationalism existed during the Ottoman Empire), the mass immigration of the Europeans somehow had more legitimacy. It wasn't even adopted by most until after WW2.

Your entire premise is based on your faulty belief that to claim a land, a people need to be a country, when, in reality, to have a legitimate claim on a land, all a people has to do is to have lived there.

It all comes back to the lies of 'A land without a people for a people without a land'.


#134    Saru

Saru

    Site Webmaster

  • 19,902 posts
  • Joined:06 Mar 2001
  • Gender:Male

  • "The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious." - Albert Einstein

Posted 12 December 2012 - 10:52 AM

View PostYamato, on 12 December 2012 - 10:41 AM, said:

Asking someone if their illegal settlements are a part of their own nation and concluding they're a reprehensible Apartheid state is against the rules of this forum?   Why is being anti-Israel a ban-able offense?

That depends on how you define anti-Israel.

If by anti-Israel you mean that you don't support Israel's position and policies then that's fine.

If by anti-Israel you mean that you expect to openly attack, criticise and defame Israel at every opportunity, to make inflammatory and derogatory remarks about the country in discussions or to bait and attack other members who happen to be from Israel, to promote an anti-Israeli agenda on the forums via your choice of comments, source links, videos and topics - obviously that is not fine.


#135    ExpandMyMind

ExpandMyMind

    Telekinetic

  • Closed
  • 6,628 posts
  • Joined:23 Jan 2009

Posted 12 December 2012 - 11:10 AM

View PostErikl, on 12 December 2012 - 10:17 AM, said:

Rubbish. There was no Palestine. The sole entity to have claim to those lands was Turkey, and they relinquished them.

The UN and the League of Nations have both retified Jewish entitlements to the land. It's part of the international law mind you.



Again, more twisted "facts". The British chopped off 78% of Palestine when they created it and gave it to the Hashemite King as a gratitude to his affair with Mr Lawrance of Arabia in WW1. He should have had all of the Arabian peninsula but he was then kicked out by the Saudi clan.

That was their original intent - 78% of the land will go to the Arabs, and 22% will be for the Jews.

However, after a series of religious anti-Semitic pogrom, instigated by the Palestinian leader Haj Amin Al-Husseini (father of Palestinian nationalism and a Nazi general), during the 1920s and 1930s, the British issued an Arab-appeasing set of "White Papers" harshly limiting Jewish immigration and settlement. Every time the Arabs killed Jews, the British gave more and more onto the demands of the Arabs.


Wow. Almost, just almost, Holocaust denial. Nazi anti-Semitism had nothing to do with Zionism nor Jewish help to the British in WW1, as many, many officers in the German army were Jewish. Don't try to blame Zionism for the Holocaust as well.


Jews have been living there for ages!

Also, I know this time you didn't say it, but let's make it clear - Zionism was a secular movement, dominated largely by socialists, and was opposed harshly by ultra-religious Jews (the very fact that they revived hebrew as a spoken language is for many religious Jews seen as blasphemy).

I'll start from the bottom up.

1. Zionism is a religious movement. It was based on the absurd notion of prophesy. To try to deny this is simply silly. This is one of the reasons it gained so much support in Jewry. Ultra Orthodox Jews do oppose it, but then there are others who also support it. Look at the Israelis illegally populating the Occupied Territories. They are for the most part, heavily religious because they believe they have a religious claim to the land. Look at the Likud party and the entire reason for Occupying 'Judea' and 'Samaria'.

2. A minority of Palestinian Jews had been living there for ages. You are trying to claim that because a small group of people have lived there for a long time, their long removed brethren somehow have a claim to the land. This is astoundingly ridiculous. African Americans have no claim to any part of Africa, Australians and Americans have no claim to any part of Britain, Mexicans have no claim to Spain, etc, etc, etc - - and their 'people' are a majority in those lands, while Palestinian Jews were outnumbered by Palestinian Arabs by around 10-1. How on earth you can  think that European Jews had a claim to Palestine is beyond me. It is so absurd, there are no words to properly describe this fallacy.

3. Holocaust denial? What on earth are you talking about? And I did not blame Zionism for the Holocaust. Again, whaaaat are you talking about? Zionism nearly prevented the Holocaust! You have strayed far, my friend.

You should read up on Jewish involvement in WW1. Haven't you heard of the planes dropping leaflet upon leaflet in Jewish areas of Germany, declaring that Jews were on the side of the allies? That's not even the point. Their influence and involvement in WW1 played a large part in bringing Germany down.

4.  "Again, more twisted "facts". The British chopped off 78% of Palestine when they created it and gave it to the Hashemite King as a gratitude to his affair with Mr Lawrance of Arabia in WW1. He should have had all of the Arabian peninsula but he was then kicked out by the Saudi clan."

Wrong. If you had bothered to read the British documents I provided for you in the nonsensical 'Jordan is Palestine' thread, you would clearly have seen that in the letter drafted by the British, that the area West of the Jordan River was never a part of what was promised to them. Jordan is not Palestine. I can't believe you actually are trying to peddle this nonsense. Nice try though.

"That was their original intent - 78% of the land will go to the Arabs, and 22% will be for the Jews."

This is a straight up lie. No 'land' was 'intended'. Jews were never to be given a country at all! What are you talking about? They were offered a 'National Home', a place to reside, in another's land which the British at that time Occupied. The first that Jews were intended to be given land was after the years of violence due to Palestinian Nationalism and the realisation by the Palestinians that Zionism called for Jews to have all of the land. The document where it was first suggested that Jews were to have their own country was first suggested was the Peel Commission - and that was over 20 years after the Balfour Declaration.

5. "Rubbish. There was no Palestine. The sole entity to have claim to those lands was Turkey, and they relinquished them."

This is more of your warped theory that a people don't have a claim to a land they have lived on for centuries, and most even longer. It is impossible to reason with such, I'm sorry, idiotic theories. You do realise that you would be laughed out of any respectable university for forwarding this absolute nonsense.

I'll say one more time: the people who were BORN have HAVE LIVED on a land and have traceable history on said land are the ONLY ones with any sort of legitimate claim to the land. The majority of NEW Israel's population were recent immigrants with 2000 years of history NOT tied to Palestine. They had no legitimate claim.

Edited by ExpandMyMind, 12 December 2012 - 11:24 AM.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users