The question of Palestine

[Anonymous]

This is a subject i feel pationaly about, because i feel a great injustice has bin comited and its a flagrante example of the West`s opression of the world. It also porves that institutions like the UN mean nothing, they dont work, if the US wants something a certain way nothing "works" impartialy. There is no justice no peace for the palestitnians and in the media the victims are the criminals.


But im already getting off track, i wont post my opinion but rather start discution on the topic. Acording to the replys ill post what i think.

[kingbee]

did the league of nations decide to out the palestinians in favour of an israeli homeland? thats wot i read somewhere, and i also read that " finally , israelis had a homeland after hundreds of years " that slike pishing all the englsih out of britain, and saying that now the clets have got their former land back

[Kez]

dum dum deelliah ey!!!
(sorry)

(coughs)
Yes the Palestinian question...
Well im glad this topic has come onto the forum after so much shit about banning some idiot or the question in afghanstan when there are more fundemental issues such as the palestinain conflict

Basically, i belive that historically the Israeli's may have point over their land, but then so would the rest of the world, such as Armenia about all the land lost to the turks in 1915, or the Red indians or the Polish and more
We have to look for justice for about at the most 200 years, any more and its ridiculous, the Israelis claim their land form 2000 years ago, and sure they should have some land as they are a nation, but not to come and conquer arab land, that land is also improtant to Arabs religiously, i would like to write more, so i will l8r

Comrade Kamo

[pce]

here's one problem i have with a jewish state. i don't understand how if the u.s. is against countries run by religion, and supports the separation of church and state, it supports israel. time and time again i hear how all non-jewish people of israel are treated as second class citizens. even jews with dark skin are discriminated against. i've heard that all non-jewish citizens are marked as such on their driver's license and on their license plates. how true these stories are, i don't know, but they must have origins in truth.

if you look at the list of peoples by tavareeshkamo, you don't see any religions - those are all nationalities, yet israel is set up to protect a religion. this doesn't make sense to me and doesn't make any sense in reference to the idea of separate church and state which the u.s. supposedly supports so much.

[Anonymous]

the main issue is what is the justification for the opression of the arab palestinians? what is the justification for the implatation of an opcuping state through the expultion and expropriation of there lands?
Why is Isreal tolerated? because we like to play with the world and people as if they were toys...

[DaNatural]

this is one area that pisses me off el che, first of all granting jews a land area whose population wasnt even over 33% jewish is absurb. seconldly jews complain about not having a home, the jews who now make up israel are not the original hebrew jews, then are europeean decendants, many of the "real" jews who were kicked out of there home live in ethiopia. these white skinned jews do not deserve israel they are not the original descendants of the land. finally before i go off, i love how that piece of shit sharon says that they are being terrorised by the palestinians. how are they attacking the jews when the jews are going into palestinian area? thats like someone getting mad at you cus you are fighting them out of your home. and yet america funds them... its amazing, they've ignored international law for over a decade, everyone has told israel to pull out of the land that isnt theres but they dont listen. anyway id like to hear from the rest of you, peace.

[Chief Rebel Angel]

israel is in-your-face imperialist... since it is a religious state, i can say that it will continue building the zionist state from the nile till iraq... furthermore, it also refuses to set a clear map concerning its borders, and i believe it's the only "country" that does that...
indeed, israel proves that the un is worthless in decision making.. how can one country (namely the usa) consistantly overrule the decision of 144 countries?? the un is a joke..
as for the reason behind this blind support, it is the great power the zionist lobby holds over us policy makers.. i believe u all already know that, but correct me if i am wrong...
and that butcher sharon makes me laugh too, the goddamn executor of the Sabra and Shatila massacres speaks against terrorism.. he's the one the us should bomb.. that is if they truely mean "terrorism" when they say "war on terrorism"...
there should be a clear seperation between actual terrorists and ppl who r struggling to bring back what is rightfully theirs...
i c that all peaceful means have been exhausted with these imperialist scum... they have oppressed, orphaned, slaughtered, and refugeed a ppl in the most horrible way... and now they want to return to negotiate... i say "FUCK U! WE'VE NEGOTIATED ENOUGH!!".. they wont be able to redo the scenario of the 1989 uprisal again with their false promises... too many have died for this cause, and its too late to back off.. liberty or death.. fuck israel...

[RedCeltic]

I recently read this article about the conflict in Archaeology Magazine... I thought this may be of interest as it's related to the Palistine Question...

LETTER FROM JERUSALEM:
A FIGHT OVER SACRED TURF

Who controls Jerusalem's holiest shrine?

BY SANDRA SCHAM

newly opened Israeli museum in the shadow of the hilltop known to Jews as the Temple Mount, and to Muslims as the Haram al-Sharif (Noble Sanctuary), aptly symbolizes the historical relationship between Israelis and Palestinians over that site. The museum is designed to give tourists the experience of being on the Mount during the time of Herod--the glory days of the Jewish Temple. The exhibits show the Israeli concept of the Temple Mount-Haram al-Sharif site, devoid of the Dome of the Rock and Al-Aqsa Mosque, both built by the Umayyad Muslims in the seventh century A.D. Only the newest of many such reconstructions in Jerusalem, they would hardly be noteworthy were it not for the fact that the museum was constructed within the walls of an Umayyad palace. The age-old impulse to build on, and to some extent obscure, the remains of a past culture is still very much at work in this region.

Almost as soon as the Israeli flag was hoisted over the site in 1967, at the conclusion of the Six-Day War, Israelis lowered it on the orders of General Moshe Dayan, and invested the Muslim Waqf (religious trust) with the authority to manage the Temple Mount-Haram al-Sharif in order to "keep the peace." In the 30 or so years that have elapsed since then, the Waqf has remained relatively independent of Israeli control. Because of this informal understanding between Israel and the Waqf, Muslims have assumed that Israelis don't care very much about the place and their current interest is just another excuse to cheat Palestinians out of what is rightfully theirs. After all, the Haram al-Sharif, revered as the site of Mohammed's ascension to heaven, is one of the three holiest places in Islam (the other two being Mecca and Medina); Muslims would never simply "give" control of it to the followers of another religion. Nevertheless, the Temple Mount is Judaism's holiest site--so holy that many religious Jews will not set foot on the hill, lest they inadvertently tread on sacred and forbidden ground. Equally important, it is a site of great national significance. In the eyes of many Israelis, the "return to Zion" that Jews living in Israel believe they have effected was completed by the capture of the Temple Mount.

Against this backdrop of historical conflict, with hidden and not-so-hidden agendas, an archaeological drama has been unfolding. It incorporates many of the issues involved in the current battle over the Temple Mount-Haram al-Sharif. The seemingly mundane construction of an exit and stairway at the site, initiated by the Waqf, has become a reminder of the battle for control there. It is difficult to envision that Israeli participation in the Waqf's prospective decisions on maintenance or construction in the Haram could take place without a significant change in the archaeological management of the site, a change that would have to be preceded by a political agreement that is now more elusive than ever. Although no one would suggest that the current conflict in the Middle East is about the Temple Mount-Haram al-Sharif any more than it is about any other single issue, the site remains a powerful symbol of the past, the present, and possibly the future of Israeli and Palestinian relations.



SANDRA SCHAM is an archaeologist who has been living and working in Israel since 1996. A former curator of the Pontifical Biblical Institute Museum in Jerusalem, she is currently affiliated with the department of anthropology at the University of Maryland at College Park.

[CommieBastard]

i've heard that the PLF is no less conservative than the current Israeli government. If the Palestinian's got into power of Israel, would it be any better than under the Israeli Government?
I think we have to look for the better of the two evils in this situation, we cannot just mindlessly support the underdog. If possible, what we leftists should be looking for is the possibility of the creation of a new force in the region, seeking to reconcile both sides together, and create a socialist state which recognises with full rights members of all the religions which consider the area holy.
i.e., Remove Israel, but dont replace it with Palestine, but rather something completely different.

[Reuben]

Hi. I'm very pleased to have found this topic as I have been thinking of starting one myself.

What we have seen over the past year has been the Israeli government brutally attempting to crush and collectively punish the palestinian's for excersizing what is unquestionably their legitimate right to resist occuppation and persecution. I will not say any more on this as much has already been said. Victory to the Intifada

As a Jew, who is also anti zionist and pro-palestinian, I see that it is natural that given our own history of persecution as well as Racism which I have had to put up with while growing up in london, that my allegiance and solidarity should be with the racially oppressed Palestinians and not with the opppressive israeli government.


I just thought I would Share some of my thoughts.

No justice no peace, victory to the intifada,

Reuben.

Remember to check out www.geocities.com/youthactionforpalestine. A group I am in here in britain. You can Join through the website.

[CommieBastard]

The question is, if the palestinians came into power, would they be any better?
Do they have any more right to nationhood than the Israelis? in my opinion all nationality is an arbitrary matter, do israelis born in israel have less of a right to nationhood than palestinian's born in the region?
is the palestinian claim to nationhood as abstract and outdated as the israeli claim was when they first set up that nation?

should we blindly support the palestinian movement because they are the current underdogs? i think not, because a palestinian victory will be no better than an israeli one.
A country needs to be made in that region which respects and caters for all of the ethnicities, religions and organisations with interests in the region.
i.e. Jews, Christians, Muslims and Taoists etc

[sabre]

I think that the U.S. shouldn't take sides in this delicate matter, rather stand back and let them settle it. It probably won't settle at all, but who knows. I just think that it's bad to support one side because my understanding is that most of the Middle East hates Israel so why ally with them when we can Ally with everyone else?

I doubt this would work though...

[pce]

commiebastard, i don't think it's an issue of the palestinians coming to power or israel being in power. it should be even and it should be fair to both sides. it should be something both sides agree on.

also, just because we don't know whether the palestinians will be better doesn't mean we shouldn't give them a chance.

[Anonymous]

the ugly truth is Isreal stole there land and did it by force. They evicted and presicuted the native arabs with the help of the west. its not a question of would it be better if the palestinians won, thats makes no sense to me. Its there home and they dont have the right to take it away just because they have a better army and the wests complicity. What they did, correction what we did is unaceptable in ethical terms, might does not make right. Its there land, there home. If some Jews feel they need a nation of there own thats fine, i certainly understand why, but they need to find some deserted inland or area in which to build it.

[Chief Rebel Angel]

yes, and most of these "Israelies" r originally from parts as far as Russia and Ethiopia... and still now, the Israeli government is looking towards encouraging Jews in Italy to be citizens of Israel...
the Palestinians r as opressed as hell... the only fair thing to do is end the occupation, terminate the Israeli structure, bring back those who immigrated and with to come back, and then hold a democratic election where a socialist (hopefully) government would be elected by the ppl.. the first step is to end the occupation, so long live the Intifadha...

[CommieBastard]

El_Che, you mean you actually support concepts of nationhood? and also of individual property?
PCE - that is exacty what i was saying... most people make it an issue of israel vs. palestine, and i am saying that that is wrong... As for the palestinians in power thing, you are right, but we would still be better off trying a method that we think would lead to something better in power, and i think that thing is a nation which caters for all relevant groups etc
Chief Rebel Angel - the Jews from Ethiopia are those most likely to actually be descended from the original isralites. AND, would you allow Jews to stay in that country? what about those born there? Yes end oppression of palestinians, but surely deporting people is no less an oppression?

[DaNatural]

i dont think its a question of power i think it is a matter of people sticking to their own area, yes we all israel doesnt deserve the land in the first place butfor now we have to deal with that. what we shouldnt be dealing with is the fact that they are occupying lands that arent theres. when this ridiculous state was claimed the palestinians were furious however up until they have not being going out of there to way to try and take back the land. they have stayed in the area that was given to them after 1947. however the jews keep trying to capture more lands. the best thing is for them just to stick to their respective area. to second what cheif rebel said 'fuck israel"
Peace

[CommieBastard]

Yes, Fuck Israel, but not the Israelis, it is their state and their system which is at fault, not the people themselves, which is something we have to keep in mind...

[Edelweiss]

Please avoid a black-white view on this topic. I have a very bad feeling about statements like "Fuck Israel". I can't understand why you can't grant the Jews this very small piece of land, after thousands of years of persecution. I mean, I'm also opposing the foreign policy of Israel, but I think no true leftist should doubt the right of Israel to exist. I think both sides should arrange and should find a way to live in peace, this isn't a conflict which can be solved with weapons. Statements like "Fuck Israel" should be reserved for the far right-wing and has nothing left here. I hope no one here is beliving in a Jewish world conspiraation or something cause I don't want such fools here.

[AgustoSandino]

I'd like to ask a few questions.

Was the land the Israelis received in 1947, according to UN resolution, majortiy jewish?

If this land was majority jewish, how did the israelis acquire it?

Is Israel republic and responsive to its citizens?

Who began the intifada?

Is the PLO a responsible government for the palestinians?

Has Israel ever begun an aggressive war for conquest, this means wars begun without any provocation, this includes the arab invasion of 1947, the closing of the Suez canal to israeli shipping in 1956, the massing of eqyptian troops in the sinai in 1967, the massing of eqyptian, jordanian and syrian troops in 1973. and the repeated attacks by the PLO from lebanon in the late 70's (in which the PLO destroyed the govt. of lebanon and became a state within a state). Has israel ever begun a war for conquest?

[CommieBastard]

yes, it has had wars of conquest. There is no excuse for conquest, even if there is 'provocation'.
That is no different to how the British conquered India, by 'protecting' themselves through conquest they prove they are in fact imperialist in motivation, not truly defensive.

And as to your statement Malte, I am afraid i disagree. Being an Anarchist i would say 'Fuck You' to any nation. Well, maybe i would let off a nation that acts responsibly, but there isnt one of those at the moment.

[Moskitto]

Quote: from AgustoSandino on 10:03 pm on Oct. 30, 2001
I'd like to ask a few questions.

Was the land the Israelis received in 1947, according to UN resolution, majortiy jewish?

If this land was majority jewish, how did the israelis acquire it?

Is Israel republic and responsive to its citizens?

Who began the intifada?

Is the PLO a responsible government for the palestinians?

Has Israel ever begun an aggressive war for conquest, this means wars begun without any provocation, this includes the arab invasion of 1947, the closing of the Suez canal to israeli shipping in 1956, the massing of eqyptian troops in the sinai in 1967, the massing of eqyptian, jordanian and syrian troops in 1973. and the repeated attacks by the PLO from lebanon in the late 70's (in which the PLO destroyed the govt. of lebanon and became a state within a state). Has israel ever begun a war for conquest?


those are actually my thoughts

Why the hell can't they just live together they're all human?

You always hear about Isrealis shooting Palistinian Kids who were only throwing rocks at them but you never hear about the Palistinian kid who's bomb blows up in his pocket.

You always hear about the atrocities of the Isreal firing into Palistinian areas but when the Palistinian blows up a market square and kills 40+ people it's just "Self Defense."

You hear about Zionism and Racism but you never hear about the Palistinian children dreaming about blowing up the Israelis.

But then again Sharron probably started the whole thing just to persue his political goals.

So America should offer a peace settlement and not back Israel blindly.

Israel/Palistine stop killing each other.

[CommieBastard]

hmm, im not sure if you were being sarcastic in those first points or not Moskitto.....
all this sarcasm on the board is starting to confuse me...

[sabre]

Malte, I don't think its right to say "I can't understand why you can't grant the Jews this very small piece of Land, after thousands of years of persecution."

Even though it might be small in size, it has tons of meaning (religious and to have a place to call "home" to judiaism) to the jews and also the Arabs want it also. THis small chunk of lannd has tremendous value for both sides so i don't think jsut granting it to them would be right.

I also agree with you that people shouldn't be saying Fuck Israel . . thats harsh


as to Moskitto's remark about never hearing anything about palestinian crimes, i disagree. Ive been hearing tons about Israels actions being in defense and the palestinians mindlessy suicide-bombing malls and stuff. I think the media is portraying it totally opposite to what you're saying. No doubt its becuase of the gov't liking israel, but the image from the media is that Israel is defending itself against bad palestinians. OF course thats not true

(Edited by sabre at 10:39 pm on Oct. 30, 2001)

[CommieBastard]

which is exactly the reason why i wasnt sure if he was being sarcastic or not...

[Anonymous]

Augostos i will be more than happy to answer your questions so you can join me in condeming ireali ocupation and US suport of it. This way you can put pressure on your goverment by contacting your local representative and declaring they should take a just postion in this matter if they wish your continued suport. Knowing that you will contest my anwsers i will try and fundament them as best i can.


Was the land the Israelis received in 1947, according to UN resolution, majortiy jewish?

"The Balfour Declaration, made in November 1917 by the British Government...was made a) by a European power, B) about a non-European territory, c) in flat disregard of both the presence and wishes of the native majority resident in that territory...[As Balfour himself wrote in 1919], 'The contradiction between the letter of the Covenant (the Anglo French Declaration of 1918 promising the Arabs of the former Ottoman colonies that as a reward for supporting the Allies they could have their independence) is even more flagrant in the case of the independent nation of Palestine than in that of the independent nation of Syria. For in Palestine we do not propose even to go through the form of consulting the wishes of the present inhabitants of the country...The four powers are committed to Zionism and Zionism, be it right or wrong, good or bad, is rooted in age-long tradition, in present needs, in future hopes, of far profounder import than the desire and prejudices of the 700,000 Arabs who now inhabit that ancient land,'" Edward Said, "The Question of Palestine."

"Arab rejection was...based on the fact that, while the population of the Jewish state was to be [only half] Jewish with the Jews owning less than 10% of the Jewish state land area, the Jews were to be established as the ruling body - a settlement which no self-respecting people would accept without protest, to say the least...The action of the United Nations conflicted with the basic principles for which the world organization was established, namely, to uphold the right of all peoples to self-determination. By denying the Palestine Arabs, who formed the two-thirds majority of the country, the right to decide for themselves, the United Nations had violated its own charter." Sami Hadawi, "Bitter Harvest."

Were the Zionists prepared to settle for the territory granted in the 1947 partition?

"While the Yishuv's leadership formally accepted the 1947 Partition Resolution, large sections of Israel's society - including...Ben-Gurion - were opposed to or extremely unhappy with partition and from early on viewed the war as an ideal opportunity to expand the new state's borders beyond the UN earmarked partition boundaries and at the expense of the Palestinians." Israeli historian, Benny Morris, in "Tikkun", March/April 1998.

"Palestine became a predominately Arab and Islamic country by the end of the seventh century. Almost immediately thereafter its boundaries and its characteristics - including its name in Arabic, Filastin - became known to the entire Islamic world, as much for its fertility and beauty as for its religious significance...In 1516, Palestine became a province of the Ottoman Empire, but this made it no less fertile, no less Arab or Islamic...Sixty percent of the population was in agriculture; the balance was divided between townspeople and a relatively small nomadic group. All these people believed themselves to belong in a land called Palestine, despite their feelings that they were also members of a large Arab nation...Despite the steady arrival in Palestine of Jewish colonists after 1882, it is important to realize that not until the few weeks immediately preceding the establishment of Israel in the spring of 1948 was there ever anything other than a huge Arab majority. For example, the Jewish population in 1931 was 174,606 against a total of 1,033,314." Edward Said, "The Question of Palestine."

If this land was majority jewish, how did the israelis acquire it?

"[The Ottoman Land Code of 1858] required the registration in the name of individual owners of agricultural land, most of which had never previously been registered and which had formerly been treated according to traditional forms of land tenure, in the hill areas of Palestine generally masha'a, or communal usufruct. The new law meant that for the first time a peasant could be deprived not of title to his land, which he had rarely held before, but rather of the right to live on it, cultivate it and pass it on to his heirs, which had formerly been inalienable...Under the provisions of the 1858 law, communal rights of tenure were often ignored...Instead, members of the upper classes, adept at manipulating or circumventing the legal process, registered large areas of land as theirs...The fellahin [peasants] naturally considered the land to be theirs, and often discovered that they had ceased to be the legal owners only when the land was sold to Jewish settlers by an absentee landlord...Not only was the land being purchased; its Arab cultivators were being dispossessed and replaced by foreigners who had overt political objectives in Palestine." Rashid Khalidi, "Blaming The Victims," ed. Said and Hitchens

"The aim of the [Jewish National] Fund was `to redeem the land of Palestine as the inalienable possession of the Jewish people.'...As early as 1891, Zionist leader Ahad Ha'am wrote that the Arabs "understood very well what we were doing and what we were aiming at'...[Theodore Herzl, the founder of Zionism, stated] `We shall try to spirit the penniless [Arab] population across the border by procuring employment for it in transit countries, while denying it employment in our own country... Both the process of expropriation and the removal of the poor must be carried out discreetly and circumspectly'...At various locations in northern Palestine Arab farmers refused to move from land the Fund purchased from absentee owners, and the Turkish authorities, at the Fund's request, evicted them...The indigenous Jews of Palestine also reacted negatively to Zionism. They did not see the need for a Jewish state in Palestine and did not want to exacerbate relations with the Arabs." John Quigley, "Palestine and Israel: A Challenge to Justice."

"Before the 20th century, most Jews in Palestine belonged to old Yishuv, or community, that had settled more for religious than for political reasons. There was little if any conflict between them and the Arab population. Tensions began after the first Zionist settlers arrived in the 1880's...when [they] purchased land from absentee Arab owners, leading to dispossession of the peasants who had cultivated it." Don Peretz, "The Arab-Israeli Dispute."

"Serfs they (the Jews) were in the lands of the Diaspora, and suddenly they find themselves in freedom ; and this change has awakened in them an inclination to despotism. They treat the Arabs with hostility and cruelty, deprive them of their rights, offend them without cause, and even boast of these deeds; and nobody among us opposes this despicable and dangerous inclination." Zionist writer Ahad Ha'am, quoted in Sami Hadawi, "Bitter Harvest."



Wasn't Palestine a wasteland before the Jews started immigrating there?

"Britain's high commissioner for Palestine, John Chancellor, recommended total suspension of Jewish immigration and land purchase to protect Arab agriculture. He said 'all cultivable land was occupied; that no cultivable land now in possession of the indigenous population could be sold to Jews without creating a class of landless Arab cultivators'...The Colonial Office rejected the recommendation." John Quigley, "Palestine and Israel: A Challenge to Justice."

[i]Is Israel republic and responsive to its citizens?


i dont think i understand the question... is ireal a rebublic? yes; does it respond to its citizens? yes it is democratic as you well know but as we all know people can be manipulated and truth distorted. We dont have to go any further than the current "war on terrorism to reach this briliante conclusion. But back to palestine and your questions.


Who began the intifada?

The United States has been a terrible 'sponsor' of the peace process. It has succumbed to Israeli pressure on everything, abandoning the principle of land for peace (no U.N. Resolution says anything about returning a tiny percentage, as opposed to all of the land Israel seized in 1967), pushing the lifeless Palestinian leadership into deeper and deeper holes to suit Netanyahu's preposterous demands.

"The fact is that Palestinians are dramatically worse off than they were before the Oslo process began. Their annual income is less than half of what it was in 1992; they are unable to travel from place to place; more of their land has been taken than ever before; more settlements exist; and Jerusalem is practically lost...

"Every house demolishment, every expropriated dunum, every arrest and torture, every barricade, every closure, every gesture of arrogance and intended humiliation simply revives the past and reenacts Israel's offenses against the Palestinian spirit, land, body politic. To speak about peace in such a context is to try to reconcile the irreconcilable."Edward Said in "The Progressive", March 1998

The roots of Intifada 2000

"The explosion of Palestinian anger last September 29 put an end to the charade begun at Oslo seven years ago and labelled the 'peace process.' In 1993 Palestinians, along with millions of people around the world, were led to hope that Israel would withdraw from the West Bank and Gaza within five years and that Palestinians would then be free to establish an independent state. Meanwhile both sides would work out details of Israel's withdrawal and come to an agreement on the status of Jerusalem, the future of Israeli settlements, and the return of Palestinian refugees.

"Because of the lopsided balance of power, negotiations went nowhere and the Palestinians' hopes were never fulfilled. The Israelis, regardless of which government was in power, quibbled over wording, demanded revisions of what had previously been agreed to, then refused to abide by the new agreements. Meanwhile successive governments were demolishing Palestinian homes, taking over Arab neighborhoods in East Jerusalem for Jewish housing, and seizing Palestinian land for new settlements. A massive new highway network built after 1993 on confiscated Palestinian land isolates Palestinian towns and villages from one another and from Jerusalem, forcing many Palestinians to go through Israeli checkpoints just to get to the next town...

"According to President Clinton and most of the media, Prime Minister Ehud Barak conceded at Camp David virtually everything the Palestinians wanted, and Yasser Arafat threw away the opportunity for peace by rejecting Barak's offer. In fact Arafat could not accept it. Barak, backed by Clinton, wanted assurance of Israel's continued strategic control over the West Bank and Gaza, including air space and borders, and insisted that Israel retain permanent sovereignty over most of East Jerusalem, including Haram Al-Sharif. This was a deal no Arab would accept.

"As the protests grew, army helicopters rocketed neighborhoods in several Palestinian cities, destroying entire city blocks and causing scores of casualties. Israeli tanks surrounded Palestinian towns with their guns turned toward the town. Armed Israeli civilians within the Green Line rampaged through Arab neighborhoods destroying Arab property and shouting "Death of Arabs'...Israeli police who were quick to use bullets against Palestinian stone throwers failed to restrain the Israelis and instead fired at Arabs trying to defend their homes. Two Arabs were killed.

"The uprising was undoubtedly fueled by the resentment caused by years of daily abuse and humiliation under Israeli occupation. On September 6, a group of Israeli border police stopped three Palestinian workers as they were returning home from Israel and, for no reason at all, subjected them to 40 minutes of torture. The San Francisco Chronicle reported on September 19 that the policemen punched the three men, slammed their heads against a stone wall, forced them to swallow their own blood, and cursed their mothers and sisters. The incident only came to light because the policemen took photographs of themselves with their victims, holding their heads by the hair like hunting trophies. Israeli human rights workers said such beatings are a common occurance, but they are seldom reported." Rachelle Marshall, "The Peace Process Ends in Protests and Blood", Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, December 2000.

"There is, in the final analysis, only one way to 'stop the violence,' and that is to end the occupation. The desire for liberation will, eventually, always bring an occupied people out into the streets, stones in hand, ready to face the might of powerful armies, preferring to risk death than live in bondage. This is not extreme nation.0 racism or religious fervor. It is the need to be free...

"[Occupation] means a reality of unending violence. It means being surrounded by an abusive foreign army that enforces a social system indistinguishable from apartheid; confiscations of land that is then given to hundreds of thousands of Israeli settlers in Jewish-only communities linked by Jewish only roads; home demolitions; torture; cities cut off from each other, closed down on a regular basis. It means living in a massive prison...

"Since 1967, there has been only one workable solution to the conflict. The plan is articulated in U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, which sets up a two-part 'land for peace' solution. Part one holds that Israel must withdraw from the territories occupied in 1967. Part two calls for all states in the region to live in peace and security in those borders. The Israeli obligation, withdrawal from the occupied territories, is utterly unfulfilled." Hussein Ibish, communications director of the American-Arab Anti Discrimination Committee, in the Los Angeles Times, October 18, 2000.


Is the PLO a responsible government for the palestinians?

The PLO isnt perfect but Isreal understands that its in there intrests to have arafat and the PLO as the party to deal with because they also understand the alternatives to the PLO are islamic jihad or hamas. This is why they speak to arafat and the PLO, because they understand there opression has radicalised the majority of the palesinians.

"Palestine belongs to the Arabs in the same sense that England belongs to the English or France to the French...What is going on in Palestine today cannot be justified by any moral code of conduct...If they [the Jews] must look to the Palestine of geography as their national home, it is wrong to enter it under the shadow of the British gun. A religious act cannot be performed with the aid of the bayonet or the bomb. They can settle in Palestine only by the goodwill of the Arabs... As it is, they are co-sharers with the British in despoiling a people who have done no wrong to them. I am not defending the Arab excesses. I wish they had chosen the way of non-violence in resisting what they rightly regard as an unacceptable encroachment upon their country. But according to the accepted canons of right and wrong, nothing can be said against the Arab resistance in the face of overwhelming odds." Mahatma Gandhi, quoted in "A Land of Two Peoples" ed. Mendes-Flohr.



Is the PLO a responsible government for the palestinians?

how can you speak of goverment for a nationless people? dont you think there is something wrong with you reasoning? furthermore do you want to know why there isnt a democratic goverment in palestine? this is why:


"If [the] principle [of self-determination] is to rule, and so the wishes of Palestine's population are to be decisive as to what is to be done with Palestine, then it is to be remembered that the non-Jewish population of Palestine - nearly nine-tenths of the whole - are emphatically against the entire Zionist program.. To subject a people so minded to unlimited Jewish immigration, and to steady financial and social pressure to surrender the land, would be a gross violation of the principle just quoted...No British officers, consulted by the Commissioners, believed that the Zionist program could be carried out except by force of arms.The officers generally thought that a force of not less than fifty thousand soldiers would be required even to initiate the program. That of itself is evidence of a strong sense of the injustice of the Zionist program...The initial claim, often submitted by Zionist representatives, that they have a 'right' to Palestine based on occupation of two thousand years ago, can barely be seriously considered." Quoted in "The Israel-Arab Reader" ed. Laquer and Rubin.

"Clearly, the last thing the Zionists really wanted was that all the inhabitants of Palestine should have an equal say in running the country... [Chaim] Weizmann had impressed on Churchill that representative government would have spelled the end of the [Jewish] National Home in Palestine... [Churchill declared,] 'The present form of government will continue for many years. Step by step we shall develop representative institutions leading to full self-government, but our children's children will have passed away before that is accomplished.'" David Hirst, "The Gun and the Olive Branch."

Denial of the Arabs' right to self-determination

"Even if nobody lost their land, the [Zionist] program was unjust in principle because it denied majority political rights... Zionism, in principle, could not allow the natives to exercise their political rights because it would mean the end of the Zionist enterprise." Benjamin Beit-Hallahmi, "Original Sins."



Has Israel ever begun an aggressive war for conquest, this means wars begun without any provocation, this includes the arab invasion of 1947, the closing of the Suez canal to israeli shipping in 1956, the massing of eqyptian troops in the sinai in 1967, the massing of eqyptian, jordanian and syrian troops in 1973. and the repeated attacks by the PLO from lebanon in the late 70's (in which the PLO destroyed the govt. of lebanon and became a state within a state). Has israel ever begun a war for conquest?

hmm i think ive answer some of these questions already but lets see, has isreal began an agressive war of conquest? what do you think...
the arab invasion of 1947? and the massive egyptian troops in sinai as you put it?


"The former Commander of the Air Force, General Ezer Weitzman, regarded as a hawk, stated that there was 'no threat of destruction' but that the attack on Egypt, Jordan and Syria was nevertheless justified so that Israel could 'exist according the scale, spirit, and quality she now embodies.'...Menahem Begin had the following remarks to make: 'In June 1967, we again had a choice. The Egyptian Army concentrations in the Sinai approaches do not prove that Nasser was really about to attack us. We must be honest with ourselves. We decided to attack him.' "Noam Chomsky, "The Fateful Triangle."

"I do not think Nasser wanted war. The two divisions he sent to The Sinai would not have been sufficient to launch an offensive war. He knew it and we knew it." Yitzhak Rabin, Israel's Chief of Staff in 1967, in Le Monde, 2/28/68


"The acceptance of partition does not commit us to renounce Transjordan; one does not demand from anybody to give up his vision. We shall accept a state in the boundaries fixed today. But the boundaries of Zionist aspirations are the concern of the Jewish people and no external factor will be able to limit them." David Ben-Gurion, in 1936, quoted in Noam Chomsky, "The Fateful Triangle."

"The main danger which Israel, as a 'Jewish state', poses to its own people, to other Jews and to its neighbors, is its ideologically motivated pursuit of territorial expansion and the inevitable series of wars resulting from this aim...No zionist politician has ever repudiated Ben-Gurion's idea that Israeli policies must be based (within the limits of practical considerations) on the restoration of Biblical borders as the borders of the Jewish state." Israeli professor, Israel Shahak, "Jewish History, Jewish Religion: The Weight of 3000 Years."

In Israeli Prime Minister Moshe Sharatt's personal diaries, there is an excerpt from May of 1955 in which he quotes Moshe Dayan as follows: "[Israel] must see the sword as the main, if not the only, instrument with which to keep its morale high and to retain its moral tension. Toward this end it may, no - it must - invent dangers, and to do this it must adopt the method of provocation-and-revenge...And above all - let us hope for a new war with the Arab countries, so that we may finally get rid of our troubles and acquire our space." Quoted in Livia Rokach, "Israel's Sacred Terrorism."

But wasn't the occupation of Arab lands necessary to protect Israel's security?

"Senator [J.William Fulbright] proposed in 1970 that America should guarantee Israel's security in a formal treaty, protecting her with armed forces if necessary. In return, Israel would retire to the borders of 1967. The UN Security Council would guarantee this arrangement, and thereby bring the Soviet Union - then a supplier of arms and political aid to the Arabs - into compliance. As Israeli troops were withdrawn from the Golan Heights, the Gaza Strip and the West Bank they would be replaced by a UN peacekeeping force. Israel would agree to accept a certain number of Palestinians and the rest would be settled in a Palestinian state outside Israel.

"The plan drew favorable editorial support in the United States. The proposal, however, was flatly rejected by Israel. 'The whole affair disgusted Fulbright,' writes [his biographer Randall] Woods. 'The Israelis were not even willing to act in their own self-interest.'" Allan Brownfield in "Issues of the American Council for Judaism." Fall 1997.[Ed.-This was one of many such proposals]

"In violation of international law, Israel has confiscated over 52 percent of the land in the West Bank and 30 percent of the Gaza Strip for military use or for settlement by Jewish civilians...From 1967 to 1982, Israel's military government demolished 1,338 Palestinian homes on the West Bank. Over this period, more than 300,000 Palestinians were detained without trial for various periods by Israeli security forces." Intifada: The Palestinian Uprising Against Israeli Occupation," ed. Lockman and Beinin.

--on the 1947 arab invasion as you say augotos, but i think your confused my friend, how can people invade there own land?

"In 1948, at the moment that Israel declared itself a state, it legally owned a little more than 6 percent of the land of Palestine...After 1940, when the mandatory authority restricted Jewish land ownership to specific zones inside Palestine, there continued to be illegal buying (and selling) within the 65 percent of the total area restricted to Arabs.

Thus when the partition plan was announced in 1947 it included land held illegally by Jews, which was incorporated as a fait accompli inside the borders of the Jewish state. And after Israel announced its statehood, an impressive series of laws legally assimilated huge tracts of Arab land (whose proprietors had become refugees, and were pronounced 'absentee landlords' in order to expropriate their lands and prevent their return under any circumstances)." Edward Said, "The Question of Palestine."

in the qoutes above i think you can understand that the only way the Ireali state could be created was through a swift and violente action to "create" the the state using the land the zionist had bought from the 19 century onwardes as an excuse to denie the majority of the population a say in there own land, and of course using force. I guess the only justice the west knows is the jungle law of might makes right.

CB- i understand what your getting at comrade. And you know I think the concept of nationality is superfulus and ficticious, and the concept of private property prejudicial. But in this world, in the real world, right now, its the way things are. I dont think its fair to abstain from try to right this wrong because we think in a perfect world (the one we hope to achive some day) there should be no nations and no proterty but rather a brotherhood of men sharing there wealt and there work.

no justice no peace for palestine.



(Edited by El_Che at 3:30 am on Oct. 31, 2001)

[Guest]

i really don't know how to thank u EL_CHE, u saved my time by writing every word i wanted to say!!!!! i just want to add something; there is a difference between my right in the holy sites and the rights of the country where the holy sites r. the jews r building all their claims on religious basis: their temple which was destroyed by the romans long time ago and some religious myths. i now wonder: should the muslims go to Mecca , occupy it, and take it from the saudis because it's thier holy land ignoring the saudis right to the land?????? should the catholics go to Vatikan and occupy it claiming that it's their holy land????!! that's not acceptable. if the jews consider palestine their holy land, they can come to pelgrimage( i don't know what they call it) whenever they want like any other religion whose followers visit their shrines in other countries .
to everyone who critisizes the palestinian suicidal bombings: the palestinians r fighting for their rights,for truth like ur comrade CHE. don't say that they r targeting civilians because if the thief brought his wife and his children with him, he is the only one to be blamed; the israelis stole the arabic land bringing their wives and children which is their fault.
why do u think only about the victims? think also about the performers of such missions. only one believes in a noble cause can kill himself that easyly.
if the palestinians don't get their rights, be sure that such bombings will continue. not only every palestinian is willing to sacrifice himself for palestine, but also every arab. millions of youth r just waiting for the chance to contribute to liberating palestine.
HASTA LA VICTORIA SIEMPRE!
FUCK ISRAEL, FUCK ISRAEL, FUCK ISRAEL, FUCK ISRAEL

[pce]

i read on the amnesty international site that since last year, 150 israeli civilians have been killed by palestinians and 570 palestinian civilians have been killed by israelis.

the biggest problem with this is that the government, the country, the state of israel is killing these civilians. they are premeditated and purposeful killings of civilians by SOLDIERS. the palestinians (though also wrong in targeting and killing civilians) are fighting because of desperation. they don't have a government with which to negotiate with. they fight with the only means they have.

p.s.- i also am disturbed by anyone saying "fuck israel"

[ernestodekam]

This is a clear example of the damage Capitalist western imperialism can do.

[Guest]

i forgot to mention another point: why don't u notice the assassinations that the israeli government use against the palestinian activists which is considered legitimate and no one condemn it??? can u imagine the meaning of a government's declaration brassly that it uses assassinations????!!!!
on the other hand, when the palestinians assassinate the israeli minister, they were punished by occupying their land, killing them(whoever gets out of his house was killed), and destroying their houses for long weeks!!!!
IS THIS THE KIND OF JUSTICE THAT CHE WAS TRYING TO ACIEVE?????????????????????? JUST ASK YOURSELVES.
FUCK ISRAEL, FUCK ISRAEL, FUCK ISRAEL, FUCK ISRAEL

[Chief Rebel Angel]

Malte - i dont think any leftist would support the right of a land to exist upon another land by force... the Jews want a homeland? fine with me... the Jews build their homeland upon another people, and step upon them? i say "fuck that homeland! fuck israel"...

"AND, would you allow Jews to stay in that country? what about those born there? Yes end oppression of palestinians, but surely deporting people is no less an oppression?" - Commie Bastard

i have nothing against Jews settling in Palestine, starting a life, and performing their religion freely... what i have a problem with is Jews settling in Palestine in place of Palestinians they deported, i have a problem with Jews wrecking Palestinian homes so they could build their own in its place, i have a problem with Jews destroying Palestinian land just because it is Palestinian, i have a problem with Jews taking Palestinian property by force and arbirarly claiming it to be theirs, and i can go on for ever...
when Palestine was under the rule of Muslim Caliphs, no Jew or Christian was prevented pilgramage, nor denied the right to perform his/her religion... but now, the Israeli government is denying the Palestinians praying in one of their most holy shrines, let alone denying them most of their basic human right...

one more thing, great post El_Che...

ps. i really like this forum, so please dont ban me :biggrin:

(Edited by Chief Rebel Angel at 5:35 pm on Oct. 31, 2001)

[Kez]

I agree with Chief Rebel :)

Also note the hypocracy of the great USA when Israel ethnically cleanses lands whcih it isnt even theirs Yanks dont care but when Milosovic gets rid of Albanian Extremists then we have a problem?

Screw the USA
Comrade Kamo

[Anonymous]

Augosto sandino i gave me a lot of trouble to answer your post, i did it gladly though because if i can do even so little as convince one person of the justice the palestinian cause represents then its worth it. I would however apreciate a reply...

and i want to ask you a question: in light of the information i have brought to your atention what is your view of Isreali actions and US suport of the same?

thanks

[Reuben]

Quote: from TavareeshKamo on 10:15 pm on Nov. 1, 2001
I agree with Chief Rebel :)

Also note the hypocracy of the great USA when Israel ethnically cleanses lands whcih it isnt even theirs Yanks dont care but when Milosovic gets rid of Albanian Extremists then we have a problem?

Screw the USA
Comrade Kamo



While I am happy to agree with the Anti-zionist sentiments expressed in this post, to describe the treatment of ethnic albanians as "Milosevic getting rid of Albanian Extremists" is a grossly false. While we may oppose the U.S./British war that was waged on Serbia, it is not the place of leftists to try to legitimize or rewrite the atrocious and racist manner in which the Serbian government tried to collectively punish the Albanians. To resort to such logic as the enemy of my enemy is my friend, unless you made a genuine mistake about the treatment of albanians or I am grossly mistaken, is to diminish the strength and the depth of our politics.

Yours In struggle,

Reuben Rosenberg

[Guest]

augusto here,

Well El che, I read your "reply" and what I found was that rather than answer my questions you made your own questions up. So don't think I'm doing you a disservice, I'm still waiting for someone to answer MY questions.

[Anonymous]

i didnt answer your questions? hmmm...
maybe i answered them too well and thats the problem no?

a small case of double think perhaps... denile and so fourth...

[AgustoSandino]

First off let me say that cutting and pasting a horde of quotes is hardly "a lot of trouble".

Then let me note it is disengenious to evoke the Balfour Declaration in response to a question about the UN resolution that partitioned Israel, and in doing so to quote Edward Said, a man disciplined by my university last year for throwing stones at Israeli soldiers as hired photographers took his pictures. But let us look past such connotative demagoguery and respond to some of your fallacies.

There was not, until very recently a "nation", or an ethnic identity know as Palestinian arabs. As a matter of fact, Palestine was populated by people from over 30 different nationalities and three different religions, according to census data (Census of Palestine --1931, volume 1, Palesfine; Part 1, Report by E. Mills, B.A., O.B.E., Assistant Chief Secretary Superintendent of Census (Alexandria, 1933), p. 147)

In addition to this lack of Palestinian ethnic identity there was a plurality of Jews living in Palestine and a majority Jerusalem since the 19th century. (No. 238, "Report of the Commerce of Jerusalem During the Year 1863," F.O. 195/808, May 1864. ". . . The population of the City of Jerusalem is computed at 15,000, of whom about 4,500 Moslem, 8,000 Jews, and the rest Christians of various denominations. . ." From A.H. Hyamson, ed., The British Consulate in Jerusalem, 2 vols. (London, 1939-1941), Vol. 2, p. 331)

But the question remains, how did the Jews acquire their plurality and land ownership in Palestine. The answer is fairly simple they purchased the land from the feudal arab overlords. The Committy for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting a palestinian tilted organization concedes that it was the policy of the Fifth Zionist Congress to "purchase land for resettlement of jews in their native homeland." Not to take or usurp by force the land. Your claim that Jews only controlled 10 percent of the land grant that was given to them in palestine is wrong. On the contrary Jewish individuals controlled 10 percent of the land given to the Jewish state in Palestine, the rest was controlled by Kibbuttz, by communal jewish entities.

While I did not ask if palestine was a wasteland, you chose for your own purposes to portray that as one of my questions. Well I didn't ask because I know to well it was. (walter Laquere (ed.), The Arab-Israeli Reader; A Documentary History of the Middle east Conflict (New York: Bantam Books, 1969), pp.113-122)


Well reading and watching the news over the past two years would reveal only one thing about the Intifada, it was incited by Yassir Arafat's Palestinian Authority in response so that they may have a better bargaining chip in negotiations. You see the Israelis had conceded to the creation of a Palestinian state and the return of the land which they rightfully seized in 1967 and 73, yet Arafat was not satisfied, he helped incite the Intifada by doing nothing to stop it and letting Hamas and Islamic Jihad run the show. The Israelis responded to terrorist attacks on their people by acting as any nation that is responsible to its people would, by defending their population. I futher take contention with claims of hundreds of "palestinian civilians dead" among those "civilians" are countless snipers, and terrorist, because you can paint it anyway you want but that is what they are.

Finally the Israeli government has NEVER undertaken a war for territorial gain. The land seized in the 1948 war and subsequent wars was taken because Gaza, the West Bank and the Golan Heights were strategic locations for the armies of Egypt, Jordan and Syria to mount their repeated attacks against Israel and to harrass the isrealis in times of peace. And by harrass I mean with artillery.
The Palestinians were never expelled from Israel, and actually jews made a tremendous effor to keep them in Israel
http://www.eretzyisroel.org/~jkatz/appeal.html

The Palestinians left out of their own free will, based on false assumptions about what the Jews would do to them. Furthermore why does no one complain about the treatment of Palestinians in Refugee camps in Jordan and Syria. Why do their arab brethren keep them in camps there and don't allow them to move freely about society?

[Anonymous]

You lie Sir.

Balfour Declaration serves the purpose of estabishing the beging of the Isreali claims for for a state, this is the original injustice from which all other on both sides derive. It is the declaration made by an arogante imperial power from the implantation of a state in someone else`s land.

Jews from the beging created the jewish national fund with the intention to create the base for the later creation of there own state backed by europian powers. They did drive arabs out of there land, they did take there land and create a landless arab class. These are facts cold facts. You deny the truth. Lands bought with money from this fund they set up could not be sold back to arabs, and note the detail "jewish national fund". You lie, check the facts, jews where in it from the start to take that land away form the arabs you say have no identity, and they knew from the start that in the end they would use force frist to create and then to expande this new contry. The only ethical problem is the people who where living there and got kick out now living in a massive prision, that is if you have ethicis. You try and mascarade the truth and play games but honestly you know im right. From the 19 century onwards this was there goal. And its pointless to try and use some doubtfull information to try and state jews where anything but a large minority up until the war and ilegal opcupation of arab land. I refer you to my "reply" post and its credible factual information regaurding all these issues. And as for the intifada..., its a cry of deperation against the injustice and the blindness of the world to the dark truth of what was and is being done. Yes its unfourtunate that hamas and islamic jihad use suicide bombers on civilians but they are fighting for there freedom the only way they know how. And isreali terrorism is much worse and has caused 3 times more civilian casualties.


You say they have no identity, well my friend even though that is not true, even if it where, they would now. There identity is greef and morning for those who died and the way they are forced to live.

[CommieBastard]

the figure i recently read in the Independant was a 1:5 ratio of Israeli to Palestinian deaths.

[AgustoSandino]

You know what El Che, they are the "cold hard facts" in your opinion. I don't know if you noticed, most if not all of your sources were opinions, mine were based on demographical studies.

[sabre]

Pardon the stupid question please, as I am not very educatedin this subject, but when you talk about israel being built on another land by force, which land were they intruding on? was it there 1st?

[Guest]

agusto,
the demOgraphic facts u r talking about r BULLSHIT!!!!!
it's very easy to hide the truth and introduce misleading information. i can bring u thousands of sources that prove my opinion that the jews stole the palestinian land, but that's not the problem. the problem is ur ability to feel and discover the truth. i can tell u the truth better than the sources because i live in the region, so i know more about what's happening in reality.
i don't understand how u can use such a CORRUPT logic; does the strategic location for some arab countries justifies their occupation by israel!!!!!!!!!??????
really ur logic fascinate me!!!!!!!
do u consider killing more about 700 and wounding more than 15,000 palestinians an act of self-defense that any nation should do?!!!!!!!!!!
THE PALESTINIAN LAND WILL BE RESTORED TOMORROW OR AFTER TOMORROW OR AFTER ONE MILLION YEARS!!!! EVERY PALESTINIAN AND EVERY ARAB WILL FIGHT TO RESTORE THE LAND, HONOR, AND DIGNITY.
u can know the truth here:
http://www.ummah.net/unity/palestine/
FUCK ISRAEL, FUCK ISRAEL, FUCK ISRAEL, FUCK ISRAEL

[Guest]

agusto,
the demOgraphic facts u r talking about r BULLSHIT!!!!!
it's very easy to hide the truth and introduce misleading information. i can bring u thousands of sources that prove my opinion that the jews stole the palestinian land, but that's not the problem. the problem is ur ability to feel and discover the truth. i can tell u the truth better than the sources because i live in the region, so i know more about what's happening in reality.
i don't understand how u can use such a CORRUPT logic; does the strategic location for some arab countries justifies their occupation by israel!!!!!!!!!??????
really ur logic fascinate me!!!!!!!
do u consider killing more about 700 and wounding more than 15,000 palestinians an act of self-defense that any nation should do?!!!!!!!!!!
THE PALESTINIAN LAND WILL BE RESTORED TOMORROW OR AFTER TOMORROW OR AFTER ONE MILLION YEARS!!!! EVERY PALESTINIAN AND EVERY ARAB WILL FIGHT TO RESTORE THE LAND, HONOR, AND DIGNITY.
u can know the truth here:
http://www.ummah.net/unity/palestine/
FUCK ISRAEL, FUCK ISRAEL, FUCK ISRAEL, FUCK ISRAEL

[Anonymous]

please lets keep it civilized there is not need for insults. Just state your opinion with calm and you will be heard.


and augostos they are not opinions man... These books speak of facts that can be verified easly. These are cerdible people speaking and some of them jews and even isreali jews. Its not opinions, of course in there some things are the opinions of the writters, but when they say something happened in this day that way, that is history and i can be verified. These are well known cerdible writters and if you doubt there opinions disregrade them, but if you doubt the facts they state check them.


thats right there`s no point...

(Edited by El_Che at 2:15 am on Nov. 3, 2001)

[AgustoSandino]

Hey guest, describe my logic. El Che, they are opinions, do you know who some of the writers are, listen, I would not trust edward said's academic credibility on this topic as far as I could throw the man.
And lastly, the Israelis have already offered to return land capture in the 67 and 73 wars, why don't the palestinians take these. Is it because if they were to suddenly get a state, then people would realize that the israelis are not the bad guys, but their own corrupt leadership is for trying to keep them in perpetual conflict for political reasons. Guest is right, the Palestinian people will eventually receive a state, as soon as they begin to accept democracy and capitalism they will begin to realize that they're struggle is hoax perpetrated upon them by their corrupt leadership.

[David Loco]

We have allowed genocide to be perpetrated by the Zionists against the Palestinian People. We have allowed death and destruction....What is up with people that they don't think the Palestinian People deserve a homeland? Peace and Security...I have to agree with the previous message...and this is not my usual style...BUT....FUCK ISRAEL!!!!

[David Loco]

"THERE WILL NEVER BE PEACE IN THIS WORLD UNTIL THERE IS PEACE IN PALISTINE"
Osama Bin Ladin
You may not agree with the messenger....But the message is pure truth.......

[Anonymous]

errm acutaly the message was "USA will only have peace when palestinians have it also" and thats a differente thing altogether due to the circunstances surounding such a statement.


on another note i would like to add what i just heard, namely that the obese crinimal of war ArielSharon has anounced in an interview with newsweek that the Oslo acordes where qoute "a mistake" because the arabs dont recognise the right Isreal has to exist as an independante nation. So basicly what he is saying is that when he invades YOU, YOU better like it and agree with him, if YOU resist YOU will be shoot. I enfasis YOU because it could happen to you, so lets think about that little detail before we cotribute our valuable opinions on the subject.


(Edited by El_Che at 8:06 am on Nov. 4, 2001)

[Reuben]

Firstly I would like to agree completely with what El Che is saying. It is partly a myth that what happened in 1948 had not been planned. Through out the 1920s and 30s zionist forces within Israel started establishing the government that would come in to power following the zionist annexation of Palestine.

[Reuben]

I am furious. As you know from previous posts I am an anti-zionist, opposed to Israel who is also Jewish. When visiting the website posted by "guest at the top of this page, i found, after entering, a page entitled "The Holocaust that Never was." I am disgusted that someone can think of the Che Lives forum as a place to Promote holocaust denial and such viscious rascism against the Jews. As I said I am an anti-zionist. However my oppsition to zionism emminates from an the same opposition to racism that leaves me disgusted at the website promoted on this Forum.

I urge other anti-zionists on this forum to condemn and distance themselves from "Guest" as I have done. Furthermore I will look at getting his posts removed.

Yours,

Reuben

[Chief Rebel Angel]

Reuben, i am aware of that website, and altho i am a Muslim myself and that is an Islamic site, i dont find myself agreeing with what's in it... so i didnt even attempt openning the link...

[Guest]

Reuben,
when i put the link, i wanted to show u all the masacres made by the israelis in palestine, and i didn't notice the part u r talking about at all. the basic issue that i'm discussing is the suffering of the palestinians, not whether there was a holocaust or not. i wanted u to see only the part of the massacres. i'm not a racist and i don't hate the jews. our confrontation is with the israelis not the jews.
FUCK ISRAEL, FUCK ISRAEL, FUCK ISRAEL, FUCK ISRAEL

[Edelweiss]

Reuben,
I didn't have checked out that website when the link was posted, sorry. I have just deleted the link to it.
I think I have clearly expressed in my posts that che-lives is not a place for anti-semitism of any kind. The Palestinian website posted by the guest is a good example why I asked you to avoid a black-white view on this topic. The ideologies of some Palestinan groups are clearly fascist and are not far away from nazism.

[Reuben]

Thankyou malte. I congratulate you on your absolute and absolute intolerance of Anti-Semitism. I have only recently joined this brilliant forum but feel it is very well managed and run


I was a little relieved to hear that 'Guest' was unaware of this part of the website and was aiming to show the true extent of Israel's terrible war crimes.; However, even if this was his main objective it does not legitimize the promotion of a website which contains such lies and hatred.

As I said this is a great and well run forum and I am very pleased at the responses I have recieved from Malte, as well as other anti-zionists such as Cheif Rebel Angel.

Yours In struggle,

Comrade Reuben

[Derar]

I was reading the news today , and as usual today :
7 isreali soldiers , killed 3 already WOUNDED ( armed with stones ) palestinians , and ofcourse said it was a selfe defense !
plus also today in israel an arab member in the kenesit , was kicked out , and about to be jailed becoz he visited his family in palestine , and accused israel for all the killings of palestinians !!!!

[Reuben]

That sounds awful but sadly Typical. The treatment of Israeli arabs is pretty terrible but is often ignored. According to the Palestinian Red Crescent, the palestinian death toll has by the beggining of today, risen to 795.

If there are any youth in Britain who wish to support palestinian rights you may be interested in joining Youth Action for Palestine. If you want to more you can e-mail [email protected] or visit www.geocities.com/youthactionforpalestine

Yours,

Reuben

[Edelweiss]

El_Che, you have left out one very important fact: The state Israel was mainly socialist in the beginning and backed by the USSR. The USSR dropped Israel and so they had no other choice than turning to the USA.

[AgustoSandino]

Hey malte, explain that one, cause I don't know if you know this, but the US was the first nation to recognize israel. Meanwhile the USSR was always antagonistic to Israel, from supplying arab states with weapons to not allowing its jewish citizens to go to Israel.

[Derar]

hey malte , i have to correct u here , the ussr didnt drop israel , but israel dropped the ussr after it found out the ussr is going down , and that the u.s. is going to be the new world power , so it stuck up to it , u can also say invaded it somehow , if u know that half of the fbi or the cia work with the israeli intelligence , and they control most of the huge companies in the us. just like coca cola , dell computers , hewlet packard .. and lots of others , and thru all these years though the us backed israel and done everything it could to help it , the israel till today spys on the u.s. , and i think u've heard about the spy ( i forgot his name ) , who was caught in 1980 i think , and was spyin for israel in the u.s. , and leaked very secretive and important infos !!

[AgustoSandino]

you're talking about jonathan pollard... private US citizens and private foreing nationals control US corporations, not any governmental entities.

[Anonymous]

hmm never heard anything about that... was isreal ever socialist or comunist?

what i do know is US backed up isreal from the start:

"By this time [November 1947] the United States had emerged as the most aggressive proponent of partition...The United States got the General Assembly to delay a vote 'to gain time to bring certain Latin American republics into line with its own views.'...Some delegates charged U.S. officials with 'diplomatic intimidation.' Without 'terrific pressure' from the United States on 'governments which cannot afford to risk American reprisals,' said an anonymous editorial writer, the resolution 'would never have passed.'" John Quigley, "Palestine and Israel: A Challenge to Justice."

"I am sorry gentlemen, but I have to answer to hundreds of thousands who are anxious for the success of Zionism. I do not have hundreds of thousands of Arabs among my constituents." President Harry Truman, quoted in "Anti Zionism", ed. by Teikener, Abed-Rabbo & Mezvinsky.

[Guest]

malte,
israel was never supported by the USSR! palestine was a british mandate when Balfour declared his promise to the jews. then when Britain decided to leave palestine, they transfered their authority and power to the jewish state. and the US was the first state to recognize israel. moreover, the USSR provided the arabs with thier wars with israel in 1956, 1967, and 1973.

[Edelweiss]

I'm talking about the labor zionists (David Ben-Gurion, first prime minister of Israel and others) in 1947 whos goal it was to create a real socialist Israel with warm relationships to the USSR. The USSR supported this idea in the beginning, but very soon dropped the support for a socialist Israel.
To make it clear: I'm not a jew and I'm not a labor zionist, but I'm German and so maybe more critical towards leftist anti-zionism and Palestine solidarity than others.