Israeli Columnist Is Fired

[Persia]

In a brief “Note to Readers” published Tuesday on the front page of The Jerusalem Post, the newspaper announced that it had parted ways with a columnist who wrote last week on his blog that terrorist attacks on Israelis were “justified” because Palestinians living under Israeli occupation since 1967 “have a right to resist.”

http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/08/30/israeli-columnist-is-fired-for-writing-that-palestinian-terrorism-is-justified/

[ExpandMyMind]

It's a difficult and complicated one, but I have to say that, to an extent, I do agree. By this I mean that the Palestinians DO have a fundamental right to resist an occupying force. The manner in which they SOMETIMES (but not very often at all these days) do so though (by carrying out attacks aimed at killing as many civilians as possible inside Israel, for instance), is not the way to go.

[Erikl]

Ex, I know the whitewash that many try to do to the term "terrorism" is somewhat sucessful, and many buy into this "one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter". However, I have devised a very simple test to actually separate freedom fighters and resistance movements from terrorism. It goes like this:

A freedom fighter, from it's core definition as fighting for the freedom of his people / group of interest, will largely direct it's asymmetrical warfare to the oppressor's armed forces. It's main attacks would be against the oppressor's bases of operations, it's soldiers or combatants, etc. If enemy civilians are harmed, they are but mere collateral damage.

A terrorist has no real aspiration to actually liberate it's people or anyone else. They do what they do for an ideology, yes, usually nationalistic or religious, but their main agenda is to spread terror to make their hate subject live in terror. They attack both armed forces and civilians, for them it doesn't matter as long as the people that are labelled as part of the enemy are dead or terrorized, and to the outside world will use the shaky argument that all of these civilians are potential combatants. They would usually call themselves freedom fighters as well. They just as might be part of an oppressed group, but they can also be state sponsored.

Would you agree to that?

[knighterror]

If you think about it though, all Israeli citizens, man and woman, must serve in the IDF. So to Palestinians all Israelis are their adversaries. They can't come and go as they please because of checkpoints, and constantly lose more land to settlements. I'd feel like I was being occupied. The IDF can enter the west bank and gaza anytime they want and attack them, but it is nearly impossible for the Palestinians to go into Israel to attack their bases and other military targets, so they do what they can to retaliate or muster some form of resistance. I'm not condoning terrorism, but anyone here would do the same under the same circumstances. Their will always be casualties in armed struggles. Hell, before the modern era, the prizes of war were rape, looting, and slaves to the common soilder. Now, we are "civilized". And apparently, this is what a civilized resistance looks like.

[Erikl]

If you think about it though, all Israeli citizens, man and woman, must serve in the IDF. So to Palestinians all Israelis are their adversaries. They can't come and go as they please because of checkpoints, and constantly lose more land to settlements. I'd feel like I was being occupied. The IDF can enter the west bank and gaza anytime they want and attack them, but it is nearly impossible for the Palestinians to go into Israel to attack their bases and other military targets, so they do what they can to retaliate or muster some form of resistance. I'm not condoning terrorism, but anyone here would do the same under the same circumstances. Their will always be casualties in armed struggles. Hell, before the modern era, the prizes of war were rape, looting, and slaves to the common soilder. Now, we are "civilized". And apparently, this is what a civilized resistance looks like.

I disagree. If you want to be picky, currently only 45% of Israeli youth is being drafted when their reach 18. This is the result of many exemptions such as religious Jewish men, Muslim Israelis, religious Israeli Jews, handicapped or just people with very low medical profile. I realise that statistics don't really concern freedom fighters or terrorists alike, but being that it is a known fact, which is published on the newspapers and not just confidential government drafts, it matters. Also, every man after 45 does not serve any more, and every non-combatant woman is also exempt.

And anyhow, even if the entire population served at one point or the other in the military, there is the following point that killing them when they're civilians or do not take any part in combatant is just as killing and targeting civilians. You could also say that every Palestinian is a potential terrorist, but no one (except for very radical racist guys) claim that, even though taking part in a terror act is much easier than being trained as a professional soldier.

You could also claim that it's ok to kill any civilian in any Western country, because any one of them can declare the draft in an emergency.

So this argument is invalid.

Attacking a military base might be considered an act of resistance. Attacking a certain point of gathering for military personnel might also be considered part of freedom fighting.

Firing rockets indiscriminately into cities is an act of terror. So is putting on explosives and explode on a bus or a normal coffee shop.

[Corp]

If someone at my paper was writting that murder is ok I'd give him the boot too.

[supervike]

Would you agree to that?

For the most part, yes I would agree. However I think it's an important distinction to make that the playing field is not level. These aren't two combantats that are in equal strength. One holds all the power, the other scrambles for any advantage it can find. I'm not defending these actions, but I can follow the mindset to that type of conclusion.

Edited August 31, 2011 by supervike

[Corp]

For the most part, yes I would agree. However I think it's an important distinction to make that the playing field is not level. These aren't two combantats that are in equal strength. One holds all the power, the other scrambles for any advantage it can find. I'm not defending these actions, but I can follow the mindset to that type of conclusion.

"Give us your planes and we'll give you our baskets"

- Larbi Ben M'hidi, FLN member justifying the use of bombs placed in baskets

[make me believe]

I disagree. If you want to be picky, currently only 45% of Israeli youth is being drafted when their reach 18. This is the result of many exemptions such as religious Jewish men, Muslim Israelis, religious Israeli Jews, handicapped or just people with very low medical profile. I realise that statistics don't really concern freedom fighters or terrorists alike, but being that it is a known fact, which is published on the newspapers and not just confidential government drafts, it matters. Also, every man after 45 does not serve any more, and every non-combatant woman is also exempt.

And anyhow, even if the entire population served at one point or the other in the military, there is the following point that killing them when they're civilians or do not take any part in combatant is just as killing and targeting civilians. You could also say that every Palestinian is a potential terrorist, but no one (except for very radical racist guys) claim that, even though taking part in a terror act is much easier than being trained as a professional soldier.

You could also claim that it's ok to kill any civilian in any Western country, because any one of them can declare the draft in an emergency.

So this argument is invalid.

Attacking a military base might be considered an act of resistance. Attacking a certain point of gathering for military personnel might also be considered part of freedom fighting.

I agree with others, obligatory civic participation in Israel creates a lot more potential 'legitimate' targets for said freedom fighters. If everyone is in some way tied to the 'state', etc.

Firing rockets indiscriminately into cities is an act of terror.

A stray rocket that harmlessly explodes in an Israeli's backyard or alongside an Israeli road is definitely an act of terror, but so is a disproportionate Israeli retaliation that levels an entire Palestinian neighborhood.

So is putting on explosives and explode on a bus or a normal coffee shop.

European Jews introduced that method of warfare to the region in the 1930s/1940s back when Palestinian Arabs were still in the stone age. The Arabs' WWI rifles, horses and swords were no match against the Jews' plastic explosives, sub machine guns, radios, planes, tanks, bazookas, etc.

Edited September 1, 2011 by make me believe

[MichaelW]

European Jews introduced that method of warfare to the region in the 1930s/1940s back when Palestinian Arabs were still in the stone age. The Arabs' WWI rifles, horses and swords were no match against the Jews' plastic explosives, sub machine guns, radios, planes, tanks, bazookas, etc.

They were equal in terms of equipment. Both sides used British equipment and any weapons they could get on the black market.

[make me believe]

They were equal in terms of equipment. Both sides used British equipment and any weapons they could get on the black market.

Except for that one side was disproportionately funded. The Palestinians had no such backing as to finance the massive cost of creating a new country, much less fight off native tribes.

Stalin (USSR), Truman (US) and Attlee (UK) all recognized Israel from day one. Little did Stalin know that less than 50 years down the road the little country he helped create would become an asylum for war criminals, Russian mobsters, Ecstasy manufacturers, organ merchants, and human trafficking syndicates.

.

Edited September 1, 2011 by make me believe

[H.H. Holmes]

For the most part, yes I would agree. However I think it's an important distinction to make that the playing field is not level. These aren't two combantats that are in equal strength. One holds all the power, the other scrambles for any advantage it can find. I'm not defending these actions, but I can follow the mindset to that type of conclusion.

This is pretty much my thinking on the matter, the palestinians ONLY option for an effective retaliation is to target unaware civilians. There is no way that they could go head to head with the might of the Israeli military. It would be suicide and quite poor judgement to target the military installations or groups of armed soldiers.

Not saying it is alright to kill innocents, but they really don't have any other choice, except total complacency to Israel's will.

[MichaelW]

Except for that one side was disproportionately funded. The Palestinians had no such backing as to finance the massive cost of creating a new country, much less fight off native tribes.

Stalin (USSR), Truman (US) and Attlee (UK) all recognized Israel from day one. Little did Stalin know that less than 50 years down the road the little country he helped create would become an asylum for war criminals, Russian mobsters, Ecstasy manufacturers, organ merchants, and human trafficking syndicates.

The Arab states, such as Egypt, aided the Palestinians to fight the Israelis.

The latter is complete and utter BS. More or less reminiscent of Kosovo than Israel.

[Erikl]

This is pretty much my thinking on the matter, the palestinians ONLY option for an effective retaliation is to target unaware civilians. There is no way that they could go head to head with the might of the Israeli military. It would be suicide and quite poor judgement to target the military installations or groups of armed soldiers.

Not saying it is alright to kill innocents, but they really don't have any other choice, except total complacency to Israel's will.

I disagree with that - Jewish resistance movements did just that - usually targeted military targets of the British. Even the King David hotel, usually mentioned by Israeli criticisers, was used as the HQ for the British army in the British Mandate of Palestine.

Also, the proponents of terror attacks against Israeli citizens easily find themselves in a logical paradox: if so many of the Israelis are in the army, then theoretically it should be much, much easier targeting mainly military personnel, on their way home, when they wait for the bus, etc.. - yet this is clearly not the case.

As for the difficulty of attacking Israeli military installations - being that Israel is a small country, many bases are usually near large cities, so it's not that difficult to find them as well. As Israeli bashers love the WW2 equation when it comes to Israel, I should mention that the partisan movements in Europe fought and targeted mainly German outposts and soldiers, rarely targeting civilians.

And last but not least - until fairly recently, the draft was in force in many, many western countries. That means that there are a lot of veterans. Are veterans a target? are people that did not serve are a target?

Clearly Palestinian terrorist organizations have no real intentions to fight Israeli occupation, but to fight Israelis, or, mainly Jews as a people. For them we are the new Crusaders, so it's not just about one piece of land or another - it's about all the land (for them). Israel have given land but got nothing in return - just more intensified terrorism (and the popular vote for a more radical organization in that territory returned). If it really was about fighting occupation of some land, then the conflict would have been resolved before. It's not. It's not about Judea and Samaria or Gaza. It's about Tel-Aviv, it's about Jewish presence in the area, or Jewish statehood.

But ofcourse, I would want to see any of you terror justifiers justify the murder of Europeans or Americans in terror attack. With your logic, what choice did Bin Laden have to liberate his country (Saudi Arabia) from American take over?

[H.H. Holmes]

As for the difficulty of attacking Israeli military installations - being that Israel is a small country, many bases are usually near large cities, so it's not that difficult to find them as well. As Israeli bashers love the WW2 equation when it comes to Israel, I should mention that the partisan movements in Europe fought and targeted mainly German outposts and soldiers, rarely targeting civilians.

I don't think you can compare the resistance movements of Europe towards the German occupation of their lands comparable to the current situation in Israel. While the German military (as well as a small portion of citizens) occupied lands of conquest, the German people were not immigrated into those lands in significant numbers with the exception of some of the Eastern European countries. There was no chance to strike at the German populace because most were far away inside Germany, well away from any outside hostility (until the end of the war, of course). You don't think that the allies got their reprisals when Germany was finally invaded, particularly the Soviets, through rape and murder?

Also, finding a military base and successfully attacking a base are two completely different things. Sure, it could be done, just like the bombing of the U.S. Saudi Arabian base that killed many soldiers in the 80's (Sorry, I don't feel like googling the exact details right now). With the security measures that must be in place today, unless the Israeli military is inept (which they are not, they are probably the most well prepared military in the world), I wouldn't believe that such an attack would garner much results.

Clearly Palestinian terrorist organizations have no real intentions to fight Israeli occupation, but to fight Israelis, or, mainly Jews as a people. For them we are the new Crusaders, so it's not just about one piece of land or another - it's about all the land (for them). Israel have given land but got nothing in return - just more intensified terrorism (and the popular vote for a more radical organization in that territory returned). If it really was about fighting occupation of some land, then the conflict would have been resolved before. It's not. It's not about Judea and Samaria or Gaza. It's about Tel-Aviv, it's about Jewish presence in the area, or Jewish statehood.

I don't believe for a second that the Palestinians are in the right in this quite complicated matter of politics, religion, and ideology. I am not taking sides, just trying to understand the reasoning behind certain tactics taken by some of the Palestinians. I don't really have a strong opinion on the matter, actually.

But ofcourse, I would want to see any of you terror justifiers justify the murder of Europeans or Americans in terror attack. With your logic, what choice did Bin Laden have to liberate his country (Saudi Arabia) from American take over?

I don't know where you get off calling me a "terror justifier". There is a big difference between justifying an act and understanding an act. I don't believe any form of terrorism is acceptable, but I can understand how certain groups believe that it is the most effective way to push their violent agenda when they are against a much superior force. You can save me the tripe about how I am trying to sympathize with them.

[Erikl]

H. H. Holmes, to understand why most of the Palestinians resort to terrorism, is to understand why Palestinians, Muslims and in general Arabs cannot stand any non-Arabic, non-Muslim entity in the Middle East. Virtually all non-Muslims or non-Arabs in the Middle East are harshly oppressed (Muslims also), and Arabs harshly agree to even acknowledge that these people exist as nations. Take the Kurds, some 30 million people that have recorded history for centuries, not some invented nation, and you don't see as much lobby in this forum for Kurdish independence as you see for Palestinians, which are a newly invented nation that is indistinguishable from Syrians, Lebanese or Jordanians (or even Egyptians) in every aspect except for their experience with Israel in the last 60 years. So their opposition and hatred to Israel and Jews in that area is actually what defines them as a nation.

[the-Unexpected-Soul]

the middle east is a spiritual region, you can't just appear and say look this is our borders, every body out,

al-Aqsa, is the third holy place in islam, i'm a muslim i can go to makka, but i can't go to al-Aqsa

why? becouse you guys exist, there is more than one and a half billion other muslims like me,

you can't come and establish your secular empire, and bring people from around the world to this area, just like that

it's given that this place is holy to the muslims chrstians and the jews, you will find most muslims and christians agree on that,

now the logical way things should be is that you let the local people coexist and let nature take it's course

if the palestinians are muslims christians or jews that's okay , holy places in palastine also should be allowed for people from around

the earth to go and visit, just like saudi arabia allow muslim people from around the world to come and visit makka

okay

now the whole israel empire is out of place, you don't want to blend with any one, you hate the host which is the arabic world

even though you took the land from them (and expanding), your whole approach is secular, you use the jewish religen to get foreign Europeans

and other nationalities who have nothing to do with the middle east, to actually think that they own the land and homes of the locals

[Erikl]

the middle east is a spiritual region, you can't just appear and say look this is our borders, every body out,

No one just "appeared" - Jews existed in the Middle East and in current Israel long before Islam was even conceived. Today, more than half of the Israeli Jews are direct descendants of these Middle Eastern Jews that were expelled 60 years ago from the neighbouring countries that just said "look this is our borders, and Jews are Zionist collaborators so all out".

al-Aqsa, is the third holy place in islam, i'm a muslim i can go to makka, but i can't go to al-Aqsa

And Jerusalem is the holiest place in Judaism, Judah is the region where the Jews historically originate, our nation was created in this land - your point?

As for not being able to visit Jerusalem - that's bull. Muslims currently run al-Aqsa and as opposed to Muslims that prevented from Israelis to pray in their holy sites pre-1967, al-Aqsa, the Temple Mount, the one most important religious site in Judaism - is being administered by a Muslim and is called a Waqf.

now the whole israel empire is out of place, you don't want to blend with any one, you hate the host which is the arabic world

Israeli Empire?! Israel occupies roughly 0.5% of the Middle East.... yeah what a HUGE empire (especially considering that it is the only democracy, so in a region filled with tyrants and monarchs, it's a poor choice of term to define Israel as an "empire").

Also, the hatred is on the Muslim side, much much more than it is on the Jewish side.

Arabs do not accept any non-Arabic, non-Muslim country in what they consider to be an Islamic and Arabic land. They tried to annihilate us in 1948, and failed. Then again in 1973, and failed again. In between they said No to peace, No to recognition of Israel. Israel also is the only country in the region to give off land it won in a war. And all for peace. Sure, we made our own mistakes here and there, but it's nothing compare to the hatred of the Arab countries towards us.

[Blackwhite]

In a brief Note to Readers published Tuesday on the front page of The Jerusalem Post, the newspaper announced that it had parted ways with a columnist who wrote last week on his blog that terrorist attacks on Israelis were justified because Palestinians living under Israeli occupation since 1967 have a right to resist.

http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/08/30/israeli-columnist-is-fired-for-writing-that-palestinian-terrorism-is-justified/

Good riddance to him. If I was an employer I wouldn't want somebody who endorses murder and terrorism working for my company. He'll be on the dole as soon I found out.

Edited September 1, 2011 by Blackwhite

[Blackwhite]

It's a difficult and complicated one, but I have to say that, to an extent, I do agree. By this I mean that the Palestinians DO have a fundamental right to resist an occupying force. The manner in which they SOMETIMES (but not very often at all these days) do so though (by carrying out attacks aimed at killing as many civilians as possible inside Israel, for instance), is not the way to go.

I think it's time that somebody told you and your fellow Palestinian supporters that the Jews were in Israel before the Arabs and Muslims, and that the Jews FOUNDED Jerusalem before the Islamic religion even existed. Muslims need to remember that Jerusalem started off JEWISH, not Islamic. Israel and Jerusalem have been Jewish a lot longer than they have been Muslim.

Here are 20 conveniently overlooked facts that give some perspective to the current Middle East situation. These were compiled by a Christian university professor.....

1. Israel became a nation in 1312 B.C.E., two thousand years before the rise of Islam.

2. Arab refugees began identifying themselves as part of a Palestinian people in 1967, two decades after the establishment of the modern State of Israel.

3. Since the Jewish conquest in 1272 B.C.E, the Jews had dominion over the land for one thousand years with a continuous presence in the land for the past 3,300 years.

4.The only Arab domination since the conquest in 635 C.E. lasted no more than 22 years.

5. For over 3,300 years, Jerusalem has been the Jewish capital. Jerusalem has never been the capital of any Arab or Muslim entity. Even when the Jordanians occupied Jerusalem, they never sought to make it their capital, and Arab leaders did not come to visit.

6. Jerusalem is mentioned over 700 times in Bible. Jerusalem is not mentioned once in the Koran.

7. King David (of Israel) founded the city of Jerusalem (in 1000 B.C.E.). Mohammed never came to Jerusalem.

8. Jews pray facing Jerusalem. Muslims pray with their backs toward Jerusalem.

9. Arab and Jewish refugees: Arabs were not driven out of their homes. Following the UN decision on Partition in 1948, the Arab refugees were encouraged to leave Israel by Arab leaders, promising to purge the land of Jews. They argued that an "Arab presence" would only get in the way of the planned devastation. Sixty-eight percent left without ever seeing an Israeli soldier.

10. The Jewish refugees were forced to flee from Arab lands due to Arab brutality, persecution and pogroms.

11. The number of Arab refugees who left Israel in 1948 is estimated to be around 630,000. The number of Jewish refugees absorbed by Israel from Arab countries is estimated to be the same.

12. Arab refugees were INTENTIONALLY not absorbed or integrated into the Arab lands to which they fled, despite the vast Arab territory. Out of the 100,000,000 refugees since World War II, theirs is the only refugee group in the world that has never been absorbed or integrated into their own people's lands. Jewish refugees were completely absorbed into Israel, a country no larger than the state of New Jersey.

13. The Arabs are represented by eight separate nations, not including the Palestinians. There is only one Jewish nation. The Arab nations initiated all five wars and lost. Israel defended itself each time and won.

14. The P.L.O.'s Charter still calls for the destruction of the state of Israel. Israel has given the Palestinians most of the West Bank and autonomy under the Palestinian Authority, and has supplied their police and security forces with weapons.

15. Under Jordanian rule, Jewish holy sites were desecrated and the Jews were denied access to places of worship. Jewish grave markers were used to build public urinals in occupied Jerusalem. Under Israeli rule, all Muslim and Christian sites have been preserved and made accessible to people of all faiths.

16. The U.N. record on Israel and the Arabs of the 175 Security Council resolutions passed before 1990, 97 were directed against Israel -- notwithstanding the fact that the Arabs refused to participate in the 15 nation United Nations Commission of Palestine which recommended partition in 1948 and sought immediately to undo its work by force of arms.

17. Of the 690 General Assembly resolutions voted on before 1990, 429 were directed against Israel.

18. The U.N. was silent while 58 Jerusalem Synagogues were destroyed by the Jordanians between 1948 and 1967.

19. The U.N. was silent while the Jordanians systematically desecrated the ancient Jewish cemetery on the Mount of Olives between 1948 and 1967.

20. The U.N. was silent while the Jordanians enforced an apartheid-like policy of preventing Jews from visiting the Temple Mount and the Western Wall between 1948 and 1967.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/584615/posts

Edited September 1, 2011 by Blackwhite

[the-Unexpected-Soul]

Jews existed in the Middle East and in current Israel long before Islam was even conceived.

this is exaclty my point, if you are a middle eastern jew, then you have all the rights to be here, in fact we

should be protecting you, the problem is that most of the jews in israel are Foreigns wich is occupation.

also the palastnians didn't come from mars, they were here also, you can't kick a palstinian from his home

and give it to a Foreign,

consider this, if a middle eastern jew converted to islam, dose that change his race or orgins ?, no

but if an asian converted to Judaism how this could make him suddenly own something in the middle east ?

Israeli Empire?! Israel occupies roughly 0.5% of the Middle East

yes but you aim to make an Empire that cover syria and egypt, that's your aganda, and we saw

how you keep expanding all the time

Also, the hatred is on the Muslim side, much much more than it is on the Jewish side.

i can't figure how you could measure the amount of hate, whoever do you remember the war on gaza 2008 ?

Arabs do not accept any non-Arabic, non-Muslim country in what they consider to be an Islamic and Arabic land.

well here you go, what did you expected?, this our identity, why should we chang it !!

[the-Unexpected-Soul]

I think it's time that somebody told you and your fellow Palestinian supporters that the Jews were in Israel before the Arabs and Muslims, and that the Jews FOUNDED Jerusalem before the Islamic religion even existed. Muslims need to remember that Jerusalem started off JEWISH, not Islamic. Israel and Jerusalem have been Jewish a lot longer than they have been Muslim.

maybe there is no arab/muslim that doesn't know this, the story of the jews are in the quraan,

first of all we muslims don't belive that islam started by Muhammad pbuh, it started with adam and eve

also the jews of the times of moses are also muslims,

second, arabs/muslims have been in palastine much more than the jews

third, religion is not a race, middle eastren people if they believed in the jewish religion, or chose any other religion

what an asian jew or an african jew for example have to do with my home ?

[Blackwhite]

second, arabs/muslims have been in palastine much more than the jews

The Jews were in Palestine before the Arabs and Muslims. Palestine was founded before Islam - a relatively young religion - was founded.

A common misperception is that the Jews were forced into the diaspora by the Romans after the destruction of the Second Temple in Jerusalem in the year 70 A.D. and then, 1,800 years later, suddenly returned to Palestine demanding their country back. In reality, the Jewish people have maintained ties to their historic homeland for more than 3,700 years. A national language and a distinct civilization have been maintained.

The Jewish people base their claim to the land of Israel on at least four premises: 1) God promised the land to the patriarch Abraham; 2) the Jewish people settled and developed the land; 3) the international community granted political sovereignty in Palestine to the Jewish people and 4) the territory was captured in defensive wars.

The term "Palestine" is believed to be derived from the Philistines, an Aegean people who, in the 12th Century B.C., settled along the Mediterranean coastal plain of what is now Israel and the Gaza Strip. In the second century A.D., after crushing the last Jewish revolt, the Romans first applied the name Palaestina to Judea (the southern portion of what is now called the West Bank) in an attempt to minimize Jewish identification with the land of Israel. The Arabic word "Filastin" is derived from this Latin name.

The Twelve Tribes of Israel formed the first constitutional monarchy in Palestine about 1000 B.C. The second king, David, first made Jerusalem the nation's capital. Although eventually Palestine was split into two separate kingdoms, Jewish independence there lasted for 212 years. This is almost as long as Americans have enjoyed independence in what has become known as the United States.

Even after the destruction of the Second Temple in Jerusalem and the beginning of the exile, Jewish life in Palestine continued and often flourished. Large communities were reestablished in Jerusalem and Tiberias by the ninth century. In the 11th century, Jewish communities grew in Rafah, Gaza, Ashkelon, Jaffa and Caesarea.

Many Jews were massacred by the Crusaders during the 12th century, but the community rebounded in the next two centuries as large numbers of rabbis and Jewish pilgrims immigrated to Jerusalem and the Galilee. Prominent rabbis established communities in Safed, Jerusalem and elsewhere during the next 300 years. By the early 19th century-years before the birth of the modern Zionist movement-more than 10,000 Jews lived throughout what is today Israel.

When Jews began to immigrate to Palestine in large numbers in 1882, fewer than 250,000 Arabs lived there, and the majority of them had arrived in recent decades. Palestine was never an exclusively Arab country, although Arabic gradually became the language of most the population after the Muslim invasions of the seventh century. No independent Arab or Palestinian state ever existed in Palestine. When the distinguished Arab-American historian, Princeton University Prof. Philip Hitti, testified against partition before the Anglo-American Committee in 1946, he said: "There is no such thing as 'Palestine' in history, absolutely not." In fact, Palestine is never explicitly mentioned in the Koran, rather it is called "the holy land" (al-Arad al-Muqaddash).

Prior to partition, Palestinian Arabs did not view themselves as having a separate identity. When the First Congress of Muslim-Christian Associations met in Jerusalem in February 1919 to choose Palestinian representatives for the Paris Peace Conference, the following resolution was adopted:

We consider Palestine as part of Arab Syria, as it has never been separated from it at any time. We are connected with it by national, religious, linguistic, natural, economic and geographical bonds.

In 1937, a local Arab leader, Auni Bey Abdul-Hadi, told the Peel Commission, which ultimately suggested the partition of Palestine: "There is no such country [as Palestine]! 'Palestine' is a term the Zionists invented! There is no Palestine in the Bible. Our country was for centuries part of Syria."

The representative of the Arab Higher Committee to the United Nations submitted a statement to the General Assembly in May 1947 that said "Palestine was part of the Province of Syria" and that, "politically, the Arabs of Palestine were not independent in the sense of forming a separate political entity." A few years later, Ahmed Shuqeiri, later the chairman of the PLO, told the Security Council: "It is common knowledge that Palestine is nothing but southern Syria."

Palestinian Arab nationalism is largely a post-World War I phenomenon that did not become a significant political movement until after the 1967 Six-Day War and Israel's capture of the West Bank.

Israel's international "birth certificate" was validated by the promise of the Bible; uninterrupted Jewish settlement from the time of Joshua onward; the Balfour Declaration of 1917; the League of Nations Mandate, which incorporated the Balfour Declaration; the United Nations partition resolution of 1947; Israel's admission to the UN in 1949; the recognition of Israel by most other states; and, most of all, the society created by Israel's people in decades of thriving, dynamic national existence.

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/The_Jewish_Claim_To_The_Land_Of_Israel.html

Edited September 1, 2011 by Blackwhite

[Erikl]

the problem is that most of the jews in israel are Foreigns wich is occupation.

Let's drop for one second the fact that this is most certainly NOT the definition of occupation, but that is still bullocks - more than 68% of Israeli Jews were born in Israel, let it be 1st, 2nd or 3rd generation.

More than half of Israeli Jews are of direct Middle-Eastern descent. That is - their forefathers never left the Middle East. Many other Jews are half European half Middle Eastern descent - so but would you do? cut them into half and send the European half to Europe? Or let me ask you this - if an Arab marries a European Muslim living in his country, does that make their children unworthy of living in that country? And if Middle Eastern Jews decide that they want the European Jews in their country, who are you to tell them not to? This is the same imperialistic thought of Arabs that believe the entire middle east is their playground, and no non-Arab or non-Muslim dhimmi should do anything without Arab supervision.

yes but you aim to make an Empire that cover syria and egypt, that's your aganda, and we saw

how you keep expanding all the time

Israel is the only country in the region to give back land it took in justified wars of defense. We gave Sinai back TWICE. We retreated from south Lebanon. We gave Gaza. We gave the Palestinians autonomy over the majority of the West Bank. Israel's territory has been shrinking since 1967, almost every decade. Yep. What an expansion .

i can't figure how you could measure the amount of hate, whoever do you remember the war on gaza 2008 ?

How?

By the amount of anti-Semitic caricatures published daily in Arabic newspapers. By all the anti-Semitic media. By the fact that right after the protesters of Egypt toppled their government, they rallied in a 2 million strong protest against Israel and how they are going to sack Jerusalem. If this is not hatred, then I dunno what. If such a thing would have occurred in Israel, it would be considered racism.

well here you go, what did you expected?, this our identity, why should we chang it !!

Who asked you to change it? Just share with the indigenous non-Arab minorities the land. Give full rights to Copts in Egypt. Allow Maronite Christians to live in peace in Lebanon. Stop persecuting Assyrians in Iraq. Give Kurds a homeland. Allow Berbers in North Africa to keep their identity. And yes, accept Jews in their historical homeland.

[the-Unexpected-Soul]

1. Israel became a nation in 1312 B.C.E., two thousand years before the rise of Islam.

wrong because we believe that islam started with Adam he is the first prophet, also we muslim follow moses as a prophet

so islam started before israel

2. Arab refugees began identifying themselves as part of a Palestinian people in 1967, two decades after the establishment of the modern State of Israel.

locals are locals no matter how hard you try to deny them, before israel came along, palestine had more than 600 village scattered all around

filled with palestinians, who lived there for god knows how many Hundreds of years

also the arab Canaanites lived in palestine for thousands of years before the jews

3. Since the Jewish conquest in 1272 B.C.E, the Jews had dominion over the land for one thousand years with a continuous presence in the land for the past 3,300 years.

wrong the collective presence of the jews in palestine is about 400 years, while muslims over 1000 years, with higher population also

and palestine was part of the islamic Umayyad, Abbasid, and Ottoman Empires LOL

4.The only Arab domination since the conquest in 635 C.E. lasted no more than 22 years.

read above !!

6. Jerusalem is mentioned over 700 times in Bible. Jerusalem is not mentioned once in the Koran.

the land of palestine is mentioned many times in the quraan

7. King David (of Israel) founded the city of Jerusalem (in 1000 B.C.E.). Mohammed never came to Jerusalem.

we believe Muhammad pbuh came to Jerusalem in the Isra and Mi'raj

8. Jews pray facing Jerusalem. Muslims pray with their backs toward Jerusalem.

wrong muslims used to pray facing Jerusalem at the times of prophet muhammad pbuh, then it was changed at his time

to be facing makkah and not necessarily with their backs toward Jerusalem, becouse if you was to the north of Jerusalem

and makka to the south then Jerusalem will be toward you

12. Arab refugees were INTENTIONALLY not absorbed or integrated into the Arab lands to which they fled, despite the vast Arab territory. Out of the 100,000,000 refugees since World War II, theirs is the only refugee group in the world that has never been absorbed or integrated into their own people's lands. Jewish refugees were completely absorbed into Israel, a country no larger than the state of New Jersey.

because palestinians are palestinians , and they have the right of return , like really do you expect for example that the iraqi refuges

in syria to become syrians, and just leave iraq for foreigners, GOD!?

13. The Arabs are represented by eight separate nations, not including the Palestinians. There is only one Jewish nation. The Arab nations initiated all five wars and lost. Israel defended itself each time and won.

israelis lost many times

14. The P.L.O.'s Charter still calls for the destruction of the state of Israel. Israel has given the Palestinians most of the West Bank and autonomy under the Palestinian Authority, and has supplied their police and security forces with weapons.

how about i steal your house then give you back the living room, what a sick logic !

Edited September 1, 2011 by the-Unexpected-Soul