It should be noted that Israel started the Six Day War in 1967. While they may try to justify it as a "pre-emptive strike" made in self defense, the simple fact is that Israel INITIATED the war and is therefore the aggressor and in the wrong. Any territory taken in that war CANNOT be legally annexed. So any claim by Israel to the 1967 "border" can only legally be a claim of occupation of Palestinian territory for security reasons. There is no way it can legally be considered as Israeli territory unless Palestine lets it go in good faith negotiations.

Considering that Israel has already illegally annexed foreign territory, including East Jerusalem, Syria's Golan Heights and Lebanon's Shebaa Farms (in 1981), I don't believe good faith negotiations with Palestine over ceding any territory will get very far.

http://www.lotsofessays.com/viewpaper/1691729.html

Israel's annexations are violations of international law and contravene a number of UN resolutions including 252, 267, 271, 279, 285, 298, 337, 427, 446, 452, 465, 476, 478, 497, 509, 517, & 587 (I left out the other ones, restricting the list only to resolutions pertaining to Israel's illegal annexations.)

http://www.ifamericansknew.org/stats/un.html

That is Israel's interpretation of Resolution 242, but their interpretation is NOT in keeping with the agreement, since it states:

"that the fulfillment of Charter principles requires the establishment of a just and lasting peace in the Middle East which should include the application of both the following principles:

Withdrawal of Israeli armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict;"

Granted it didn't explicitly specify ALL territories occupied in the '67 conflict, however, it states elsewhere:

that it emphasizes "the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war..."

Since anything past the Green Line was territory taken in war, it CANNOT legally be annexed, so, while Israel MAY be able to hang on to the 1967 "borders" temporarily, they are and will remain occupied palestinian territory and can never legally be a part of Israel. These occupied territories include East Jerusalem, illegally annexed by Israel in 1967, which contravenes Resolution 242 and a number of other UN resolutions.

I'm not the OP... But I'll gladly answer.

1) Israel is a expansionist entity that encroaches on Arab land by military means and settlement activity... This is NOT internationally recognized nor legal.

2) The Israeli economy is based on War... Industries & population donate extreme amounts of money to the cause. A booming economy in a financially desperate area of the globe. Sound normal? plz don't give me BS that Israelis are real hard workers Yea I'll call them "ROGUE" if they refuse to sign the NPT.

3) The military style expulsion of civilians is unacceptable... The Jews know this first hand.

4) The unrelenting Israeli lobby in the US has taken over. Much of US foreign policies aren't even decided in the states Until Obama?

5) They are just as fanatically religious as their adversaries... Don't kid yourself.

6) The Jews had militias in the past... Why do they call resistance>>> Terrorist now? Their spy agency "Mossad" thinks nothing of assassinating people abroad... This fact, makes us all a potential target to the whims of the Israeli military.




As a side note... The land allocated to Israeli settlements should not have been in an area where fighting has been going on for thousands of years... over the same chit over and over.
North Dakota would have been more suitable I say!


Nothing against the Jews... Everything against Israel. 39 governments since It's birth... Do the math, there can NEVER be stability there!

EDIT*

No not North Dakota!!!!.... We're gonna need a buffer zone so South Dakota then!

ZOA: ABBAS” FATAH “HAMAS NEED NOT STOP MURDERING JEWS OR RECOGNIZE ISRAEL “

By Ruth King on June 22nd, 2010

ABBAS’ FATAH: HAMAS NEED NOT STOP MURDERING JEWS OR RECOGNIZE ISRAEL

Senior Fatah leader, Nabil Shaath – considered a “moderate” – speaking on behalf of Mahmoud Abbas’ Fatah, which controls the Palestinian Authority (PA) last week said that Hamas, the genocide-seeking terrorist group that has controlled Gaza since violently seizing the territory in 2007, need not recognize Israel, nor stop murdering Jews in Israel, nor meet any other demands laid down by the Quartet (the U.S., European Union, Russia and the United Nations).

Hamas calls in its Charter to the destruction of Israel (Article 15) and the murder of Jews (Article 7) and has murdered over 600 Israelis in nearly a decade of suicide bombing, roadside bomb, sniping and rocket attacks. Yet the Quartet has demanded only the meager conditions that in order to be accepted as a legitimate party to negotiations, Hamas must recognize Israel, renounce the use of terrorism and accepting the existing Oslo agreements signed by the PA. Already in 2007, the ZOA argued that these conditions, even in the unlikely event that they were accepted by Hamas, are inadequate, as real change in Hamas could only be said to have occurred once it explicitly renounces its Charter, disarms terrorists, ends incitement to hatred and murder against Israel and ceases all violence for at least a year.

Asked in the Jordanian publication, Al-Dustour, to comment on claims by Hamas that the PA was demanding that the Islamist movement recognize Israel’s right to exist as a condition for achieving reconciliation between the two parties, Shaath said, “This is completely untrue. We have never asked Hamas to recognize Israel’s right to exist. Nor have we demanded that they accept the conditions of the Quartet … We want the proposed unity government to be committed to the PLO’s political program, as was the case with the unity government under Ismail Haniyeh … The peace negotiations will be conducted by the PLO. That’s all we’re demanding.” Shaath said that he has been urging European governments to drop their demand that Hamas accept the Quartet’s three conditions, saying, “All the Arab and Islamic states that don’t recognize Israel have agreed to the Arab Peace Initiative … Acceptance of the initiative and a cease-fire [with Israel] is therefore sufficient” (Khaled Abu Toameh, ‘Fatah: No need to end violence,’ Jerusalem Post, June 17, 2010).

In recent days, Shaath has also emphasized that terrorism against Israel is perfectly legitimate:

* “MP Dr. Nabil Shaath, member Fatah Central Committee and Commissioner of Foreign Relations… emphasized that the Fatah’s stated strategy for the struggle is to adopt the growing popular and ‘non-violent’ struggle against Israel, because of the inability to engage in the armed struggle, which has become undesirable now, although it is the right of the Palestinian people, which all international treaties and resolutions have guaranteed” (PA daily, Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, May 20, 2010).

* “The current distancing from the armed struggle does not mean its absolute rejection… He noted that the difficulty of the conflict required the Palestinian people to diversify its activities of struggle – along with an emphasis on the importance of the armed struggle, which laid the basis for the existence of the state and contributed to maintaining the right and presenting it to the world – especially since the armed struggle at the present time is not possible, or is not effective, because of to the difficulties with which the Palestinian people contends” (Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, May 21, 2010, translation courtesy of Itamar Marcus & Nan Jacques Zilberdik, ‘Abbas not truthful to Obama; denies PA incitement,’ Palestinian Media Watch Bulletin, June 10, 2010).

Mahmoud Abbas’ Fatah also does not recognize Israel as a Jewish state, supports terrorism, incites the Palestinian population against Israel and Shaath’s latest statements mirror others by Abbas and other senior Fatah officials:

* Mahmoud Abbas, PA president and Fatah chairman: “I say this clearly: I do not accept the Jewish State, call it what you will.” (Itamar Marcus and Barbara Crook, ‘Mahmoud Abbas: “I do not accept the Jewish State, call it what you will,” Palestinian Media Watch, April 28, 2009).

* Abbas: “The Palestinians do not accept the formula that the state of Israel is a Jewish state.” (David Bedein, ‘Olmert reports to Israel Cabinet Meeting,’ Bulletin [Philadelphia], December 3, 2007).

* Abbas: “It is not required of Hamas, or of Fatah, or of the Popular Front to recognize Israel” (Al-Arabiya [Dubai] and PA TV, October 3, 2006, Itamar Marcus & Barbara Crook, ‘Abbas dupes US: “Recognition” is functional, not inherent,’ Palestinian Media Watch, October 5, 2006).

* Abbas: “[W]ith the will and determination of its sons, Fatah has and will continue. We will not give up our principles and we have said that rifles should be directed against the occupation…. We have a legitimate right to direct our guns against Israeli occupation” (Khaled Abu Toameh, ‘Abbas: Aim guns against occupation,’ Jerusalem Post, January 11, 2007).

* Kifah Radaydeh, senior Fatah official: “Fatah is facing a challenge, because [Fatah] says that we perceive peace as one of the strategies, but we say that all forms of the struggle exist, and we do not rule out the possibility of the armed struggle or any other struggle. The struggle exists in all its forms, on the basis of what we are capable of at a given time, and according to what seems right” [PA TV July 7, 2009, translation courtesy of Itamar Marcus and Nan Jacques Zilberdik, ‘Fatah official: ‘Our goal has never been peace. Peace is a means; the goal is Palestine,’ Palestinian Media Watch Bulletin, July 12, 2009).

* Rafik al-Natsheh, senior Fatah official: “We will maintain the resistance [i.e. terrorism] option in all its forms and we will not recognize Israel …Not only don’t we demand that anyone recognize Israel; we don’t recognize Israel ourselves. However, the Palestinian Authority government is required to do it, or else it will not be able to serve the Palestinian people. I am certain that we will hinder all the traitors who wish to remove the resistance option from the movement’s charter” (Ali Waked, ‘Senior Fatah official: We won’t recognize Israel. Fatah official: Movement to display commitment to armed struggle in upcoming convention,’ Yediot Ahronot, July 22, 2009).

* Muhammad Dahlan, former commander of Fatah forces in Gaza: “We do not demand that the Hamas movement recognize Israel. On the contrary, we demand of the Hamas movement not to recognize Israel, because the Fatah movement does not recognize Israel, even today” (Itamar Marcus and Barbara Crook, ‘Western funders misled: Fatah still refuses to recognize Israel, PA’s “recognition” only to receive international aid,’ Palestinian Media Watch, March 17, 2009).

* Abu Ahmed, Fatah commander: ‘“The base of our Fatah movement keeps dreaming of Tel Aviv, Haifa, Jaffa and Acco. …There is no change in our official position. Fatah as a movement never recognized Israel” (David Bedein, ‘The American Sanitizing of a Terrorist Group,’ Israel National News, October 5, 2006).

* PLO foreign minister Farouk Kaddoumi: “The Palestinian national charter has not been amended until now … It was said that some articles are no longer effective, but they were not changed. I’m one of those who didn’t agree to any changes” (Khaled Abu Toameh, ‘Kaddoumi: PLO charter was never changed,’ Jerusalem Post, April 22, 2004).

ZOA National President Morton A. Klein said, “Nabil Shaath’s latest statements underscore the fraudulence of Fatah’s claims in the West to being moderates and peace-seekers. It perfectly clear that Fatah itself does not accept Israel as a Jewish state, has not renounced terrorism or accepted the idea of a peaceful Palestinian state alongside Israel. Unsurprisingly, it does not expect Hamas to act differently. However now it is demanding explicitly of the Quartet that Hamas be accepted as it is without even its acceptance of the weak requirements of the Quartet.

“The Obama Administration should act on this irrefutable evidence of Fatah’s fraudulent peace pretensions by immediately condemning Abbas’ Fatah-controlled PA and cutting off U.S. aid to it until and unless Fatah renounces its own Constitution calling for Israel’s destruction and the use of terrorism as an indispensable element in the campaign to achieve that goal; arrest and jail terrorists; and end incitement to hatred and murder against Israel in its mosques, media, schools and youth camps.”

http://www.ruthfullyyours.com/2010/06/22/zoa-abbas-fatah-hamas-need-not-stop-murdering-jews-or-recognize-israel/


yet People claim that PA is adhering to 242!

The way this is worded would lead some to think that Israel was there as a safe haven during the war. Yet Israel came about in 1948 ... 3 years after the war.

Insofar as Arab leaders siding with the Axis...

"Meanwhile, back in Israel, the majority of the Irgun (the Jewish National Military Organization, or Irgun Tzvah Leumi - commonly abbreviated Etzel) decided to cease fighting against the British and, instead, assist them in Europe. However, Avraham Stern led a small faction of the Irgun against the British. Stern believed that the war in Europe was so important to the British that they would be more than willing to make consessions to Jews in Israel if this proved necessary. He even negotiated with the Germans and the Italians!"

http://www.stateofisrael.com/arab-israel/worldwarii/


So during WW2 'Israel' was not a safe haven. Indeed many who tried to get away tried to get to the U.S. only to find the doors closed to them. Those who did try to get away from the war persecution found that they had to return to it.

"Although Jews have, over the eighteen centuries since the Roman Exile, maintained a constant presence (albeit small) in the Land of Israel, the modern concept of Zionism - which led to the formation of the State of Israel - has its roots in nineteenth century Europe. There, Jews experienced the political and scientific renaissance known as the Emancipation, which gave Jews the chance to break their general isolation from the day-to-day affairs of the countries in which they resided. Many Jews adopted the ethno-nationalist political ideology that was developing in Europe at the time and set up moshavim - communities which were financed largely by Baron Edmund de Rothschild of Paris - and socialist communes (called kibbutzim) in Israel, their ancient homeland. The first wave of Jews who were so inclined arrived in Israel (then known as Palestine) in 1882, in what is known as the First Aliyah ("going up:" the way Jews describe their immigration to the Holy Land)."

http://www.stateofisrael.com/arab-israel/1stevents/


"The Jewish claim to Palestine was also strengthened by the rapidly increasing Jewish population in this region. Under the leadership of future Israeli prime minister David Ben-Gurion, large tracts of land were purchased from Arabs, many of whom resided abroad. Alarmed at their ever-shrinking majority, the Arabs in Palestine began to take defensive measures. Palestinian Arab nationalist organizations were set up, including the Higher Arab Council, which attempted to influence British policy and to counter the activities of the Zionists. Haj Amin al-Husseini, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, tried to garner foreign support for the cessation of Zionist activity and for the conclusion of the British mandate. The British, in an effort to win Arab support, issued several "White Papers," which restricted Jewish immigration. Palestinian Jews, however, fought the White Papers by helping European Jews immigrate to Palestine illegally."

http://www.stateofisrael.com/arab-israel/priortostate/


Even Israeli history from an Israeli site makes it look like they pushed for a fight and when pushed back yelled "We are being bullied" to the world. Now they bulldoze villages and clear areas in the name of 'security zones' and allow Israeli citizens to build, take over the land thus "repossessed'. How can they cry foul when the rockets that land wouldn't be landing had the land not been taken?

I'm not pro either side. But when you start to push .... expect to be pushed back. You take from another .. expect them to want it back. That goes for the Palestinians as well. Want to fire rockets and shoot at people....put on a real uniform and show who you are instead of hiding with civilians.







yup I'm still lurking.

What was the cause of all of these refugees?

Not knowing what "classic denier rhetoric" is, I kinda resent the implication that I was "employing" it, because it suggests that I'm a "holocaust denier", which I certainly am NOT!!

Moreover, your innuendo suggests that YOU are employing well known propagandist techniques in a deliberate effort to try to tar my feathers.

To keep this post on TOPIC, I guess I should post something relevant to it eh?:

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4316114,00.html

FALSE; it is on occupied Palestinian territory.

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/162880#.UL-QP--z7vg

It could be legally made into Israeli territory IF Palestine sold it to Israel, but indications are that such a sale is unlikely to happen.

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/162856

you all really haven't got an inkling what you talking about!
Sad!

From NYT article - Amid Euphoria Over U.N. Vote, Palestinians Still Face Familiar Challenges

By ISABEL KERSHNER
Published: December 2, 2012


At least in the short term, with Israeli elections scheduled for January, things are likely to get tougher for the Palestinians before they get better.

In Jerusalem on Sunday, the Israeli government unanimously rejected the General Assembly’s decision to upgrade the status of Palestine to a nonmember observer state of the United Nations. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu described the Palestinian move as “a gross violation of the agreements that have been signed with the State of Israel.”

In its latest response, Israel said it would not transfer tax revenues it collected on behalf of the Palestinian Authority last month, instead using the money, about $100 million, to pay off about half the debt run up by the authority to the Israel Electric Corporation.

The Palestinian Authority has already been suffering through a financial crisis, often unable to pay the salaries of its employees on time. Palestinian officials said that Arab countries had promised to donate funds and make up for any losses caused by punitive Israeli actions, though it was a shortfall in donor money, largely from Arab nations, that caused the financial crisis in the first place.

Israel’s financial sanctions followed a government decision to build 3,000 previously planned housing units in contested areas of Jerusalem and in parts of the West Bank that Israel intends to keep under any future arrangement with the Palestinians. The Palestinians have long refused to return to the negotiating table unless Israel halts the construction of settlements.

The government has also decided to continue planning and zoning work for the development of a particularly contentious area of East Jerusalem known as E1, a project long condemned by Washington because it would harm the prospects for a contiguous Palestinian state, though privately, Israeli and Palestinian officials said that this last decision could be easily reversed.

Mr. Abbas, for his part, was expected to hold meetings with the members of his leadership to discuss how to begin to translate the Palestinians’ new status into practical steps.

“We are celebrating our dignity,” said Xavier Abu Eid, a Palestinian spokesman. “Our small nation withstood a lot of pressure for something that is our right.”

But the way forward may be fraught with legal obstacles as the Palestinians try to balance their diplomatic victory with the demands of their previous, more concrete achievements.

Israel signed its agreements with the Palestine Liberation Organization, which resulted in the creation of an interim self-rule body, the Palestinian Authority. Asked whether the Palestinian Authority would remain the Palestinian Authority in name, Mr. Abu Eid said: “That requires a decision of the leadership. I think it will not be changed in a day.”

Palestinian officials have insisted that they will not give up the option of seeking to join the International Criminal Court and pursuing claims against Israel, and some Palestinians now expect their leaders to take legal action against the Israelis’ settlement building.

Letters of application for membership in various United Nations bodies and international agencies have been signed “The State of Palestine.”

But the Palestinians may not rush to change the name on the front of their passports to Palestine. Even Mr. Abbas is dependent on Israel’s good graces to be allowed to travel through checkpoints and across borders.

Many Palestinians were hoping that Mr. Abbas would now seek genuine reconciliation with his rivals in Hamas, the Islamic militant group that controls Gaza.

“Unity is the most important step,” said Malik Barghouti, an employee of the authority’s Finance Ministry in Ramallah. “We are one people.”

But if there is no tangible change on the ground, some Palestinians warned, the celebrations could eventually be eclipsed by frustration.

“Most people here think we now have lots of rights,” said Mahmoud Mansour, 22, a student of electrical engineering from Jenin in the northern West Bank, who attended the welcome rally. “When they realize that nothing has changed, they will be angry.”

This whole holocaust business is an obfuscation of the topic of this thread. It has nothing to do with it, and I didn't even mention it initially; Horowitz's video did, and I did nothing but offer to critique the video. After being encouraged to critique it, and since the video went rather extensively into it, I had to say something about it, but didn't want the subject to derail the thread, so my only initial mention of it was "I won't touch the Holocaust stuff in his video…" . I then went on to say why I wasn't going to touch it (because it was illegal in many parts of the world to question it) and went on to make a side point about what I thought of laws that curtail freedom of speech and historical revision.

Apparently, that was enough to touch off questions about me being a "holocaust denier." STILL I wanted to leave the issue alone, but I was asked this repeatedly, with the implication that if I didn't answer, then I must be, so I answered with a slew of holocausts and stated for the record that I deny NONE of them.

Now I'm told that I was only trying to obfuscate the issue? Obfuscate what? It seems to me that I was in all cases attempting to CLARIFY, not obfuscate. It seems to me that I was trying to PREVENT the obfuscation of the topic of this thread with a heated "side" discussion about the Jewish holocaust.

Well apparently the conversation swayed to the term "holocaust."

So I ask again, why do the Jews object to that term being used by anyone else?