Obama Needs to Hear from You on Israeli-Palestinian Negotiations
kingblaze84
New member
judahxulu;1257186 said:
You are voluntarily BLOCKING information from your brain. There are plenty of sources out there that will tell you that Israel is stealing water from Arabs and building illegal settlements on stolen farmland.
Go out there and read the many sources me, Memphis, and others have posted.
Read the TONS upon TONS of of statements from the United Nations (an organization run by a Korean, NOT an Arab) that lambast CONSTANTLY the evil and disgusting policies of theft, destruction, and murder that Israel is bestowing upon Palestinians.
Than read this funny BBC poll that, shockingly, found that Israel is the 3rd most hated nation in the world.
http://www.viciousbabushka.com/2010...-country-in-the-world-germany-most-loved.html
Last edited:
kingblaze84
New member
The evil and thieving Nazi nation of Israel is approved by only 19% of responders in a worldwide BBC Poll taken THIS YEAR.........
http://www.viciousbabushka.com/2010...-country-in-the-world-germany-most-loved.html
World poll: Only 19% see Israel in positive light
Survey conducted in 28 countries on 29,000 respondents reveals that only Iran, Pakistan, North Korea have more negative perception than Israel. Most 'loved' country is Germany. 'Obama effect' has resulted in improvement in relations towards US for first time since 2005
Only Iran, North Korea, and Pakistan are viewed in a more negative light than Israel, according to a poll conducted in 28 countries and published Tuesday by the BBC.
The poll shows that just 19% of the 29,000 respondents questioned view Israel positively versus 50% who perceive the country in a negative light. Together with Israel at the bottom of the list are Iran (15% positive, 56% negative), Pakistan (16% positive, 51% negative), and North Korea (17% positive, 48% negative).
The poll also showed that world perceptions of the US are improving with 46% of respondents viewing the country favorably and 34% viewing the country negatively. Only two countries saw a decrease in the perception of the world's number one superpower – Turkey and India.
Read more at YNet and BBC.
----Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm.........I wonder why. It might be because of the fact Israel is bulldozing the homes of Palestinians everyday while millions of Palestinian refugees are living in misery around refugee camps.
The world knows what the fuck is going on....and Israel will never have peace as long as it mistreats and murders its neighbors.
http://www.viciousbabushka.com/2010...-country-in-the-world-germany-most-loved.html
World poll: Only 19% see Israel in positive light
Survey conducted in 28 countries on 29,000 respondents reveals that only Iran, Pakistan, North Korea have more negative perception than Israel. Most 'loved' country is Germany. 'Obama effect' has resulted in improvement in relations towards US for first time since 2005
Only Iran, North Korea, and Pakistan are viewed in a more negative light than Israel, according to a poll conducted in 28 countries and published Tuesday by the BBC.
The poll shows that just 19% of the 29,000 respondents questioned view Israel positively versus 50% who perceive the country in a negative light. Together with Israel at the bottom of the list are Iran (15% positive, 56% negative), Pakistan (16% positive, 51% negative), and North Korea (17% positive, 48% negative).
The poll also showed that world perceptions of the US are improving with 46% of respondents viewing the country favorably and 34% viewing the country negatively. Only two countries saw a decrease in the perception of the world's number one superpower – Turkey and India.
Read more at YNet and BBC.
----Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm.........I wonder why. It might be because of the fact Israel is bulldozing the homes of Palestinians everyday while millions of Palestinian refugees are living in misery around refugee camps.
The world knows what the fuck is going on....and Israel will never have peace as long as it mistreats and murders its neighbors.
Last edited:
kingblaze84
New member
memphis;1258369 said:
Damn, you're really making Judah look silly right now.
Great posts you're putting up, very educational......every educated person knows the many war crimes Israel is forcing upon the throats of Palestinians, and people worldwide have said for years Israel has become almost as evil as their oppressors the Nazis were.
Judah's favorite response seems to be "war is war".......he would make a great serial killer. He would be an even better mass murderer. I'm pretty sure he was one in his past life.
Last edited:
memphis;1258353 said:
Name ypur sources for this revisionist bullshit besides Deborah Sontag, Robert Malley or the damn P.A. propaganda squad itself. I been typing on my phone on the go and unable to really dig in your ass, but now I'm at home. So lets go..
First of all the whole fucking point of the summit was to NEGOTIATE. Time was running out on Barak and Clintons terms and they were trying their damndest to get a FINAL solution. According to firsthand accounts, this was NOT in accordance to the goals of Arafat. The chief negotiator for the U.S. , David Ross is on record saying basically that yeah, the four canton deal was offered without the Gaza nucleus BUT THERE WERE OTHER OFFERS MADE. All Arafat did was say no to everything but the nigga had no ideas or counter-offers to present. Prove me wrong by firsthand sources! Clinton snapped off on Arafat and his negotiation team at their lack of real contribuition to the process and it is on record in the diaries of Shlomo Ben-Ami : “‘A summit's purpose,’ Clinton said, ‘is to have discussions that are based on sincere intentions and you, the Palestinians, did not come to this summit with sincere intentions.’ Then he got up and left the room.”
Israel also offered a Jerusalem solution in which there would be "a division in practice that would not look like a division". Israel was willing to divide Jerusalem and accepted “full Palestinian sovereignty” on the Temple Mount and asked the Palestinians only to recognize the site was also sacred to Jews. What was Arafats response? That no temple ever existed on the Temple Mount: just an obelisk and that the real Temple was in Nablus. WTF???? Ross said of this “he denied the core of the Jewish faith.” AND THIS IS ALL THIS MUTHAFUCKA ARAFAT HAD TO SAY BESIDES "NO" DURING THE WHOLE THING.
Now the bullshit perspective you are repping comes from the Malley chick in the New york Times. She basically said, to paraphrase the U.S. and Israeli negotiators were not tactically sound in their presentation and aroused suspicion in Arafat which made him revert to being passive. FOH!! This nigga got his people's lives on the line and this is the lame line of reasoning to why he had no COUNTEROFFERS TO MAKE?
Lets see what eyewitness Ambassador Ross said :
[Malley’s] account of “the tragedy of errors” of Camp David — though correct in many aspects—is glaring in its omission of Chairman Arafat's mistakes. One is left with the impression that only Barak did not fulfill commitments. But that is both wrong and unfair, particularly given Arafat's poor record on compliance… Did Prime Minister Barak make mistakes in his tactics, his negotiating priorities, and his treatment of Arafat? Absolutely. Did the American side make mistakes in its packaging and presentation of ideas? Absolutely. Are Prime Minister Barak and President Clinton responsible for the failure to conclude a deal? Absolutely not. Both Barak and Clinton were prepared to do what was necessary to reach agreement. Both were up to the challenge. Neither shied away from the risks inherent in confronting history and mythology. Can one say the same about Arafat? Unfortunately, not — and his behavior at Camp David and afterward cannot be explained only by his suspicions that a trap was being set for him
Abu Mazen, one of the lead Palestinian negotiators, said even before the summit the Palestinians ”made clear to the Americans that the Palestinian side is unable to make concessions on anything.“ He also maintained the whole process was some sort of trap.
Now afterwards, when Barak was out- did Sharon do anything like take a piss on the steps of the Temple Mount? No. But Arafat still orders the infitada while asking for another summit. What happens then?
The U.S. plan offered by Clinton and endorsed by Barak would have given the Palestinians 97 percent of the West Bank (either 96 percent of the West Bank and 1 percent from Israel proper or 94 percent from the West Bank and 3 percent from Israel proper), with no cantons, and full control of the Gaza Strip, with a land-link between the two; Israel would have withdrawn from 63 settlements as a result. In exchange for the three percent annexation of the West Bank, Israel would increase the size of the Gaza territory by roughly a third. Arab neighborhoods of East Jerusalem would become the capital of the new state, and refugees would have the right of return to the Palestinian state, and would receive reparations from a $30 billion international fund collected to compensate them. The Palestinians would maintain control over their holy places, and would be given desalinization plants to ensure them adequate water. The only concessions Arafat had to make was Israeli sovereignty over the parts of the Western Wall religiously significant to Jews (i.e., not the entire Temple Mount), and three early warning stations in the Jordan valley, which Israel would withdraw from after six years
Yeah withdraw after six years.....
Thats more than reasonable considering the fact the nigga had just ordered an infitada.
"The Palestinian negotiators wanted to accept the deal, and Arafat initially said that he would accept it as well. But, on January 2, “he added reservations that basically meant he rejected every single one of the things he was supposed to give.” He couldnt countenance any Israeli control over Jewish holy spots, nor would he agree to the security arrangements; he wouldn’t even allow the Israelis to fly through Palestinian airspace. He rejected the refugee formula as well.
The reason for Arafat’s rejection of the settlement, according to Ross, was the critical clause in the agreement specifying that the agreement meant the end of the conflict. Arafat, whose life has been governed by that conflict, simply could not end it. “For him to end the conflict is to end himself,” said Ross. Ben-Ami agreed with this characterization: “I certainly believe that Arafat is a problem if what we are trying to achieve is a permanent agreement. I doubt that it will be possible to reach an agreement with him.” Daniel Kurtzer, former U.S. ambassador to Israel and Egypt concurred: “The failure of Camp David is largely attributed to the fact that Arafat did not even negotiate....It didn't matter what he put on the table; he put nothing on the table.” Kurtzer added that he would never understand why Arafat withdrew from the talks without even offering a maximalist position.
Instead, Arafat pursued the path of terror in hope of repositioning the Palestinians as victims in the eyes of the world. “There’s no doubt in my mind,” Ross said, “that he thought the violence would create pressure on the Israelis and on us and maybe the rest of the world.”
Last edited:
memphis;1258357 said:
Your a fucking liar. Like I said before, you take actual events and distort them to fit your agenda. Now I have time to break that shit down, piece by piece.
This sets the tone for your post and is presented as a fact: on several occasions many Arab and Palestinian proposals for peace have been offered, only to be rejected by the Israeli side.
What alternative history of some alternate universe did you read that bullshit that Nasser was striving for peace since the 50's? if anything he set the stage for further amalgamation of indigenous and unique cultures, tribes and ethnicities withion the so-called Arab world under the banner of that pan-Arab bullshit. 60 years later---hows that been working. You idiots love to canonize these inept Arab leaders and blame the results of their fuck-ups on Israel.
But anyway back up that bullshit claim that Nasser expressed (and I would say follow through) on any desire for long term peace. FOH.
On to the next one.
'81 was a clear cut case of your boys starting something they couldnt finish. How you gone make it seem like the Israelis rejected peace when the PLO started shelling civilians up North FIRST. But theres allways an excuse for that type of brutality right? Because theyre victims right? Yeah on purpose. Why would you kick that shit off like that knowing youre outnumbered by more than 2 to 1? Come on son...
Ok the Saudi Peace Plan a/k/a UN Resolution 242 Jr. Its funny how you say the Israelis do this and that but dont state WHY. The resolution calls on Israel to withdraw from territories occupied during the war, not "all" the territories in exchange for peace. Shit was ambiguous at best about what the fuck the Arab nations were supposed to do beside "PROVIDE NORMAL RELATIONS". Come on son. You act like the rejection of this was some demonic fuckery by Israel and not maybe like, a smart political move not to agree to some specific shit when the otherside is being vague to their end of the bargain. They woulda gave up territory and it'd be the samew ol same ol bombing and shit to try and wear the Israelis down and drive them all the way out. And the Palestinian leadership would be like "oh, were innocent...we cant control those darn terrorists" to the world, and go stir that shit up behind closed doors. Come on son.
Ok so Im confused. Does the U.S> indiscriminately give Israel money even when she behaves badly or do loans and shit get denied as a result of hawkishness. You switch around details to manipulate the rhetoric surrounding your presentation of SCANT facts. Your shit is like 2% facts and 98% conjecture and assumptive rhetoric. How many bodies does Judah have to catch on the IC before you fools realize I see through your tricks.
But anyway....Taba? Are you for real? How is it those "dirty Jews" faults again when a JOINT STATEMENT was issued: 'The sides declare that they have never been closer to reaching an agreement and it is thus our shared belief that the remaining gaps could be bridged with the resumption of negotiations following the Israeli election'." You take a date or an event and then just make up shit around it. I see you.
This last one was my favorite. Boy, your fiction is better than Dean Koontz..
At Camp David, Ehud Barak presented the following:
No Palestinian sovereignty over the Temple Mount, No Right of Return or any return of refugees to Israel Israel’s annexation of large settlement blocs, An Israeli military presence in other areas, Effective Israeli sovereignty over the borders of the future Palestinian state.
These were unreasonable conditions, conditions that no Palestinian leader could accept though Arafat proved willing to negotiate on several of them.
Thats not what Barak offered and even if he did what makes more sense to a "Palestinian leader" sincerely concerned about the lives of his people- making a COUNTEROFFER or inciting a fucking infitada after the fact and then try to call another summit later. Quit acting like Arafat wasnt playing them hoe ass games. He wasnt willing to negotiate on ONE SINGLE THING. This is on record. You are unbelievably dishonest.
Last edited:
There will be more to come. Im not done by far. And onlookers, please do not be fooled by people throwing out dates and names and dressing it up with rhetoric and opinion to only pass the whole package off as factual. Check and doublecheck BIASED (on both sides) and UNBIASED sources.
memphis...you done fucked up. You see, I was just writing from the heart and memory before from the phone. Now I knew you were a dishonest little manipulator from how you keep misrepresenting my stance in my posts i.e. referring to me as a Zionist or an apologist but I didnt really thoroughly fact check you till now to realize how THOROUGHLY you pass off 2% fact and 98% spin as TRUTH. I am officially serious about this debate and focused on decimating you in an orderly fashion. You will need more than your weak ass Canadian community college conflict cliff notes to defend what Im about to unleash.
People, I repeat...check and double check ALL SOURCES and see who's full of shit and who aint. See whose regurgitating propaganda and who aint.
memphis...you done fucked up. You see, I was just writing from the heart and memory before from the phone. Now I knew you were a dishonest little manipulator from how you keep misrepresenting my stance in my posts i.e. referring to me as a Zionist or an apologist but I didnt really thoroughly fact check you till now to realize how THOROUGHLY you pass off 2% fact and 98% spin as TRUTH. I am officially serious about this debate and focused on decimating you in an orderly fashion. You will need more than your weak ass Canadian community college conflict cliff notes to defend what Im about to unleash.
People, I repeat...check and double check ALL SOURCES and see who's full of shit and who aint. See whose regurgitating propaganda and who aint.
Last edited:
kingblaze84
New member
judahxulu;1258547 said:
Just like how Israel doesn't want to negotiate on its many many many illegal settlements, huh?
Why should Palestinians negotiate fairly when Israel has NEVER EVER stopped building illegal settlements and ILLEGALLY bulldozing the homes of Palestinians?
While at the same time, Israel is ILLEGALLY stealing water from Palestinians, which the United Nations has condemned as provocative and wrong? I await your answers on that.
Last edited:
kingblaze84;1258556 said:
So I refute you guys bullshit and all you can do is repeat yourselves? Those are argument tactics women use. Remeber now...I never said Israelis were totally innocent so you cant argue on that premise. Im saying, showing and proving that the Palestinians are far from being innocent victims. Im going to bed now but I promise you i will pick apart EACH AND EVERY MUTHAFUCKIN POST from your boy and now from you sice yo ugly ass keep wanting to talk that stupidity. You should know better by now, son. You aint in my league. Watch....
Last edited:
kingblaze84
New member
I notice you didn't answer any of my points.
Keep it up though.....you're only lowering your credibility on the IC.
Answer me when you have a good excuse as to why Israel is such an evil nation that loves to steal and terrorize Palestinians. So far you have none, clown.
With spokeswomen like you (Judah), I see clearly now why Israel has a 19% approval rating in the world.
Keep it up bozo.
Keep it up though.....you're only lowering your credibility on the IC.
Answer me when you have a good excuse as to why Israel is such an evil nation that loves to steal and terrorize Palestinians. So far you have none, clown.
With spokeswomen like you (Judah), I see clearly now why Israel has a 19% approval rating in the world.
Keep it up bozo.
Last edited:
BiblicalAtheist
New member
Thread recap for late comers:
Predictions on the outcome:
Both will walk away feeling the same as they did when they started.
Predictions on the outcome:
Both will walk away feeling the same as they did when they started.
Last edited:
Naw, talk to me when you turn 5. How do you expect an answer to that loaded, prejudiced, idiotic question? All I have to say if the scenario you just described is true, exactly the way you described it then the every other country in the world is weak and just as guilty of those false allegations you are rendering being that the State of Israel is no bigger than NEW JERSEY. And the term "IC credibility" is an oxymoron and is not my motivation or reward. Im not responding to any more shit like this. Challenge me on specific policies and provide sources that so I can expose whether its real or not or shut up.kingblaze84;1258565 said:
Last edited:
memphis;1258361 said:
"Establish normal relations" is ambiguous and a bullshit term. Thats the equivalent of Wimpy telling Popeye "I will gladly pay you tomorrow for a hamburger today". Israel was to IMMEDIATELY fulfill certain and DEFINITE terms, yet all the Arab league has to offer is recognition and and IOU to "establish normal relations"...On what planet is it unreasonable to not feel comfortable with such a deal. Especially when you would are surrounded by Arab nations (whose hostilities would not be abated by said initiative) in a smaller space then you had before. Show me where the Arab League has a track record on being able to deliver on such a promise as establishing normal relations. They cant even manage internal Arab beef but Israel is supposed to be secure that they can prevent the hawks on the Arab side of things from swooping once they smell the blood of concessions? Come on son....
Does the leadership of Iran say threatening shit or not? For whatever the reasons, whether real or imagined, do they talk shit? And dont quote what Maoz said without citing why the wars happened because thats just deceptive.
Did Maoz mention the Arab revolt of 36-39 which led up to the 48 war? That the uprisers were armed? That they attacked Israeli civilians?
Did Maoz mention the Arabs rejected Resolution 181 which would have been the solution right then and there and instead chose to rally up FIVE STATES against Israel? Is Israel a villian or are these 5 states busters for starting shit and getting their ass handed to them by one, itty, bitty non-state?
Did Maoz mention that Israel was going after the Fedayeen? Did Israel not change its policies after the Kafr Qasim massacre? YES. Did they punish those responsible? YES, although they coulda got more time in al fairness. Did they pay reperations? YES. Do Palestinian leaders mete out any form of punishment or legislation when their military attacks civilians? HELL NO.
And tell me who struck the first blow in all the other four wars, ESPECIALLy THE 2 LEBANESE wars? Who started the infitadas?
You need to face the facts that these surrounding Arabs continuously start fights they know they cant win and sacrifice their own simply for MANIPULATIVE purposes. They attack civilians, go and hide amongst civilians then cry foul when the IDF rides down on them and some more civilians get hurt. But that shit is calculated! They tried their hand at a legitimate war in 48 and got fucked up and been on that dirty shit ever since.
Last edited:
I told you I am done with you. You don't know shit, and havent' refuted one fucking thing in this whole thread. Give up now, everyone see's who the zionist dupe is, JUDAS
And like I said. I am done with you. So go ahead and waste your time with attempts to refute what I posted. But you have done nothing of the sort.
And like I said. I am done with you. So go ahead and waste your time with attempts to refute what I posted. But you have done nothing of the sort.
Last edited:
memphis;1258362 said:
LOL. You messed up by referring to the Un definiton of apartheid first of all.
The ICSPCA has defined the crime of apartheid as "inhuman acts committed for the purpose of establishing and maintaining domination by one racial group of persons over any other racial group of persons and systematically oppressing them."
As I have admitted in previous posts, discrimination does exist and inhuman acts have been committed- but by this definition and by a historical point by point comparison with the South African regime- apartheid it is not.
The key to this, is the fact that "Palestinian" is not a race and neither is "Israeli". These are self-proclaimed designations for ethnically diverse populations who to greater or lesser extents agree upon common culture, social structure and ideology in a national format. This a glaring and insurmountable contradiction to the apartheid analogy.
The Law of Return-
There are no "mandates" by the UN in relation to this issue first off. Secondly, this is not the only portal to getting into Israel. You can go through naturalization, marry a Jew or participate in various temporary and permanent residency options. Thirdly, the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination Article I(4) allows for preferential treatment for some groups in order to remedy past discrimination. Last but not least, you assert that the Law of Return is racist but once again "Jew" is not a race. Therefore your claim that the Law of Return is a case of racial discrimination is inaccurate, inflammatory rhetoric used to manipulate world opinion.
Identity Card (Possession and Presentation) Law
You cannot unequivocally draw the conclusion of discrimination from the fact that identity cards in Israel havenational designations. You said that that one's nationality must be printed on them and in the next sentence claimed this is racial discrimination. Nationality is not race. Is there an American race? A Canadian race? No. You and your faulty propaganda. As we go right down the line, everybody on the bpoard will see how you anti-Israel propagandists use hot button words to incite emotional reactions but their connection to reality is dubious at best. There is no way that you can fairly or honestly interchange the terms "race" and "nationality" just to suit the qualifications of your argument.
Last edited:
continued
Cultural Exclusion:
By the very definition of the term Palestinian alone, the Palestinians have culturally excluded themselves. There is no international law of any kind that mandates cultural inclusion. And once again, we are specifically talking about apartheid, which is centered on race. Culture is not race. And to keep it real, Palestinians and Israelis eat mostly the same shit, dress in the same types of clothes and speak one anothers languages for starters. This is basically because at such a proximity state sponsored CULTURAL EXCLUSION is virtually impossible. Beside, the 1993 Oslo Peace accords removed the ban and I have seen the Israeli and Palestinian flag fly side by side publicly for official functions of the State of Israel. More blatant lies that you disguise under inflammatory term to circumvent criticism.
Land:
Palestinians and non-Jews are NOT excluded from state land. This is an outright lie as I live on state land and I am considered a non-Jew by rabbinical standards. And once again this is not based on race, but instead politics and shaky religious definitions. I have issues with this, but it is not relative to apartheid at all ACCORDING to the definition you referenced but craftily did not post in entirety.
Absentee Property Law (1950)
Nothing here relative to apartheid. this is not even worthy of a full response.
Matter of fact, none of these other bullet points you listed are based on terms of race so I will totally disregard them. BUT I do want to touch on
Education
Palestinians in Palestinian territory are responsible for their own schools. How do you not recopgnize the right for Israel to exist yet claim that is responsible for educating your children? Furthermore, the problem with education deeply affects MOST ISRAELIS in the Negev region as their schools are second rate in comparison with those up North. Firsthand eyewitness experience, buddy. Is it a problem. Yes. One EXCLUSIVE to Palestinians. No. Related to apartheid. HELL NO.
But lets see what an Arab-Israeli educator has to say about your apartheid line of malarkey:
ISRAELI ARAB LEGAL SCHOLAR: ISRAEL IS NOT AN APARTHEID STATE
By Rhonda Spivak,
Dr. Mohammed Wattad (Photo by Rhonda Spivak), an Arab Israeli Muslim who is a senior lecturer at Zefat College’s School of Law and editor of the International Journal on Medicine and Law told an audience here that Israel is not an apartheid state.
The very articulate Dr. Wattad spoke at the University of Manitoba during Israel Apartheid Week [IAW], but virtually none of the IAW organizers and supporters came to hear his lecture.
Dr. Wattad said that
“As an Israeli citizen, I belong to a political entity… I have no other home than the State of Israel. I am a proud Israeli citizen but that doesn’t mean I can’t criticize it… At the same time I am a proud Arab national. I like Arab culture, people, etc… Whenever something wrong happens to the Arab world, I feel it. These are not contradictory things.”
He added,
“Don’t tell me Israel can’t define itself as Jewish and democratic… This doesn’t mean that Israel is innocent in all of this [conflict], but there are others here that also aren’t innocent.”
Dr. Wattad, who was sponsored by the Jewish Students Association/Hillel pointed out that
“Israeli Arabs, for example in the Galilee, decided upon the State of Israel’s birth to stay and take citizenship, to be an Israeli citizen or not… That was their choice…”
In 2007, Dr. Wattad, was the recipient in Italy of the an award for the ‘‘Best Oralist for Legal Arguments” given by the International Institute of Higher Studies in Criminal Science. At the University of Manitoba he spoke about the difference between discrimination and apartheid.
“Is there discrimination in Israel? Yes-there is discrimination against women, elderly, Arabs, Russian Jews, Christians,… But the same goes for Canada. Is it good-No? But it means we have to deal with the problem from within…. The existence of discrimination in a state does not mean it is an apartheid state…There is a big difference between apartheid and discrimination,” he said.
“In an apartheid regime, there is no possibility of judicial review, because the judges are appointed by the regime and all serve one ideology. This is not the case in Israel… There is a very strong, independent Supreme Court in Israel. In an apartheid regime [unlike in Israel] there is no place to go to argue against the government,” Dr. Wattad added.
He further noted for example that in the case of Israel’s security “fence”, there were
“more than 163 judgments of the Supreme Court where they decided that the fence had to be re-routed/rebuilt.”
He also said that Egypt also has a fence between it and Gaza.
Regarding Israel’s national anthem ‘Hatikvah’, Dr. Wattad, is of the view that the Hebrew words “nefesh yehudi” (the Jewish soul/spirit) ought to be changed to be inclusive of Arabs, Christians and non-Jewish citizens. He proposes that the words in “Hatikvah” be changed to refer to “an Israeli spirit” rather than a “Jewish spirit.”
According to Dr. Wattad, the
“big problem is the right of return. Is it a right of return to West Bank and Gaza or a right of return to Jaffa and Haifa? One possible solution is for Palestinians to receive an apology in addition to compensation. After World War II, the Jewish people got an apology from the Germans as well as money (reparations). It was very important that they got an apology which was an acknowledgement of collective responsibility.”
In Wattad’s view, after Hosni Mubarak’s reign is over, Egypt could end up falling into the hands of the Moslim Brotherhood.
“I am not so sure that as an Israeli it is good to have democracy in other Arab countries, such as Egypt, given what the majority believes,” he said.
Regarding Hamas, Dr. Wattad said that a “big opportunity was lost,” saying that Hamas started launching missiles, when instead they ought to have used their “golden opportunity to build a state.”
As for Hezbollah’s Hassan Nassrallah, Dr, Wattad noted that he caused the death of a large number “of Israeli Arabs” who were hit by missiles in the Second Lebanon war.
Dr. Wattad, who is a member of Scholars for Peace in the Middle East, said that according to the Knesset website,
“Israeli government protocols show that East Jerusalem was not intended to become part of Israel.”
When asked about the campaign to boycott Israeli academics, Wattad responded that it was as “idiotic”, saying that academic institutions should be “a marketplace of ideas,” and that academic boycotts means that even “left-wing Israelis aren’t able to speak or write.”
When asked whether he thought an economic boycott of Israel would be effective, Wattad answered that they would be “useless” because “Who of the Arab states will boycott Israel economically?… They will help Israel out,” he said.
He noted that notwithstanding the official position of Arab states, they “are doing business with Israel,” such as in Dubai.
“The biggest gas pipeline in Israel is jointly owned by Israel and Iran and has been that way since it was established.”
He further noted, that in the case of war with Iran, “Saudi Arabia will allow Israel to use its airspace.”
Dr. Wattad believes that a “real chance for peace was lost” when former Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin was murdered. He also is of the view that Rabin’s murderer Yigal Amir ought not to have been given the right to pro-create while he was in jail.
Dr. Wattad asked if there was an Arab person present in the audience, but there wasn’t.
He noted that usually when he speaks there are a lot of Arab students in the audience who are
“against the idea that an Arab Muslim guy is speaking for Israel.”
However, he clarified that he says what he says because “I believe it to be so,” and he is aware that what he says can be “provocative.”
Dr. Wattad is one of the founders of Zefat’s Legal College in Northern Israel. He told the Winnipeg Jewish Review that the new public college is “a baby.”
He said that
“It’s something to be part of building it. When you work at a place like this, you can lead.”
According to Dr. Wattad, this past year only 70 out of 200 students who applied were accepted, but 20 were dismissed by the college during the year for not coming to enough classes. “We are strict,” he said.
About the author,
Rhonda Spivak is attorney, writer, and member of Canadian & Israel Bar Associations, now edits Winnipeg Jewish Review.
(^ironic)
Cultural Exclusion:
By the very definition of the term Palestinian alone, the Palestinians have culturally excluded themselves. There is no international law of any kind that mandates cultural inclusion. And once again, we are specifically talking about apartheid, which is centered on race. Culture is not race. And to keep it real, Palestinians and Israelis eat mostly the same shit, dress in the same types of clothes and speak one anothers languages for starters. This is basically because at such a proximity state sponsored CULTURAL EXCLUSION is virtually impossible. Beside, the 1993 Oslo Peace accords removed the ban and I have seen the Israeli and Palestinian flag fly side by side publicly for official functions of the State of Israel. More blatant lies that you disguise under inflammatory term to circumvent criticism.
Land:
Palestinians and non-Jews are NOT excluded from state land. This is an outright lie as I live on state land and I am considered a non-Jew by rabbinical standards. And once again this is not based on race, but instead politics and shaky religious definitions. I have issues with this, but it is not relative to apartheid at all ACCORDING to the definition you referenced but craftily did not post in entirety.
Absentee Property Law (1950)
Nothing here relative to apartheid. this is not even worthy of a full response.
Matter of fact, none of these other bullet points you listed are based on terms of race so I will totally disregard them. BUT I do want to touch on
Education
Palestinians in Palestinian territory are responsible for their own schools. How do you not recopgnize the right for Israel to exist yet claim that is responsible for educating your children? Furthermore, the problem with education deeply affects MOST ISRAELIS in the Negev region as their schools are second rate in comparison with those up North. Firsthand eyewitness experience, buddy. Is it a problem. Yes. One EXCLUSIVE to Palestinians. No. Related to apartheid. HELL NO.
But lets see what an Arab-Israeli educator has to say about your apartheid line of malarkey:
ISRAELI ARAB LEGAL SCHOLAR: ISRAEL IS NOT AN APARTHEID STATE
By Rhonda Spivak,
Dr. Mohammed Wattad (Photo by Rhonda Spivak), an Arab Israeli Muslim who is a senior lecturer at Zefat College’s School of Law and editor of the International Journal on Medicine and Law told an audience here that Israel is not an apartheid state.
The very articulate Dr. Wattad spoke at the University of Manitoba during Israel Apartheid Week [IAW], but virtually none of the IAW organizers and supporters came to hear his lecture.
Dr. Wattad said that
“As an Israeli citizen, I belong to a political entity… I have no other home than the State of Israel. I am a proud Israeli citizen but that doesn’t mean I can’t criticize it… At the same time I am a proud Arab national. I like Arab culture, people, etc… Whenever something wrong happens to the Arab world, I feel it. These are not contradictory things.”
He added,
“Don’t tell me Israel can’t define itself as Jewish and democratic… This doesn’t mean that Israel is innocent in all of this [conflict], but there are others here that also aren’t innocent.”
Dr. Wattad, who was sponsored by the Jewish Students Association/Hillel pointed out that
“Israeli Arabs, for example in the Galilee, decided upon the State of Israel’s birth to stay and take citizenship, to be an Israeli citizen or not… That was their choice…”
In 2007, Dr. Wattad, was the recipient in Italy of the an award for the ‘‘Best Oralist for Legal Arguments” given by the International Institute of Higher Studies in Criminal Science. At the University of Manitoba he spoke about the difference between discrimination and apartheid.
“Is there discrimination in Israel? Yes-there is discrimination against women, elderly, Arabs, Russian Jews, Christians,… But the same goes for Canada. Is it good-No? But it means we have to deal with the problem from within…. The existence of discrimination in a state does not mean it is an apartheid state…There is a big difference between apartheid and discrimination,” he said.
“In an apartheid regime, there is no possibility of judicial review, because the judges are appointed by the regime and all serve one ideology. This is not the case in Israel… There is a very strong, independent Supreme Court in Israel. In an apartheid regime [unlike in Israel] there is no place to go to argue against the government,” Dr. Wattad added.
He further noted for example that in the case of Israel’s security “fence”, there were
“more than 163 judgments of the Supreme Court where they decided that the fence had to be re-routed/rebuilt.”
He also said that Egypt also has a fence between it and Gaza.
Regarding Israel’s national anthem ‘Hatikvah’, Dr. Wattad, is of the view that the Hebrew words “nefesh yehudi” (the Jewish soul/spirit) ought to be changed to be inclusive of Arabs, Christians and non-Jewish citizens. He proposes that the words in “Hatikvah” be changed to refer to “an Israeli spirit” rather than a “Jewish spirit.”
According to Dr. Wattad, the
“big problem is the right of return. Is it a right of return to West Bank and Gaza or a right of return to Jaffa and Haifa? One possible solution is for Palestinians to receive an apology in addition to compensation. After World War II, the Jewish people got an apology from the Germans as well as money (reparations). It was very important that they got an apology which was an acknowledgement of collective responsibility.”
In Wattad’s view, after Hosni Mubarak’s reign is over, Egypt could end up falling into the hands of the Moslim Brotherhood.
“I am not so sure that as an Israeli it is good to have democracy in other Arab countries, such as Egypt, given what the majority believes,” he said.
Regarding Hamas, Dr. Wattad said that a “big opportunity was lost,” saying that Hamas started launching missiles, when instead they ought to have used their “golden opportunity to build a state.”
As for Hezbollah’s Hassan Nassrallah, Dr, Wattad noted that he caused the death of a large number “of Israeli Arabs” who were hit by missiles in the Second Lebanon war.
Dr. Wattad, who is a member of Scholars for Peace in the Middle East, said that according to the Knesset website,
“Israeli government protocols show that East Jerusalem was not intended to become part of Israel.”
When asked about the campaign to boycott Israeli academics, Wattad responded that it was as “idiotic”, saying that academic institutions should be “a marketplace of ideas,” and that academic boycotts means that even “left-wing Israelis aren’t able to speak or write.”
When asked whether he thought an economic boycott of Israel would be effective, Wattad answered that they would be “useless” because “Who of the Arab states will boycott Israel economically?… They will help Israel out,” he said.
He noted that notwithstanding the official position of Arab states, they “are doing business with Israel,” such as in Dubai.
“The biggest gas pipeline in Israel is jointly owned by Israel and Iran and has been that way since it was established.”
He further noted, that in the case of war with Iran, “Saudi Arabia will allow Israel to use its airspace.”
Dr. Wattad believes that a “real chance for peace was lost” when former Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin was murdered. He also is of the view that Rabin’s murderer Yigal Amir ought not to have been given the right to pro-create while he was in jail.
Dr. Wattad asked if there was an Arab person present in the audience, but there wasn’t.
He noted that usually when he speaks there are a lot of Arab students in the audience who are
“against the idea that an Arab Muslim guy is speaking for Israel.”
However, he clarified that he says what he says because “I believe it to be so,” and he is aware that what he says can be “provocative.”
Dr. Wattad is one of the founders of Zefat’s Legal College in Northern Israel. He told the Winnipeg Jewish Review that the new public college is “a baby.”
He said that
“It’s something to be part of building it. When you work at a place like this, you can lead.”
According to Dr. Wattad, this past year only 70 out of 200 students who applied were accepted, but 20 were dismissed by the college during the year for not coming to enough classes. “We are strict,” he said.
About the author,
Rhonda Spivak is attorney, writer, and member of Canadian & Israel Bar Associations, now edits Winnipeg Jewish Review.
(^ironic)
Last edited:
memphis;1260187 said:
LOL. You see my refutations plain as day. And dont worry...I will continue. Look at you...you die like all the rest. Once people like you see I have bested you, you have nothing left but irrational denial and name-calling. This is hilarious to me. Squirm little pig, squirm.
Last edited:
Go ahead and continue, you're wasting your time, I don't care anymore, I'm not continuing this debate. It's my last year of Univesity and school started yersterday, and I have better things to do than try and convince a zionist of his country's crimes. It's an exercise in futility. You are an irrational dupe.
Last edited:
memphis;1258363 said:
Can you say STRAWMAN? The point you claim to refute here was about "Judaizing" Jerusalem yet now you ar trying to put me on the defensive about "military occupation". Funny how you failed to mentioned it was an illegal Jordanian occupied territory and annexed IN A TIME OF WAR. It has been claimed by Israel for 42 years so this illegal occupation myth does not stand the test of historical accuracy. No aggressor/victim paradigm once again but rather a petty squabble in the aftermath of war. BESIDES, the proposed building site has NOTHING THERE. I know this for a fact. It is miles away from any Palestinian home.
Last edited:
