Popular Culture Exposes Racism That Enables Israeli War Fever

no one likes the Jews and most don't care if they are wiped out.

At present it is the sate of affairs imposed by Jews in Israel on Arabs of Palestine. The crime Slow holocaust of several million people in Palestine by Israel has been well recorded in history now all through last century.

Europeans will move them enmass to Poland and Russia

Illegal immigration is discouraged world wide by all countries. These are illegal immigrants who have occupied the land, properties of people in Palestine.

The Israeli's and Iranians will make their decisions in real time.

Obviously the whole nation of Israel is being mentally brainwashed to accept war and killing of other people through such TV shows and acts. The Nazis played similar acts to make a whole nation accept the concept war and killing.

Surely Israelis are brainwashed in thinking that violence can help their country to be secure. Unless Israel sincerely accepts the 1967 borders, the chance of peace is very low.

Surely Israelis are brainwashed in thinking that violence can help their country to be secure. Unless Israel sincerely accepts the 1967 borders, the chance of peace is very low.

Unless I missed the memo, the Muslim world does not accept Israel's 1967 borders either. Have the Muslims ever said they recognise Israel's existence with in the 1967 borders? They have made no demands to have the land of pre 1967 Israel returned to the Muslims? Last I heard, the Muslims have called for the pre 1947 borders.

Obviously the whole nation of Israel is being mentally brainwashed to accept war and killing of other people through such TV shows and acts.

It seems both the Jews and the Muslim have a lot of blood on their hands with this matter. Peace is not happening in the Holy Land anytime soon. Both sides want peace from victory.

Other then Iran taking out the Israelis and Paleistians and making the matter moot; the best chance for peace is building a wall between the two people. Even then they'll still attack each other.

Illegal immigration is discouraged world wide by all countries. These are illegal immigrants who have occupied the land, properties of people in Palestine.

So what should they do with them? If the Jews were give their eviction notice where would they go? Would they get a one way plane ticket to anywhere? Could we give them Zimbabwe? Should we tell them to start swimming?

More than 80 % of Israelis of European decent have dual and in some cases triple nationalities. They are just hanging in Israel either because of extremist false religious emotional adherence to a so called holy land or simply because living in Israel gives them free opportunities to make fortunes through good jobs, businesses, using occupied free land and resources of Palestine people to uplift their life styles and above all a whole bunch of freebies that are supported by US aid and European free subsidies that are handed over by Europe as a false claim by Israelis on lost property or land in Europe.

This is one big hoax imposed on people of Palestine by the European immigrants who are on the fore front of building illegal settlements on occupied Palestine land.

You might be right. I still doubt the Europeans are looking to take the Jews back. They seemed to of made their opinion clear back in the 1940's.

Unless Israel sincerely accepts the 1967 borders, the chance of peace is very low.

Do the Muslims recognise the 1967 borders? Do they accept Israel within those borders? If not, then the 1967 border issue doesn't seem a path towards peace.

As far as I know that it is true that Palestine Leaders and people who are muslims christians jewishs and other religions are asking for pre-67 borders but Israel is not accepting

As far as I know that it is true that Palestine Leaders and people who are muslims christians jewishs and other religions are asking for pre-67 borders but Israel is not accepting

Research it a bit. The Muslim position is that even the 1967 borders are wrong. Check out the right of return issue. The common opinion is that any Jewish state on that land is unjust. This issue is not a fight over a nation expanding it's borders, it is an issue of a state within borders.

I have sympathy, mockery, displeasure and digust for both sides. Both don't give a @!$%# for the common man. Most folk Jew or Muslim just don't wish to have their kids killed. A decent life is also not much to ask for.

The Jews gave the Palesinians Gaza back. That is a big deal. Few other nations have gave back an area so completely. It did not work out in the manner of other places.

The Muslim position is that even the 1967 borders are wrong. Check out the right of return issue. The common opinion is that any Jewish state on that land is unjust. This issue is not a fight over a nation expanding it's borders, it is an issue of a state within borders.

With some minor changes I think your comment is very perceptive. However, the right of return issue is not a Muslim one nor one in which Muslims hold a significantly different idea than the international concensus. International law is clear that refugees have a right to return. It is an humanitarian principle which discourages state aggression to obtain territory and one that provides for orderly resolution following violence that displaces civilians.

The right of Palestinians returning to their homes directly contradicts Israel's policy to privilege Jews. Thus the common opinion is that it is unjust to discriminate against rightful persons in favor of others (in this case Jews). So it does become a problem of the state that is within those borders.

Is it possible to have a just Jewish state? Sure. Many Zionists have envisioned their homeland as inclusive (magnes one of my favs). Palestinians present a "demographic threat" to Israel because it seeks a particular purity of identity of it's citizens which precludes non-Jews (not just Muslims). There's the moral dilemma. Is it OK to deprive some people of their human rights in order to socially engineer a state which imposes demographic standards like they do in Israel?

Is it OK to deprive some people of their human rights in order to socially engineer a state which imposes demographic standards like they do in Israel?

Is it Ok? No. As a practical matter it is the only way for the Jews to have their nation. Neither the Palestinians or the Jews wish to live under the other guy's rule. Having a large part of your population hostile to the government and the other half of the citizens, is a recipe for civil war. If you think the Jews are bastards now, they would only be worse if it was a civil war.

Both the Palestinians and the Israelis are wrong, right and have legitimate reasons for their hatred and fear. Both people are bloody from wicked deeds and the blood of innocents. Neither side wants peace unless they also have victory.

The Palestinians got the short end of the stick. The Jews took their land and the Muslims used them as pawns. They were kept as stateless people by their allies. That is the root of their current weakness. Their allies then launched the ill fated 1967 war which lost them even more of their land. The Jews have only been hated and attacked repeatedly by the Arabs since day one. At some point you realise you are not making friends with the neighbors.

The Israelis made an attempt at "Land for Peace", they gave back all of Gaza. Gaza had the first free and fair elections in the Arab world. It didn't work out so well for either the Israelis or the Palestinians.

I have little hope these two people will be at peace in my lifetime. I'd do this. Draw a border along where each people live today. The past borders are meaningless now. Then connect the dots and adjust the borders to take in isolated populations. This will entail people being displaced. Hopefully for the last time. Build a big wall between the two folk. Have a cold war for a decade. As time goes by if people don't have their friends, family and children being killed by the otherside, a better peace can develop.

The conflict of two people wanting to live on the same land is hard to solve. The only place I can think of where peace finally came in that situation is Ireland. Even that took a thousand years.

As a practical matter it is the only way for the Jews to have their nation.

I know what you mean - that it's the way some Jews say their state and it's citizenship must be defined - but it's not the only way.

The conflict is not exclusive to the two peoples as you have framed it. It won't go away even if all the Palestinian refugees were to dry up and blow away tomorrow. The citizenship exclusion applies to all non-Jews, so that children born in Israel who don't have the state sanctioned heritage or non-Jews who marry Jews, are denied by Israel. Refinement of just who qualifies as a Jew and may be entitled to privileges of citizenship also effects the Jewish community itself as Jews who chose not to live in Israel or disagree with Israeli policy are marginalized.

I don't know why you brought up 'land for peace' or the elections but as a clarification I'd like to note that those elections were open to all Palestinians (not only Gaza) and were held to satisfy the requirements of the Road Map plan. The entire plan (as all of the negotiations) have not turned out well/have engendered a worse circumstance.

The new plan you'd endorse (which connects the dots) has been envisioned by others. It's the 2 state solution adjusted for defacto Jewish control of territory that was once thought would be part of a Palestinian state.

I don't endorse a particular solution myself so feel a bit awkward criticizing the proposed solutions others make. I do think that a just solution will address that state which has created citizenship entitlements on the basis of birthright by ever narrowing heritage requirements.

I do think that a just solution will address that state which has created citizenship entitlements on the basis of birthright by ever narrowing heritage requirements.

If they wish to not grant non Jews citizenship it's no skin off my ass. Many nations have quirky rules for citizenship. Religious, cultural and ethnic requirements are not rare. Most nations in that part of the world don't grant non- Muslims full rights either.

The entire plan (as all of the negotiations) have not turned out well/have engendered a worse circumstance.

Because neither side trusts the other and each feel they give up too much for too little gain. Both sides know the wrong concession can doom their people.

I don't know why you brought up 'land for peace' or the elections but as a clarification I'd like to note that those elections were open to all Palestinians (not only Gaza)

I brought it up because the Israelis pulling out of Gaza seemed a concrete move toward peace. Returning disputed territory is a big deal.

it's not the only way.

If they wish to keep Israel a Jewish nation it seems no other way. Neither the Jews or Palestinians have any desire to live in a mixed state. They both seem to desire their own nations.

I brought it up because the Israelis pulling out of Gaza seemed a concrete move toward peace. Returning disputed territory is a big deal.

ah, well, now we both recognize it wasn't. Maybe it wasn't ever designed as "a concrete move toward peace" or a "return of disputed territory" eh? This may sound cynical but the eviction of Israelis was a unilateral move to save Israel money it was using to provide security there.

snipped from a NYT item 2005:

The pullout comes a year and a half after Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, for decades a leading advocate of settlement building, declared his intention to withdraw from Gaza. Mr. Sharon has argued that Israel can no longer afford the costs of maintaining 21 heavily fortified Jewish settlements in the coastal strip, and that Israel's security will be strengthened by removing them.

There was no peace agreement made nor recognition of returning territory. There is nothing concrete at all as regards peace or sacrificing land. There was speculation, based on hopes for peaceful resolution through negotiations, but, no, nothing concrete, no land returned.

They both seem to desire their own nations.

I think that goes to the way the issue has been framed rather than want people want. The people want to live without fear of violence from this political conflict. People want to participate in a just society. The nationalists take advantage of those desires and have created peace and security narratives that have provided neither.

Palestinians access to land in Gaza has declined by about 30% since 2005:

In Gaza an estimated nearly 30% of agrable land according to Save the Children report is inaccessible due to the Israeli buffer zone along the Gaza/Israeli border (OCHA May 2010; Save the Children, 2009). In Gaza, Since Israeli unilateral disengagement of Gaza in 2005, Israel has established a buffer zone along the fence that surrounds Gaza, extending into the Strip's territory by 500m to 1km. Agricultural land is being lost through extension of this buffer zone. Frequent Israeli incursions have also levelled significant amounts of agricultural land and uprooted trees. (ICRC, December 2007) Israel incursion in January 2009 entailed destruction of an estimated 17% of cultivated lands and vast destruction of agricultural related infrastructure (FAO, May 2010). In May 2009, Israel further reduced access to Gaza agricultural land when it expanded the size of its self-declared “buffer zone. Reports suggest that up to 30% of Gaza agrable land is inaccessible due to the buffer zone (Save the Children October 2009; FAO, May 2010).

http://www.internal-displacement.org/idmc/website/countries.nsf/(httpEnvelopes)/3EDA73BE63D0F226C12574B7005087D5?OpenDocument

Giving back land or turning over control in Gaza is an illusion.

This may sound cynical but the eviction of Israelis was a unilateral move to save Israel money it was using to provide security there.

It doesn't sound cynical. It seems reasonable that was part of the reason they gave it up. I doubt it was just out of the goodness of their heart. They did say it was a unilateral withdrawl.

but, no, nothing concrete, no land returned.

It seems to me that the people are living under a Palestinian government and the Israelis are out of much of Gaza. That seems a better deal then when they were occupied by the army and had the settlements in their midst.

Palestinians access to land in Gaza has declined by about 30% since 2005:

I guess it is how you look at it. I would imagine 70% under your control is better then 100% out of your control. Maybe the glass is half full.

The border zone does take up alot of land. Gaza has also attacked across that border. A fair deal would be this. Every year there are no attacks launched from Gaza the security zone shrinks by a 100 meters. It increases by a 100 meters a year if attacks are launched.

Giving back land or turning over control in Gaza is an illusion.

How so? It might not be perfect but the Gazans certainly have more self determination and freedom then when they were occupied by Israel. They are governed under their own government that they voted into office. Their life is not a bed of roses but they do seem to run their own lives more so then the past.

the Gazans certainly have more self determination and freedom then when they were occupied by Israel

I'd be hard pressed to cite examples of the relatively greater benefits to the people of Gaza. What did you have in mind?

They are governed under their own government that they voted into office.

This can't be it. There hasn't been another election since the all Palestinian one in 2006. Six years ago they went to the polls along with other Palestinians to fulfill an obligation toward The Road Map. A plan that disintegrated. That vote is a pretty feeble indicator of freedom I'd say. It's especially feeble considering the extent of power or control they have in mechanisms of governance (trade, currency, borders, air space, population registry & so on) they have.

The people lost the measure of security Israeli forces did provide, they lost access to land and have less control over their own lives (especially economic) since the Israeli withdrawal.

It's part and parcel to the bigger picture there. Like you said the Palestinians have gotten the short end of the stick and it's just getting shorter. There's no appreciable benefit to the people of Gaza for having 1% of it's population withdrawn seven years ago.

I'd be hard pressed to cite examples of the relatively greater benefits to the people of Gaza. What did you have in mind?

They voted for their own leaders. It's a big thing.

(trade, currency, borders, air space, population registry & so on)

The common man thinks little of those things. That their town and community is ruled by their own is a good step towards power.

There's no appreciable benefit to the people of Gaza for having 1% of it's population withdrawn seven years ago.

It's tough to blame that on the Jews. I can't imagine the Gazans were better off occupied with foreign settlements on their land.

eek - It's tough to blame that on the Jews - sorry you went there. I thought better of our exchange.

Thanks for your thoughts.

Our world holds many opinions.

Is it really so radical to believe the Gazans are better off on their own then occupied by Israel? Yeah, they can't be pawns anymore, but it's likely better for the average Mo or Wally.

No one wants to understand real situation of the conflicts when comes to Palestine. Nice work Meloney simple.

hi SPECTACULARARAB - thanks, really.

How radical the belief is depends on who you ask. Is it widely accepted in some quaters? I'd say it is. Does that make it a well founded belief or opinion? No.

Why imagine the people of Gaza are better off when it is contradicted by the facts? Why imagine there is substance to claiming Gaza is not occupied or that the people are relieved of being used as pawns? Why imagine the average guy is better off when the circumstances are demonstrably worse? Those average guys don't stand to benefit by those misperceptions. The economy of Gaza has been suffocated. That serves whose interest?

Why imagine the people of Gaza are better off when it is contradicted by the facts?

Why were they better off with the Jewish settlements in their midst? Why are they better off ruled by the Israelis instead of Hamas?

I agree the Gazan's life sucks. They are boxed in, isolated and raided. Still, you don't hear them asking for the Israelis to come back.

The economy of Gaza has been suffocated.

How was the economy so great for the Gazans when Israel occupied the whole place? Other then the abilty to work for the enemy it doesn't seem much changed.

The economy wasn't "so great" but it was better when businesses could trade outside the Israeli controlled boundaries. It was better when they had 30% more arable land to cultivate. The smuggling tunnels have made up for some of the lost exchange. We already talked about how Jews, the evicted people, were only 1% of the population in Gaza in 2005.

Why are they better off ruled by the Israelis instead of Hamas?

They are still ruled by Israelis! I don't think you understand the limited scope of internal governance there. They were directing traffic and picking up garbage, doing most all of the routine local services while the settlers were there too. At least when the Israelis were in their midst the incursions limited damage so as not to disrupt the business of Israelis. When the settlers were in their midst the Israeli government provided some police services.

Gaza is crawling with UN and NGOs. They don't do anything without a report. Start by looking at the UN agency that works right there to find out what the quality of life is there.

The Gaza Strip is home to a population of more than 1.5 million people, including 1.1 million Palestine refugees.

For the last decade, the socio-economic situation in Gaza has been in steady decline. Years of conflict and closure have left 80 per cent of the population dependent on international assistance. The tightened blockade, imposed following the Hamas takeover of Gaza in June 2007, has decimated lives and livelihoods, resulting in the impoverishment and de-development of a highly skilled and well-educated society. Despite adjustments made to the blockade by the government of Israel in June 2010, restrictions on imports and exports continue to severely hamper recovery and reconstruction.

Operating through more than 11,000 staff in over 200 installations across the Gaza Strip, UNRWA delivers education, health care, relief and social services, microcredit and emergency assistance to registered Palestine refugees.

many, many reports at http://www.unrwa.org/etemplate.php?id=64

Here's a Palestinian NGO flush with reports http://www.pchrgaza.org/portal/en/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=3028&Itemid=176

Here's an Israeli NGO that also reports on Gaza http://www.btselem.org/search/google_cse_adv/gaza

I guess you're right, they might of had it better before.

I see little chance of their fate changing anytime soon. I doubt the Israelis will lift the blockade and pull back from the security zone while attacks are still being launched from Gaza. They have to do a better job with knocking off the missile attacks. Few people have much incentive to lighten up in a case like that.

There is no hope for peace when people are still fighting. The first peace treaty has to make it a cold war. Each year Gaza doesn't launch an attack, Israel will give them back x- amount of land from the security zone and allow x to be imported and exported. If there is an attack then Israel takes a bit more land and x is restricted on trade. Each side would gain something from peace.

This barricading of Gaza began back in the 90's. There were comprehensive peace agreements that resulted in increased Israeli military presence. At the time the prospects for peace seemed so real that an airport was planned and built at the southeast corner of Gaza. A physical barrier was established around Gaza, Israeli settlements expanded in the West Bank outside of that barrier. Restriction of movement in & out of Gaza increased and Israel monitored traffic through gates (called crossings) which they controlled. These became increasingly specialized (ie -one for fuel, one for trucks, a couple for people or cars) and restricted.

In the larger context of this evolving barricading, considering the expansion of Israeli control in the rest of what was to have been a Palestinian state, I do not believe that Palestinians can effect positive change there through knocking off whatever is perceived by Israel to be an attack. It's not a matter of their volition. Palestinians and whatever leadership they have had has been effectively neutered in establishing a separate viable state. They recognize this and have increasingly turned to the international community based primarily on an appeal to human rights.

There will always be hope for peace but the time for treaties, as in two separate states for two peoples, has passed. The way to a just future and peace will not be based on 2 states.

The way to a just future and peace will not be based on 2 states.

You might be right, but it will sure be a bloody one.

As you said, the Gazans especially are boxed in with few options. A couple pissant missiles every couple weeks isn't doing much. They likely have little to lose by playing the peace game. If they declared a real cease fire from Gaza and held it a couple months it would put pressure on Israel to ease up. The Israelis wouldn't have the tit for tat excuse. The Gazans can't do much to stop the Israelis from raiding. Every Israeli raid is 'in response' to an attack. Who started it is always in doubt but each time, both sides are on the offensive.

The Palestinians have it tough. They hold the short end of the stick. Maybe things could of been different, but they were not. I'm not an expert on the region have no dog in the fight. It seems the Palestinians had it better in the mid 1960's, they were ruled by Jordan and Egypt. Their allies attacking Israel cost them alot. Israel was rather small before the 1967 and 1970's war. More importantly they didn't rule Gaza, the West Bank and east Jerusalem.

They should pray that Iran doesn't try to "Save them from the Jews". You know some of those missiles regardless of weapon are falling short or will be shot down. If Jerusalem is nuked or gassed the Israeli Palestian conflict is over. Both people will be destroyed and their children we be unable to live on the land. The common man can only pray both their leaders get their act together and have a calm head.

If they declared a real cease fire from Gaza and held it a couple months it would put pressure on Israel to ease up. The Israelis wouldn't have the tit for tat excuse.

I think Israel has a larger plan and being they are exponentially more powerful they would be able to identify a tit (hmm?) any time their strategy needed a tat. iow, no matter how compliant and peaceful the Palestinians behave they will never be Jews and will be subject to the fundamental discrimination against non-Jews imposed by Israel. The only asset Palestinians have to resist Israeli control is people. Do you see what happens when they rise up in peaceful protest? This is why they have made a plea to the international community.

As to the bloody future (entirely a guess assuming the US continues to support Israel's regional dominance in the near term) I think we're seeing it played out now in Syria (part of the Biblical levant) and other areas where turmoil leads in instability that can then be colonized and gradually have imperial power exerted to exclude some people and privilege others. With the waning power of the US the influence of Russia and especially China will eventually intercede.

With the waning power of the US the influence of Russia and especially China will eventually intercede.

What what you wish for. I'm not sure a Chinese take over would work out so well.

My mom was from Northern Ireland and I was sent there to go to some of high school in the 1980's. It was to get me away from a bad element. The Bronx vs North Ireland, I'm glad I don't have to make that choice with my kids. I am empathetic with the hatred of those that kill your loved ones.

I am empathetic to the Palestinians but see little good coming from the current state of affairs. I doubt the Palestinians if the shoes were reversed would treat the Jews much differently.

Call me an optimist. I don't see any end for this region except in war and one side driving the other people away. More likely the issue between these people will be rendered moot with an Israel vs Iran war. That said, I didn't imagine the uneasy peace of Northern Ireland today when I was there.

There can be no compromise when the otherside is killing your people and children. A coldwar or hot peace at least gives the people some breathing room.

ha - was the move from the Bronx to Northern Ireland like going from the frying pan into the fire? I love to hear your mom tell the story of how that decision came down.

It could well be that the same sort of thing would happen if reversed Palestinian to Jews. If the Jews had an established homeland and then people from Palestine decided that was where their homeland should be and should be exclusive to Palestinians so excluded the Jews ... um, it doesn't quite work the other way but I take the point that the behavior is human - not related to ethnicity or religion or where they were born ...

I'm sending a FR because I've enjoyed our exchange and hope to find you else where on the Vine OK?