Terror State Israel builts more illegal settlements

[rosends]

More discussion of the legalities of building...
Israel’s right to build homes is settled … under international law

but let's not let facts get in the way.

 

[Flankerl]

@LuisDantas - because the migration of Jews to the British Mandate, followed by the establishment of the State of Israel, resulted in the suffering and dislocation of large numbers of Arabs.

More Jews than Arabs were displaced. But they have never counted.

Probably because the Zionist scum didn't herd them into refugee Camps. An error on our part.


Also still counting the days till OP becomes a Shaheed.

 

[Kirran]

More Jews than Arabs were displaced. But they have never counted.

Probably because the Zionist scum didn't herd them into refugee Camps. An error on our part.

I make no argument with that, I'm just saying why it is that things have escalated as they have. All a big shame, really.

Putting displaced people in camps in that area of the world is the preserve of the Palestinian, Jordanian, Lebanese, Syrian and British (Mandate) governments.

 

[Revoltingest]

That's a cheapening of the word. Israel is a country with a questionable human rights record, as is typical of the region. Terrorist is just you using a dirty word.

Not so fast.
Example....
Israel uses group punishment, ie, punishing innocents for the actions of others.
This strikes me as terrorism because the violence is intended to coerce people
using terror.

 

[LuisDantas]

@LuisDantas - because the migration of Jews to the British Mandate, followed by the establishment of the State of Israel, resulted in the suffering and dislocation of large numbers of Arabs.

Is that so?

That is a half formed explanation at best. It truly needs a lot more elaboration and context even if completely true.

I don't think it explains anything at all. If anything, it raises more questions.

 

[Tumah]

That isn't evidence of anything.
But they needn't convince anyone of their right to exist.
They only need to live in peace.
That will mean changing some behavior.

Religious faith is a flexible thing.
If Israelis engender hatred, then religion will justify hatred.
If instead they pursue justice & peace, then Islam will allow reciprocation.

When people say "there is no choice" in some matter, what they really mean is they want to ignore other choices.
They have a choice, but they choose to brutalize others & ignore justice with an us-against-them mentality.

I think that's a pretty naive view of the situation here and of groups in general. For one thing, it ignores the fact that there is a spectrum of adherence to religious beliefs among both Jews and Palestinians here. I can't speak for Palestinians, but among the Jewish population (80% of the Israeli population), only half are actually religious (41% of the population) and that includes about 4% who could probably be classified as anti-Zionist. The other half (40% of the general population) are secular Jews. That includes the PM of Israel.

Although for many it does play a part, to drop it all on religion just reflects a desire to condemn without really caring to be aware of what's actually going on. I'd put a lot more blame on national pride and government power struggles rather than religion without a question.

Palestinian terror typically occurs in the most peaceful zones of Israeli civilization. There was one attack by some Palestinians kids last year where they stabbed a Palestinian old man (thinking he was Jewish) near the Israeli open market in Jerusalem (I think he was waiting for the train). There's been numerous stabbings or attempted stabbings in the past years of people on the way to or from praying at the Western Wall. They aren't attacking violent people -more often than not, they aren't even attacking settlers. They're attacking citizens peacefully going about their business usually far removed from any violence or contentious neighborhoods.

The first thing you need to realize, is that Palestinians (or the ones influenced by Hamas and Fatah's media) view Israelis as a single entity. To the extent that (and I think this was in bad taste) some Haredi Jews (who are typically anti-Zionist to one degree or another) actually circulated a letter in Arabic after a number of them were attacked, asking Palestinians not to attack Haredim since they're anti-Zionist. And its also obvious that Palestinians (and most Muslims apparently - if RF is any indication) see Israelis as a monolithic entity from the propaganda put out by Hamas and friends. So being a friendly Israeli isn't going to net any benefits until the entire country unanimously decides to be friendly.

And of course that's impossible. That would be like expecting the entire Muslim world to become peaceful. Instead, wiser heads understand that among every group there are moderates and extremists. You're not going to blame Egyptian citizens for Isis. There are moderate Muslims out there and there are extremists who become Isis. Its called diversity and it has a good side and a bad side. That's true of the wider world in general and here in Israel and the Palestinian territories specifically.

And on the Palestinian side we have exactly the same thing. If you go to more affluent communities, or basically any community outside Gaza and Hebron, you'll find the majority of Palestinians are just as peaceful as the majority of Israelis, trying to get through the day just like those Israelis in the market. Palestinians (and Palestinians-Israelis) are ubiquitous in Israeli society. You go to any construction site in the country and you hear Arabic. You go to an Israeli hospital and its a 50-50 chance your doctor's name will be Ahmed. The problem is not changing some behavior. There's plenty of groundwork already in place for peace among the citizens on the street.

According to a poll by the PCPO half of Palestinians living in East Jerusalem would prefer Israeli citizenship. There's even a growing trend of Arabs choosing to move into Jewish neighborhoods. Never mind places like Abu Ghosh that are already a part of Israel.

In my opinion, the real problem is simply down to politics and the government trying to advance an agenda in its own best interests rather than its peoples'. Selling land to Israelis is punishable by death in the Palestinian Authority. Here is a video of the Arab mayor of Nazareth yelling at the head of the Joint Arab List for ruining his city.

“You’ve ruined everything, go to Haifa!

“There wasn’t a single Jew here today. Not even one!”...

"I blame the leaders; they are destroying our future, they are destroying coexistence,” Salem (the mayor) told Army Radio.​

I think that's what it does come down to.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

Ah yes its all our fault. Because we had it so unimaginably good when we lived under their rule and never started any conflict.

Absolutely ridiculous. So it is our destiny to live as second class citizens who might get murdered every once in a while.
Or how about we don't do that?

It take two to start an argument.
I have not attempted to say why the Jewish people have got involved so often throughout history, and always end up with the short end of the stick.
I just pointed out that they always have.

 

[Kirran]

Not so fast.
Example....
Israel uses group punishment, ie, punishing innocents for the actions of others.
This strikes me as terrorism because the violence is intended to coerce people
using terror.

Yeah, I see your point. But I'm loth to extend the term terrorism to cover countries with poor human rights. By the same measure, we'd count China as a terrorist entity.

Is that so?

That is a half formed explanation at best. It truly needs a lot more elaboration and context even if completely true.

I don't think it explains anything at all. If anything, it raises more questions.

I am not trying to justify anything, I'm just trying to answer your question of why much of the Arab world believes X. I don't see you don't think it explains anything - there was substantial trauma to the Arab population living in Palestine/Israel resulting from the formation of the State of Israel. From a Pan-Arab perspective, it was also an annexation of land by a colonialist entity. Secular forms of Zionism, which have been the driving force for much of the movement's history, bear striking similarities to European colonialist thought.

 

[LuisDantas]

But that is what I asked in the first place. How did such an odd mindset come to be?

 

[Kirran]

But that is what I asked in the first place. How did such an odd mindset come to be?

Right. So I explained that it was because many Arabs were displaced by the incoming Jewish migration and because many suffered in the conflict between Arabs and Jews which ensued. There were many attacks on Arab settlements by Jewish militias such as Haganah and the Irgun - at this time, much of the Jewish leadership were desperate to establish their own state as a sanctuary after their suffering, so that it couldn't happen again. Nothing would be permitted to stand in their way.

 

[LuisDantas]

Right. So I explained that it was because many Arabs were displaced by the incoming Jewish migration and because many suffered in the conflict between Arabs and Jews which ensued.

And that justifies or at least explains an attempted war of conquest and revenge over Israel in 1948? Really?

I am sorry, but I am just not seeing it.

If anything, that suggests that the presence of Israel there may very well be a release - even a true scapegoat - for much deeper problems.

When I think of India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Iraq, Syria and Iran, that suggestion is very much reinforced. Israel begins to look more saintly - at least by comparison - every time.

There were many attacks on Arab settlements by Jewish militias such as Haganah and the Irgun - at this time, much of the Jewish leadership were desperate to establish their own state as a sanctuary after their suffering, so that it couldn't happen again. Nothing would be permitted to stand in their way.

Indeed. Land disputes are nasty and have effects that last for generations, and open conflict only makes the wounds fester and spread.

That might as well be an universal truth if the evidence is any indication.

 

[Kirran]

And that justifies or at least explains an attempted war of conquest and revenge over Israel in 1948? Really?

I am sorry, but I am just not seeing it.

If anything, that suggests that the presence of Israel there may very well be a release - even a true scapegoat - for much deeper problems.

When I think of India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Iraq, Syria and Iran, that suggestion is very much reinforced. Israel begins to look more saintly - at least by comparison - every time.

Indeed. Land disputes are nasty and have effects that last for generations, and open conflict only makes the wounds fester and spread.

That might as well be an universal truth if the evidence is any indication.

I find it somewhat bizarre you don't understand how this explains the Arab aggression against Israel in '48. But I don't think I can explain it more clearly.

Yes, Israel is very commonly a scapegoat for other problems with roots in Arab society, as is the West.

Israel is neither saint nor terrorist, as far as I'm concerned. For one thing, it's a society with a diversity of views and with a government that needs to cater to as many divergent groups as possible.

 

[Revoltingest]

I think that's a pretty naive view of the situation here and of groups in general. For one thing, it ignores the fact that there is a spectrum of adherence to religious beliefs among both Jews and Palestinians here. I can't speak for Palestinians, but among the Jewish population (80% of the Israeli population), only half are actually religious (41% of the population) and that includes about 4% who could probably be classified as anti-Zionist. The other half (40% of the general population) are secular Jews. That includes the PM of Israel.

Although for many it does play a part, to drop it all on religion just reflects a desire to condemn without really caring to be aware of what's actually going on. I'd put a lot more blame on national pride and government power struggles rather than religion without a question.

Palestinian terror typically occurs in the most peaceful zones of Israeli civilization. There was one attack by some Palestinians kids last year where they stabbed a Palestinian old man (thinking he was Jewish) near the Israeli open market in Jerusalem (I think he was waiting for the train). There's been numerous stabbings or attempted stabbings in the past years of people on the way to or from praying at the Western Wall. They aren't attacking violent people -more often than not, they aren't even attacking settlers. They're attacking citizens peacefully going about their business usually far removed from any violence or contentious neighborhoods.

The first thing you need to realize, is that Palestinians (or the ones influenced by Hamas and Fatah's media) view Israelis as a single entity. To the extent that (and I think this was in bad taste) some Haredi Jews (who are typically anti-Zionist to one degree or another) actually circulated a letter in Arabic after a number of them were attacked, asking Palestinians not to attack Haredim since they're anti-Zionist. And its also obvious that Palestinians (and most Muslims apparently - if RF is any indication) see Israelis as a monolithic entity from the propaganda put out by Hamas and friends. So being a friendly Israeli isn't going to net any benefits until the entire country unanimously decides to be friendly.

And of course that's impossible. That would be like expecting the entire Muslim world to become peaceful. Instead, wiser heads understand that among every group there are moderates and extremists. You're not going to blame Egyptian citizens for Isis. There are moderate Muslims out there and there are extremists who become Isis. Its called diversity and it has a good side and a bad side. That's true of the wider world in general and here in Israel and the Palestinian territories specifically.

And on the Palestinian side we have exactly the same thing. If you go to more affluent communities, or basically any community outside Gaza and Hebron, you'll find the majority of Palestinians are just as peaceful as the majority of Israelis, trying to get through the day just like those Israelis in the market. Palestinians (and Palestinians-Israelis) are ubiquitous in Israeli society. You go to any construction site in the country and you hear Arabic. You go to an Israeli hospital and its a 50-50 chance your doctor's name will be Ahmed. The problem is not changing some behavior. There's plenty of groundwork already in place for peace among the citizens on the street.

According to a poll by the PCPO half of Palestinians living in East Jerusalem would prefer Israeli citizenship. There's even a growing trend of Arabs choosing to move into Jewish neighborhoods. Never mind places like Abu Ghosh that are already a part of Israel.

In my opinion, the real problem is simply down to politics and the government trying to advance an agenda in its own best interests rather than its peoples'. Selling land to Israelis is punishable by death in the Palestinian Authority. Here is a video of the Arab mayor of Nazareth yelling at the head of the Joint Arab List for ruining his city.

“You’ve ruined everything, go to Haifa!

“There wasn’t a single Jew here today. Not even one!”...

"I blame the leaders; they are destroying our future, they are destroying coexistence,” Salem (the mayor) told Army Radio.​

I think that's what it does come down to.

I never said my view was useful.
Things won't go as I'd like.
But it's better looking path than what's most likely to occur.

 

[Revoltingest]

Yeah, I see your point. But I'm loth to extend the term terrorism to cover countries with poor human rights. By the same measure, we'd count China as a terrorist entity.

I don't label Israel as a "terrorist state" either.
But it clearly engages in the tactic.

I am not trying to justify anything, I'm just trying to answer your question of why much of the Arab world believes X. I don't see you don't think it explains anything - there was substantial trauma to the Arab population living in Palestine/Israel resulting from the formation of the State of Israel. From a Pan-Arab perspective, it was also an annexation of land by a colonialist entity. Secular forms of Zionism, which have been the driving force for much of the movement's history, bear striking similarities to European colonialist thought.

Your explanation looks sound to me.

 

[Tumah]

I never said my view was useful.
Things won't go as I'd like.
But it's better looking path than what's most likely to occur.

I was arguing against your impression of the root of the issue and how to solve it. It seems like you were saying that the problem is religion and by relaxing religious outlook and being friendly it would solve the problem. I'm saying that religion is not the source of the problem and being more friendly isn't going to solve anything.

 

[Kirran]

The primary historical schools of Zionism have been Revisionist Zionism, Liberal (or mainstream) Zionism, Socialist/Labour Zionism and Religious Zionism. Three of these are essentially outgrowths of European 19th Century thought, and in the case of Revisionist Zionism in particular deeply colonialist. Revisionist Zionism considers Israel to be an extension of a superior Western culture into the Eastern world, essentially. This was the guiding philosophy of many of the State's early leaders.

Only Religious Zionism is different and non-secular, and historically that's had a small effect on politics in Israel, although it has grown a lot in recent decades, and has produced New Zionism via fusion with Revisionist Zionism. New Zionism is Likud's thing nowadays.

Secular Zionism's core has essentially been about creating a society in which Jews could be safe, and in which the cultural institutions central to the society were based in Judaism and Jewish culture rather than in Christian or Islamic frameworks.

In the modern day, Zionism's meaning has progressed in both the Israeli, diasporic and non-Jewish contexts. In Israel, Zionism increasingly refers to a kind of Israeli patriotism more than anything, it seems. This is why you get Druze and Muslim Arabs saying they're Zionists - they support Israel, they support the military of Israel and they accept the predominance of Jewish culture in the country (as a Muslim in the UK might acknowledge the historical Christian nature of that society) and that makes them Zionist.

Words change! But in the Western 'left' there tends to be an understanding of Zionism as this quasi-genocidal imperialist religious conviction, as opposed to a varied and nuanced ideology that exists in the real world.

 

[LuisDantas]

I was arguing against your impression of the root of the issue and how to solve it. It seems like you were saying that the problem is religion and by relaxing religious outlook and being friendly it would solve the problem. I'm saying that religion is not the source of the problem and being more friendly isn't going to solve anything.

I am not sure about that. From the Muslim side, that is.

I stand unsatisfied in my search for explanations for why the war of 1948 happened, and the provisional explanation is, until something more convincing presents itself, that Islaam teaches a rather unhealthy attitude towards dealing with neighbors and land disputes.

To say nothing of what it teaches about the Jewish People and Judaism, of course...

 

[Kirran]

I am not sure about that. From the Muslim side, that is.

I stand unsatisfied in my search for explanations for why the war of 1948 happened, and the provisional explanation is, until something more convincing presents itself, that Islaam teaches a rather unhealthy attitude towards dealing with neighbors and land disputes.

To say nothing of what it teaches about the Jewish People and Judaism, of course...

In the same way as we must conclude Catholicism teaches an unhealthy attitude, due to the conflict in Northern Ireland?

 

[LuisDantas]

In the same way as we must conclude Catholicism teaches an unhealthy attitude, due to the conflict in Northern Ireland?

Actually, in a very different way, since the Irish situation is so remarkably different and localized.

It is easy to find Catholics who truly seek peace in Ireland (which, I understand, has mostly been attained already), while it takes herculean effort to find even vague criticism of the Palestinian violence or of the 1948 war among Muslims.

That is most worrisome, to me at least.

 

[Kirran]

Actually, in a very different way, since the Irish situation is so remarkably different and localized.

It is easy to find Catholics who truly seek peace in Ireland (which, I understand, has mostly been attained already), while it takes herculean effort to find even vague criticism of the Palestinian violence or of the 1948 war among Muslims.

That is most worrisome, to me at least.

While not to the same degree, the conflict in Northern Ireland did have wider implications. For example, there was a lot of resistance in North America to letting in Irish refugees, justified by fears that some among them might be Irish Republican terrorists (familiar?).

There are certainly Catholics who truly seek peace there, but not many who'd support the establishment of the Protestant Northern Irish population through colonialism by the British state. Time has somewhat numbed these sentiments, in particular given that the events occurred prior to the emergence of nationalism during the late 19th Century.

Look, it is quite simple: the massive influx of Jews from Europe during the early 20th Century into Palestine leading up to the foundation of the State of Israel caused harm to Arab populations which were long-established there. Many were forced from their homes due to losing their land or through the violence of Jewish nationalist militias. These groups arriving from Europe were seen by many as an invading population that was marginalising the natives. Arab solidarity and the emergent Arab nationalism meant that this outrage was shared by other Arabic-speaking populations throughout the region, rather than confined to the Arabic-speaking peoples of the Mandate.

Just because a political situation involves Muslims, it doesn't mean it is sensible to immediately assume it is Islam's fault that there are problems. Certain Islamic ideologies have not helped the situation, but that's something which has primarily emerged in the latter decades of the 20th Century. They're in no way the root of the problem, just as Catholicism isn't the root of the problem in Northern Ireland and Islam isn't the root of the problems in Cyprus.