Harry's Place

The creation of Israel meant the Jews could finally return to their homeland, but for the Palestinians it meant going into exile.

If you said this, you’d be wrong. You’d be playing the ‘everyone is equally to blame’ game, which is historical nonsense.
The creation of Israel did NOT mean ‘for the Palestinians it meant going into exile’. The genocial attack by several countries on the nascent Jewish homeland, THAT meant ‘for the Palestinians it meant going into exile’.

An interesting statement of principles.

I take issue with your assertion that Jerusalem should become the capital of both future states. This would inevitably lead, just as Christians, Christianity and Christian holy sites are marginalised now, to the further disenfranchisement of the Christian minority.

Jerusalem should be a city for everyone, not just Jews and Muslim Arabs.

A mass influx of Palestinian refugees would mean that the State of Israel would become another Arab state. As a result, we cannot accept anything more than a symbolic number of refugees, although we hold no objection to their absorption in the new State of Palestine, as long as they are offered a fair choice, one that includes third country repatriation. At the same time, we are willing to discuss issues of compensation and responsibility, as long as the Arab world is prepared to discuss the issue of Jewish refugees who were displaced from their homes.

Read like this:

A mass influx of Muslim refugees would mean that the UK would become another Islamic state. As a result, we cannot accept anything more than a symbolic number of refugees, although we hold no objection to their absorption in the new state of Kosovo, as long as they are offered a fair choice, one that includes third country repatriation. At the same time, we are willing to discuss issues of compensation and responsibility, as long as the Muslim world is prepared to discuss the issue of British refugees who were displaced from their homes.

…the paragraph reads altogether differently.

Idealistic rubbish, It will never happen because too many players on the Arab side need conflict, Peace with israel spells doom for those who rule much of the Arab world, The conflict with Israel is the only thing that gives them legitimacy in their own and outsiders eyes, They need conflict to survive like they need air to breathe.

Just more of the usual twaddle, accompanied by the usual threat. And, of course, skipping over all the hard parts. Basically, it adopts the Arab position with a bone or two thrown to the Jews, like “discussing the Jewish refugee problem”. What about Murbark’s speech in Cairo, after Obama, declaring that a Palestinian state would have to be contiguous? Including Gaza and the West Bank? What would that mean? If not contiguous, how would the two parts communicate? What would Israel owe a Palestinian state? As in electricity and water? And why is Jerusalem now open to all a poorer situation than were it divided again? Remember that last time Arabs ruled it Jews were excluded from their holy places.

Your view is a nonstarter; naive, repetitive, and of course, threatening (”This is perhaps our last chance. If we do not grasp it there will be no forgiveness.”)

“A mass influx of Muslim refugees would mean that the UK would become another Islamic state. As a result, we cannot accept anything more than a symbolic number of refugees, although we hold no objection to their absorption in the new state of Kosovo, as long as they are offered a fair choice, one that includes third country repatriation. At the same time, we are willing to discuss issues of compensation and responsibility, as long as the Muslim world is prepared to discuss the issue of British refugees who were displaced from their homes.”

Yes, and if you change it to

“A mass influx of Martian refugees would mean that Earth would become another Martian state. As a result, we cannot accept anything more than a symbolic number of refugees, although we hold no objection to their absorption in the new state of…”

The relationship of Israel and the Palestinians to one another does not equal the relationship of Kosovo and the UK.

“Basically, it adopts the Arab position with a bone or two thrown to the Jews, like “discussing the Jewish refugee problem”.”

How is peace the “Arab position”? (Also, no RofR, no destruction of Israel, etc…) This is very much what a compromise would need to look like.

When in 2001 riots started in Buenos Aires, there was an obsessive pendejo in the distribution list who couldn’t stop writing the long speeches he would give from the balcony of the Pink House (Argentina’s White House) if he would only be given the chance.

I thought that he was a poor imbecile and I think the same of anyone who writes imaginary historical speeches.

Grow up.

And now I see that Alex Stein was responsible…

Well, please don’t take it personally. Imbecile is too strong a word.
But do please grow up! Even if you were Mother Teresa with the looks of Marilyn Monroe you wouldn’t be able to make peace with the Palestinians in the foreseable future.

Why don’t you do something more useful, like writing a list of all the girls you would sleep with? (you can add a short pick up speech)

Alex Stein? Ah well, that does explain it.

It is not a case of ‘right v right’. That is nonsense.

There were no ‘Palestinians’ as we know them today PRIOR to 1967.

The term ‘Palestinian’ was always used to refer to the Palestinian Jews who were already living there and had been for the past 3500 years – continuously.

And Jordan – which takes up around 80% of what was Palestine – is where today’s Palestinians should be living. They have no ‘right’ to any inch of Israel.

Er, apparently you have NO understanding of what happened either prior to or in 1948?

You wrongly state:

‘The creation of Israel meant the Jews could finally return to their homeland, but for the Palestinians it meant going into exile.’

No, it did not mean that the Palestinians had to go into exile – firstly, the ‘palestinians’ were also the PALESTINIAN JEWS.

And the SOLE reason for the exodus of the Palestinian ARABS was because the ARAB world ORDERED THEM TO FLEE, so they would not be in the way of the SIX ARAB ARMIES poised to attack! Which they then DID – within 12 hours of Israel declaring independence.

Sorry, but I find it quite extraordinary that you feel confident enough to presume to revise Bibi’s speech when you are woefully ignorant of the FACTS.

Oh, please educate yourself:

“The fact that there are these refugees is the direct consequence of the act of the Arab states in opposing partition and the Jewish state. The Arab states agree upon this policy unanimously and they must share in the solution of the problem.”
– Emile Ghoury, secretary of the Palestinian Arab Higher Committee, in an interview with the Beirut Telegraph Sept. 6, 1948.

“The Arab state which had encouraged the Palestine Arabs to leave their homes temporarily in order to be out of the way of the Arab invasion armies, have failed to keep their promise to help these refugees.”
– The Jordanian daily newspaper Falastin, Feb. 19, 1949.

“Who brought the Palestinians to Lebanon as refugees, suffering now from the malign attitude of newspapers and communal leaders, who have neither honor nor conscience? Who brought them over in dire straits and penniless, after they lost their honor? The Arab states, and Lebanon amongst them, did it.”
– The Beirut Muslim weekly Kul-Shay, Aug. 19, 1951.

“The 15th May, 1948, arrived … On that day the mufti of Jerusalem appealed to the Arabs of Palestine to leave the country, because the Arab armies were about to enter and fight in their stead.”
– The Cairo daily Akhbar el Yom, Oct. 12, 1963.

“For the flight and fall of the other villages it is our leaders who are responsible because of their dissemination of rumors exaggerating Jewish crimes and describing them as atrocities in order to inflame the Arabs … By spreading rumors of Jewish atrocities, killings of women and children etc., they instilled fear and terror in the hearts of the Arabs in Palestine, until they fled leaving their homes and properties to the enemy.”
– The Jordanian daily newspaper Al Urdun, April 9, 1953.

The object of our longings was not empty. The Palestinians were the people of the land when Zionism emerged onto the scene, and with time they developed a sense of national identity of equal validity to ours. Then, however, our histories diverged. The creation of the State of Israel was a moment of supreme joy for the Jewish people, the fulfilment of our dream, the return to Zion. Just three years after the Holocaust, it felt like something akin to a miracle. For the Palestinians, though, it meant the end of their dream, and the destruction of hundreds of longstanding communities. The creation of Israel meant the Jews could finally return to their homeland, but for the Palestinians it meant going into exile.

I am not the first contributor to tell you this is absolute bollocks!

Tabatha at 8:45 says some of this for me. I go back to the fundamentals. Mandate For Palestine 1922 defined the Palestine was to become The Jewish National Home. At the time that Palestine was created by the Allies out of The Ottoman Empire they ALSO created three Arab countries The Lebanon, Syria and Jordan (having actually stolen land destined for Palestine).

These Arab states were created with no rights for Jews but Palestine was created with the rights of Jews to create the infrastructure and institutions for A Jewish National Home, possibly leading to a single state.

Mandate says that Jews and Arabs have equal rights but that Jews have the extra rights of creating that Jewish National Home by the creation of State-like structures (legal, political and community).

The British ran it and under Arab pressure tried to strangle any nascent Jewish Nationalism by restricting immigration. The British had enough and the UN created Res 181 whereby there would be a Jewish and Arab state. The Arabs rejected and attacked The Jews. The Jews accepted.

So, don’t give us that crap about a Palestinian aspiration for a state being crushed by the presence of Jews.

The Palestinians have been offered statehood so many tiomes its a joke. “Oh”, you say, “but these weren’t REAL states”. Since they kept rejecting a state so less and less is left.

Let me cut to the chase. Palestinian Terrorism is NOT about a state but about the ancient hatred for Jews by Arabs/Muslims. Its a Holy War against Jews. That is why Hamas cannot say “Yes” to “The Jewish State” because it smashes their pride that they failed to destroy Israel/Jews.

Absolutely “NO JERUSALEM FOR PALESTINIANS”. Let all faiths and people come and worship in Jerusalem but its Israel’s capital city and for ever-more will it be.

Under what logic does it merit consideration as a Palestinian city? Because of a story that Mohammed ascended to heaven from there?

FACT, it has been Israel’s capital since biblical times, hence “Next Year in Jerusalem”.

I think someone is suffereing from Obama-I-haven’t-got-time-for-history-and-the-facts syndrome.

Revisionism rears it’s ugly head, I’m afraid. Netanyahu had it exactly right..the chief obstacle to Arab-Israeli is the Arab’s inability to accept a Jewish state, with Jews living next to them in peace and equality.

Israel has actually given quite a bit of land already to settle an Arab refugee problem that it had no part in creating. How has that worked out – in Gaza, for instance?

Israel resettled almost 1 million Jewish refugees from the Arab world after 1948 on it’s own territory at its own expense. Is it Israel’s responsibility that the Arab world chose not to do the same, even with the UN paying the tab?

And finally, as far as Jerusalem is concerned, I don’t recall that the world had anything to say in 1948 when Jews were ethnically cleansed from the Old City.

After the Jordanians took over the Eastern part of Jerusalem in 1948, they killed or drove out every Jew who lived there – which is how it became, in that phrase so beloved by al-Reuters, the AP and the Beeb, ‘traditionally Arab East Jerusalem’.Many of the Palestinians who claim they’ve ‘lived in Jerusalem for generations’ are squatters who appropriated Jewish homes after the residents were killed or exiled.

The Jordanians demolished half of the Old City’s fifty-eight synagogues, and the historic Jewish cemetery on the Mount of Olives was plundered for its tombstones, which were used as paving stones and building materials. Some of the synagogues were turned into public latrines. The area around the Western Wall, Judaism’s most sacred site, was turned into a public dump.

Ever since Oslo, the Palestinians have made a point of defiling or destroying any Jewish Holy sites that are in the areas of Judea and Samaria (AKA the West bank) that they occupy, like the Cave of the Patriarchs in Hebron or Joseph’s tomb.

With that history, do you really expect Israel to turn over part of Jerusalem to the Arabs? And trust in ‘guarantees’ from the likes of Obama and Hillary Clinton? Or Gordon Brown?

If you had been Binyamin Netanyahu by Monday morning you would have had neither a cabinet, a government nor a job.

Oh, and what about that most basic of issues; the recognition of Israel as the Jewish homeland by the Palestinians and the rest of the Arab world? (and increasingly, the un-Arab trendy lefty world)

Arfur -well said!

If you had been Netanyahu, Israelis would not have voted for you in any larger numbers than they did for the parties to the left of Meretz, and your speech would have been taken no more seriously than speeches by people of that political fringe.

And Netanyahu, I must say, is not someone I can imagine ever blogging anonymously whilst putting his opinions into the mouth of an opponent he reviles and despises.

Could you all(Tabatha,Rob,arfur) please think of one word to describe how you feel about arabs? How about ’subhuman’?

ARFUR – spot on.

Islam inculcates such hatred of ‘infidels’ in its followers, and reserves a special loathing of Jews. Also, and of particular relevance here: under Islamic law, any land that has *ever* been in Muslim hands even if for a mere five minutes, must RETURN to Muslim hands – by any means necessary.

It is this that Hamas and Islamic Jihad cite when they claim that Israel must cease to *exist*.

It is not about land.
It is about RELIGION – specifically, Islam.

The Jihad against Israel is the same Jihad that is currently being waged against America and Europe. And no, it is not ‘islamophobia’ to state this. Rather, it is FACT.

http://ajewwithaview.wordpress.com/2009/06/20/cognitive-dissonance-and-the-palestinian-state-will-bring-peace-myth/

http://ajewwithaview.wordpress.com/2009/04/17/islamophobia-no-such-thing/

Israelinurse,when has Israel ever recognised the rights of the palestinians?Is there another nation on earth that demands that the people who have been robbed recognise the right of the thieves?

Me – you must have missed this sentence, “Today is not the time to play the blame game or to compete over our respective victimhoods.”

To the person making the ASININE accusation that some of us regard Arabs as ’subhuman’:

Perhaps you’d care to show WHERE any of us said or implied that? I know I didn’t and nor have I seen anyone else say anything remotely like it!

If we can’t state HISTORICAL FACT about Arab violence towards Israel without some moron claiming we view Arabs as ’subhuman’ then things are really in a very bad way!

And to that moron, also: go and read the Quran. You’ll find that the ONLY place ANYONE is described in such terms is in ISLAM.

The Jihad against Israel is the same Jihad that is currently being waged against America and Europe. And no, it is not ‘islamophobia’ to state this. Rather, it is FACT.
Tabatha,you are completely chicken fuckin oriental.And you sound like the sort of braindead idiot who thinks that Ayn Rand had anything worthwhile to say.

I usually respond to these missives by thinking that constipated British twats intoning in solemn voices the diplomatic lies they imagine will bring peace to the middle east if only every last Israel repeated them 3 times before bed is the most boring masturbatory fetish on the planet.

However I am noting a certain lack of reading comprehension among the commenter. This speech was placed in the mouth of Binyamin Netanyahu, thus when he ends the speech with a threat, it’s a threat against the Palestinians – if only it were a little stronger.

In my opinion this war can only end when the Israelis show their strength and make absolute ultimatums. In a sense it matters not at all what they offer, since no offer will every be accepted willingly. But it’s wiser to give the Palestinians the choice between something fair and destruction rather than between humiliation and destruction.

Israelinurse – regarding the basic issues; I believe that the Palestinians and the Arab world should recognise the State of Israel, and vice versa.

And to that moron, also: go and read the Quran. You’ll find that the ONLY place ANYONE is described in such terms is in ISLAM.

You will chase your enemies, and they shall fall by the sword before you. Five of you shall chase a hundred, and a hundred of you shall put ten thousand to flight; your enemies shall fall by the sword before you. For I will look on you favorably and make you fruitful, multiply you and confirm My covenant with you. You shall eat the old harvest, and clear out the old because of the new.

“Moses was enraged with the officers of the army … ‘So you spared the women! … Kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman who has had sexual intercourse with a man, but keep the virgins for yourselves … divide them up evenly.’” (Numbers 31:15)

Yeah. Facts are important. The Palestinian Arabs did NOT have to go into exile, period. That is a myth and it’s pernicious.

Nobody had to start a war either, or organizations whose purpose is to “liberate” all of Israel.

Also, I don’t get the comparison of Israel to Britain and its Muslim immigrants? That is just nonsense.

I do agree, any and all states in the area must work together on resource allocation and environmental protection issues. The basic economics of the situation are critical.

But: creating a contiguous state by chopping the other into pieces is highly problematical given environmental and political realities.

Sunken roads or railways, probably even an elevated train, would impact animals and the environment as well as making Israel even harder to defend. Do people seriously believe the threat to Israel will disappear? It would be nice to think so but…

I do agree with the contention that the Palestinian diaspora should be given a choice including repatriation in other nations, the idea that they should all be driven out of their homes in Lebanon for example is problematic, with or without a Palestinian state.

I don’t think people have thought this issue through at all. In Lebanon for example the camps are not only poor and conditions very harsh but the people are heavily armed AND they are unwanted but the fact is, those towns are home for 400,000 human beings who may not want to leave them.

And, many have been radicalized over the decades – how will they be moved and/or integrated into other communities?

Lest we forget people are still living in “refugee camps” in Gaza and the West Bank – where is the housing, the economy to support an influx of people, where is the process to undo all the harm that’s been done, including the incitement to armed resistance and utterly horrendous antisemitism? I don’t see much progress in those directions either. In this regard Bibi’s speech, about making economic improvements, was realistic and it was correct. Others have addressed the issue of incitement but not much seems to be done about it.

I also don’t see how we can deplore Israel’s creation as “ethnic cleansing” – then force more ethnic cleansing, consciously and by design: cleanse the Jews from the West Bank (they’re already gone from the Sinai and Gaza, ahem, as well as from the rest of the Arab world) – and also cleanse Palestinian Arabs from other states where they currently reside (and are unwanted as citizens).

So I think everybody needs to go back to the drawing board on this and really think about these issues.

Number one on the list: if “ethnic cleansing” is wrong why are we working to encourage more of it?

Where there is good will there are solutions to be found .

Take the issue of contiguity between Gaza and the West Bank. The two are only about 30 mile apart. With some exchange of territory a tunnel/motorway could be built to link the two territories maybe covering 20 miles.

Take the issue of return. With some ingenuity there could be a substantial return for screened Palestinians who would remain citizens of Palestine and have no involvement in Israel’s government. Their presence in Israel would be dependent on adherence to a set of rules designed to ensure non-involvement in the political life of Israel. In exchange for this concession, Jewish settlements would be allowed to remain on the West Bank.

Good will is all that is required. It’s not there yet, but if it comes then we will see real progress.

Alex, there is no need for an “alternative” speech to the one Netanyahu gave, because the fact of the matter is that on the core issues, Netanyahu articulated the views of the majority of Israelis. For a prime minister who has to guide his country’s people through a time when an American president is resolved to pursue a solution to the I/P conflict, the most important thing is not to show a politically correct “empathy” with the Palestinians, but to show empathy with the concerns of the people he leads as prime minister. I’m no Netanyahu fan, but his speech was excellent.
In substance, I’m not even sure where exactly you differ. Would you countenance a Palestinian state that can have an army, whatever weapons and military capabilities it wants, and whatever military alliances it wants? Netanyahu’s demand that a Palestinian state will be demilitarized is not a new one.
Moreover, the urge to show “empathy” with the Palestinians that seems to motivate you is arguably rather patronizing. Israelis tend to see Palestinians as an enemy, because that’s how they have behaved for some 6 decades, and even before. To validate their narrative that they are victims of evil Zionist designs and policies is not necessarily a sign of respect.
Last but not least, at a time when even Agha/Malley can acknowledge that the Palestinians have never really wanted a state — particularly not when everybody wanted them to have a state — I think it’s high time for Israeli doves to face up to this fact. There is no point to pretending that if only Israelis show enough empathy, the Palestinians will suddenly feel that a state of their own is what they aspired to all along. We all know what the Palestinians turned down during the Annapolis talks, because, as Abbas said in Washington, it once again wasn’t enough. He thought he can just sit back and wait until Obama delivers him more on a silver platter. He is currently finding out that he was mistaken.

Me – you must have missed this sentence, “Today is not the time to play the blame game or to compete over our respective victimhoods.”

I read it, and I recognised it for what it is: a feeble attempt at a figleaf, completely undermined by the rest of the nonsense, as ably demonstrated by Tabitha, Sophia and Arfur.

To ! – yet again you demonstrate your utter ignorance regarding Islam.

I suggest you read this: it’s not by me, it’s by a Muslim scholar. Perhaps you’ll take his views seriously, given that he presumably understands the nature of Islam better than you do.

http://ajewwithaview.wordpress.com/2009/06/01/answering-the-apologists-for-islam/

Surely there is some human rights body or organisation that can give refuge to this poor article to save it from further punishment. Some of the comments border on so much accuracy and correction that the poor thing is almost crushed and hanging-on for life. If it was a boxing match the referee would have stopped it within 30 seconds.

Won’t stop me having a bash in a mo though!

Given that ! probably won’t bother to follow the link I provided in order to correct him/her/it:

Those who seek to justify Islamic terrorism, often do so by stating that both Judaism and Christianity also have violent histories. Islam, they insist, is being ‘unfairly’ singled out, even though the other Abrahamic faiths are also inherently violent.

The two favourite and increasingly weary examples offered are the slaying by the Hebrews of the Canaanites (Judaism) and the bloody crimes of the Crusades (Christianity).

And this tactic by apologists for Islamic terrorism often works. It helps shore up the pervasive yet false premise that Islam is ‘just like other religions’. Or, to put it another way: it is not Islam that causes Islamic terrorism, but rather human nature.

One of the best responses I’ve read to this apologist tactic, comes courtesy of writer and expert on radical Islam, Raymond Ibrahim. Here is what he says on the issue of whether Judaism and Christianity also promote violence in the same manner as Islam (emphasis is mine):

“Such questions reveal a great deal of confusion between history and theology, between the temporal actions of men and the immutable words of G-d. The fundamental error being that Jewish andChristian history—which is violent—is being conflated with Islamic theology—which commands violence.

Of course all religions have had their fair share of violence and intolerance towards the “other.” Whether this violence is ordained by G-d or whether warlike man merely wished it thus is the all-important question.

The Israelites’ violence is an interesting case in point. G-d clearly ordered the Hebrews to annihilate the Canaanites and surrounding peoples. Such violence is therefore an expression of G-d’s will, for good or ill. Regardless, all the historic violence committed by the Hebrews and recorded in the Tanakh is just that—history. It happened; G-d commanded it.

But it revolved around a specific time and place and was directed against a specific people. At no time did such violence go on to become standardized or codified into Jewish law (i.e. the Halakha).

“when has Israel ever recognised the rights of the palestinians?” (!)

Well for a start all the Palestinians who elected to stay in Israel, despite being told to leave by the leaders of the Arab nations invading at the time, all got citizenship, education, healthcare, pensions, benefits payments such as family allowance, voting rights (including the women-the first Arab women in the world to get this right), and equal rights as citizens.
Which is, of course, a damned sight more than those who did chose to leave got from any of their Arab ‘brothers’.
The Palestinians were not ‘robbed’ of anything. Since 1920 they have been given countless opportunities to come to some sort of agreement on this issue, but they have repeatedly refused to do so because their incompetent leadership has repeatedly fed them the lie that they can have their cake and eat it. They can’t.

In 1923 (25 years before the birth of Israel) the British Mandate government of Palestine tried to set up a Legislative Assembly for the territory including Christian, Arab and Jewish representatives. The number of Arab representatives would have been greater than the other two ethnic groups put together.
The Arabs, under instruction from their leaders, boycotted the elections to the Assembly and the Palestine Arab Executive issued the following proclamation:

To The People
The East from one extremity to the other will take pride today in you and will boast of your unity and defence….The fact that you have united to boycott the elections to the Legislative Assembly…..is a true sign that you are suited and fit for the freedom you demand….Today the limbs of our enemies will tremble with sadness and vexation….Today the holy land clothes itself with garments of glory…..Long live free Palestine that it may stand independent!

As you can see, not only has the florid prose changed little, the incredible lack of pragmatism coupled with a very special talent for missing every opportunity going has persisted until this day too.

This is where Islamic violence is unique. Though similar to the violence of the Tanakh —commanded by G-d and manifested in history—certain aspects of Islamic violence have become standardized in Islamic law (i.e. the Sharia) and apply at all times. Thus while the violence found in the Koran is in fact historical, its ultimate significance is theological. Consider the following Koranic verses:

Then, when the sacred months have passed, slay the pagans wherever you find them—take them [captive], besiege them, and prepare for them each ambush. But if they repent and establish worship and pay the poor-due [i.e. submit to Islam], then leave their way free. Lo! Allah is Forgiving, Merciful (9:5).

Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger [i.e. Islamic law], nor acknowledge the religion of Truth [i.e. Islam], from the people of the book [i.e. Jews and Christians], until they pay tribute with willing submission, and feel themselves utterly subdued (9:29).

As with Tanakh verses where G-d commanded the Hebrews to attack and slay their neighbors, these Koranic verses also have a historical context. Allah (through Muhammad) first issued these commandments after the Arab tribes had finally unified under the banner of Islam and were preparing to invade their Christian and pagan neighbors.

But unlike the bellicose verses and anecdotes of the Tanakh these so-called “sword-verses” subsequently became fundamental to Islam’s relationship to both the “people of the book” (i.e. Christians and Jews) and the “pagans” (i.e. Hindus, Buddhists, animists, etc).

In fact, based on the sword-verses (as well as countless other Koranic verses and oral traditions attributed to Muhammad), Islam’s scholars, sheikhs, muftis, imams, and qadis throughout the ages have all reached the consensus—binding on the entire Muslim community—that Islam is to be at perpetual war with the non-Muslim world, until the former subsumes the latter. (It is widely held that the sword-verses alone have abrogated some 200 of the Koran’s more tolerant verses.)

Famous Muslim scholar and “father of modern history” Ibn Khaldun articulates the dichotomy between jihad and defensive warfare thus:

In the Muslim community, the holy war [i.e. jihad] is a religious duty, because of the universalism of the Muslim mission and the obligation to convert everybody to Islam either by persuasion or by force…
The other religious groups did not have a universal mission, and the holy war was not a religious duty for them, save only for purposes of defense… They are merely required to establish their religion among their own people.

That is why the Israeilites after Moses and Joshua remained unconcerned with royal authority [e.g. a “caliphate”]. Their only concern was to establish their religion [not spread it to the nations]…

But Islam is under obligation to gain power over other nations (The Muqudimmah, vol. 1 pg. 473, emphasis added).

Even when juxtaposed to their Jewish and Christian counterparts, the Islamic sword-verses are distinctive for using language that transcends time and space, inciting believers to attack and slay non-believers today no less than yesterday.

G-d commanded the Hebrews to kill Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites, and Jebusites—all specific peoples rooted to a specific time and place. At no time did G-d give an open-ended command for the Hebrews, and by extension their descendants the Jews, to fight and kill gentiles.

On the other hand, though Islam’s original enemies were, like Judaism’s, historical (e.g. Christian Byzantines and pagan Persians), the Koran rarely singles them out by their proper names. Instead, Muslims were (and are) commanded to fight the people of the book—“until they pay tribute with willing submission and feel themselves utterly subdued” (9:29) and to “slay the pagans wherever you find them” (9:5).
The two conjunctions “until” and “wherever” demonstrate the perpetual nature of these commandments: there are still “people of the book” who have yet to be “utterly subdued” (especially in the Americas, Europe, and Israel) and “pagans” to be slain “wherever” one looks (especially Asia and sub-Saharan Africa).

Aside from the divine words of the Koran, Muhammad’s pattern of behavior—his “Sunna” or “example”—is an extremely important source of legislation in Islam. Muslims are exhorted to emulate Muhammad in all walks of life: “You have indeed in the Messenger of Allah a beautiful pattern [of conduct]” (33:21).

And Muhammad’s pattern of conduct vis-à-vis non-Muslims is quite explicit. Sarcastically arguing against the concept of “moderate” Islam, terrorist Osama bin Laden, who enjoys half the Arab-Islamic world’s support per a recent al-Jazeera poll, portrays the prophet’s Sunna thus:

“Moderation” is demonstrated by our prophet who did not remain more than three months in Medina without raiding or sending a raiding party into the lands of the infidels to beat down their strongholds and seize their possessions, their lives, and their women” (from The Al-Qaeda Reader).
In fact, based on both the Koran and Muhammad’s Sunna, pillaging and plundering infidels, enslaving their children, and placing their women in concubinage is well founded (e.g. 4:24, 4:92, 8:69, 24:33, 33:50, etc.).

While law-centric and legalistic, Judaism has no such equivalent to the Sunna; the words and deeds of the patriarchs, though recorded in the Tanakh never went on to be part of Jewish law. Neither Abraham’s “white-lies,” nor Jacob’s perfidy, nor Moses’ short-fuse, nor David’s adultery, nor Solomon’s philandering ever went on to instruct Jews. They were merely understood to be historical actions perpetrated by fallible men who were often punished by G-d for their less than ideal behavior.“

As always, Petra has stated the situation exactly – Netanyahu’s speech quite properly represented the views of a majority of Israelis in the face of Palestinian irredentism.

Lozowick has described such irredentism well:

http://yaacovlozowick.blogspot.com/2009/06/ignoramusi-pontificating.html

In July 2001, 9 months into the Jerusalem Intifada and four months into the Government of Ariel Sharon, a group of some two dozen intellectuals from both ides convened to build a bridge over the ruins of peace. … Between them there must have been many thousands of hours of dialogue. Intelligent, educated individuals, rational realists, there was not a hard-line militant among them.

Their idea was simple: to agree on a joint declaration calling on the warring factions to desist from their insanity and return to negotiations. The peaceniks would join hands, and with their moral authority embarrass the politicians back to sanity.

The Palestinians were willing to join in stating that there should be two independent states alongside one another, but the Israelis, alerted by the fiascos of Camp David and Taba to a nuance they had previously overlooked, demanded that the statement clearly say that Israel would be a Jewish State and Palestine an Arab one.

The Palestinians refused. Jews, they said, are a religion, not a nationality, and neither need nor deserve their own state. They were welcome to live in Israel, but the Palestinian refugees would come back, and perhaps she would cease to be a Jewish State.

It is noteworthy that (1) it took 20 years of absolute Israeli control (1967-87) for the Palestinins to resign themselves to an Israeli/Jewish presence in the Mideast and (2) as soon as the Jews made a major concession (setting up the PA via Oslo), the Palestinians reverted to the dream of eliminating Israel.

It seems that having ones cake and eating it is a privilege that only one people in Judea & Samaria are entitled to and it sure as hell isn’t the palestinians.Israelinurse,I remember what you had to say when Gaza was getting bombed to fuck,you never seemed to realise that if one is claiming to be in mortal danger from the peashooters being fired out of Gaza you kind of undermine your own mendacious case if in the next post you are boasting about Israels vast military superiority,as well as gloating about all the dead terrorists,not one of whom was a civilian or a child!

G-d commanded the Hebrews to kill Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites, and Jebusites—all specific peoples rooted to a specific time and place.
Well,that’s okay then!!! Although this G-d fella seems a touch on the random side-and these commandments seem to tally remarkably well with what the rulers of the time wanted! Seriously though,I’m not hung up on violence in the bible-I just wanted to see if your whole Moozlims and Izzlam are the cause of all eeeevill belief system is as rigid as it seems.It is-thank you for a good laugh at your expense!

“claiming to be in mortal danger from the peashooters being fired out of Gaza”

It truly is a pity that you seem to take some sort of pleasure in demeaning the suffering of the people that have had to live with the threat of kassams and other missiles fired from Gaza.

If a member of your family were killed or maimed by one of these missiles, as has happened to the people of the western Negev, would you appreciate others referring to the weapon as a peashooter?

Israelinurse, if I remember correctly, expressed genuine sadness at the loss of innocent lives in Gaza, so try not to project your unfeeling approach onto her.

“In substance, I’m not even sure where exactly you differ. Would you countenance a Palestinian state that can have an army, whatever weapons and military capabilities it wants, and whatever military alliances it wants? Netanyahu’s demand that a Palestinian state will be demilitarized is not a new one”

Petra, I think that is the least of the differences. A demilitarized Palestinian state in itself is not a deal-breaker (although post-peace, that agreement would mean nothing.) The problem is that Bibi talked about “peace” but clearly has no interest in it. He set up all these pre-conditions for talks that he knows are impossible and it’s quite similar to the way Hamas talks when they say they want peace. They both want the other side to concede everything and then start discussions. How about just starting discussions? If he indeed speaks for most of Israel, it is incredibly sad. Read David Grossman’s analysis (http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1093572.html) I know, I know, he’s a liberal elitist who doesn’t understand that the Jews who are burning Palestinian fields in the West Bank are heroes because Iran has nuclear weapons and the Holocaust happened.

Thus saith the LORD of hosts … go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.

I researched this and the story is that the Midian’s slaughtered the Jews and they were forced to flee and live in poverty under under the yoke of the Midianites. God then told the Jews to take revenge in total war. Moses was angry that women were spared (hence exercising a moral Jewish conscience) but Moses wanted God to be obeyed to the absolute letter and so he said what he said. It was a revenge.

Perhaps the antisemite “!” could explain how this suggests that Jews treat Arabs as sub-human.

Since we wre discussing holy books and Islam’s description of Jews then we only have to refer to “apes & pigs” which is used often by Islamic hate preachers even today.

remember what you had to say when Gaza was getting bombed to fuck,you never seemed to realise that if one is claiming to be in mortal danger from the peashooters being fired out of Gaza you kind of undermine your own mendacious case if in the next post you are boasting about Israels vast military superiority,as well as gloating about all the dead terrorists,not one of whom was a civilian or a child!

Israel, by its understated response to Gaza terror, missed an opportunity to finish off Hamas. My only sympathy is with innocent Gazans who Hamas sacrificed to try and make a moral and political gain which they miscalculated because its a moral and political loss.

Hamas were warned what would happen and Egypt begged them to stop breaking the ceasefire and renew it (not that they kept to it).

If there is a next time with Bibi in charge they know it will be the last time. Israel has let it be known that any futher attack on it by Hamas or Hezbollah will be met with a response so hard it will take the breath away. And they will deserve it. (ooh that lets the door open for “!” who laughs at its own jokes)

Tell me. If there was a peace deal between Israel and Palestinians then who gets the benefit?

I can’t see any benefit or prize for Israel.

The party has who has nothing to gain has nothing to negotiate,

Perhaps the antisemite “!” could explain how this suggests that Jews treat Arabs as sub-human.
I wasn’t suggesting anything of the sort-rather ,I was suggesting an attitude on the part of three people on this thread.I don’t even think this attitude(these attitudes?) is based in religion-the reason I quoted from the old testament was to see what reaction this example of bigotry evinced.

@ Spectrum
I researched this and the story is that….
Fuck me, that was quick research! How about you solve string theory before bedtime! HARHARHARHAR!!!!!!

“I can’t see any benefit or prize for Israel.”

Spectrum, if a true peace deal emerges between Israel and the Arabs, then there will be actual benefits for Israel.

Israelis will not have to live with the fear of being killed by kasams, katyushas, suicide bombers, snipers, rock throwers etc.

Israelis will also be able to enjoy better human relationships with their Palestinian neighbours.

Israel will be able to concentrate all it’s resources towards solving the internal problems Israel has, instead of concentrating on defence.

I would also say Israel’s international image would also improve, but despite my religiosity, this is one miracle I doubt will come about, even with a peace deal.

I wasn’t suggesting anything of the sort-rather ,I was suggesting an attitude on the part of three people on this thread.I don’t even think this attitude(these attitudes?) is based in religion-the reason I quoted from the old testament was to see what reaction this example of bigotry evinced.

And what relevance did you think the Old Testament had to the opinions of these three people – whom I support 100%. I think I know your answer and if its what I suspect it is then you will get cut to ribbons (my bible says so – LOL!)

Thanks Yossi.

Blahx3 -sorry; your memory must be failing you.
Just out of interest, have you ever met a terrorist? I have, several in fact. Whilst changing their dressings, administering their medicines, bathing them, washing their hair and changing their bedclothes, I always tried to talk to them. Not about their terrorist activities -I always insisted on not knowing what they had done because I felt it may compramise my ability to empathise. No -I talked about family, friends, football, plans for the future. I tried to show them that when it boils down to it, we are all the same, with similar hopes, worries and fears.
You know what? It didn’t work. Not even once. I could blather on about the world cup for ages, but I never became anything other than the Zionist enemy.

Israelinurse, thanks for your crushing and well written demolitions of Alex Stein’s grandstanding of ye olde Palestinian mythologies, presented by him as moderate, balanced and infinitely superior analyses to Netanyahu’s statements. I also think N’s statements on the Iranian uprising are very well chosen– centring as they do on admiring the courage of the Iranian protesters and drawing repeated attention to the hollowness of the IR’s claims to democracy. He seems to be drawing on the political analyses of Sharansky.

@ Spectrum
I researched this and the story is that….
Fuck me, that was quick research! How about you solve string theory before bedtime! HARHARHARHAR!!!!!!

Religious freaks tend to have lower IQ’s IMHO. Also, the feeble mind often finds simple things funny and fascinating. You need to get out of your cage and stopy hitting the mirror with your beak and tweeting “Who’s a pretty boy”.

Also, people with a lack of ability will often be amazed at the simplest of things – like copying a key phrase into Google and spending 60 seconds reading the article.

And what relevance did you think the Old Testament had to the opinions of these three people
Not what you think dickhead.Someone called “tabatha” said And to that moron, also: go and read the Quran. You’ll find that the ONLY place ANYONE is described in such terms is in ISLAM.

Spectrum, if a true peace deal emerges between Israel and the Arabs, then there will be actual benefits for Israel.

I would also say Israel’s international image would also improve, but despite my religiosity, this is one miracle I doubt will come about, even with a peace deal.

Yossi, I respect your answers but I’m not sure I put value on what you say the benefits are. Israel could stop the rockets fired at them by the international consensus to stop Hamas from re-arming and next time devastating Hamas with greater intent until they cry for mercy and to stop. They need a Hiroshima.

I don’t think for one minute that relations with Palestinians will be any better than relations with any other Arab/Muslim group. I will still believe they want to kill Jews.

Israel will NEVER stop concentrating on defence. It can’t afford to.

Israel’s image will never approve. Once there is peace they will start on the recriminations and reparations. I am 100% convinced that a Palestinian State will become a new rocket launching pad.

And so,you support “100%” “tabatha”’s demonstrably false views on the Quran…I don’t know if the “religious freaks” you refer to is aimed at myself..may I suggest you take longer than 60 seconds to read anything in future..

Not what you think dickhead.Someone called “tabatha” said And to that moron, also: go and read the Quran. You’ll find that the ONLY place ANYONE is described in such terms is in ISLAM.

And you proved Tabath wrong by …………

Remember you used the word ’subhuman’. An “ape & pig” are subhuman. That’s what the Koran says.

You’re not very good at debate are you. First sign of a losing argument is insulting people. As a defender of Islam/Arabs/Muslims/Palestinians I think you are fab and can only encourage you to become a professional at it. Please!!!

And so,you support “100%” “tabatha”’s demonstrably false views on the Quran

I suspect you are a Tequila drinker.

I didn’t say that the old testament said any people were subhuman!Show me where I specifically said that! look back at what I wrote at 10:53…

Spectrum,

I understand what I consider to be the pessimism, and you no doubt view as the realism, in your post. The situation is not one that breeds optimism.

Is it possible for Israel to stop rocket attacks through increased and harsher military responses? Perhaps.

Can a harsh military response prevent suicide bombings? Or snipers or stabbings, or lynchings? No.

The world will never ever accept what you call a “Hiroshima” style approach, and besides, the morality behind it is highly questionable to say the least. The day Israel decides to adopt “hiroshima” tactics in Judea, Samaria or Gaza, or on it’s own Arab citizens, will be the day the State is destroyed, with the approval of just about every nation on earth.

While there are Arabs in and around Israel who passionately hate Jews and wish to do them harm, then no amount of harsh measures will work. Ultimately peaceful coexistence is the only solution.

It is possible for Arab and Jew to live in peace together. We are not biologically driven to hate each other. There are and have always been good relations between individual Jews and Arabs. These can be built upon and expanded

Will peace be easy? Defiantly not.

Will it occur in this century? I’m not hopeful.

Is it a goal which should be worked for? Yes.

You are making a huge assumption that the Palestinians want a state.
They receive billions a year in foreign aid as long as they keep their victim status. I see no historical or present Palestinian longing for a state. Only the ever present desire to destroy Israel. If Israel did not exist, there would not be a Palestinian State.

Stan

Gabriel, instead of reading David Grossman’s commentary on Bibi’s speech, you might be better off reading Bibi’s speech first. If you do, you will find out that he made no “preconditions” for talks whatsoever; all the conditions he formulated were conditions he (and the vast majority of Israelis) consider indispensable for any genuine peace. However, since genuine peace is not very likely, we would probably also settle for a cold peace like we have with Egypt and Jordan, where good old-fashioned Jew-hatred remains as popular as ever.

You may know Netanyahu better than I do, since you are sure he doesn’t want peace. From what I can tell, he surely doesn’t believe the Palestinians are willing to live peacefully in their own state alongside Israel — and just like the majority of Israelis, he doesn’t believe that because there is precious little evidence that would support such an idea. When Olmert last year offered the Palestinians a state on the equivalent of 100 percent of pre-1967 Gaza/Westbank territory, with East Jerusalem as their capital, plus a guaranteed passage between Gaza and the Westbank, Abu Ala, one of the veteran Palestinian negotiators, responded with threats that given this totally outrageous offer, the Palestinians would go back to demanding a 1state solution… A recent issue of the Israel-Palestine Journal offered 2 Palestinian views on the “right of return”: one was Abu Sitta, who has spent all his life pushing for the right to turn back the clock to 1947; the other, “moderate” writer (I believe a former Palestinian minister) spent much of his article to explain how dreadfully unjust it would be not to insist on the ROR to Israel, and then just added that while it was dreadfully unjust, it would actually be more pragmatic, though he hurried to add that this was of course a decision Palestinian society still had to ponder…
Most Israelis are sick and tired of having anything whatsoever to do with the Palestinians; after all, just 3 years ago, we elected Kadima on a platform of further unilateral withdrawals from the Westbank. The rocket barrage from judenrein and settlement-free Gaza taught us that the Palestinians don’t want to let go of us, so we will have to find some other solutions. Bibi doesn’t believe that the bi-lateral track will yield any results, because there simply is no Palestinian politician who can sell any realistic agreement to his people; moreover, despite much international support, the Palestinians have failed to build up anything resembling a solid institutional infrastructure for a state; so even if by tomorrow morning, all settlements would be magically evacuated, there wouldn’t be a functioning Palestinian state; instead, you would get Gaza. These are facts that no amount of empathy can change — only the Palestinians could change these facts, but they are not interested, as the complete lack of support for the sterling work Fayyad was trying to do shows.

Yo, View…

You left out the important part where we all form a big circle and sway from side to side singing “kumbayah”.

Yo, View…

You left out the important part where we all form a big circle and sway from side to side singing “kumbayah”.

“From what I can tell, he surely doesn’t believe the Palestinians are willing to live peacefully in their own state alongside Israel — and just like the majority of Israelis, he doesn’t believe that because there is precious little evidence that would support such an idea.”

He’d be crazy to believe that. Many, maybe even most, Palestinians have no interest in living in a state alongside Israel. The problem is the next logical step. You, and Bibi, say “Palestinians don’t want a state therefore…we should keep taking more and more of their land and keep ruling over them forever.” What Alex is saying is that we need to move towards a place where Palestinians may be willing to make peace. It is undeniable that Palestinian attitudes towards Israelis both within Israel and without is at its best when there is some sort of progress. Nobody believes that if Israel took down the settlements tomorrow there would be peace, there would be rockets, but movements towards helping moderates are needed.

“Most Israelis are sick and tired of having anything whatsoever to do with the Palestinians;”

I guarantee you that Palestinians are even more sick of Israelis. You are repeating the same right-wing nonsense about “Palestinians did not build a state”. Well, how exactly are they supposed to do that when A)Israel keeps destroying its infrastructure B) It doesn’t control its own borders C) Going from one village to the next may take hours or days D) You are occupied. What would happen if the hourney from Ramat Gan to Tel Aviv took maybe 4 hours, maybe 30 minutes, or maybe you couldn’t get in at all.

Now, nobody sane will say that Palestinians have done as good as they can have. They have made a tonne of mistakes and almost always end up doing the wrong thing, but all you are doing is ensuring that Palestinians will become more and more desperate. Then, when Hamas keeps gaining in popularity you can exclaim even louder how the Palestinians don’t want peace. When was the last time Israel did anything to help moderate Palestinian? Gaza was a gift to Hamas and everything else Israel does is basically about stealing Palestinian land and resources. Yes, why aren’t the Palestinians moderate? It’s shocking. Most people who are treated like a lesser species are grateful for it. I don’t expect Israel to be better than other countries and I don’t expect Palestinians to bend over and keep taking it. Bibi doesn’t believe there is a Palestinian worth talking to largely because Israel ensures there never will be. This is the issue. Not that Palestinians don’t want peace. They don’t…but Israel wants to keep the status quo forever and does everything it can to make sure it can. There is no end game with this line of thought. No long term plan. Just a perpetual stranglehold on the Palestinians.

Now, nobody sane will say that Palestinians have done as good as they can have. They have made a tonne of mistakes
What sort of tonne? A metric tonne? More likely an imperial tonne.Details count!

Stupid crap, the Palestinians can’t have peace because they don’t want it.

Every one of their problems comes from that. If they ever grow the fuck up then a generation or two later they will have achieved normalcy, an economy etc. etc.

What Alex is saying is that we need to move towards a place where Palestinians may be willing to make peace.

Is it possible for you, or Alex to consider that maybe it’s about time that “we” should be demanding of the Palestinian leaderships that they move towards a place where Israelis may be willing to make peace?

Well, how exactly are they supposed to do that when A)Israel keeps destroying its infrastructure B) It doesn’t control its own borders C) Going from one village to the next may take hours or days D) You are occupied. What would happen if the hourney from Ramat Gan to Tel Aviv took maybe 4 hours, maybe 30 minutes, or maybe you couldn’t get in at all.

Gee, I don’t know, Zionist Jews built a state without billions of dollars of international support when: A) The British kept restricting Jewish immigration and Arab gangs pursued murder sprees B) Zionist Jews had no control over the borders of the Mandate C) Going to Jerusalem meant being fired upon or if you lived there it meant being held hostage to a siege D) The British were the occupiers.

Gabriel, neither you, nor Alex Stein, nor David Grossman have a long term plan or an end game, so it’s kind of rich that you accuse others of not having one.

And I find your insinuation that Palestinians or Arabs are treated as “a lesser species” to be the kind of racist hyperbole I’d expect from a foaming at the mouth nutter.

Wot Gabriel Said

Bibi exposed that the Palestinians simply hate Jews. He demands that they formally recognise Israel as The Jewish State. Nothing wrong with that when we have the Islamic Republic of Iran and Pakistan. That foces us to recognise Iran and Pakistan as Islamic countries. Nothing wrong with that. Its their country and they can call it The Fanny State for all anyone cares.

But Bibi knows that its Jew-hatred that drives the Palestinians and so neither Fatah nor Hamas can use “The Jewish State”. Well, if you refuse to recognise the people you are negotiating with by name then its clear you have a genocide reson because refusing to acknowledge the existence of a country is tantamount to an intended Genocide ie denial of the right to exist.

He is also right to slap down Obama – who has remained silent on Israel. Putting another storey on a house or building another supermarket in a settlement isn’t a barrier to peace. Its an excuse and device to see if Israel can be controlled by USA and/or Palestinians. Well it can’t. Palestinians can’t have what they want as if simply speaking it is something they have a right to.

West Bank seems to be prospering and Bibi is also right that as soon as West Bank sees the benefit of economic success they are more likely not to want to lose it by attacking Israel.

Why is Alex Stein’s name not displayed as the author of this?

Alex’s moral posturings are so preposterious that they can only be understood as a marketing campaign for his elsewhere-stated dream of receiving a Nobel Prize for his novels.

Since it was never the aim to of israelis to ‘ethnically cleanse’ Israel of Arabs, presumably there’s no problem with the refugees returning?
Or is the resulting demographic makeup of the country actually essential for Israel’s survival?
If the latter, then goodness what a serendipitous outcome there! Thanks genocidal Arab states who shoulder all the blame!

What Lbnaz said.

Ohad – as pleasant as ever, I see.

To !:

You stated – wrongly – that some of us regard Arabs as ’subhuman’. I responded, fairly, by noting a simple *fact*: that it is only in Islam that ‘non believers’ are irrevocably defined as being less than human. I then backed up my stance.

I suggest that you go and read the Hamas Charter which cites the Quranic verse stating that the hour will come when ALL Muslims must kill ALL JEWS.

Note: not ‘israelis’.
JEWS.

If you are actually trying to deny that Islam – when followed literally – is a massive problem, then clearly you are inhabiting a different dimension to the rest of the world. Over 90% of terrorism is ISLAMIC TERRORISM.

Let’s use a simple analogy. If a group of people with red hair were responsible for over 90% of terrorism, and if said group followed a manifesto that referred to all NON red heads as being less than human, would you not agree that this group was a massive problem…?

Just because Islam is a religion, does not render it immune from criticism. No religion, no ideology, is immune from critique. Much of what Islam says about Jews and Christians is the same as the Nazi ideology re ‘non aryans’. Take your blinkers off and maybe you’ll realise that for yourself.

Go and read the Quran. Then come back and try and tell us that Islam does not condemn ‘infidels’ to all maner of subjugation and worse.

smarmy kack. european bullsh1t. bleurgh

Gabriel, WRT Palestinian state (non)building: Wot Lbnaz said — gee, that is soooo convenient!
In one of the BBC’s Doha debates, on the proposition: Palestinians have become their own worst enemies, a member of the audience in traditional Arab attire made exactly the point Lbnaz made…
Your points re. the supposed Israeli unwillingness for peace are demonstrable non-sense, as can be shown e.g. by polls that have measured popular Israeli support for the 2state solution for almost 10 years now. It started to erode only with the increasing intensity of the rocket barrage from settlement-free Gaza. And, BTW, Israelis were depressed when Camp David failed, Palestinians welcomed Arafat back as a hero, and promptly proceeded to unleash the senseless violence of the Al-Aksa intifada.
As to the settlements: you seem to know a lot about them, so you sure know what percent of Westbank land (not counting the annexed Jerusalem area)the built-up areas of the settlements actually “grab”…
You don’t know? Well, it’s less than 3 percent, see e.g. here
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1245184871039&pagename=JPArticle%2FShowFull
http://www.jcpa.org/brief/brief2-16.htm

BTW, as far as I remember, in the Doha debate, the proposition that the Palestinians have become their own worst enemies was resoundingly endorsed by the audience…

Ohad is saying it like it is, as are Petra et al.

Since it was never the aim to of israelis to ‘ethnically cleanse’ Israel of Arabs, presumably there’s no problem with the refugees returning?
Or is the resulting demographic makeup of the country actually essential for Israel’s survival?
If the latter, then goodness what a serendipitous outcome there! Thanks genocidal Arab states who shoulder all the blame!

It strikes me that this is a very concise summation of the kind of thinking, the extremely bitter paranoia shading into hatred that a large proportion of Brits have for Jews and Israelis.

Gaza was a gift to Hamas and everything else Israel does is basically about stealing Palestinian land and resources

Gabriel is one of those people who can argue a thing and its opposite without batting an eyelid. Israel withdrew from Gaza, leaving behind many millions’ worth of infrastructure (or perhaps that was also ’stealing Palestinian land and resources’?). To people like Gabriel, withdrawing from Gaza simply doesn’t figure in the equation because it paints Israel in a positive light and shows up the basic gangsterism of the Palestinian leadership.
He also, in the same breath, admits that the Palestinians almost (?) always end up doing the wrong thing, but finds a way to blame Israel for that.
The tiny yishuv managed to build a state under hugely difficult conditions, because it wanted to. The proof of the pudding: the Palestinians are not making concrete steps to build any sort of civilised state.

(look at what passes for civic instituions and democracy in Gaza).

Petra – given that the report cites B’tselem, it’s worth citing the original report in full – http://www.btselem.org/English/Publications/Summaries/200205_Land_Grab.asp

Yes, Alex, it’s worth citing the orginal report in full. Are you citing it to dispute the figure I have given?
You should: it turns out I vastly exxagerated — as Table 9 on p.93 of the report shows, the built-up settlement area, INCLUDING Jerusalem metropolitan area, amounts to just 1.7 percent of Westbank land.
Mind you, this point is important only to show how little “meat” there is to the idea that the settlements make a Palestinian state impossible — as long as there is no Palestinian state, the settlements certainly add much hardship to the life of Palestinians on the Westbank, but the idea that they are soooo big, and take up sooooo much land that they would somehow prevent a Palestinian state is obviously bizarre, given that it is hard to see how 1.7 percent of built-up areas should prevent the formation of a Palestinian state after a peace agreement.

I wasn’t disputing your figures; the point is that much of the land is now de facto off limits to the Palestinians, and it seems the endgame of successive governments has been to work towards a scenario where key sections of land are cleared of Palestinians. Whats going on in the South Hebron Hills, for example, is a good case in point. Would you like to accompany me on a visit there?

What I find inexplicable is that Netanyahu has been called a coward by the Haaretz! BBC has a quote with a Palestinian blaming Netanyahu for killing any hope of a peace agreement, but I think most of us know that’s absurd. Neither side really wants peace (that is, without getting everything they want, like annihilation of the other). But they’re going to play that card because it will get them international sympathy.

Newsy recently ran a fairly in-depth report about Netanyahu’s speech and its significance. It may be familiar information to some of you, but for those who aren’t sure about the impact of it, you can see it at http://www.newsy.com/videos/newsy_in_depth_israel_and_the_u_s. They do a fairer job to the topic than I could.

Neither side really wants peace (that is, without getting everything they want, like annihilation of the other). But they’re going to play that card because it will get them international sympathy

Quite possibly the stupidest and most ignorant comment on the blogosphere, ever.

Alex:
“it seems the endgame of successive governments has been to work towards a scenario where key sections of land are cleared of Palestinians.” — for what purpose, you imagine? In all negotiations, Israel wanted to annex the main settlement blocs close to the Green Line in exchange for land swaps; which parts of the Westbank have which Palestinian population density hasn’t been a factor for anything, as far as I can see. And why would it be? In case of a peace agreement, the Palestinians will anyway be free to build wherever they decide. I don’t doubt that some of the settlers do their best to chase Palestinians away from anywhere near their settlements, but I can’t see what would be the purpose of your imagined Israeli “endgame”.
Thanks for the invitation to join your excursion, but I won’t be able to.

“As to the settlements: you seem to know a lot about them, so you sure know what percent of Westbank land (not counting the annexed Jerusalem area)the built-up areas of the settlements actually “grab”…
You don’t know? Well, it’s less than 3 percent, see e.g. here”

Except that this is complete nonsense as anyone who has ever been to the West Bank can tell you ad if you believe that 1.7% figure, there really is no point trying to argue because it is insane. Maybe, although I doubt it very highly, that number is correct, but even if it is it is so incredibly misleading as to be an outright lie. The implication is that Palestinians are whining about a tiny percentage of land taken. The reality is that the problem is not only the settlements, but the Israeli-only roads, the military presence to guard the settlers, the road blocks designed to stop Palestinians from going from one town to the next, the Jewish theft and destruction of Palestinian crops, the outposts that never get taken down, and many other problems.

But seriously, go into the West Bank. Look at the settlements and outposts dot every goddamn hilltop . (http://haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1094773.html) , (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d8/Westbankjan06.jpg)

The reality for Palestinians is not an annoyance of tiny number of settlements, it’s that for many of them, their entire lives are ruled by Israel. Go with Alex to look. I don’t know anybody who has ever gone who has not left disgusted with Israeli governments.

“srael withdrew from Gaza, leaving behind many millions’ worth of infrastructure (or perhaps that was also ’stealing Palestinian land and resources’?). To people like Gabriel, withdrawing from Gaza simply doesn’t figure in the equation because it paints Israel in a positive light and shows up the basic gangsterism of the Palestinian leadership.”

Yawn…I see you cannot understand a rather simple form of logic. What I said was something along the lines of -Leaving Gaza in the way that Israel did was a massive boon for Hamas. And it was. The problem with Sharon’s unilateral withdrawal, is that to Palestinians it looked like Israel was fleeing. (Just like in S. Lebanon). Had Israel, for a second, actually wanted to boost moderates like it says it does, why not invite Abbas over for talks? Even if you don’t like Abbas, invite someone else. Then, you make it look like talking helped the Palestinians instead of violence. Hell, even fake having talks, Abbas would love the credit Why would any Palestinian think that negotiations work? They don’t. Instead, Israel constantly strengthens the extremists. Instead of “Negotiations got Israel out of Gaza” it became “Hamas got Israel out of Gaza”.

Petra – I’m interested to know how often you visit the WB and in what context.

Gabriel -
‘but the Israeli-only roads, the military presence to guard the settlers, the road blocks designed to stop Palestinians from going from one town to the next,’

Do you know why these things came about Gabriel?
The Israeli-only roads:
Of course to be accurate you should have pointed out that there are also Palestinian-only roads upon which Israelis cannot travel.
During the first intefada numerous Israeli citizens were burned alive in their cars after Molotov cocktails were thrown at them by Palestinian terrorists. The government even repealled the law on wearing a safety belt in cars on the WB roads when investigations showed that the time spent undoing them could mean the difference between life and death.
That is why the roads were segregated -to save lives.

The military guard for settlements is because children were literally murdered in their beds by Palestinian terrorists. What government would not protect its citizens under such circumstances?

The road blocks -their aim is NOT to stop Palestinians getting from one town to the next, it is to prevent Palestinian terrorists getting into Israeli towns and blowing up cafes, buses and market places.
Before the Intefada there were no roadblocks.

During the second Intefada the IDF managed to prevent a very high percentage of attempted terrorist attacks by using the above method. As we all know, over 1,000 Israelis died during those years -imagine how many more would have perished without them.

‘I don’t know anybody who has ever gone who has not left disgusted with Israeli governments.’
Well now you do.

“The road blocks -their aim is NOT to stop Palestinians getting from one town to the next, it is to prevent Palestinian terrorists getting into Israeli towns and blowing up cafes, buses and market places.”

Utter nonsense. I fully support a strong border with the Palestinians. Israel does need to protect itself from people seeking to destroy it. However, the vast, vast majority of roadblocks have zilch to do with Israel’s safey. The same goes for the vast vast majority of Israeli-only roads and so on. These are partially about securing the safety of outpost and settlements, but they are also about making the lives of Palestinians harder. Look at a maps above and seriously tell me that the series of roadblocks, earth mounds, guard towers, all over the West Bank. Not between Israel and the West Bank. Just in the middle of the West Bank. If you think that those are there to protect Israel, you are insane. But that is the right-wing Israeli mantra. “Making the lives of Palestinians intolerable for umm…security purposes. No, well of course, it doesn’t look like we need them…but you just don’t understand.”

Gabriel -I am far from being the ‘insane’ one here, unless in your eyes it is insane to want to live.
Having seen on countless occasions with my own eyes the results of Palestinian terror, having experienced it myself, having had 4 children serve in the Israeli army, one of whom spent his entire 3 years undercover in the WB tracking down terrorists, I am very grateful for every roadblock and guard tower which puts even one possibly crucial metre between the murdering terrorists and the people I love.
I’m very sorry that the Palestinians have hard lives, but if that is the price which has to be paid so that my fellow countrymen can live, then so be it. Terror was their choice. Living is ours.

Many years ago a suicide bomber drove a car bomb into a bus in the town where I was working at the time. Most of the dead and injured were teenagers on their way home from school. When the injured were brought to A&E, we initially thought that they were all Ethiopian children. They weren’t -they were just so badly burned that their skin was black. One of my colleagues was trying to get an IV line into one of the victims when our manager came over and told her to let another nurse do it. She didn’t understand why he insisted that she hand over the patient to someone else. He took her aside and explained to her that the youth she had been treating was her own son. He was so badly burned that she hadn’t even recognised him.
He lived, but that family went through years of hell, and there are thousands of other families in Israel who have lived through and are still living through that same hell.
So I’m really sorry if it takes 4 hours to get from Schem to Ramallah, but that’s the price the Palestinians will have to pay until they renounce terror and we can be sure that no other schoolchild will have to suffer like my friend’s son did.
And you know what Gabriel, I find it commendable that you can find the empathy for a Palestinian stuck in a road block, but exceedingly strange that your empathy does not not extend to an Israeli child burned beyond recognition.

Israelinurse – I think you’re missing Gabriel’s point. He has no objection, even in the absence of a negotiated settlement, to Israel separating itself from the Palestinians. He’s asking why they don’t do it properly? If the fence was designed to separate Israelis from Palestinians why does the route often take in more Palestinian populations? Why have over 500 checkpoints when you could have a smarter series of terminals? The answer, as is clear to a five year old, is that we have continued to use our legitimate right of a security as a pretext to take valuable land and resources. The report above, for example, shows this very well. Do not impugn our motivations by suggesting we would be happy for Israeli civilians to be killed by terrorists. If we’re telling stories, here’s one of mine: I was thankfully at home the night of the Cafe Hillel bombing when I was at yeshiva for the year in 2003/4. Unfortunately, my flatmate at the time was not. Thankfully he escaped with nothing more than a few scratches. He would not, however, agree with your analysis of the checkpoints, and it is wrong to suggest that only one lesson regarding Israel’s security can be extrapolated by those who have been victims of terror (see the Parents’ Circle, for example). You do not have a monopoly on the national pulse.

IsraeliNurse–often when I read your posts I realize how difficult it is to give people a sense of the Israeli experience that doesn’t just start when Alex or Seth made Alyiah. Somebody who hasn’t experienced the years when PeaceNow could rally hundreds of thousands, and then the time when taking a bus or going to the supermarket could mean risking one’s life, when parents sent their children to school in the morning, trying not to think what could happen by the time it was evening.

Gabriel, you’re welcome to doubt Btselem figures — sometimes they are really not accurate. I made the point about the 1.7 percent in a specific context, which you could have realized if you bothered to read other people’s posts — but then, you perhaps find it more important to type up your own. So I guess there isn’t much point in once again responding to your post — just go ahead and write what you wanted to write anyway.

Alex, bit strange, frankly — I asked your views about Netanyahu’s demand that the Palestinian state would be demilitarized, I asked what you meant by darkly hinting at an “endgame” pursued by successive Israeli governments … no response — which is fine if you don’t have the time/inclination; but you’ll understand that I don’t have the time/inclination to give you details about when, why, and with whom I go to the Westbank.

PetraMB – re. endgame, that’s why I specifically invited you to the South Hebron Hills, where the reality on the ground is totally at odds with your analysis. If you’re not willing to have a look for yourself, that’s your choice.

I’m not surprised to see you patronise me with the new immigrant stuff, it’s par for the course as far as you are concerned. I also have friends who have been involved in terror incidents, as the story above shows, not that I need to prove anything, and I’m also more than aware of the circumstances in which the left has collapsed – I was here for the year before the intifada, a year in the middle of the intifada, and then I made aliyah the year after disengagement. Either way, I won’t be patronised like that, and I object to Israeli nurse’s attempts to convince the HP audience that she’s the only one with her finger on the national pulse.

Alex: I have feared for quite some time now that at some point I was going to have to write these words to you because I really don’t want to write anything which may be misconstrued as being insulting or patronising -that is not my intention -and these sort of things really should be said face to face, with all the accompanying nuances of facial expression; not written in black and white.

Firstly, by no means do I think I am ‘the only one with her finger on the national pulse’. Petra, Fabian, Lbnaz and many other non-Israelis here seem to be able to count the heartbeats very well without my help. But it is patently clear that I am counting a different pulse to you, and the question is why.
The obvious answer would be political outlook, and whilst I rather suspect that deep down we have more in common than not on that subject, there are obviously some pretty big chasms of disagreement too. These, I suspect, are based on age and experience -and no I’m not ‘pulling rank’ here, I’m just pointing out that experience colours one’s views. There is experience which comes with time and there is experience which comes with things happening to you and around you.
I too was a new immigrant from the UK, Alex, and when I look back now at how my opinions changed as time progressed and my Hebrew improved to the point where today it is my first language before English and I even learnt a little Arabic and was able to absorb more and more of the myriad of personal stories which make up Israel, I know that the comforting absolutism of my initial youthful opinions was often superficial and naive.
I say this in the friendliest possible of manners, Alex, (this is the bit I didn’t want to write) – you can’t come to the ME with 20-odd years of experience from another part of the world, which to be honest may just as well be another planet, and without the language skills to comprehend fully the nuances of what is going on and expect to be able to bypass the long learning process.
Of course your political opinion is as valid as the next person’s: at the ballot box there is no difference between your vote and mine, but don’t you sometimes ask yourself why more people do not think like you? I’m sure you don’t think it’s because they are stupid or wicked -could it be that the majority in Israel have a legitimate opinion which is different to yours because their views are coloured by different experiences to your own? And could it just be possible that in 20 or 30 years time your own opinions may be a little less entrenched, a little less black and white than they are now?
I hope so Alex -not for political reasons, but because the secret to sucessfull absorbtion into Israeli society -which is what I wish you – is to be able to gradually cast off what one was before and to begin to think not like an Englishman living in Israel, but like an Israeli.

Alex, what a hypersensitive reaction! I’m sorry if you took my remarks as being patronizing, that’s not what I had in mind. I simply think that for young people who immigrate to Israel on their own, it’s hard to get the sense of Israeli identity that is shared by veterans/sabras for whom the country’s story is part of what shaped their lives and their families and friends. I think it’s a statement of fact, and I didn’t mean it to be patronizing. That you rush to take it like this, and take so much offense, perhaps is a reflection of your sense that I don’t quite know what I’m talking about. (I don’t take offense at that, it’s the prerogative of youth to think they know better — and sometimes they do!)
Let me make one thing clear: I respect your efforts to grapple in a serious and intelligent way with the issues that confront you as an Israeli by choice, and I wouldn’t judge your effort here to provide an “alternative” to Bibi’s speech as harsh as some commentators have done. Personally, my disagreements with your writings are often not neccessarily on the views per se that you present, but rather on the question what hat you are wearing when you publish them: are they meant to be the personal subjective views of Alex Stein the blogger, or do you want them to be read as serious political analysis that presents a solidly argued political perspective. It’s under the latter take that I respond to what you publish on HP.

One last thing: I don’t agree with your notion that IsraeliNurse is attempting “to convince the HP audience that she’s the only one with her finger on the national pulse.” She clearly writes for herself, often sharing personal experiences, and while I don’t know her or who she is, I can tell you for sure that among my family and friends, there is not a single one who wouldn’t look at her views and experiences as reflecting a very authentic mainstream Israeli perspective.
I don’t see any need for you to go into a contest with her about who of you has more claim to having the “finger on the national pulse”, as you like to put it. It’s a contest you loose by a devastating margin. But it’s a contest you yourself set up, without any reason.

IsraeliNurse, seems we were typing at the same time here…

These posts deserve a full response; I shall try and write something about them in the next couple of weeks.

In the meantime Petra, see here – http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1095031.html
Do you think this is the behaviour of a government that is truly interested in a fair peace with the Palestinians?

I see that Gert has posted another hissy fit about Harry’s Place and this post. The summer nights must fly by…