Comments on: The Archipelago of Eastern Palestine

By: Qifa Nabki

Qifa Nabki — Tue, 12 May 2009 03:57:51 +0000

I think we’ve solved the Arab-Israeli conflict so this comment board can be shut down now. Cheers.

By: Akbar Palace

Akbar Palace — Tue, 12 May 2009 01:33:15 +0000

Mike,

Be aware of what?

By: mike

mike — Tue, 12 May 2009 01:06:25 +0000

You see guys? The last two comments prove my point. So be aware.

Did I mention “Jew” anywhere in my comment?

By: Akbar Palace

Akbar Palace — Tue, 12 May 2009 00:41:50 +0000

Therefore, I’d ask the Arab commentators to take this information into consideration when they converse with zionists on this or any other blog.

Strangely,

Lots of people have no problem conversing with Zionists. Who knows why? Maybe because they accept Israel?

Anyway, count the Pope as one such person out of millions…

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3714295,00.html

By: Akbar Palace

Akbar Palace — Tue, 12 May 2009 00:41:36 +0000

Therefore, I’d ask the Arab commentators to take this information into consideration when they converse with zionists on this or any other blog.

Strangely,

Lots of people have no problem conversing with Zionists. Who know why? Maybe they accept Israel?

Anyway, count the Pope as one such person out of millions…

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3714295,00.html

By: mike

mike — Tue, 12 May 2009 00:22:00 +0000

I’d like to point out to Arab commentators in particular, that there is a new theory which seeks to explain why the words zionist and zombie share the same page in the English dictionary. There is an emerging consensus that the two words have more in common than just having fallen by accident into that same page. There are striking similarities, people are saying, between a zionist and the qualities of a zombie. In particular, the proponents of the theory point out to the definition of the word zombie: “a person held to resemble the so-called walking dead or a person markedly strange in appearance or behavior” as it appears in the dictionary to be equally applicable to the zionist (notice that I am using a non capital letter z on purpose).
Therefore, I’d ask the Arab commentators to take this information into consideration when they converse with zionists on this or any other blog.

By: AIG

AIG — Mon, 11 May 2009 23:47:57 +0000

Your example is not the right analogy. The right one is as follows. Two clans live in an apartment house. They start fighting. Clan A evicts Clan B. In a nearby building the reverse happens. Clan B evicts Clan A. Clan A accepts into its building its evicted clan members while Clan B doesn’t. That is the right example. The Arabs created the Palestinian refugee problem by rejecting the 47 UN Partition Resolution and by going to war in order to throw the Jews in the sea.

Not only can I pass the buck, I have every moral right to do so. The Arabs created the mess and therefore should solve it.

You have a very narrow view of the 1948 conflict. You are focused on the actual result without looking at why it was achieved and what were the other possible turn of events.

You should rethink your views because they lead to ridiculous conclusions. According to you, it would have been better had the Jews murdered all the Palestinians instead of evicting them because then today there would not be discrimination and oppression. And, the Jewish state would not be at the expense of anybody because there would be no Palestinians. So it seems that according to you, Jews cannot have a state because they just evicted the Palestinians instead of murdering them.

By: sean

sean — Mon, 11 May 2009 22:15:07 +0000

I’m afraid you can’t pass the buck. It’s like if I went to a building, evicted all of the residents and then when they weren’t allowed to buy apartments in neighboring buildings, claimed that their homelessness was the fault of the neighboring buildings and not the initial eviction. Why should Israel’s neighbors clean up the mess that she created?

Finally, I am a liberal humanist, and as such, I cannot accept the ideology of an exclusionary religio-ethnic state. I am against states that define themselves ethnically, racially or religiously at the expense of other populations within that state. As someone whose academic specialty is genocide and ethnic violence, I can see that such mindsets lead to discrimination and oppression in the best case scenario and ethnic cleansing and/or genocide in the worst. Israel/Palestine saw ethnic cleansing in 1948 and is currently an example of discrimination and oppression. I fear that if a just solution is not enforced soon, it’s only a matter of time before another attempt at ethnic cleansing occurs. (See transferists and even your own idea of stripping Arabs of their citizenship.)

So the short answer is no, I don’t think you have the right to a Jewish state at the expense of the Palestinians.

By: AIG

AIG — Mon, 11 May 2009 21:50:12 +0000

So what if Israel wanted to absorb the Jews from Arab lands? I mean that is not surprising and only natural. What is surprising and sad is that the Arabs did not want to absorb their Palestinian brethren, but decided to cynically use their suffering as a weapon against Israel. Therefore, the Palestinian refugees are the responsibility of the Arab countries, not Israel. The Arabs could have easily absorbed the refugees but chose not to in an evil and cynical manner.

Ok, Israel is not perfect, we are just as bad as Japan. I can live with that.

But let’s return to the main point. Do you still deny me the right to a Jewish state?

By: sean

sean — Mon, 11 May 2009 21:05:29 +0000

Actually, the refugee crisis that comes to mind first is that of Rwandan Tutsis, who were exiled in 1959 but were not allowed to return, contrary to the universal declaration of human rights, which states that "Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country." The Hutu government decided that there was no space for the Tutsis and that their presence might jeopardize the majority rule of the Hutus, so they were not allowed back into the country and were left to rot in refugee camps in Uganda, Burundi and the Congo. They finally came back to Rwanda, through force of arms. Also, Israel wanted to "absorb" the oriental Jews. In some cases, like in Iraq, the Israeli government actually colluded with the Arab government to organize the expulsion of Jews. To my mind, any Jews who left any Arab country should have the right to return. Here in Lebanon, where the Jewish population increased after 1948, I think the country would be bettered by the return of Lebanese Jews, most of whom are now in Paris, Montreal and New York. As for the Catholic monks, give me a break. Answer me this question: could I move to Israel and be naturalized as a citizen? Do you not think that it's racist that a Palestinian cannot move to Israel or become Israeli even if he/she marries an Israeli? And as for Japan, it is a super racist country, and many people view it as such, including the UN.