The Palestinian Papers

[YmirGF]

Sure, they have just as much right to live in Israel. Both have a claim to land, detracting from the rights of one is disgusting.

So... we agree. Oy vey.

Bismillah, that is why I specifically spoke about 1948, Israel's neighbors declared war. If it had not been for the Arabs inability to accept Israel then, we wouldn't be having this discussion NOW. From 1948, the Arab world has not exactly been terribly supportive of the "Palestinian" cause. It is only when Arafat arrived on the scene that the world sat up and took any real notice. The Arab world certainly didn't seem to care all that much about the plight of the "Palestinians".

 

[Bismillah]

Thus, Jews have as much right to be in the area as the so-called "Palestinians". What part of this are you not getting?

This is the underlying part of your post. Obviously they have a right to Israel, this a complete turnaround from your own posts which, not so subtly, question the same right for the Palestinians.

I never denied a Jewish right to a home in Israel, supposing I did is an amazing distraction and turnaround but that is irrelevant.

The Islamic imperialistic expansion was pretty extreme.

Hardly, Jewish culture expanded under Islamic rule. The tribes of the Great Plains ceased to exist.

No. The DNA shows that they both have equal claim. I do not see how you can deny it.

You realize that this excludes European Jews right? Their connection to the land is much weaker than the Palestinians, but they too can claim a right to live in Israel.

Indeed. How dare anyone look to history for answers. So.... even if I am right, I am wrong? Ah, the nuance.

The idea of the establishment of Israel is not wrong in itself, just the racist ideology by which it was implemented and its leaders espoused. Regardless, it doesn't make it any less meaningless in modern day standards. This stupid question of whether it was right to establish Israel or not is moot. Who cares, the realities are here and what I am concerned with is the accompanying right for the existence of Palestine.

Ok, more to the point, I have seen precious little from the "Palestinian" side that counts as serious negotiation. Have they been serious? Did I miss something?

The right to return, Jewish annexation of all colonies within Eastern Jerusalem except Hor Hamma, acquiescence of Harem Al-Sharif, and acceptance of a completely demilitarized state which would include no right to sovereign air space, a large disarmament of Fatah security forces, a large contingent of Israeli troops with a long term presence in "Palestine" including various garrisons strategically located throughout the state for rapid deployment of Israeli troops. Yes "precious little".

 

[Enoughie]

Because Israeli refugees are compensated with Arab homes and Arab land. Palestinian refugees are stateless and live in abject poverty.

Jewish refugees whose private lands equaled 3 times the size of the state of Israel are "compensated with Arab homes" in the state of Israel?!

That is a cruel and apathetic response. Not to mention that it's a mathematical impossibility - Arabs who were dispossessed of their homes in Israel owned about 21% of the land in Israel. How can 300% fit in 21%?

If you think the resources of the state of Israel are enough to compensate for the suffering of its refugees, then the resources of the Arab-Muslim World (with its vast land and resources) should satisfy all Palestinian demands.

And the right of return, in these documents, is the right of Palestinians to return to Palestinian state after its creation.

NO IT IS NOT!! It is about the right of return of Palestinians into Israel proper!

If all this time you were under the impression that Israel is denying Palestinian refugees the right to return to a future Palestinian state, then you're extremely misinformed.

The negotiations have always been about the right of Palestinians to return to Israel, and not to the Palestinian state. And that it something that the Israeli government has largely rejected (they would only agree to the return of a few ten of thousands of refugees into Israel, maybe).

You are comparing unrelated and incomparable conditions and it is irrelevant as I think most Jews want to live in Israel

What you think is irrelevant to what is historically just. You can't force someone out of his house because "you think" he may prefer to live somewhere else. That is an entirely perverted logic.

_____________________
Natural Philosophy of Life offers a simple, elegant, and powerful alternative to religious dogma. This philosophy has a firm foundation in nature, science, and reason, and it is centered on the core values of honesty, generosity, equality, and freedom

 

[Bismillah]

Bismillah, that is why I specifically spoke about 1948, Israel's neighbors declared war. If it had not been for the Arabs inability to accept Israel then, we wouldn't be having this discussion NOW. From 1948, the Arab world has not exactly been terribly supportive of the "Palestinian" cause. It is only when Arafat arrived on the scene that the world sat up and took any real notice. The Arab world certainly didn't seem to care all that much about the plight of the "Palestinians".

I could care less about the Arab world, I revile and hate their leaders as much as I hate terrorists like Sharon. They are all equally guilty and all stooges of the West, they are not interested in the cause of the Palestinians. Regardless the Zionists had a completely disgusting outlook on their aims and implementations of Israel and that should be noted as well, as did those who resorted to allying with mass murders to establish their statehood (Haji Amin). Both were the byproducts of the repression of their people, neither is excusable and none of it is much relevant.

 

[Genuine Realist]

I understand your passion, but I fail to see what in all the heat provides a solution. Somewhat the same in your denunciation of the 1991 coalition, for the willingness of Arab nations to spill Arab blood. That's fine, but doesn't it leave Saddam Hussein, no one's friend, in possession of another state?

 

[Enoughie]

You realize that this excludes European Jews right? Their connection to the land is much weaker than the Palestinians, but they too can claim a right to live in Israel.

Actually no. DNA shows that Palestinians, Lebanese, Syrians, Sephardi Jews and Europeans Jews are all very closely generically related. In fact, European Jews, Sephardi Jews and Palestinians are almost indistinguishable in their [mitochondrial] DNA (while European Jews and Europeans only share about 15% on their DNA).

This is because Jews and Palestinians are basically the same nation that separated some 2000 years ago. Zionist (European) Jews did not come to Palestine to drive out the Palestinians who lived there. This is why I showed you that quote from Herzl's book. They came to Palestine under an internationally recognized mandate, and were legally buying land there. It is only due to Arab aggression that the situation spiraled out of control - Arabs were spreading rumors that Jews want to rule over them (which was not true), however, it became a "self-fulfilling prophecy" because of Arabs continual Arab attacks on Jews, from the 1920s and on. This eventually led to a situation where Jews realized that a peaceful coexistence would be impossible, and decided that they need a separate state (which eventually led to the 1948 war). But you cannot deny the fact that Arab aggression is a main cause to the Arab-Israeli conflict.

_____________________
Natural Philosophy of Life offers a simple, elegant, and powerful alternative to religious dogma. This philosophy has a firm foundation in nature, science, and reason, and it is centered on the core values of honesty, generosity, equality, and freedom

 

[Bismillah]

That is a cruel and apathetic response. Not to mention that it's a mathematical impossibility - If you think the resources of the state of Israel are enough to compensate for the suffering of its refugees, then the resources of the Arab-Muslim World (with its vast land and resources) should satisfy all Palestinian demands.

Jewish refugees were granted compensation, a home, and most importantly citizenship. Palestinian refugees are stateless are you really trying to compare the two, if you insist on comparing property losses with the status of Palestinian refugees in camps around the Arab world I am done talking to you.

Clearly the Arab world does not have the best interests of the Palestinians in mind and that is one of the major reasons for the establishment of the Palestinian state.

The negotiations have always been about the right of Palestinians to return to Israel, and not to the Palestinian state. And that it something that the Israeli government has largely rejected (they would only agree to the return of a few ten of thousands of refugees into Israel, maybe).

My mistake I am confusing two different topics. The number of refugees to return, in these documents, is indeed those in Israel.

I am referring to the great collection of refugees who will no doubt be prohibited from living in Palestine, this is a well known clause and has been sense Arafat's time. I paraphrase that when asked whether Palestinians could live in Palestine the response was "No but they can be buried here".

 

[kai]

Jewish refugees were granted compensation, a home, and most importantly citizenship. Palestinian refugees are stateless are you really trying to compare the two, if you insist on comparing property losses with the status of Palestinian refugees in camps around the Arab world I am done talking to you.

Clearly the Arab world does not have the best interests of the Palestinians in mind and that is one of the major reasons for the establishment of the Palestinian state. I beleive the Arab leaders have been much more interested in the destruction of the Israeli state than the creation of a Palestinian state

My mistake I am confusing two different topics. The number of refugees to return, in these documents, is indeed those in Israel.

I am referring to the great collection of refugees who will no doubt be prohibited from living in Palestine, this is a well known clause and has been sense Arafat's time. I paraphrase that when asked whether Palestinians could live in Palestine the response was "No but they can be buried here".

It is a problem indeed where so many refugees could actually settle. how many are there 2 million?

 

[Bismillah]

I understand your passion, but I fail to see what in all the heat provides a solution. Somewhat the same in your denunciation of the 1991 coalition, for the willingness of Arab nations to spill Arab blood. That's fine, but doesn't it leave Saddam Hussein, no one's friend, in possession of another state?

Perhaps because it is buried under a host of irrelevant posts

My general conclusion is that Fatah is no longer fit to lead the PA. That much has been clear for a while and these documents expressly provide that they are much more concerned with maintain political hegemony rather than pursuing a cause that would be beneficial to the Palestinians, in fact in many cases their political decisions came at the cost to their people.

Second it is clear that they have offered Israel some major concessions and while I may not agree with them, I now think that these concessions are both necessary and the bottom line. While I have particular problems with some such as the relinquishment of Haram Al-Sharif, the annexation of Jewish colonies in Jerusalem is a political reality, even if the rest of Clinton's point by point plan will not be aided by Israel.

Third it is time to appeal more strongly to the U.N making it clear that the demands Israel imposes, such as annexation of Ariel and Maa'el Adumim, while not only illegal under international law, inherently posses an impassable obstacle to the formation of Israel. Appealing strongly to the international community, while forgoing these shams of trilateral talks, will place much more emphasis on the United States to stop its unconditional support of Israel. That the U.S recently vetoed a resolution banning settlements on the grounds that it is not the correct means to pursue dialogue is disgusting. Palestinians must make it clear that the conditions they state address both Israel and the world and that they are seeking dialogue through international processes instead of this cloak and dagger nonsense.

This in the hope that with the eventual pressure on the U.S will make it comply more strictly with its policy of being a "third party" and thus put much more pressure on Israel itself.

 

[Genuine Realist]

It is unfortunate that they, and not the kleptocrat Arafat, were not at the table when the Oslo Accords were still in process. The moderate element of Israeli politics has been really reduced in the last decade, partly because of that failure. Conservatives are now the dominant voice.

 

[Bismillah]

I beleive the Arab leaders have been much more interested in the destruction of the Israeli state than the creation of a Palestinian state

Sure, they sure as hell don't care about Palestinians. The Jordanians are the closest ones to accepting them as part of their country and even then there is a tragic history of violence.

It is a problem indeed where so many refugees could actually settle. how many are there 2 million?

That is the arbitrary number I am familiar with. It is despicable that they are to be abandoned.

Also I realize that what I said is undermined greatly just by the fact that these colonies grow larger every day. But the status quo is not working and Fatah is much more concerned with containing Hamas than figuring out a solution.

Like I stated earlier the negotiators have repeatedly threatened a one state solution and that is Israel's worst fear, but currently they are heavily manipulating the status of the occupied territories. Either push for a definitive rallying for a Palestinian state among a broader international consensus or recognize that it is impossible due to lack of humanity in the world. It would be best to then start to look towards the merger between these two societies and ensuring that Palestinians are adequately represented because as I remember one article boldly stating, the current conditions of the Palestinians would be unacceptable given a one state solution and their repression would strongly parallel that of Apartheid S. Africa.

 

[Bismillah]

It is unfortunate that they, and not the kleptocrat Arafat, were not at the table when the Oslo Accords were still in process. The moderate element of Israeli politics has been really reduced in the last decade, partly because of that failure. Conservatives are now the dominant voice.

The Oslo accords were doomed from the start because they, in essence, undermined U.N resolution 242 and allowed Israel to redefine where and when they will withdraw troops and settlements, fast forward a couple decades and we see where this has led us. Arafat's Oslo accord was a slap in the face for everyone involved, the Palestinians reviled him and the Arabs viewed it as treachery that he had been dealing behind their backs during the Madrid conference. Anyone with a hint of practical foresight should have seen the trap that Oslo assured, the average Palestinian did.

Also there really is no use in using the term moderate anymore IMO, Ehud Barak seen as the most pro-Palestinian regime processed settlements three times as fast the Likud party and Livni of the much hailed Kadima is just as stringent and unrealistic as the conservatives in their demands.

 

[kai]

Sure, they sure as hell don't care about Palestinians. The Jordanians are the closest ones to accepting them as part of their country and even then there is a tragic history of violence.

That is the arbitrary number I am familiar with. It is despicable that they are to be abandoned. Unless integrated into the Arab countries i dont really see how they can be assimilated, do you?

Also I realize that what I said is undermined greatly just by the fact that these colonies grow larger every day. But the status quo is not working and Fatah is much more concerned with containing Hamas than figuring out a solution.

Like I stated earlier the negotiators have repeatedly threatened a one state solution and that is Israel's worst fear, but currently they are heavily manipulating the status of the occupied territories. Either push for a definitive rallying for a Palestinian state among a broader international consensus or recognize that it is impossible due to lack of humanity in the world. It would be best to then start to look towards the merger between these two societies and ensuring that Palestinians are adequately represented because as I remember one article boldly stating, the current conditions of the Palestinians would be unacceptable given a one state solution and their repression would strongly parallel that of Apartheid S. Africa.

I have to ask in all seriousness is a separate independent Palestinian state really viable?

 

[Bismillah]

Unless integrated into the Arab countries i dont really see how they can be assimilated, do you?

Nope, unless these refugees are allowed to return to a future Palestinian state I do not. And I think another reason is that many Arab rulers tend to shift the responsibility to dialogue between the Israelis and Palestinians so that they do not have to accommodate the filthy refugee camps. I wish more countries would take Jordan's approach of attempting to reconcile views between nationals, after all they are all born in the same country.

I have to ask in all seriousness is a separate independent Palestinian state really viable?

It is as viable as the international community allows it to be. If there is greater pressure on the U.S Israeli relationship and a realization that there are certain conditions that must be met for the survivability of the state of Palestine then of course it is. But I look to the Armenians, Kurds, Kashmiris and I am doubtful and filled with sorrow.

Either way a one state or a two state solution is good but what is happening now is inexcusable. They must take action and either the international community accept or reject the state of Palestine, it is not fair to take advantage of a stateless people as we see now.

 

[Enoughie]

Jewish refugees were granted compensation, a home, and most importantly citizenship. Palestinian refugees are stateless are you really trying to compare the two, if you insist on comparing property losses with the status of Palestinian refugees in camps around the Arab world I am done talking to you.

There is no doubt that the Palestinians are the main victims of the Arab-Israeli conflict. And I am not trying to belittle in any way their suffering or their legitimate right to live in dignity.

But I am stressing here that this is an Arab-Israeli conflict. The only one who's compensated Jewish refugees so far is the Israeli side in the conflict.

You cannot simply ignore the fact that these Jewish refugees are an integral part of why there is a conflict in the first place. You simply cannot expect Israel to be the only part in the conflict that has to be accountable for both the Jewish refugees and the Palestinian refugees. This is simply unfair.

Now, I'm not saying that Arab countries should take these refugees, or anything of that sort. I'm merely suggesting that so far all the fingers have been consistently pointed to Israel. What about some Arab-Muslim self reflection about their role in the conflict? I've never heard al-Jazeera or any Arab representative, or public figure ever discuss Arab responsibility for Palestinian refugees. And that is why I feel this discussion is very frustrating. There is no doubt that Israel has a key role in resolving this conflict, and the Palestinian refugee situation. But this would do nothing to resolve the Arab-Israeli conflict, as long as there is no self-reflection on the Arab side. That is not the road to peace, only to another long-term ceasefire, and that possibility does not reassure me one bit.

Clearly the Arab world does not have the best interests of the Palestinians in mind and that is one of the major reasons for the establishment of the Palestinian state.

Even if a Palestinian state were established. As long as there is no self reflection on the Arab side, I see very little hope for a resolution for this conflict.

My mistake I am confusing two different topics. The number of refugees to return, in these documents, is indeed those in Israel.

I am referring to the great collection of refugees who will no doubt be prohibited from living in Palestine, this is a well known clause and has been sense Arafat's time.

I have never heard any Israeli leader, since the signing of the (disastrous) Oslo Accords, who refused the right of Palestinians to return to a Palestinian state. Every Israeli prime minister has recognized that right, including Olmert and Netanyahu.

The problem has always been that Palestinians insisted that refugees should return to Israel, and not Palestine. This insistence has always been a major stumbling block in the negotiations, and that is why Israelis demand that the Palestinian side recognize Israel as a "Jewish state" - so Israelis know that the intention of Palestinians is not to undermine the state of Israel.

The fact that Abu Alaa recognize the legitimacy of such Israeli concerns, and that this mere recognition created such an uproar in Palestinian street and in the Arab world, suggests to me that it is the Palestinians who are not interested in a resolution to the conflict - not the Israelis.

I paraphrase that when asked whether Palestinians could live in Palestine the response was "No but they can be buried here".

A quote (possibly out of context) from Arafat on this issue is a very flimsy piece of evidence. You'd have to do more than that to substantiate such claim.

_____________________
Natural Philosophy of Life offers a simple, elegant, and powerful alternative to religious dogma. This philosophy has a firm foundation in nature, science, and reason, and it is centered on the core values of honesty, generosity, equality, and freedom

 

[kai]

Nope, unless these refugees are allowed to return to a future Palestinian state I do not. And I think another reason is that many Arab rulers tend to shift the responsibility to dialogue between the Israelis and Palestinians so that they do not have to accommodate the filthy refugee camps. I wish more countries would take Jordan's approach of attempting to reconcile views between nationals, after all they are all born in the same country.

It is as viable as the international community allows it to be. If there is greater pressure on the U.S Israeli relationship and a realization that there are certain conditions that must be met for the survivability of the state of Palestine then of course it is. But I look to the Armenians, Kurds, Kashmiris and I am doubtful and filled with sorrow. When is say viable i mean economically ? could it be viable as a sovereign state or would it have to survive on foreign aid ?

Either way a one state or a two state solution is good but what is happening now is inexcusable. They must take action and either the international community accept or reject the state of Palestine, it is not fair to take advantage of a stateless people as we see now.

I agree that the status quo is shameful.

 

[Bismillah]

But I am stressing here that this is an Arab-Israeli conflict. The only one who's compensated Jewish refugees is the Israeli side in the conflict.

Obviously and a large part of the compensation was Arab land, do you deny it?

You cannot simply ignore the fact these Jewish refugees are an integral part of why there is a conflict in the first place. You simply cannot expect Israel to be the only part in the conflict that has to be accountable for both the Jewish refugees and the Palestinian refugees. This is simply unfair.

I do not expect Israel to absorb 2 million refugees. I am talking about this

I have never heard any Israeli leader, since the signing of the (disastrous) Oslo Accords, who refused the right of Palestinians to return to a Palestinian state. Every Israeli prime ministers has recognized that right, including Olmert and Netanyahu.

There were transcripts relating to this and the Palestinian side acknowledging Israeli refusal of this event and further justifying their own disgusting abandonment of the refugees by stating the economic implications. I do not have the will to dig through to find them now, but will post it later.

A quote (possibly out of context) from Arafat on this issue is a very flimsy piece of evidence. You'd have to do more than that to substantiate such claim.

You do remember this was during Oslo right? This was a major issue and Arafat is widely known to have regarded the possibility of Palestinians returning to Palestine an impossibility that is the context of the quote in which he was questioned on whether they could return to their homeland.

 

[Bismillah]

When is say viable i mean economically ? could it be viable as a sovereign state or would it have to survive on foreign aid ?

I think it would very much need some major loans to at least build some semblance of industrial output because at the moment all I believe it to be exporting is agricultural products. I think that were the country given its own sovereignty and respected as an independent state there would be a greater willingness to invest in it rather than it being some quasi-independent state with Israeli troops asserting their presence for a long time. It would be necessary that Israel recognize these rights and respect them so that nation building could enter the picture.

 

[kai]

I think it would very much need some major loans to at least build some semblance of industrial output because at the moment all I believe it to be exporting is agricultural products. [/COLOR]I think that were the country given its own sovereignty and respected as an independent state there would be a greater willingness to invest in it rather than it being some quasi-independent state with Israeli troops asserting their presence for a long time. It would be necessary that Israel recognize these rights and respect them so that nation building could enter the picture.

This may be of interest:

Building A Successful Palestinian State | RAND

 

[Bismillah]

Reading this as a heads up their own disclaimer argues why certain colonies should not be annexed by Israel.

The RAND analysis suggests that, overall, the chances of a Palestinian state’s success will increase with a high level of territorial contiguity of Palestinian lands (apart from the separation of Gaza and the West Bank); relatively open borders allowing movement of people and goods between Palestine and its neighbors, especially Israel; and security within Palestine and for its neighbors.

I believe that if a Palestinian state is to be created with the conditions that the Israeli delegation imposes then it would severely weaken the ability of a Palestinian nation to succeed. Bad for Palestine, bad for Israel. Though my devil's advocate is thinking that it would allow Israel to possess all of its colonies without having to take responsibility for Palestine if it were to break apart given that the onus of responsibility was not on them.