So why do people hate Israel?

[senojekips]

What?... you thought that a few days in the wilderness was going to allow us to forget your previous lies and attempted distortions and allow you to come back with a few lines of ........"otiose"........ remarks

No, it doesn't work like that.

Just for your information the word "otiose" has been out of general use in the English language for nearly 300 years. Where the fcuk did your script writers (controllers) come up with a word like that????

You still have not shown your much quoted Frame 633 that you allege enables you to see the victim's uninjured foot inside his shoe and told us how you reached this miraculous conclusion. Another of your lies made up (poorly) on the run.

Neither have you posted any evidence to support your claim that the view of the hole in the sole of the shoe shows it is pushed inwards. Another lie

Also you have never explained how the material you posted, allegedly from Forensic Architecture states clearly the victim was shot in the foot from a range of 1.5 metres and yet their supposedly forensically accurate drawing clearly shows the victim to be 4 metres away. Like you they make up their excuses (very poorly) on the run.

You have never explained how Nahum Sharaf's Official Affidavit denies the findings of the Israeli High Court that Abu Rameh WAS shot in the foot, Too many lies for them to keep track of, eh? It doesn't say much for the investigative powers and findings of the Israeli High Court. I think that it would be easierjust to write them off as another branch of the Israeli Hasbara Department rather than any sort of Legal Justice system as understood by the rest of the free world.

So much for your childish deliberate lies about richochets and the foot being injured at some other time.

You still have not been able to produce this mysterious "uncut" video showing the projectile hitting the ground 6m behind the victim and having this alleged "conversation" on it. So far there is absolutely no evidence that this conversation ever took place, and the only mention that can be found of it is on a Hasbara site run by Rivka Shpak Lissak, an Israeli born Hasbarat, quoting Jonathan D. Halevi an ex Lt Col. in the IDF, now employed by The Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs (A recognised Hasbara site). Liar!

You also stated that Abu Rameh was not a protester, however it was stated in the court proceedings that he was, He is also clearly visible protesting in the opening scenes of the video. Another Lie on your behalf.

Your sources just have no credibility whatsoever, to the point that even you must realise this. Either that or you are the world's most gullible HasbaraTroll.

 

[VDKMS]

Really so why do you think British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw said in a 2002 interview with newspaper New Statesman

It would seem to me that it is common knowledge that Britain lead the Palestinians (Note they are what he calls them as well) to believe that in return for their support against the Ottoman Empire they would be given their land as a state, but by all means keep trying to deny it because it doesn't suit your indoctrinated mind.

At the time of the Palestine Mandate no one was talking about "Palestinians", they were Arabs. You can't change history today by saying they were "Palestinians" back then. It is true, and I told you more than once, that the British did not fulfill their assignment.
The British, nor anyone else, promised the "Palestinians" anything. The British promised the Arabs an Islamic caliphate to Sharif Hussein, who BTW recommended Jewish immigration but not a Jewish state.
My mind is not indoctrinated, yours is. You cannot seem to accept the fact that there was no talk of "Palestinians" nor a "Palestine" state back then. Not by the Arabs nor the British. The Arabs living in what is now Israel and the PA didn't want an independent state but annexation to Syria (first) and Transjordan (later). Both demands were dismissed by the British.

Then of course there was the minutes of the Cabinet Eastern Committee meeting, chaired by Lord Curzon on the 15th December 1918 which documented...

First, the meeting was held on the 5th december not the 15th.
Second, this was not for an independent "Palestine" but to include the region of Palestine into the promised Islamic caliphate.
Third, it was the Palestine Mandate that would decide what would happen to the region.
Fourth, please give me the link to the minutes of that meeting.

Lets not forget the memorandum from the British Foreign Office prior to the Paris Peace Conference in 1919 that stated

Again, this was a British promise to Sharif Hussein. The international community thought otherwise.

Still going to cling to the idea that Britain never made promises to the Palestinians?

The promises were made to Sharif Hussein, not to the "Palestinians".

Please at least stop trying to spread the zionist narrative which is essentially little more than a fairy tale made up 100 years ago to pretend you have a 3000 year link to a region none of you have any right or link to, it is bad enough that we know you are doing it but your continued defense of an apartheid regime is only assisting us in making the world aware of it.

From the Palestine Mandate:

"Whereas recognition has thereby been given to the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country"​

Why do you keep ignoring the facts?

Anyway perhaps this is a reason Israel is not liked?

After Latest Incident, Israel’s Future in FIFA Is Uncertain
Dave Zirin on March 3, 2014 - 4:21 PM ET


The Palestinian national soccer team, a source of pride for many, has been under attack by the Israeli state. (Youtube)

Their names are Jawhar Nasser Jawhar, 19, and Adam Abd al-Raouf Halabiya, 17. They were once soccer players in the West Bank. Now they are never going to play sports again. Jawhar and Adam were on their way home from a training session in the Faisal al-Husseini Stadium on January 31 when Israeli forces fired upon them as they approached a checkpoint. After being shot repeatedly, they were mauled by checkpoint dogs and then beaten. Ten bullets were put into Jawhar’s feet. Adam took one bullet in each foot. After being transferred from a hospital in Ramallah to King Hussein Medical Center in Amman, they received the news that soccer would no longer be a part of their futures.

This is only the latest instance of the targeting of Palestinian soccer players by the Israeli army and security forces. Death, injury or imprisonment has been a reality for several members of the Palestinian national team over the last five years. Just imagine if members of Spain’s top-flight World Cup team had been jailed, shot or killed by another country and imagine the international media outrage that would ensue. Imagine if prospective youth players for Brazil were shot in the feet by the military of another nation. But, tragically, these events along the checkpoints have received little attention on the sports page or beyond.

Much has been written about the psychological effect this kind of targeting has on the occupied territories. Sports represent escape, joy and community, and the Palestinian national soccer team, for a people without a recognized nation, is a source of tremendous pride. To attack the players is to attack the hope that the national team will ever truly have a home.

The Palestinian national football team, which formed in 1998, is currently ranked 144th in the world by the Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA). They have never been higher than 115th. As FIFA themselves said in assessing the state of Palestinian soccer, “Given the passion for football that burns among Palestinians, both in the Occupied Territories and the Diaspora, such lowly status hints at problems on the ground.” These “problems on the ground” consist, as Chairman of the Palestinian Football Association Jibril al-Rajoub commented bluntly, of “the occupation's insistence on destroying Palestinian sport."

Over the last year, in response to this systematic targeting of Palestinian soccer, al-Rajoub has attempted to assemble forces to give Israel the ultimate sanction and, as he said, “demand the expulsion of Israel from FIFA and the International Olympic Committee.” Al-Rajoub claims the support of Jordan, Qatar, Iran, Oman, Algiers and Tunisia in favor of this move, and promises more countries, with an opportunity at a regional March 14 meeting of Arab states, to organize more support. He has also pledged to make the resolution formal when all the member nations of FIFA meet in Brazil.

Qatar's place in this, as host of the 2022 World Cup, deserves particular scrutiny. As the first Arab state to host the tournament, they are under fire for the hundreds of construction deaths of Nepalese workers occurring on their watch. As the volume on these concerns rises, Qatar needs all the support in FIFA that they can assemble. Whether they eventually see the path to that support as one that involves confronting or accommodating Israel, will be fascinating to see.

As for Sepp Blatter, he clearly recognizes that there is a problem in the treatment of Palestinian athletes by the Israeli state. Over the last year, he has sought to mediate this issue by convening a committee of Israeli and Palestinian authorities to see if they can come to some kind of agreement about easing the checkpoints and restrictions that keep Palestinian athletes from leaving (and trainers, consultants, and coaches from entering) the West Bank and Gaza. Yet al-Rajoub sees no progress. As he said, “This is the way the Israelis are behaving and I see no sign that they have recharged their mental batteries. There is no change on the ground. We are a full FIFA member and have the same rights as all other members.”

The shooting into the feet of Jawhar and Adam has taken a delicate situation and made it an impossible one. Sporting institutions like FIFA and the IOC are always wary about drawing lines in the sand when it comes to the conduct of member nations. But the deliberate targeting of players is seen, even in the corridors of power, as impossible to ignore. As long as Israel subjects Palestinian athletes to detention and violence, their seat at the table of international sports will be never be short of precarious.

http://www.thenation.com/blog/178642/after-latest-incident-israels-future-fifa-uncertain

Did you verify that story?

"In response to inquiries, a Border Police spokesman said, “During operational activity, a group of individuals was seen just seconds before throwing bombs at security forces. When they saw the Border Policemen, the group attempted to run away and tried again to throw bombs at the policemen. The policemen initiated the protocol for opening fire in order to neutralize the threat. The suspects were apprehended, and a bomb was found on them, which has been deactivated.”

The response included a picture of the bomb, but did not include any answers to the claim that the suspects were beaten."​

http://www.haaretz.com/news/middle-east/1.572103

Someone said : "Lets not pretend it's not possible they're not involved in some terrorist cell just because they happen to play football."

 

[VDKMS]

What?... you thought that a few days in the wilderness was going to allow us to forget your previous lies and attempted distortions and allow you to come back with a few lines of ........"otiose"........ remarks

No, it doesn't work like that.

Just for your information the word "otiose" has been out of general use in the English language for nearly 300 years. Where the fcuk did your script writers (controllers) come up with a word like that????

You still have not shown your much quoted Frame 633 that you allege enables you to see the victim's uninjured foot inside his shoe and told us how you reached this miraculous conclusion. Another of your lies made up (poorly) on the run.

Neither have you posted any evidence to support your claim that the view of the hole in the sole of the shoe shows it is pushed inwards. Another lie

Also you have never explained how the material you posted, allegedly from Forensic Architecture states clearly the victim was shot in the foot from a range of 1.5 metres and yet their supposedly forensically accurate drawing clearly shows the victim to be 4 metres away. Like you they make up their excuses (very poorly) on the run.

You have never explained how Nahum Sharaf's Official Affidavit denies the findings of the Israeli High Court that Abu Rameh WAS shot in the foot, Too many lies for them to keep track of, eh? It doesn't say much for the investigative powers and findings of the Israeli High Court. I think that it would be easierjust to write them off as another branch of the Israeli Hasbara Department rather than any sort of Legal Justice system as understood by the rest of the free world.

So much for your childish deliberate lies about richochets and the foot being injured at some other time.

You still have not been able to produce this mysterious "uncut" video showing the projectile hitting the ground 6m behind the victim and having this alleged "conversation" on it. So far there is absolutely no evidence that this conversation ever took place, and the only mention that can be found of it is on a Hasbara site run by Rivka Shpak Lissak, an Israeli born Hasbarat, quoting Jonathan D. Halevi an ex Lt Col. in the IDF, now employed by The Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs (A recognised Hasbara site). Liar!

You also stated that Abu Rameh was not a protester, however it was stated in the court proceedings that he was, He is also clearly visible protesting in the opening scenes of the video. Another Lie on your behalf.

Your sources just have no credibility whatsoever, to the point that even you must realise this. Either that or you are the world's most gullible HasbaraTroll.

You cannot have a blister on your toe when someone fires a steel bullet in your foot. Either he had a blister or he was shot in the foot. EVERYONE , including the victim, claimed it was a blister on his toe.
Your Nazi technique of "keep lying untill they believe it" won't work.

http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/otiose

 

[MontyB]

At the time of the Palestine Mandate no one was talking about "Palestinians", they were Arabs. You can't change history today by saying they were "Palestinians" back then. It is true, and I told you more than once, that the British did not fulfill their assignment.
The British, nor anyone else, promised the "Palestinians" anything. The British promised the Arabs an Islamic caliphate to Sharif Hussein, who BTW recommended Jewish immigration but not a Jewish state.
My mind is not indoctrinated, yours is. You cannot seem to accept the fact that there was no talk of "Palestinians" nor a "Palestine" state back then. Not by the Arabs nor the British. The Arabs living in what is now Israel and the PA didn't want an independent state but annexation to Syria (first) and Transjordan (later). Both demands were dismissed by the British.



First, the meeting was held on the 5th december not the 15th.
Second, this was not for an independent "Palestine" but to include the region of Palestine into the promised Islamic caliphate.
Third, it was the Palestine Mandate that would decide what would happen to the region.
Fourth, please give me the link to the minutes of that meeting.



Again, this was a British promise to Sharif Hussein. The international community thought otherwise.



The promises were made to Sharif Hussein, not to the "Palestinians".



"

Yet you said no promises were made yet clearly they were made at least in the minds of British government officials between 1915 and 2002, it does not matter whether they made them to Sharif Hussein or Santa Claus they still made them.

You can dance around all you like playing with semantics and deflection techniques but you can not deny the root fact.

In the end what it boils down to is an argument of trust, who do I trust more the writings of British diplomats and departments or a guy who I am almost convinced is a made up persona of someone pretending to be a Belgian in Spain and to be frank you are not winning that competition by a long shot.

But hey lets keep up the pretense tell me why do you think those diplomats would say what they said if they thought otherwise, take your time maybe check with some of the folks in the other cubicles get some consensus before you respond.

Did you verify that story?

"In response to inquiries, a Border Police spokesman said, “During operational activity, a group of individuals was seen just seconds before throwing bombs at security forces. When they saw the Border Policemen, the group attempted to run away and tried again to throw bombs at the policemen. The policemen initiated the protocol for opening fire in order to neutralize the threat. The suspects were apprehended, and a bomb was found on them, which has been deactivated.”

The response included a picture of the bomb, but did not include any answers to the claim that the suspects were beaten."​

​

So lets if I am to understand what you believe is fact...
- first the suspects were observed about to throw bombs.
- then they were thoroughly disabled by shooting them in the feet.
- then a bomb was found.
Care to explain how it was observed earlier if it wasn't found until after they were shot.

I would also like you to explain to me or perhaps any one of our combat veterans from the forum could explain to me how hard it is to shoot someone 10 times in the feet accidentally, I would also like an explanation as to how the other guy only managed to get one shot in each foot, I am sure VD will have an autobot response perhaps they were kicking bombs at the Israelis?

However there is a further hitch in the idea that bombs were involved and that is that both kids were treated in Ramallah before being transfered to King Hussein Medical Centre in Jordan, if they were throwing "bombs" why were they treated in a military hospital first before being released to a civilian hospital in Ramallah and then allowed to travel to Jordan for further treatment.

My suggestion is that you should perhaps verify your story instead of publishing the scripted fairy tales that let Israelis get away with murder but would not stand up in a court anywhere in the civilised world.

Your continuous defense of the indefensible, the blind obedience to dogma and the xenophobic, ideological nonsense is what convinces me you are a fake, every time I have encountered people like you I realise the dangers of fanaticism.

 

[senojekips]

You cannot have a blister on your toe when someone fires a steel bullet in your foot. Either he had a blister or he was shot in the foot. EVERYONE , including the victim, claimed it was a blister on his toe.

I don't know why you are telling me this crap I have always disagreed with it. It was you who made this statement. I never ever said that the victim had a blistered toe,... or was it a bruised toe? Hmmm another mystery arises out of what is quoted as evidence of the Israeli Supreme Court. They don't seem very thorough do they for someone supposedly providing evidence for a High Court Case?
Also as seen in the review of the Court case the sh!tbags were convicted of having shot the victim in the foot. So who do you believe?

You also posted that Nahum Shahaf stated in his Official Court Affidavit that "the projectile never went anywhere near the victim's foot". Then produced possibly the most childish presentation supposedly demonstrating this miracle, which contradicts itself on the very first paragraph of the first page saying that the projectile was shot at a range of 1.5metres then presenting a drawing clearly showing it to be 4 metres.
They don't seem very thorough do they for someone supposedly providing evidence for a High Court Case?

http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/otiose[/QUOTE]
So you are writing from the dictionary, which has long out of use words over 1000 years old. I never indicated that it was not a word, I just told you that you are struggling with the English language because this word has not been in common use for nearly 350 years. A bit like the time you tried to tell me that "owning" something, and "occupying" it were the same thing.

You have lied yourself into so many blind corners that you are running out of corners

You still have not shown your much quoted Frame 633 that you allege enables you to see the victim's uninjured foot inside his shoe and told us how you reached this miraculous conclusion. Another of your lies made up (poorly) on the run.

Neither have you posted any evidence to support your claim that the view of the hole in the sole of the shoe shows it is pushed inwards. Another lie

Also you have never explained how the material you posted, allegedly from Forensic Architecture states clearly the victim was shot in the foot from a range of 1.5 metres and yet their supposedly forensically accurate drawing clearly shows the victim to be 4 metres away. Like you they make up their excuses (very poorly) on the run.

You have never explained how Nahum Sharaf's Official Affidavit denies the findings of the Israeli High Court that Abu Rameh WAS shot in the foot, To many lies for them to keep track of, eh?

You still have not been able to produce this mysterious "uncut" video showing the projectile hitting the ground 6m behind the victim and having this alleged "conversation" on it. So far there is absolutely no evidence that this conversation ever took place, and the only mention that can be found of it is on a Hasbara site run by Rivka Shpak Lissak, an Israeli born Hasbarat, quoting Jonathan D. Halevi an ex Lt Col. in the IDF, now employed by The Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs (A recognised Hasbara site). Liar!

You also stated that Abu Rameh was not a protester, however it was stated in the court proceedings that he was, He is also clearly visible protesting in the opening scenes of the video. Another Lie on your behalf

 

[udaka]

Well, if American army or Japanese army attack Israeli,As the first wave of attack, the American or Japanese just need to bomb the airport,and seal the harbor of Israeli. War is over.

Reason: The Jews found them can't run away. Then they took out the American flags or Japanese flags under their bed.:angel:

 

[Yossarian]

Well, if American army or Japanese army attack Israeli,As the first wave of attack, the American or Japanese just need to bomb the airport,and seal the harbor of Israeli. War is over.

Reason: The Jews found them can't run away. Then they took out the American flags or Japanese flags under their bed.:angel:

.........WHAT THE

MAN?

How is that statement even relevant or logical?

 

[senojekips]

Well, if American army or Japanese army attack Israeli,As the first wave of attack, the American or Japanese just need to bomb the airport,and seal the harbor of Israeli. War is over.

Reason: The Jews found them can't run away. Then they took out the American flags or Japanese flags under their bed.:angel:

The subject of this thread is, "So why do people hate Israel" which is nothing to do with attacking Israel.

If you want to talk about that, make a thread of your own.

 

[MontyB]

Maybe it is trying to politicise tragedies for their own gain that makes people dislike them?

Clearly Israeli foreign policy consists of "if in doubt Iran did it" and if you have absolutely no clue "Iran probably did it".


Ex-El Al expert: Iran likely involved in MH 370
By Debra Kamin March 16, 2014, 7:35 pm

Based on profiling, pilots are unlikely suspects, says Israeli airline’s former security chief; he and other experts believe plane intact.

A former security chief for El Al said that the disappearance of Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 points directly to Iran.

Isaac Yeffet, who served as head of global security for Israel’s national carrier in the 1980s and now works as an aviation security consultant in New Jersey, said investigators were correct in homing in on the two fake-passport carrying Iranian passengers on the doomed
flight, and they have wasted valuable time by exploring other leads.

“What happened to this aircraft, nobody knows. My guess is based upon the stolen passports, and I believe Iran was involved,” he said. “They hijacked the aircraft and they landed it in a place that nobody can see or find it.”

In the immediate aftermath of the aircraft’s disappearance, which occurred last week during a standard night flight from Kuala Lumpur to Beijing, Malaysian officials and the media were fixated on the story of two Iranians who had made it onto the plane with stolen passports. As the days wore on and the investigation uncovered new and confusing
details, with officials admitting that the plane could have traveled for as long as seven hours without radio contact, and that its potential location could be anywhere from northern Kyrgyzstan to the southern Indian Ocean, attention has shifted to the pilots and to far-flung conspiracy theories. This is a misstep, said Yeffet, and one that would not have happened in Israel.

“This would never have happened on an Israeli plane,” says Yeffet. “An El Al aircraft was hijacked for the first and last time in 1968. Since then, there has not been a single flight where security did not check every single name.”

However, it would have taken more than just a pair of Iranians with forged documents, Yeffet said, to pull off such an astonishing crime. “I can’t believe for a second that if these people planned to hijack the aircraft, it was just them,” he said. But based upon the tried-and-true Israeli intelligence strategy of profiling, the pilots, he said, are unlikely suspects.

“We are talking about a captain who is 53 years old, who has worked for Malaysia Airlines for 30 years, and suddenly he became a terrorist? He wanted to commit suicide? If he committed suicide, where is the debris?”

Adding that the captain in question, Zaharie Ahmad Shah, was known to be happily married and comfortably well-off, Yeffet said the profile simply does not fit. “From the United States to China to Japan, everybody is searching for this aircraft or piece of it. And there is no sign. So in my opinion, the aircraft was hijacked. And it was an excellent plan from the terrorists, to land in a place where they can hide the plane and no one can find it.”

Lt. Col. (Res.) Eran Ramot, a former IAF fighter pilot and the head of aviation research at Israel’s Fisher Institute for Air and Space Strategic Studies, however, drew other conclusions.

“It would be very complicated [for someone other than the pilot to have flown the plane],” Ramot said, based on the stunning revelations that the flight not only made a total U-turn from its planned route but also dipped in between radar points for hours and had all of its tracking systems manually turned off. “It takes somebody that knows how to operate an airplane like this.”

Like Yeffet, Ramot believes the plane was being intentionally flown to a secret location, and he went as far as to say he is holding out hope that the 239 passengers and crew who were on board are still alive.

“We don’t know any better yet,” he said. “One of my theories is that the airplane landed in Bangladesh. It could reach there, it’s very close to Afghanistan. It could have landed on airstrip there, and everybody on board is still alive. It could be done.”

Asked what would have happened if the plane – which went undetected for hours as it blipped across Malaysian radars – had entered Israeli airspace, Ramot said, “It would not go unnoticed, that’s for sure.
Action would have been carried out, the least of which would have been an interception to escort it.”

That doesn’t mean that the Malaysian military wasn’t paying attention, he added. It’s simply that in Israel, the margin for taking chances is significantly reduced.

“It’s a matter of atmosphere,” he said. “Here, every blip on the screen is suspicious because that’s the way we live. That’s our daily program.
I can’t imagine they pay as much attention, but if a blip runs wide or runs strange, I would expect them to notice.”

Pini Schiff, one of Israel’s top aviation security experts, said that if there is any comfort that Israelis can take from the story of MH 370, which is proving to be one of the most confounding aviation disasters of all time, it is that it could never happen to a plane flying out of Ben-Gurion International Airport.

“It simply wouldn’t happen at Ben-Gurion,” he said. “The level of security at Ben-Gurion and on all El Al planes is so high, there is nothing more they could do… Nations are not spending billions of dollars the way the Israeli government is protecting Israeli aviation, because the threat against Israeli aviation is so high. What we are doing in Ben-Gurion is an operation that is not being done in any other airport in the world. Not in the
United States, not in Britain, not in Germany, not anywhere.”

Like his colleagues, Schiff said that his guess is as good as anyone’s as to the fate of MH 370, but he also believes there’s a good possibility that it has been brought down, intact, on a hidden runway in some far-flung corner of the world.

“It will be found. It may take a month or a year, but eventually, it will be found,” he said. “This aircraft didn’t vanish. It exists somewhere in the world, and it will be found, probably in one piece.”

http://www.timesofisrael.com/ex-el-al-expert-iran-likely-involved-in-mh-370/

 

[MontyB]

This seems like a realistic break down of the issues involved in reaching a peace deal...

Trudy Rubin: If two-state is ‘no’, then what?
http://www.omaha.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20140330/NEWS08/140339993&template=printart


The prospects for reaching an Israeli-Palestinian deal by John Kerry’s April 29 deadline are about as unlikely as Vladimir Putin giving up Crimea.
The secretary of state probably wishes he never launched his quixotic campaign for Middle East peace a year ago. Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas’ meeting earlier this month with President Obama at the White House only illustrated the unbridgeable gulf between the Israeli and Palestinian positions.
But Kerry was right to warn in April that “if we do not succeed now, we may not get another chance.” The failure of these talks would signify it’s no longer possible to reach a two-state solution — a state of Palestine beside Israel.
This formula has been the basis of peace talks for more than two decades, and no one has come up with a realistic formula to replace it. That’s why there is a desperate need for fresh thinking about what to do if it dies.
Of course, it’s hard to think of a time less likely to produce a final agreement between the Palestinians and Israel.
The Arab world is in disarray, and there is an ongoing struggle within Islam. The strong Arab neighbors that Israel would require to guarantee the future of a weak Palestinian state no longer exist. And the issue of Iran’s nuclear program looms over all.
But the reason the two-state solution has become passé goes deeper than the press of current events. It has to do with the passage of time and changed facts on the ground.
The generation of Palestinians and Israelis that negotiated the Oslo accords in 1993 had faith in the two-state concept. Its strongest Palestinian advo- cates had served years in Israeli prisons as secular Fatah activists and knew Hebrew. They believed a two-state solution was the best deal the Palestinians would get.
Israeli activists and intellectuals had long contacts with their counterparts, at a time when Palestinians could travel freely inside Israel and vice versa. Unlike now, peace negotiators were discussing the nuts and bolts of ending the conflict: for example, how to divide Jerusalem into two capitals, and how to resettle hundreds of thousands of Palestinian refugees in third countries.
Those days seem like ancient history. There’s no room to list all of the reasons the Oslo Accord failed, including Palestinian suicide bombers and Israel’s vast settlement project on the West Bank. Suffice it to say that today, Palestinians and Israelis are mostly cut off from each other by walls and fences and their youths rarely meet, except at Israeli military checkpoints.
So it’s unsurprising that the younger generation is more skeptical about two states than their parents. The two-state solution is still the most popular option on both sides, but that support is waning. A poll by Zogby Research Services showed barely one-third of Israelis and Palestinians believe a two-state solution is feasible, while younger Israelis take harder-line positions than their elders.
A similar generation gap emerged from a December poll by the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research. It found that, while 65 percent of Palestinians over 50 still supported the two-state idea, only 47 percent of those 18-34 did.
This brings us to the options other than two states. If Palestinians got full rights inside a single state, its Arab citizens would soon outnumber (and outvote) Jewish Israelis. That would mean the end of the Jewish homeland and would guarantee permanent civil war.
A hawkish Israeli version of the one-state solution is equally unrealistic. It argues that Palestinians would be satisfied to live without political rights in cantons essentially controlled by Israelis.
The one-state solution is a non-starter: Either Israel would remain an eternal occupier, or it would no longer be a Jewish state.
Some Israelis have suggested the country unilaterally withdraw from populated areas of the West Bank, but this would solve little. Those areas would be economically and politically unviable, becoming hotbeds of protest or rockets, as happened with Gaza. Others argue that Jordan might be persuaded to take control of segments of the West Bank. That hoary idea is anathema to Jordan’s monarch and people.
So Obama was not off base when he told the Atlantic’s Jeffrey Goldberg: “I have not yet heard ... a persuasive vision of how Israel survives as a democracy and a Jewish state ... in the absence of ... a two-state solution. Nobody has presented me a credible scenario.”
The problem is that there is none, which is why the negotiators may ultimately produce a vague framework that keeps the talks going, to buy time to figure out what to do if they end.


http://www.omaha.com/article/20140330/NEWS08/140339993

 

[senojekips]

Everyone knows the answer that will work , but no one, will bite the bullet.

Israel must vacate Palestine, just is the Germans had to vacate their occupied territories. The fact that the Israelis have deliberately made it almost physically impossible is no one's fault but their own.

The longer this goes on the worse it's going to be when it finally comes about. It's almost as if the Israelis have deliberately reduced the options to, another Holocaust or nothing. Of course they won't actually say it, but you only have to look at the options they have left open to see that this is clearly the case. They are relying on peoples abhorence of the Holocaust.

What they don't realise is that Internationally world views of the Holocaust have changed a lot, especially in view of what the Israelis have been doing to the Palestinian People over the last 65 + years. Their lies have been uncovered and are being further uncovered as more and more people start looking for, and finding the truth

 

[JOC]

mideast conflict

Has anyone considered that Israel is doing what it has just to insure that it exist in an area with X100 enemies? Yes they play hardball, but the neighborhood is nondemocratic - Autocratic and in many cases fanatical. Do you believe these countries would tolerate Israel weakness? No I.E. Iran states they would gladly destroy it. This is not likely to change since the Israelis are vilified by virtually all Mideast nations. Of course the trouble in any conflict is the average person was is not politically affiliated and just wants to live and take care of his family has hardships resulting from the conflict, this is the shame of it all. This is the suffering of peoples that usually occurs on both sides that occurs in war. It is not for me to say who has suffered more in the last 60+ years, likely the Arabs – Palestinians have had far more causalities.

 

[senojekips]

Did you ever stop to think that if the Israelis hadn't stolen the land that was judged to belong to the Palestinians,... and only to be administered by the Brits until such time as the US could administer their own country, they would not have had any enemies.

The Israelis made their own enemies and now they whinge that those from whom they stole the land, driving over 770,000 others into refuge for 65+ years, and treating those who resisted like animals for the 65 years, resist.

As an example: Had the Puerto Ricans told the Zionists that 54% of the USA (containing all of the worthwhile, arable and usable land) was theirs,... then provided them with over 7 Billion dollars per annum, and unlimited military aid and assistance to retain it. I guess that you'd blame the US citizens for being the enemies of the US people?

I'm presuming that you are a high school student because it is very obvious that you have absolutely no knowledge of Middle eastern history from the time prior to the arrival in Palestine of the Zionists in the late 1890s. Before you continue making an idiot of yourself I recommend that you read ALL of this thread and the truth will be made apparent to you.

 

[JOC]

suite yourselve

Did you ever stop to think that if the Israelis hadn't stolen the land that was judged to belong to the Palestinians,... and only to be administered by the Brits until such time as the US could administer their own country, they would not have had any enemies.

The Israelis made their own enemies and now they whinge that those from whom they stole the land, driving over 770,000 others into refuge for 65+ years, and treating those who resisted like animals for the 65 years, resist.

As an example: Had the Puerto Ricans told the Zionists that 54% of the USA (containing all of the worthwhile, arable and usable land) was theirs,... then provided them with over 7 Billion dollars per annum, and unlimited military aid and assistance to retain it. I guess that you'd blame the US citizens for being the enemies of the US people?

I'm presuming that you are a high school student because it is very obvious that you have absolutely no knowledge of Middle eastern history from the time prior to the arrival in Palestine of the Zionists in the late 1890s. Before you continue making an idiot of yourself I recommend that you read ALL of this thread and the truth will be made apparent to you.

If you can't discuss without insults then you have no argument at all. This is a good way to start conflicts

 

[senojekips]

If you can't discuss without insults then you have no argument at all. This is a good way to start conflicts

That was not an insult, but it was a friendly warning that I am well aware of the fact that you are completely ignorant of this whole affair, yet still willing to offer advice to those more knowledgeable, on a subject you know absolutely nothing about. Just as a matter of interest, exactly how old are you? Your understanding of History is that of a child below the age of responsibility.

According to the BBC World Poll, Israel is the world's fourth most despised state, only just ahead of Pakistan, Iran and North Korea. http://http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/2013%20Country%20Rating%20Poll.pdf

My advice that you read all of the thread still stands.

 

[MontyB]

Has anyone considered that Israel is doing what it has just to insure that it exist in an area with X100 enemies? Yes they play hardball, but the neighborhood is nondemocratic - Autocratic and in many cases fanatical. Do you believe these countries would tolerate Israel weakness? No I.E. Iran states they would gladly destroy it. This is not likely to change since the Israelis are vilified by virtually all Mideast nations. Of course the trouble in any conflict is the average person was is not politically affiliated and just wants to live and take care of his family has hardships resulting from the conflict, this is the shame of it all. This is the suffering of peoples that usually occurs on both sides that occurs in war. It is not for me to say who has suffered more in the last 60+ years, likely the Arabs – Palestinians have had far more causalities.

Have you considered that the Palestinians are doing what they are doing because they should n't be in the area in the first place?

it is difficult to justify giving a bunch of East Europeans a country based on an imaginary link to that land in some other part of the world and it is damn sight more difficult to justify giving them someone elses country.

 

[JOC]

My 2 cents

You are obviously prejudiced against the Jew and think yours is the only opinion worth listening to. Mine comes from the many Mideast people I know Israeli and Arab. Israel managed to turn the desert wastelands into a modern miracle that feeds ½ of Western Europe. They are the only democratic nation in the Mideast; I suppose you will argue about this as well. In earlier conflicts they overcame almost insurmountable odds to come out on top: 1948 Arab-Israeli war, the 67 conflict, </SPAN>Yoh Kipper War with multiple enemies that refused to recognize their right to exist, which is pretty silly since their roots go back to Roman times. Palestine was just a term made up after centuries of autocratic rule by the Ottoman Turks whom certainly were not a benevolent entity. BTW what happened when the Palestinians took up residence in Jordan some years back? Weren’t they supposed to be allies? If Israel were to vacate the left bank they may as well give up. The country would be so narrow as to be indefensible. Do you really expect them to do this, I don’t think so. Your ridicules insults only go to show how ignorant you are by lowing yourself to a childish level.

 

[senojekips]

You are obviously lacking in brain cells as you have not read this thread through as I advised you to. If you had, you would have read that my Great, Great Grandmother was Rebecca Hart who married married Chaim "Hyam" JONAS in the Great Synagogue Duke Street London, in 1859.

I am a Jew by birthright although their disgusting behaviour made me a "Card Carrying" Atheist long ago. Twenty years or so ago I was a supporter of Israel until various Crimes against Humanity and War Crimes made me start looking for the truth. It was the truth that finally showed me that the Palestinians had the legal claim to Palestine. A land that has been known as such since the 5th century BCE when it was recorded by Herotodus the earliest known historian of the area.

I'll bet that you are not even aware that attempting to colonise the land of another people is banned under International law and can never be annexed. Her is a short exerpt from the Israel Law Resources Centre, who study the legalities of the Israel/Palestine conflict

ISRAELI VIOLATION: HISTORY & THEORY​

In 1947 the United Nations hoped to settle the conflict between the Palestinian people and the Zionists by dividing the land between them. Unfortunately, they chose a plan which the Palestinians did not agree with, and implemented it anyways. The plan, described in UN Resolution, divided the land of Palestine into two sections awarding the Zionists more than 1/2 of the land (55%) even though their current holdings totalled only about 6%, and their population was only about 16% of all the people in Palestine. Plus the plan gave the most fertile farmlands to the Zionists. The plan was clearly unfair, and the Palestinians and their Arab neighbors rebelled against the plan, and war broke out.
The Zionists won the fighting, and during the course of the fighting took additional lands bringing their total holdings to about 75% of the lands of Palestine, which they kept.
Even though this additional land was thus illegally gained in violation of both the Hague Regulations (1907) and UN Charter (1945) which both included the basic legal principle that it is illegal to acquire territory by force, these new boundaries soon became the accepted boundaries of the new State of Israel in the various peace agreements Israel signed with its neighbors.

ISRAELI VIOLATIONS OF INTERNATIONAL LAW​

• Major Legal Principle Violated -
  • 1. Acquisition of Territory by Military Conquest is Illegal
  • 2. Occupation (either Legal or Illegal) is Generally Temporary and Must Never Lead To Sovereignty over Occupied or Conquered Lands of the Enemy People or Nation.
• As Per International Law -
  • UN Charter, article 2, para. 4 (1945) (full text) (specific article - see below)
  • Declaration On Principles Of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations And Co-Operation Among States In Accordance With The Charter Of The United Nations (1970), Principle 1 (full text) (specific article - see below)
  • Hague Regulations IV (1907), articles 43 & 55 (full text) (specific articles - see below)
  • Geneva Conventions IV (1949), article 47 & 54 (full text) (specific articles - see below)

You will eventually get sick of treading on your tongue and realise you know absolutely nothing about Israel or the Zionazis.

Read the thread and save yourself a lot of embarrassment

 

[JOC]

This is ging nowhere quick

You simple want to dominate the tread with your Opinion. I have seen your many posting and you are ignorant of others as well. Believing yourself and only you to have correct answers. I opt out of this tread since I don’t desire a childish contest.

 

[senojekips]

You simple want to dominate the tread with your Opinion. I have seen your many posting and you are ignorant of others as well. Believing yourself and only you to have correct answers. I opt out of this tread since I don’t desire a childish contest.

The difference between my opinion and yours is that I can post links to back every word of of what I say, and you can't. Yours is no more than opinion, opinion that has been disproved 20 years or more ago.

A fact that you would be fully aware of by now had to bothered to read the whole thread. You opt out of this thread because you are starting to realise that you have already made an idiot of yourself, and as yet have not been able to show that my answers to you are false in any way.

If you think I am wrong, quote the relevant post and also a credible link that proves you are right.