http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1003156.html (2 minute video embedded in the above page) "Why stones? Why Violence? If we stay home and raise children, in 20 years we will be the majority." This is why the pragmatic camp in Israel are so desparately hoping for a "Palestinian" state to be created. That is why despite the just solution of having all "Palestinians" sent to the existing "Palestinian" state of Jordan, instead of pushing for integration of these people into the population of other countries who already share their genes (Arab), language (Arabic), religion (mostly Islam) and culture, despite all that, pragmatic Israelis are willing to carve out half of Israel and "give back" Gaza and most of "West Bank" -- just to see a state of Palestine created. So that THAT entity can take control of the "Palestinian" population. So that IT deals with the astronomical birthrates and the caretaking that is required to make sure these people have adequate basic services. It is required so that the State of Israel washes its hands of any responsibility of these people. Let THEM be their own bosses, and masters of their own destiny (as gay as that sounds). In a just world no such state would come to be and the disgusting nazi-copy-cat regimes of the 40's would answer for their historical mistake of genocidal ambitions. But Israel can't afford to wait till that happens. Now is the time to set up an entity that the "Palestinians" can call home which would be responsible for them. Otherwise, as per the HAMAS member who renounced violence as the means, the end will be the same: the end of Israel. Olmert himself said that the day that Jews are outnumbered in their own state, the date that there is necessity to enact racial laws to preserve the Jewish state like South African whites did when they found themselves outnumbered by South African blacks, THAT is the day that Israel is finished. Not when it is destroyed by military might. In order to avoid such reality a "Palestinian" state must be set up, as soon as possible.
How is denying any group the right to self determination a just solution? Jordan is a Palestinian state. Your showing heavy overtones of bigotry here. with the first paragraph. You mean the land the Jews annexed through warfare? It was wrong when it happened in south africa and it would be wrong if the Israelis did it.
Most of us have had enough of Noam Chomsky's opinions...Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Seriously though, interesting argument in support of a 23rd Muslim terrorist state.
What is now called Jordan was supposed to be the state for the people who now call themselves "Palestinian". I don't really know how they make the cookie distinction between a Jordanian and a "Palestinian", but even today, the majority population in Jordan are "Palestinians". Anyway, this is just history and you're obviously going to dispute it, citing Arafat or other stooges or crypto nazis who speak Arabic. Today's Jordan is the real "Palestine". To the credit of the late King Hussein, a great but miserable man, at least he tried very hard to make Transjordan (and later Jordan) to be the "Palestinian" state by offering the spot of Prime Minister to the "Palestinians". So in a just world, all the "Palestinians" would move there, or at least admit and officially recognize that that is their national home. That would be part of the justice.
Unlike Jews, other people do not confuse religion or ethnicity or Biblical land grants with self determination. IIRC, greater Syria was a different proposition altogether. And if we are going by what people said at the time, the King Crane Commission ruled against a Jewish state in non-Jewish dominant lands As history has shown, they were right.
Israel should go back to the borders of King David. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Actually David was an occupier. He should have stayed in Iraq, where Abraham was from. The Philistines they fought were the rightful natives.
um No what is now Jordan was always Jordan it controls no land that was to go to the Palestinian state. Israel controls all that land. The British mandate was orginally before the jews got involved be turned into 2 states. Jordan from the Transjordan part and Palestine for well Palestine. Well this is assumed how it would have been divded up based on the nationlist movement and promises made my the brits. When the jews made there demand for a nation Palestine was divided between the people already there(the Palestinians) and the jews imagrents(The future Israelis). During the war in 1948 the Israelis took control of the land that was for the Palestinian state and annexed. Just because the Jordinians wanted to annex the Palestinian land doesn't make Jordan Palestine. Your version is only parts of history to make your side look better
You mean like the Muslims? Really? And Muslims should have all stayed in Mecca where Mohammed was from. Huh? The Philistines were from Greece and spoke Greek. The root word Phlistim literally means "foreign invader."
Um your ignoring the fact religions also spread through trade routes and the arabs were very good traders
Not "did", but "could potentially do", which is why it should be nipped at the bud, before it grows into an apartheid system. Yes. I'm a Chomsky supporter! Just ask anyone here on the board. I practically repeat Chomsky talking points, all the time. There's a difference between what's just (which is what I want), and what realistically could happen. And my #1 support is for the long term survival and thriving of the Jewish state -- and I'm talking centuries at least -- with out being a "pariah" state like North Korea or like South Africa has become. This is the bottom line: I like Jews more than I don't like "Palestinians".
There y'all go and talk about the past instead of the future. Our versions of the past differ. It's not like one day SAM will be convinced by truth that she's been wrong all along... It's all about the future and common ground and common interests. You guys are arguing over the wrong things.
The Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! was supposed to indicate sarcasm. It was meant to be a joke that he's a Hamas supporter but I guess it went over your head because he actually is one. Oh well.
Not Palestinian Muslims. Genetically, they are indigenous as proved by the unique markers they share with the Negev Bedouins and no other ethnic group, showing at least a 5000 year ethnicity in their land, as proved by Israeli discovery of 5000 year Negev Bedouin graves. Anyone can be a Muslim. As defined by the Hebrews, who came there from Egypt. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Genetics do not show that the Palestinians or Lebanese or Syrians are closer to the Greeks. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian Blood, as they say, will tell.
Wow. Did the Nazis teach you that in Eugenics 101 at Heidelberg University? Not anyone with more than 2 brain cells. Exactly. Arabs an Philistines are two totally different peoples. Arafat was an Egyptian Arab (Arabs illegally occupy Egypt) from Cairo not a Greek from Philistia.
Wow. Did the Nazis teach you that in Eugenics 101 at Heidelberg University? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Arafat had a Palestinian father. Unlike Israelis who had an Iraqi [great]^n grandfather and a [0]^n Palestinian grandfather.
Whatever that means. Arafat was an Arab born in Cairo because Arabs invaded Egypt and illegally occupy it to this day.
Uh, the Egyptians, like the Palestinians are Arabised. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! I guess you need at least two brain cells to figure that one out.
