Waiting for a Palestinian Gandhi?

[ExpandMyMind]

For years prominent corporate media pundits have told us that the world -- and the media -- would embrace a dramatic, non-violent Palestinian resistance movement. If only such a movement -- perhaps led by a Gandhi-like figure -- were to finally emerge, we are told, the media coverage will come, and sympathy from across the world will strengthen support for the Palestinian cause.

Read more...

It is truly shocking how little news coverage this man's story is receiving. No food since mid December, the man is a bag of bones being held without charge or any evidence. Israel has the self prescribed 'right' to detain any Palestinian without charge for 6 months. The article is correct: there really is no point to non violent resistance for the Palestinians. It receives almost literally no media coverage. Though we should all already be aware of this, as the first 3 futile years of non violent protest when the occupation began amounted to nothing.

[Flibbertigibbet]

It is truly shocking how little news coverage this man's story is receiving. No food since mid December, the man is a bag of bones being held without charge or any evidence. Israel has the self prescribed 'right' to detain any Palestinian without charge for 6 months. The article is correct: there really is no point to non violent resistance for the Palestinians. It receives almost literally no media coverage. Though we should all already be aware of this, as the first 3 futile years of non violent protest when the occupation began amounted to nothing.

Who lived in that country first?

[ExpandMyMind]

Jews also lived in Egypt first, are you going to now tell me they have more of a claim to that territory than modern day Egyptians? Going by that EXTREMELY flawed logic the U.S. Should give control of the country to the Native Americans and Australians should give the country back to Egyptians.

But to answer your question: there was only around a percentage of around 10% jews in what is now Israel and the occupied territories before the mass immigration of European Jews. Read a book. Preferable by an Israeli author if you want Perspective.

Anyways, please don't derail my thread. If you want to debate this subject then do a forum search and reply (in a relevant thread) to one of my 800+ posts on the subject. Thanks.

Edited February 19, 2012 by expandmymind

[Flibbertigibbet]

Jews also lived in Egypt first, are you going to now tell me they have more of a claim than modern day Egyptians? Going by that EXTREMELY flawed logic the U.S. Should give control of the country to the Native Americans and Australians should give the country back to Egyptians.

Anyways, please don't derail my thread. If you want to debate this subject then do a forum search and reply (in a relevant thread) to one of my 800+ posts on the subject. Thanks.

I'll comment where I like, if you don't mind. Your argument appears to be that because the conquest and settlement of Egypt, Palestine etc. by the Muslims happened in the past, it should be allowed to stand (might is right, in other words). Then surely, by your own logic, the conquest and settlement of Palestine by the Israelis should also be allowed to stand, because it too happened in the past.

[ExpandMyMind]

I'll comment where I like, if you don't mind. Your argument appears to be that because the conquest and settlement of Egypt, Palestine etc. by the Muslims happened in the past, it should be allowed to stand (might is right, in other words). Then surely, by your own logic, the conquest and settlement of Palestine by the Israelis should also be allowed to stand, because it too happened in the past.

In rePly to your first sentence: in fact, no you can't. There exists etiquette on Internet forums that users must not derail topics, diverting the conversation, unless, the topic gradually leads down that path after substantial debate - and also o ly as long as the thread creater agrees. So I will as you only one last time not to derail the important subject matter of this thread.

And apologies to the mods for my accidental quote of my own post

Edited February 19, 2012 by expandmymind

[Flibbertigibbet]

In rePly to your first sentence: in fact, no you can't. There exists etiquette on Internet forums that users must not derail topics, diverting the conversation, unless, the topic gradually leads down that path after substantial debate - and also o ly as long as the thread creater agrees. So I will as you only one last time not to derail the important subject matter of this thread.

My questions, which you avoided, are perfectly relevant to this thread.

[ExpandMyMind]

Start a new thread and I'll be happy to reply. What is your opinion on the topic of this thread? What do you think of Israel holding the leader and main bread winner (no pun intended) of a dependent family without charge and without evidence? What is your opinion of the man's noble and non violent attempt to gain the attention of the world's mass media through non violent means? And what ia your opinion of the article?

Edited February 19, 2012 by expandmymind

[Flibbertigibbet]

Start a new thread and I'll be happy to reply. What is your opinion on the topic of this thread? What do you think of Israel holding the leader and main bread winner (no pun intended) of a dependent family without charge and without evidence? What is your opinion of the man's noble and non violent attempt to gain attention to the world's mass media through non violent means? And what it your opinion of the article?

Israel has every right to do what it feels necessary to secure peace. If it was this man's intention to gain attention, the Israelis have done him a favour.

[ExpandMyMind]

Ah, so not much of an opinion at all then. Fair enough.

[Flibbertigibbet]

Ah, so not much of an opinion at all then. Fair enough.

A very strong opinion, in fact. Every nation has the right to secure its own borders and peace for its people. I could also add that had he been a non-Muslim dissident in a Muslim country, he would probably have been tortured to death.

[ExpandMyMind]

Only this man (along with countless others) has done nothing wrong. And please don't bring up other countries crimes as a means to deflect attention away from this one. It is a truly weak tactic to employ when debating.

What you are basically saying - and I hear you loud and clear - is that Israel can do what it wants when it wants with regards to the Occupied Territitorries without repercussion.

What exactly is it they were defending their Borders from when it comes to this man?

And I notice you didn't answer the majority of my questions.

[Flibbertigibbet]

Only this man (along with countless others) has done nothing wrong. And please don't bring up other countries crimes as a means to deflect attention away from this one. It is a truly weak tactic to employ when debating.

What you are basically saying - and I hear you loud and clear - is that Israel can do what it wants when it wants with regards to the Occupied Territitorries without repercussion.

What exactly is it they were defending their Borders from when it comes to this man?

And I notice you didn't answer the majority of my questions.

How do you know he's done nothing wrong?

[ExpandMyMind]

He is being held without charge. Fairly obvious to deduce I would have assumed.

[Flibbertigibbet]

He is being held without charge. Fairly obvious to deduce I would have assumed.

Not necessarily. It could be a pre-emptive security measure or anything at all really. Israel is usually pretty good when it comes to its intelligence service. I suspect you don't believe anything the Israelis ever say though.

[ExpandMyMind]

You can bet that if there was evidence, it would have been released at one of the man's legal hearings by now. In a free society, incarcerating someone without evidence is effectively tyranny.

And I'm sorry, but the Israeli government has done very little to gain the trust of others. Only if we go by documented history, mind you.

[Flibbertigibbet]

You can bet that if there was evidence, it would have been released at one of the man's legal hearings by now. In a free society, incarcerating someone without evidence is effectively tyranny.

And I'm sorry, but the Israeli government has done very little to gain the trust of others. Only if we go by documented history, mind you.

Since this is presumably some sort of PR disaster for the Israelis, one would assume they wouldn't have done it without good reason. You shouldn't let anti-Israeli prejudice get the better of you.

[+and-then]

If this man dies it will have been his choice. And I think that if he truly was wrongly imprisoned it will have been an honorable choice. However I don't find it so hard to grasp that he might just hate Israelis enough to die just to spite them. A suicide bomber without the bomb so to speak. I don't know the real facts of the case. But it definitely doesn't help Israel in the Hasbara department. I do agree that a true Gandhi like movement,with peaceful demonstration by the thousands would bring tremendous pressure to bear on any Israeli government. But that will never happen IMO because it would require more than one great figure of peace to reset the hatred that has been taught to them as children for generations.

[Yamato]

Who lived in that country first?

Who lived in the US first? If we were genuinely interested in the indigenous people of a region having claim, we wouldn't support Israel in the first place. So no, you're not interested in that, at all. Governments always think they have a good reason; if that's what excuses government, whether there's a PR disaster involved or not, then that attitude will effectively deliver us to tyranny's bedchamber.

There's thousands of Palestinians being held and tortured in Israeli dungeons for nefarious charges made against them and this case should be a reflection to a much larger and systemic problem than invoking an emotional response that only feels compassion for one guy. There are children in Israeli prisons. Where's their light of justice been all these years? Hidden by the dark and dirty regime in Israel that would make the world a much better place if it disappeared from the face of the earth yesterday. I don't even have to blink first before washing this bullseye off the forehead of America. How convenient it must be to drop the ball and then insist that we keep paying for your bedeviled mess. A citizen of the occupier of 25% of the earth's landmass going to ask whose country it was first? That's rich!

[ExpandMyMind]

Seeing Yamato has opened up that line of debate:

"Who lived that country first?"

“If I was an Arab leader, I would never make terms with Israel. That is natural: We have taken their country. … They only see one thing: we have come here and stolen their country.”

David Ben-Gurion [1886-1973]... first prime minister of israel...

It seems pretty clear who Israel's first prime minister thought lived there first. Hmm, indigenous population or immigrating (for all intents and purposes, invading) Europeans?

[Flibbertigibbet]

Who lived in the US first? If we were genuinely interested in the indigenous people of a region having claim, we wouldn't support Israel in the first place. So no, you're not interested in that, at all. Governments always think they have a good reason; if that's what excuses government, whether there's a PR disaster involved or not, then that attitude will effectively deliver us to tyranny's bedchamber.

There's thousands of Palestinians being held and tortured in Israeli dungeons for nefarious charges made against them and this case should be a reflection to a much larger and systemic problem than invoking an emotional response that only feels compassion for one guy. There are children in Israeli prisons. Where's their light of justice been all these years? Hidden by the dark and dirty regime in Israel that would make the world a much better place if it disappeared from the face of the earth yesterday. I don't even have to blink first before washing this bullseye off the forehead of America. How convenient it must be to drop the ball and then insist that we keep paying for your bedeviled mess. A citizen of the occupier of 25% of the earth's landmass going to ask whose country it was first? That's rich!

Wrong. I'm not American.

[Flibbertigibbet]

Seeing Yamato has opened up that line of debate:

"Who lived that country first?"

“If I was an Arab leader, I would never make terms with Israel. That is natural: We have taken their country. … They only see one thing: we have come here and stolen their country.”

David Ben-Gurion [1886-1973]... first prime minister of israel...

It seems pretty clear who Israel's first prime minister thought lived there first. Hmm, indigenous population or immigrating (for all intents and purposes, invading) Europeans?

He was clearly stating what an Arab would think, rather than his own opinion. As the first prime minister of Israel, he knew very well it was the Jewish ancestral homeland.

[ExpandMyMind]

"That is natural: WE HAVE TAKEN THEIR COUNTRY"

Nuff said to be honest.

Edited February 19, 2012 by expandmymind

[Flibbertigibbet]

"That is natural: WE HAVE TAKEN THEIR COUNTRY"

Nuff said to be honest.

He was expressing what an Arab would think, which is exactly what he said he was doing. Why can't you see this? Your anti-Israeli prejudice is clouding your judgement.

[ExpandMyMind]

In the second part of the quote he is, no doubt, but in the part I quoted again there can be no doubt that he is giving his own opinion. Besides, there are ample quotes from him as well as others that reiterate what he is saying. Pick up a book by Benny Morris or Norman Finkelstein or any of the New Historians from Israel and you'll see. Jesus, I actually can't even believe I'm having to debate this long debunked nonsense et again. The documented history is clear. Saying that I have a claim to Ireland or that a Phillipino has a claim to spAin or that an AustraliN has a claim to Britain is on the same level of absurdity as claiming that a group of European Jews, 2000 years removed from the land no less, had more of a claim to the land than the indigenous population. Israeli academia recognised this decades ago, yet you cone to Internet forums and encounter pseudo debaters that think they know more than Araeli historians.

Ludicrous. Seriously, I would love to know how you attained such absurd reasoning.

Edited February 19, 2012 by expandmymind

[Flibbertigibbet]

In the second part of the quote he is, no doubt, but in the part I quoted again there can be no doubt that he is giving his own opinion. Besides, there are ample quotes from him as well as others that reiterate what he is saying. Pick up a book by Benny Morris or Norman Finkelstein or any of the New Historians from Israel and you'll see. Jesus, I actually can't even believe I'm having to debate this long debunked nonsense et again. The documented history is clear. Saying that I have a claim to Ireland or that a Phillipino has a claim to spAin or that an AustraliN has a claim to Britain is on the same level of absurdity as claiming that a group of European Jews, 2000 years removed from the land no less, had more of a claim to the land than the indigenous population. Israeli academia recognised this decades ago, yet you cone to Internet forums and encounter pseudo debaters that think they know more than Araeli historians.

Ludicrous. Seriously, I would love to know how you attained such absurd reasoning.

But you said yourself that once a conquest has happened and is in the past, such as the Arab conquest of the Middle East, it should be allowed to stand. Why don't you apply the same rule to the Israeli conquest of Palestine?