Middle East Peace Talks: Israel, Palestinian Negotiations More Hopeless Than Ever

New York Times:

The American invitation on Friday to the Israelis and Palestinians to start direct peace talks in two weeks in Washington was immediately accepted by both governments. But just below the surface there was an almost audible shrug. There is little confidence -- close to none -- on either side that the Obama administration's goal of reaching a comprehensive deal in one year can be met.

Read the whole story: New York Times

Comments

[Taghi]

03:56 PM on 08/29/2010

The negotiation is even more hopeless since a Rabai has issued a "Fatwā" to kill Abbas.

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middleeast/2010/08/201082913280929137.html

[forbiddenplanet]

07:07 PM on 08/27/2010

Quote from someone eloquent from a different thread commenting on us. This relates not only to the Glenn Beck BS but also to this thread as well:

Thread: Congo Government: Mass Rapes Can't Be Stopped Without More International Aid

"200 women and 4 baby boys are raped for 4 days and there are 56 comments. Beck plans to dishonor Dr.King (Beck Rally, 'Restoring Honor', Stirs Controversy) and there are 5,056 comments. Is the rally of 1 idiot really 1,000x more provocative than these heinous crimes? The West ignores the inhumanity of the conflicts in Darfur, Congo, Zimbabwe and other African nations. The people of these countries are at the mercy of greedy, murderous regimes propped up by the West through the forces of the UN. The United Nation forces are hamstrung by mandates that don't allow them to protect the most vulnerable civilians even when these crimes against humanity are occurring under their watch. The West knows who is committing these crimes and they must allow the United Nations forces to protect these civilians by going after the criminals. in many missions the United Nations peacekeepers are keeping the violence, not the peace. It's past time for the United Nations to live up to it's charter and bring the criminals to justice while providing real protection. Give the peacekeepers the right to disarm the rebels and the government forces so these poor people can have a chance at living the kind of life the West takes for granted."

[lonngfello]

08:39 AM on 08/26/2010

Before the Zionist movement when Jews, Christians and Muslims lived together Palestine was somewhat peaceful. What's amazing, is that although Zionism has unjustly sqeezed the Palestinians more and more as time goes by, while the world in its complicity and apparent indifference looks on, somehow the Palestinians hang on. Against all odds, the human spirit prevalent here, is something to be admired.
Give me Liberty, or give me Death!" is a famous quotation attributed to Patrick Henry from a speech he made to the Virginia Convention. It was given on March 23, 1775, at St. John's Church in Richmond, Virginia, and is credited with having swung the balance in convincing the Virginia House of Burgesses to pass a resolution delivering the Virginia troops to the Revolutionary War. Among the delegates to the convention were future US Presidents Thomas Jefferson and George Washington. Reportedly, those in attendance, upon hearing the speech, shouted, "give me liberty or give me death!"[1]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Give_me_Liberty,_or_give_me_Death!

[StCuthbert]

01:38 PM on 08/26/2010

Somewhat peaceful? That's an interesting way to describe a society where Jews and Christians were treated as third class citizens.

[lonngfello]

02:47 PM on 08/26/2010

Going strictly by demographics I would expect there was relative peace in 1880 Palestine before the zionist movement. How much fighting could their have been 1880 when 5% of the population was Jewish? The numbers in percentage of Jews to Arabs translates to: 1800 = 3%, 1880 = 5%, 1915 = 15%, 1931 = 21%, 1947 = 48%, The Christians were not mentioned in the chart. Going by the numbers alone I would conclude the rising violence between Jews and Arabs would correlate with the rising percentage of Jews(migrating Zionists) in Palestine.

Demographics in Palestine[2] year Jews Arabs
1800 6,700 268,000
1880 24,000 525,000
1915 87,500 590,000
1931 174,000 837,000
1947 630,000 1,310,000

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zionist_and_Palestinian_Arab_attitudes_before_1948

[Brewerstroupe]

10:44 PM on 08/26/2010

"third class citizens."
This is largely not true. The Dhimmi tax, which was the major discriminatory factor applied because of the political mix in Islam i.e. Muslims supported the State through the Mosque. In its earliest form it was a tithe levied to support the army - protection if you will. On one documented occasion when the ruler (I thjink it was Umar) had to take the army away on other business, he refunded the Dhimmi tax during his period of absence.
The Dhimmi Tax became a Head tax under the Ottomans, distinguished from the equivalent imposed on Muslims only by name.
The entire history of the Ottoman Empire is littered with Jewish Ministers of State and important personages. Some that come to mind from ancient times are: Hekim Yakup Pasa, Moses Hamon, Ishak Pasha, Abraham de Castro, Joseph Nasi. In 1908 there were five Jewish members of the Ottoman Parliament. Sir Sassoon Eskell was Iraq's Minister of Finance up until 1936 (from memory).

[Alex Young]

12:24 AM on 08/26/2010

israel has existed for only 60 + years.

it might be useful to compare america at age 60 with israel.

ownership of slaves

women and non land owners could not vote

War is declared by the United States against Mexico, backed by southerners while northern Whigs were in opposition

U.S. President Polk invoked the concept of Manifest Destiny, announcing to Congress that the Monroe Doctrine should be strictly enforced and that the settlement of the West should be aggressively pursued

shall i continue?

[RubalKhali]

01:26 AM on 08/26/2010

In those 60 + years Israel has been an occupier of foriegn lands for 47, attacked everyone of its nieghbours and a few that aren't. The only true roadblock to peace is Israel.

[IDF]

08:36 AM on 08/26/2010

Define your version of peace please.

I'll put my money on ME without Israel.

[IDF]

08:44 AM on 08/26/2010

Define your version of peace, please.

I'll put my money on ME without Israel.

[IDF]

08:56 AM on 08/26/2010

Are you reading my mind? This argument has been in my head for the last two weeks.

[Brewerstroupe]

05:42 PM on 08/25/2010

The Secrets In Israel’s Archives
By Jonathan Cook
18 August, 2010

...a decision quietly taken last month by Benjamin Netanyahu... to extend by an additional 20 years the country’s 50-year rule for the release of sensitive documents.

The new 70-year disclosure rule is the government’s response to Israeli journalists who have been seeking through Israel’s courts to gain access to documents that should already be declassified.....

The state’s chief archivist says many of the documents “are not fit for public viewing” and raise doubts about Israel’s “adherence to international law”, while the government warns that greater transparency will “damage foreign relations”.

The army’s post-war tasks included flushing out thousands of farmers hiding in caves and woods to send them over the new border. Homes were looted before the army set about destroying all traces of 200 villages so that there would be nowhere left for the former inhabitants to return to. The first Jewish settlers sent to till the fields recalled seeing the dispossessed owners watching from afar.

The Haaretz investigation offers an account of methodical and wholesale ethnic cleansing that sits uncomfortably not only with the traditional Israeli story of 1967 but with the Israeli public’s idea that their army is the “most moral in the world”. That may explain why several prominent, though unnamed, Israeli historians admitted to Haaretz that they had learnt of this “alternative narrative” but did nothing to investigate or publicise it.

http://www.countercurrents.org/cook180810.htm

[Jared Israel]

08:55 PM on 08/25/2010

More venom from Post-anything-as-long-as-it-smears-Israel-Incorporated.

I read the Haaretz article this is based on. The supposed statement by the chief archivist, quoted above, is, in Haaretz' article, an amalgam of a partial quote from something he SUPPOSEDLY told Haaretz, and something Haaretz claims they learned he said in a non-public meeting. So: Is Haaretz reliable?

Haaretz is a "New Historian" newspaper: its passion is to discredit Israel's war of independence, supporting the Arab victim narrative.

Since in the quote Haaretz claims it was given, the archivist says the archives should stay *closed*, why would he turn around and tell Haaretz, which is suing to open the archives, that they are closed because they reveal terrible things? Split personality? Or a Haaretz lie?

What he might have told Haaretz was that keeping ANY secret service archives closed has implications for international law, and Haaretz published the truncated sentence because his full sentence contradicts their hate-Israel message.

As for the stuff about flushing out farmers, ethnic cleansing, etc., that's venom from Cook (whose jnob is attacking Israel) and Haaretz.

Many (most?) Arab states would ban such a viciously hostile newspaper, saying something about them and the state Haaretz routinely *lies* to destroy, where it's NOT banned.

The Haaretz article has nothing about damaging Israel’s relations, as claimed above. So: an unreliable rendition of a possibly concocted so-called “news” report from a ruthless/vicious combatant.

National Enquirer anyone?

[lonngfello]

09:14 PM on 08/25/2010

Did you read the post below? I can't help wondering if you have bought into exactly what this post is referring to.

MMIIXX 5 hours ago (4:19 PM) 137 Fans
Become a fan Unfan
"Hasbara refers to the propaganda efforts to sell Israel, justify its actions, and defend it in world opinion. Using contemporary euphemisms, it is Public diplomacy for Israel, or using a pejorative interpretation, then it is apologia. Israel portrays itself as fighting on two fronts: the Palestinians and world opinion. The latter is dealt with hasbara. The premise of hasbara is that Israel's problems are a matter of better propaganda, and not one of an underlying unjust situation."

More...
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Hasbara

[IDF]

09:23 PM on 08/25/2010

The irony about this "so called" news paper is that in any Arab country a publisher of this sort would be executed for crimes against the state.

Another irony, most of Israel's haters who comes up with insane arguments why Israel is not a "democracy" are so quick to quote Haaretz to support their argument.

[IDF]

09:14 PM on 08/25/2010

the far right have only one Rush Limbaugh. The far left is blessed with many. Jonathan cook is only one of the players on the dream team of lefties Rush's.

[Jared Israel]

10:51 PM on 08/25/2010

Actually much of the attack on Israel comes from the right, and not just the David Duke and Stormfront types, but also, in an open and violent way, from the Catholic Right, such as the SSPX (remember that Jew-baiting bishop whose excommunication the pope ended last year?) and in a slightly veiled way, from the Vatican itself -- quite a formidable opponent, and probably the main force behind European opposition to Israel.

An article of mine about the Vatican's role -- "Vatican Complicity in Yeshiva Murders" -- can be read at http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/7836

And Hamas and the Iranian mullahs are hardly left wing, whatever bizarre claims they may make.

So while there are people on both self-described right and left who want to destroy Israel, there are people on the right, including I assume you, and people like me, a left wing socialist of the variety of Julio Alvarez del Vayo, foreign minister of spain before the fascist victory, whose critique of the Arab Palestinians in 1947 resonates today:
http://emperor.vwh.net/history/br.htm#vayo

And by the way, Israel was not founded by people like Rush Limbaugh. The founding leaders were the Labor Zionists, people with the politics of Congressman Jerrold Nadler of New York, who is a leftist and pro-Israel.

As am I

Jared Israel http://emperors-clothes.com

[Jared Israel]

11:11 PM on 08/25/2010

I may have *entirely* misunderstood your point. (I.e., assuming you were on the right.) If so, it shows that I need sleep. :-) (And thanks for fanning)

But regardless of that, the point I made -- that many on both right AND left defend Israel (Congressmen Markey, Waxman and Nadler are among the most left congressmen, and all defend Israel) is still an important point. Israel's enemies wish to limit the ranks of its defenders as much as possible.

Jared

[MMIIXX]

04:19 PM on 08/25/2010

"Hasbara refers to the propaganda efforts to sell Israel, justify its actions, and defend it in world opinion. Using contemporary euphemisms, it is Public diplomacy for Israel, or using a pejorative interpretation, then it is apologia. Israel portrays itself as fighting on two fronts: the Palestinians and world opinion. The latter is dealt with hasbara. The premise of hasbara is that Israel's problems are a matter of better propaganda, and not one of an underlying unjust situation."

More...
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Hasbara

[lonngfello]

08:28 PM on 08/25/2010

Human Nature often dictates irrational behavior or beliefs, especially if one perceives they will gain by being irrational. The last sentance in your quote, "The premise of hasbara is that Israel's problems are a matter of better propaganda, and not one of an underlying unjust situation," makes exactly that point.

I wonder if in the subconsious mind, the new generation having been schooled in falsehoods, would ever be able to understand and admit, they were mislead by those who preceded them? Again, that same human nature would compell most to continue in irrational belief for the very same reason, of perceived personal gain, that compelled the originators.

[MMIIXX]

03:31 AM on 08/26/2010

I would call it "programing" ,or "indoctrination" thanks to the "originators".

[Londoncall]

02:50 AM on 08/26/2010

Sit Tom Phillips, the outgoing British ambassador gave this interesting interview to the JPost - for some reason I can't find the whole thing, but here are parts of it:
http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Columnists/Article.aspx?id=183074
You can see that, despite following the government line, he is trying very tactfully to explain what is wrong with Israel's policies and attitudes - one being that this is all just a problem of hasbara, and it will all be OK if they just throw some more hasbara on top.

[MMIIXX]

04:18 PM on 08/25/2010

Blogs are being "targeted" by Israel's PR propagandist (Hasbara).
"Hasbara is the Hebrew word for public diplomacy, i.e. the role people outside of government can have to spread pro-Israel messages and attack Israel's critics. It is a tried and tested propaganda method long relayed not only by Israeli citizens, but also pro-Israel lobbies (e.g. AIPAC), pro-Israel Jewish community groups (e.g. CRIF) and pro-Israel think tanks (e.g. WINEP). With the advent of the web, pro-Israel groups working in tandem with Israel's Ministry of Foreign Affairs has conducted an often successful and often intensive hasbara effort targeting bloggers. This has included, for instance, efforts to leave comments in blog posts regarding Israel to defend the Israeli perspective."
More...
http://www.arabist.net/blog/2010/5/31/how-israeli-hasbara-works.html

[IDF]

09:02 PM on 08/25/2010

"Blogs being targeted by Israel's PR propagandist"
Sounds like it's your own private property. Is there a toll charge?

"Hasbara is the Hebrew word for public diplomacy"
Your knowledge of the Hebrew language and the fact that you are wiling to share this "knowledge" is so moving. I am in tears.

"Its a tried and tested propaganda method"
I have to agree with you. We are speaking the language of propaganda, cos the language of truth and enlightenment is already divinely assigned to you.

"pro-Israel groups working in tandem with Israel's Ministry of Foreign Affairs has conducted an often successful and often intensive hasbara effort targeting bloggers."
Sorry, but that's really our only skill. All we do in life is "targeting". Some time innocent terrorist, and some time innocent bloggers.

You see, unlike you we don't have any passion for issues, we are only guns for hire by the super Munster "Hasbara" ministry.

I suggest you look up in the dictionary the word "Arrogant" , and please ask somebody to explain to you what it means, cos you wouldn't know what arrogant is, if it hit you in the face with the force of a high speed train.

[Jared Israel]

09:16 PM on 08/25/2010

Hey, just by the way, you "fanned" a post of mine, but I actually never got fanned.

But that's OK. I don't mind sitting here, sad and lonely, in the dark. :-)

[barefoot2626]

01:37 AM on 08/26/2010

> I suggest you look up in the dictionary the word

You don't even know what "START" means. You are not exactly in the position to be giving English lessons.

[IDF]

12:55 PM on 08/25/2010

“Ehud Ulmert the former prime minister of Israel Spent countless hours one on one with Abbas negotiating the terms of peace agreement.

It's also known that Abbas was offered 97% of the west bank and the remaining 3% from other Israeli territory.

Another known fact is Ulmert offered a returned of some 20,000 refugees.

Ulmert was for many years part of the Likud party, he split, together with Sharon over the issue of the occupation and form the Kadima party committed to END the occupation.

The Gaza pull out was an Israeli initiative over the objection of the Busch administration and even the PA came along kicking and screaming.

Abbas confirmed he did get the above mentioned offer from Ulmert, but declined to give explanation why he refused.

Now, I would like to pose a question to all the Palestinians and their supporters here. Do you think you have ANY responsibility for the stalled negotiation?

You are complaining about Bibi, why you didn't cooperated with Sharon and Ulmert when they extended a hand?

I know you are going to jump on the issue of the settlements, and the most right wing administration in Israel's history. I am not a Bibi supporter and the settlements are a huge problem and a big mistake on our part.

In my view it didn't have to get to this point had the Palestinians showed more cooperation with the Kadima Administration.

[barefoot2626]

12:34 PM on 08/27/2010

Israel has **never** "offered" *all* of the lands it took in the war it started nor the right of return.

[IDF]

11:00 AM on 08/25/2010

Ehud Ulmert the former prime minister of Israel Spent countless hours one on one with Abbas negotiating the terms of peace agreement.

It's also known that Abbas was offered 97% of the west bank and the remaining 3% from other Israeli territory.

Another known fact is Ulmert offered a returned of some 20,000 refugees.

Ulmert was for many years part of the Likud party, he split, together with Sharon over the issue of the occupation and form the Kadima party committed to END the occupation.

The Gaza pull out was an Israeli initiative over the objection of the Busch administration and even the PA came along kicking and screaming.

Abbas confirmed he did get the above mentioned offer from Ulmert, but declined to give explanation why he refused.

Now, I would like to pose a question to all the Palestinians and their supporters here. Do you think you have ANY responsibility for the stalled negotiation?

You are complaining about Bibi, why you didn't cooperated with Sharon and Ulmert when they extended a hand?

I know you are going to jump on the issue of the settlements, and the most right wing administration in Israel's history. I am not a Bibi supporter and the settlements are a huge problem and a big mistake on our part.

In my view it didn't have to get to this point had the Palestinians showed more cooperation with the Kadima Administration.

[barefoot2626]

12:37 PM on 08/27/2010

> Another known fact is Ulmert offered a returned
> of some 20,000 refugees.

20K out of one million, gosh!!!! what generosity.

Meanwhile, Jews have the "right of return" even though they have no connection to Israel whatsoever. None. Zero.

It's a matter of time.

[forbiddenplanet]

10:34 AM on 08/25/2010

The parameters for a peace deal are on the PLO web-site. Give or take 3-5% everything has been discussed and most items put to paper. Regardless of either sides' postering that is the deal.

The Pal rejected it several times (lastly, Abbas in 2008).

What is their counter-offer?

They don't have one because they haven't as a people decided what comprimises they're willing to make. Its as simple as that.

Here's the Hamas position from August 15, 2010:

"Hamas, 10 other groups reject all forms of compromise with Israel"

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/hamas-10-other-groups-reject-all-forms-of-compromise-with-israel-1.308197

[lonngfello]

08:48 AM on 08/27/2010

As the occupiers, the onus for concessions would fall on the Israelis and nobody else. Israel has taken from the Palestinians, that is documented. What have the Palestinians taken in comparison from the Isrealis over the last 60 or 70 years?
In 1880 the Jewish population was 5% that of the Arabs? The numbers are in percentage when taken in comparison of Jews to Arabs translates to: 1800 = 3%, 1880 = 5%, 1915 = 15%, 1931 = 21%, 1947 = 48%, The Christians were not mentioned in the chart. Going by the numbers alone, I would conclude the rising violence between Jews and Arabs would correlate with the rising percentage of Jews(migrating Zionists) into Palestine.
"Demographics in Palestine[2]
year Jews Arabs
1800 6,700 268,000
1880 24,000 525,000
1915 87,500 590,000
1931 174,000 837,000
1947 630,000 1,310,000 "
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zionist_an­d_Palestin­ian_Arab_a­ttitudes_b­efore_1948

[forbiddenplanet]

01:20 PM on 08/27/2010

Random statistics unrelated to my post don't your point make.

"As the occupiers, the onus for concessions would fall on the Israelis"

That's YOUR opinion. Mine is that if there are 2 parties to a conflict they can each provide an offer and/or counter-offer. Go to the soukh - that's how it works.

[Flyingpigs]

11:43 PM on 08/24/2010

Just wondering why HP doesn't mention the recent clash in Lebanon between Shi'ites and Sunnis where a Sunni Mosque was burned down by Shi'ite Moslems... Where 3 are dead and many seriously wounded... Is this called selective Journalism? If it was a Jew or Israeli burning a Mosque then its newsworthy to be posted? But NO JEW NO ISRAELI NO POST - Much like the infamous - Khartoum of three NOs by Arab League in 1967 - 1. NO peace with Israel 2. NO recognition of Israel. 3. NO negotiations with Israel. Now its the same but w/ preconditions... in other words - NO

[MMIIXX]

01:49 AM on 08/25/2010

That like me asking why doesn't Huffington Post mention the almost daily over flights of Lebanon by Israeli Fighter/Bombers .You know an act of terrorism against the people of Lebanon .

[Flyingpigs]

04:17 PM on 08/26/2010

Or the rockets lying from Gaza or the Genocide of Christians that took place in southern Lebanon or presently in Gaza or the Racist laws of the PA - like selling LAND to Jews is Death... or its Illegal for a Non-Moslem to marry a Moslem... Like they just opened a brand NEW Shopping (Modern) Center in Gaza... Yeah... let's be real,,, Fx,,, Cnn,,, Hp... etc.. they are all the same - but shout from different corners... while the posters wear colored eye glasses and see only what they want to see...... get real!

[MMIIXX]

01:50 AM on 08/25/2010

Or this story "Israeli Mossad Spying in America ." as linked below.

[Flyingpigs]

04:19 PM on 08/26/2010

more like the NSA... but we don't want to say that caus they will tap in computer... oops they have already done that w/ the ok of Bush, Obama and both Congresses... Dems and Reps

[MMIIXX]

08:40 PM on 08/24/2010

Is this anti-semetic or News....?

Israeli Mossad Spying in America .
Israeli government claims that it does not spy on the United States are intended for the media and popular consumption. The reality is that Israel’s intelligence agencies target the United States intensively, particularly in pursuit of military and dual-use civilian technology. Among nations considered to be friendly to Washington, Israel leads all others in its active espionage directed against American companies and the Defense Department. It also dominates two commercial sectors that enable it to extend its reach inside America’s domestic infrastructure: airline and telecommunications security. Israel is believed to have the ability to monitor nearly all phone records originating in the United States, while numerous Israeli air-travel security companies are known to act as the local Mossad stations.

http://www.intifada-palestine.com/2010/08/philip-giraldi-israeli-mossad-spying-in-america/

[Brewerstroupe]

10:39 PM on 08/24/2010

I cannot see any reference to assaults on Jewish people, desecrating tombstones or Synagogues so my guess is its not antisemitic.

Israel spying on America? That's not news.

[lonngfello]

10:14 AM on 08/25/2010

Seems like much of what Israel does is anti-Semitic because much of what they do turns fair minded people against them. Could it be they are their own worst enemy? If they are spying on us are they really our fiends as they claim to be? Seems like they expect their "friends' to look the other way while they just go ahead and do..................................what ever they can get away with.

[lonngfello]

08:42 AM on 08/24/2010

Why is there so much denial regarding the realities of Israel? Everybody can't possibly be right when the statements being mede are so contradictory. I keep seeing people refering to Israel as a democracy. From what I understand the Zionist movement began more than 100 years ago. It is, afterall, the Zionist Jewish religion, with which the Zionists have claimed rights to Isreal and lands taken, in their case it is a religious edict, prophesy or some divine right from religious text, which is behind the movement and that fact constitutes a religious theocracy. The movement has not stopped since it's beginning as has been evident with the bulldozing of Palistinian homes from ancestral lands to this day, only to be replaced by Zionist "settlers" as Israel law(lessness) allows.
"The Talmud tells us that G-d obligated us not to rebel against the ruling bodies, and not to take the land of Israel by force (see Babylonian Talmud tractate Kesubos 111A).

The aggression that Zionism presents in originally taking the Holy Land from its indigenous inhabitants is the first flag that exposes this movement for what it is -- a real deviation from Judaism. Judaism forbids us from taking the land away from those who currently have jurisdiction over it."

The above quote was exerpted from:
http://www.israelversusjudaism.org/

[nk5otr]

06:25 PM on 08/24/2010

Theocracy is a form of government in which a god or deity is recognized as the state's supreme civil ruler, or in a higher sense, a form of government in which a state is governed by immediate divine guidance or by officials who are regarded as divinely guided.

Democracy is a political form of government where governing power is derived from the people, either by direct referendum (direct democracy) or by means of elected representatives of the people (representative democracy).

The United States, Canada and Australia are all countries that were founded on lands that already had inhabitants living there, yet would anyone consider those countries to not be democracies?

The Knesset in Israel is elected by free and fair elections. The Prime Minister is selected by the party or coalition of parties that have a majority of votes in the Knesset.

Zionism is not solely based on a divine right from religious text. It is also the belief that the Jewish people deserve self-determination and a homeland free from persecution. Israel is the homeland for the Jewish people and has been a homeland for Jews for 6,000 years, whether you agree it was given by God's will or not.

The Zionists did not take the land by force. The modern Zionism movement purchased its land. It was land that at the time people were happy to sell off. Much of the land was considered worthless by its owners and Jews paid a high premium for the land.

[barefoot2626]

07:59 PM on 08/24/2010

> The Knesset in Israel is elected by free and fair elections.

HAhahaha!

It's free and fair as long as you are an Israelis Jew. It is not if you are not.

Were American elections free and fair before 1970?

[barefoot2626]

08:12 PM on 08/24/2010

> The Zionists did not take the land by force. The modern
> Zionism movement purchased its land.

"Zionists" purchased **a fraction** of the land given to the by the UN in 1948.

TINY fraction.

[Jared Israel]

04:12 AM on 08/24/2010

Below, "Brewerstroupe" quoted the Arab League justifying their 1948 invasion of Israel because "The [previous -- J.I.] Zionist aggression resulted in the exodus of more than a quarter of a million of its Arab inhabitants."

Fact: Before the May 15 Arab invasion, Arab provocations, secretly encouraged by the UK, led to a mini civil war. The Dec. 1, 1947 'N.Y. Times' reported that, on Nov. 30, Arabs murdered seven Jews in various parts of the Palestine territory. The 'Times' reported:

"The Arabs will wage a holy war if an attempt is made to enforce the partition plan, Dr. Hussein Khalidi, acting chairman of the Palestine Arab Higher Committee declared in an interview tonight."

And later in the article:

" 'Partition,' Dr. Khalidi said, 'is going to lead to a 'crusade' against the Jews.' "

A pdf of the article is now at http://emperors-clothes.com/a/khalidi.pdf

Regarding refugees, the key is: did the Haganah want them to go? Here's 'Time,' May 3 1948:

"The mass evacuation, prompted partly by fear, partly by orders of Arab leaders, left the Arab quarter of Haifa a ghost city. More than pride and defiance was behind the Arab orders. By withdrawing Arab workers, their leaders hoped to paralyze Haifa. Jewish leaders said wishfully: "They'll be back in a few days. Already some are returning."
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,798519,00.html#ixzz0xUVhtexB

"WISHFULLY"! The Jews DIDN'T want them to leave!!

Jared Israel, Emperor's Clothes

[Brewerstroupe]

05:41 AM on 08/24/2010

An Historian would find your NY Times report interesting for one reason alone. That is to see whether or not the press of the day was accurate.
Khalidi may well have warned that there was trouble in store. How right he was.
Fact is at least 250,000 people were thrown off their land by people who were recent immigrants during this period. It would be truly miraculous if reprisals did not happen.

The myth that Arab orders caused them to leave has been thoroughly debunked by Israeli sources. Even Christopher Hitchens weighed in:
"The "broadcast" issue relates to whether or not the Palestinian Arab population who were dispossessed were induced or incited to run away by their own leadership during the 1948 Palestinian exodus. Hitchens refers to Benny Morris´s then newly published article "The Causes and Character of the Arab Exodus from Palestine: The Israel Defence Forces Intelligence Service Analysis of June 1948", which was first published in January 1986 in the Middle Eastern Studies.

According to Hitchens this confirmation; "by an Israeli historian using the most scrupulous and authentic Zionist sources, at last allows us to write finis to a debate which has been going on for a quarter of a century"

[Jared Israel]

06:11 AM on 08/24/2010

The MAIN way we know what leaders said in 1948 is from documents or media interviews. In this NOVEMBER 1947 N.Y. Times interview at http://emperors-clothes.com/a/khalidi.pdf the Arab Committee chief says they will launch "a crusade against the Jews" if Israel is formed.

So a) a slaughter; B) the supposed eviction of 250,00 was NOT the reason for the invasion, which they promised to carry out six months earlier. And c) they were instigating provocations -- murders -- in November. THEY were the aggressors.

The 'Time Magazine' article is important because a) Time was hostile to Israel, which was seen as Leftwing (its biggest backer was the USSR!); b) the article is not friendly to Israel but c) the writer includes the crucial point that Israelis WANTED the Arabs to return. Crucial.

Regarding Benny Morris and his "New Historians," Prof. Efraim Karsh used original documents to show that Morris lied about every document he quoted, falsely picturing Ben Gurion et al as wanting to drive Arabs out. People can read Karsh at http://www.meforum.org/466/benny-morris-and-the-reign-of-error

Benny Morris was promoted in a big media campaign that made him a star because it suited the big push by the US, the Vatican and other key players to force the Israelis to make Arafat a "peace" partner -- peace in quotes because Arafat was the pupil of Haj Amin Al Husseini, Hitler's aide.

Jared Israel Emperor's Clothes www.emperors-clothes.com

[StCuthbert]

02:08 PM on 08/24/2010

"Fact is at least 250,000 people were thrown off their land by people who were recent immigrants during this period. "

What does it matter when the people moved into the land? You try to kill me, I'm fighting back, no matter whether I just got off the plane or have been there for fifty years.

[Brewerstroupe]

05:42 AM on 08/24/2010

The Hitchens reference.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blaming_the_Victims#.22Broadcasts.22_.28Christopher_Hitchens.29

[Darcha]

04:07 AM on 08/24/2010

For Jared Israel: You're link refers to your own writing, hardly an independent source. If you could supply an independent source for your 'slaughter to end all slaughters' quote, we might talk. For the time being, I'll stick to the facts. A look at the maps of the 48 war show that the Arab armies fought on territory partitioned to the Arab population. Why would Israel fight a defensive war outside its borders? Further, we have Ben-Gurion's own words that the Yishuv only accepted partition as a step to the taking of the whole of Palestine. Are we to assume that Ben-Gurion's statements and later events are just a coincidence?