Switzerland says Israel breaking international law

[MontyB]

Redneck, What borders these? Bear in mind that 90% of the decent land lies in the Jewish boundaries, is this fair?


Another interesting fact is that from November 1947 to May 1948 the Zionists were already on the offensive and had already attacked Arabs. In the months before Israel was declared, the Zionists had driven 300,000 non-Jews off their land. In the months before Israel was declared, the Zionists had seized land beyond the proposed Jewish State. http://www.representativepress.org/IsraelHistory.html .

You know what really intrigues me about that map most is at what point anyone thought that was going to be a good layout for two nations, I can only assume that it was designed by Boris Yeltsin during a hard night on the vodka.

 

[Del Boy]

Faced with the the rewriting of history by agenda-led web-sites dependent upon doing so to justify their existence, and thereby becoming propagandists consciously or otherwise, constantly pushing and only pushing one side of very complex issues, let us take a look at some of the known facts:-


Jews in Israel.

Between the time of the Israelite kingdoms and the 7th-century Muslim conquests, the Land of Israel fell under Assyrian, Babylonian, Persian, Greek, Roman, Sassanian, and Byzantine rule Jewish presence in the region dwindled after the failure of the Bar Kokhba revolt against the Roman Empire in 132 CE and the resultant large-scale expulsion of Jews. (by holocaust)

In 628/9, the Byzantine Emperor Heraclius conducted a massacre and expulsion of the Jews, at which point the Jewish population probably reached its lowest point. (holocaust again)

Nevertheless, a continuous Jewish presence in the Land of Israel remained.

Although the main Jewish population shifted from the Judea region to the Galilee the Mishnah and part of the Talmud, among Judaism's most important religious texts, were composed in Israel during this period

The Land of Israel was captured from the Byzantine Empire around 636 CE during the initial Muslim conquests. Control of the region transferred between the Umayyads, Abbasids, and Crusaders over the next six centuries, before falling in the hands of the Mamluk Sultanate, in 1260.

In 1516, the Land of Israel became a part of the Ottoman Empire, which ruled the region until the 20th century.

Jews living in the Diaspora have long aspired to return to Zion and the Land of Israel That hope and yearning was articulated in the Bible, and is a central theme in the Jewish prayer book.

Beginning in the 12th century, Catholic persecution of Jews led to a steady stream leaving Europe to settle in the Holy Land, increasing in numbers after Jews were expelled from Spain in 1492.

During the 16th century large communities struck roots in the Four Holy Cities, and in the second half of the 18th century, entire Hasidic communities from eastern Europe settled in the Holy Land.


Just to clear matters up, I trust that these credentials will make clear the strength of their homeland claims as opposed to say, European claims to homelands in Australia and NZ today.

 

[senojekips]

When I see that map Perseus, all I can think of is that maybe the designers were thinking of diversifying into the Jig saw puzzle market. Neither state being contiguous, it's amost as if someone were planning a poor quality joke,... or maybe an ongoing war???

Not content with that, but to give most of the land suitable for agriculture all to one of the two, (who also happened to be the minority), leaving the majority with mainly desertified country not much good for anything.

 

[A Can of Man]

Or maybe the hard liners are actually right. There really is no hope for an end in this sort of thing so might as well slug away and be good at it.

 

[senojekips]

Or maybe the hard liners are actually right. There really is no hope for an end in this sort of thing so might as well slug away and be good at it.

Hard liners are almost without exception riding for a fall, as are extremists of all varieties. The truth usually lies somewhere closer to the middle ground.

In these cases, even if it's not exactly correct, nearly everyone can learn to live with it without losing too much dignity or money.

 

[A Can of Man]

Right, there is no such thing as a perfect solution for anything.

 

[Del Boy]

Redneck, What borders these? Bear in mind that 90% of the decent land lies in the Jewish boundaries, is this fair?

Tut-tut.
Not so, seeing as the large brown area in the Jewish state, from Beersheba down to Eilat at the very bottom, is mostly the Negev desert, and remains so, with leopards, if I am not mistaken. Is this fair??

 

[SHERMAN]

MontyB what do you base this assumption that it is "rightfully" theirs. I dont see how they have any more right than the jews...?

 

[Del Boy]

Re: Jews in Palestine - Homeland issues.


During the siege of Acre in 1799, Bonaparte prepared a proclamation declaring a Jewish state in Palestine, though he did not issue it, because the siege was lost to the Ottoman Empire and the plan was never carried out., .He was impressed with Haim Farhi, the Jewish advisor to the ruler of Acre, Ahmed al Jazzar, as Farhi was the actual commander of the defence of Acre on the field.

This proclamation in 1799 is counted by some as having historic importance in the history of Zionism, because it was made by the major political power of its time, many years before Theodor Herzl's Der Judenstaat or the Balfour Declaration.

 

[SHERMAN]

@del boy...Good point with the map.

By the way, it wasent Israel that screwed the palis on that...The arab countries took most of that land. only the upper gallilie was taken by us..

 

[MontyB]

MontyB what do you base this assumption that it is "rightfully" theirs. I dont see how they have any more right than the jews...?

If New Zealanders of English ancestry decided we were sick of New Zealand what right do we have to jump into boats and lay claim to vast chunks of England?

Hey lets assume that 70% of the people we would displace in our "ancestral homeland" were originally from Pakistan or India or Jamaica but have been living there legally for the 100-500 years does that improve our claim to the land?

Anyway to answer your question directly the fact that they had lived there for what close to 1000 years and that the people who evicted them from the land had literally no ties to the land at all other than some rather tenuous religious claims.

 

[Del Boy]

@del boy...Good point with the map.

By the way, it wasent Israel that screwed the palis on that...The arab countries took most of that land. only the upper gallilie was taken by us..

Sherman - you know why it is a good point Because it is the truth; something not always appreciated as hard to digest.

Look at Monty's last post in response to your question ; in spite of the fact that I have carefully posted a great many details of the legitimate claim of the Jewish people, and their conitnued presence in Palestine throughout the past 2000 years, and I have not concentrated on earlier issues. But still he simply ignores that information as though it does not exist, although he sees nothing contradictorary in his attitude to the status quo of his presence in his own country, where Europeans had no valid claim whatsoever. ( Not that I have any argument with him or his country on that question, but the fact remains.)

 

[senojekips]

If New Zealanders of English ancestry decided we were sick of New Zealand why right do we have of jumping into boats and laying claim to vast chunks of England?

I have tried to put this forward on several occasions, however it seems there is one set of rules for the Jewish people, and another for everyone else in the world.

I could just imagine the reaction if I were to suddenly decide to take over Longtown in Cumbria saying that this town was built by my 6X Gt Grandparents for their tenants, and therefore I have a right to just steal it and move back in.

I'd end up in prison, or more likely the nut house.

 

[BritinBritain]

I have been watching this thread with great interest and the diverse opinions expressed.

However, in my humble opinion for what its worth, blaming whomever for whatever is not going to sort the problem out between Israel and the Palestinians. Until both sides sit down together, and thrash out a solution acceptable to both sides, nothing is going to change. At present both sides are losing, losing lives, losing dignity, losing the right to live in peace. I accept neither side may not want to live among each other in the same district or town. In towns and cities around the world different cultures, faiths and races congregate in their own communities and generally live in peace.

Northern Ireland being a case in point. The British Government were in a no win situation, if British troops pulled out and left the six counties to the republicans, the loyalists will scream “Foul, the Brits have left us in the crap.” The British Army stays and the republicans shout “The Brits are an army of occupation.” Since 1969 thousands of lives have been lost in Northern Ireland and the British mainland to terrorist attacks, what has all this violence achieved? Nothing, not a bloody thing.

Forget the past, its gone, dusted, finished. Look towards the future, a peaceful future.

 

[SHERMAN]

If New Zealanders of English ancestry decided we were sick of New Zealand what right do we have to jump into boats and lay claim to vast chunks of England?

The English who came to NZ were not brought there after their national and religous center was destroyed. Jews have no other place to live in.

Anyway to answer your question directly the fact that they had lived there for what close to 1000 years and that the people who evicted them from the land had literally no ties to the land at all other than some rather tenuous religious claims

who the heck are you to decide if the jewish claims are "tenuous"? There is no doubt that Jews lived , worshiped and had self gov in Israel thousends of years before the arabs even got out of Arabia. More over, Jews are the only people who even after being kicked out for 2000 years continued to hope for a return. The "palestinian" nationality is a mish-mash of Egyptian Syrian and Jordanian Arabs, that only started thinking in terms of self-definintion in the 1920s....You tell me that their claim is stronger than thousends of years of Jewish heratige?

 

[senojekips]

The English who came to NZ were not brought there after their national and religous center was destroyed. Jews have no other place to live in.

What difference would it make if they were? If it were so, it would give them no more right to dispossess the present inhabitants of that place.

Look,... Sherman, I'm not trying to be obnoxious, I don't even know if I'm asking the right questions, I just want some answers that will make some sense of this ludicrous position, and the things that are happening in Israel in recent history.

It just seems to me that to get people to answer my questions I first have to explain to them what I see happening in Israel, otherwise they will merely reel off what they believe with no reference to what is actually going on.

I have no love of the Palestinians, Mongolians, Greeks or Calathumpians, but every thing I see happening in your part of the world flies in the face of what Israel is telling us.

 

[SHERMAN]

have no love of the Palestinians, Mongolians, Greeks or Calathumpians, but every thing I see happening in your part of the world flies in the face of what Israel is telling us.

Again, if people lived somewhere and were kicked out but maintained thier wishes to comeback, and indeed came back. And there is all the evidence to proove they came back to the right place. How are the palis holding a high morale ground here.

Im not saying the Palis dont belong here, what i am saying is that both people belong here. The diffrence between me and them is they are not willing to compermise. You keep looking at it like some grand invasion...There was nothing to invade. Why did the Palis not rise up against the turks? because they did not exist as palestinians. This is all a reaction to the Jewish national movement. Only thing is Zionisem is a positive national movement and the PLO was a negative one. They want to destroy israel more than they want to be independent. They are at civil war right now and they arnt even independent yet. They teach their school kids to hate, they preech hate in their musqs. And you support them based on the fact that they were here, while in fact they did not even exist as a nation. To this day their dialects are diffrent in Gaza and the West bank. You still have a lot to learn before you can take away 4000 years of Jewish history and claim it irrelevent in the face of the palestinian "suffering"(Again, think how much fun it is to be a syrian citizen)

 

[senojekips]

My answers might appear simplistic, but it is my firm belief that this is a simple matter and making it more complex will certainly not get us any closer to the answer

Again, if people lived somewhere and were kicked out but maintained thier wishes to comeback, and indeed came back. And there is all the evidence to proove they came back to the right place. How are the palis holding a high morale ground here.

The Palestinians comprised 67% of the population of the area before the European Jews returned. Just because someone desires to return, does not give them any legal or moral right to go back and steal the land from those who have legally owned it for hundreds of years. Hell,... I'd love to go back to Angaston where I spent my childhood, but there's no way the people living in our old house are going to let me just move in again becuse I once lived there.

Im not saying the Palis dont belong here, what i am saying is that both people belong here. The diffrence between me and them is they are not willing to compermise.

That is because the Palis do belong there, they actually own the place, and should not have to compromise,... It's their country. If you own a car and I say let's compromse, "Give me half" what would you say?

You keep looking at it like some grand invasion...There was nothing to invade. Why did the Palis not rise up against the turks? because they did not exist as palestinians

The term Palestinian, to describe the Arab inhabitants of the area is a new meaning to the word. If we go back to the analogy of you giving me part of your car, it doesn't make any difference what you are called if you are Abraham or Isaac, it is still your car. The fact that I bring a lot of reinforcements with me and I'm willing to fight to get it, does not make it mean that I deserve it

This is all a reaction to the Jewish national movement. Only thing is Zionisem is a positive national movement and the PLO was a negative one.

If I were you, I would leave the Zionists right out of this debate, because to most of the non Jewish world, the Zionists are regarded as an extremist or a violent terrorist organisation.

They want to destroy Israel more than they want to be independent. They are at civil war right now and they arnt even independent yet. They teach their school kids to hate, they preech hate in their musqs.

But they were not always like this, they lived peacefully alongside their Jewish neighbours for many hundreds if not a thousand years, they have become this way because they have had their own land stolen from them. What they do in that land is their business and fighting between themselves is part of that business

And you support them based on the fact that they were here, while in fact they did not even exist as a nation. To this day their dialects are diffrent in Gaza and the West bank. You still have a lot to learn before you can take away 4000 years of Jewish history and claim it irrelevent in the face of the palestinian "suffering"(Again, think how much fun it is to be a syrian citizen)

Yes, without a doubt, I do support their point of view because it is their land, and I would do exactly the same if the UN had given part of my land to another group without my permission.

What would you do, if tomorrow the UN convened and said, "The Indonesians have overrun Australia, and the population have lost everything, we will give them half of Israel"?

 

[Del Boy]

I have been watching this thread with great interest and the diverse opinions expressed.

However, in my humble opinion for what its worth, blaming whomever for whatever is not going to sort the problem out between Israel and the Palestinians. Until both sides sit down together, and thrash out a solution acceptable to both sides, nothing is going to change. At present both sides are losing, losing lives, losing dignity, losing the right to live in peace. I accept neither side may not want to live among each other in the same district or town. In towns and cities around the world different cultures, faiths and races congregate in their own communities and generally live in peace.

Northern Ireland being a case in point. The British Government were in a no win situation, if British troops pulled out and left the six counties to the republicans, the loyalists will scream “Foul, the Brits have left us in the crap.” The British Army stays and the republicans shout “The Brits are an army of occupation.” Since 1969 thousands of lives have been lost in Northern Ireland and the British mainland to terrorist attacks, what has all this violence achieved? Nothing, not a bloody thing.

Forget the past, its gone, dusted, finished. Look towards the future, a peaceful future.

BritinAfrica - I absolutely agree with this post. It earns my respect on all counts. This is a subject upon which I am ready and willing to debate all issues, but what I would come back to in the end is what you have just said.
That is where I would end - here is where I would begin:-

For those who do not understand, criticizing Israel is not anti-semetic. But singling out Israel for opprobrium and international sanction, out of all proportion to any other party in the Middle East - is anti-Semetic, and not saying so is dishonest. A good working definition of anti-Semitism is taking a trait or an action that is widespread and blaming only the Jews for it. That is what Hitler and Stalin did.

 

[SHERMAN]

If I were you, I would leave the Zionists right out of this debate, because to most of the non Jewish world, the Zionists are regarded as an extremist or a violent terrorist organisation.

That shows exactly how much understanding you have of the area, the Jewish people, or the Zionist movement. Zionisem is a term t odescribe the Jewish national movement. It means nothing else exept that Jews should have a country. At times some people who were Zionists considered building this country some where else all togather. Territorial zionists were the ones that claimed it must be in Israel itself. I am a zionist and I don not think Im militant or extreme. More to the point, most radical right jewish groups today are considered by some yo be anti-zionist or post-zionist.

But they were not always like this, they lived peacefully alongside their Jewish neighbours for many hundreds if not a thousand years, they have become this way because they have had their own land stolen from them. What they do in that land is their business and fighting between themselves is part of that business

LOL. they lived under turk law and obeyed it. From the minute Jews started thinking of a national home in Israel...These people suddenly became a nationality. That makes as much sens if notless than people who were kicked out and want to come back for 2000 years. This is a make belief nationality.

Yes, without a doubt, I do support their point of view because it is their land, and I would do exactly the same if the UN had given part of my land to another group without my permission.

What would you do, if tomorrow the UN convened and said, "The Indonesians have overrun Australia, and the population have lost everything, we will give them half of Israel"?

Your attemt to negate my peoples right to live on their historicall motherland is absurd. There are 22 arab countries for arabs. there is no otheer jewish state.