Israel’s ‘Right to Exist’

[Sunni Man]

I'll take that as a no. Despite your onslaught of fact stating, I have to admit I remain unconvinced by your argument.

Since you made the orginal allegations.

What are your facts to back them up?

 

[Tristan]

Since you made the orginal allegations.

What are your facts to back them up?

On the difference between life in Israel for Palestinians and their lot in the rest of the world? Are you kidding? LOL

Ring ring goes the clue phone.

Palestinians who live in Israel, including Jerusalem, appreciate Israel's economic success, social services, and other benefits. Salaries in Israel are about five times higher than in the West Bank and Gaza Strip and Israel's social security system has no parallel on the Palestinian side. Palestinians living outside of Israel want an economic in - when the Israeli government announced the completion of the security fence in one region, a resident of the West Bank border town of Qalqiliya reacted with outrage: "We are living in a big prison."

These comments point to Palestinian appreciation for the benefits of elections, rule of law, minority rights, freedom of speech, and a higher standard of living. Amid all the PA's political extremism and terrorism, it is good to know that a Palestinian constituency also exists for normality.

Unfortunately, it remains a furtive constituency with little political sway. The time has come for decent Palestinians to make their voices heard and state that Israel's existence is not the problem but the solution.

Palestinians Must Bear Burden of Peace, DeLay Tells Israelis - New York Times

 

[Tristan]

Coexistence in Israel: A National Study

New Study Finds Strong Jewish and Arab Consensus
for Peaceful Coexistence in Israel

Cambridge, MA (May 15, 2008) – A new study released today finds strong support for coexistence efforts amongst a majority of Jewish and Arab citizens of Israel. The findings may buoy hopes for long-term peace in the region.

“Coexistence in Israel: A National Study” provides a compelling snapshot of current relations between Jewish and Arab citizens in Israel as the nation celebrates its 60th anniversary. Harvard Kennedy School (HKS) associate professor Todd L. Pittinsky, research director of the school’s Center for Public Leadership (CPL), served as lead researcher on the project. The study was conducted in Hebrew and Arabic, and included 1,721 adult citizens of Israel, with assistance from researchers at the University of Haifa

Center for Public Leadership | John F. Kennedy School of Government | Harvard University - Coexistence

77% of the State of Israel’s Arab citizens would rather live in the Jewish state than in any other country in the world, according to a new study titled “Coexistence in Israel”.
http://politicalmavens.com/index.php/2008/06/23/77-palestinian-arabs-we-like-living-in-israel-best/

 

[DavidS]

That's he guy that wrote the article you squid brain

Squid and octopus are some of the most intelligent animals on the planet. You actually complimented him.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Besides being misinformed. You are also very gulible.

You are the dumbshit terrorist supporter with out facts. Arabs in Israel even have 12 members in the Knesset. As I recall one holds a position of high power.

Arabs are the only group exempt from mandatory military service though they are encouraged to volunteer. Except in several Large cities most Arab communities are run by Arab officials. They even have their own Courts.

 

[HelloDollyLlama]

As soon as the phrase 'stolen land' is seen, the article can be dismissed as bias nonsense.

We can't dismiss the concept of "stolen land" outright. Amazingly enough, he may have accidentally stumbled in the direction of a valid point.

"Stolen land" is as slippery a concept as "right to exist". There is no way on God's earth to ascertain who has a right to that land. The Jews took the land once by violent conquest (described in appalling detail in the Book of Joshua), were kicked out, came back, were kicked out again, etc. The Arabs then arrived much later, also by armed conquest.

Now, if we assume that no one can obtain rights to territory simply by conquering it by violence, then no one really has clear title to it. You could just as easily make an argument that the land belongs to the Turks, or the Italians as their heirs to Imperial Rome, or the descendants of the Crusaders on Malta.

That being the case, it is in everyone's interest to figure out a way to share fairly.

And that's where the Arab argument collapses completely.

The Jews made clear from the beginning, in the 1940s, that they were willing to bend over backwards to share. They even agreed to a partition plan which only gave them two tiny, disconnected sausage links of territory, and then a chunk of useless desert further south. The Arabs got all the rest of the land west of the Jordan, and everything to the east of the Jordan, too. Virtually the entire international community said it was a fair deal, and the Israelis accepted it even though they hated it.

(And they clearly needed a place to go. Going back to Germany, Poland and Russia were simply not on.)

But the Palestinians said "fuck, no, we refuse to give them an inch of territory", and have refused for 60 years to budge. Their position is so indefensible that even the other Arab states have abandoned them. Only whack jobs like Ahmadinejad support them, and that is mostly for domestic political purposes.

 

[José]

Originally posted by HelloDollyLlama
But the Palestinians said "fuck, no, we refuse to give them an inch of territory", and have refused for 60 years to budge.

And rightfully so.

It is morally repugnant to have an ethnic state carved out of a territory that is the historical homeland of more than one ethnic group.

19th century America and 20th century South Africa were white homelands that discriminated against minority/native ethnic groups.

21th century Israel is a jewish racial dictatorship that faithfully reproduces the racist policies of those two white ethnocracies.

But I don't even need to invoke any big words from political science to advocate Palestine's racial desegregation.

Common morality itself demands that this kind of racially exclusionary state is peacefully dismantled and replaced by modern liberal-democratic states that are not based on the dehumanisation of any ethnic group.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

And rightfully so.

It is morally repugnant to have an ethnic state carved out of a territory that is the historical homeland of more than one ethnic group.

19th century America and 20th century South Africa were white homelands that discriminated against minority/native ethnic groups.

21th century Israel is a jewish racial dictatorship that faithfully reproduces the racist policies of those two white ethnocracies.

But I don't even need to invoke any big words from political science to advocate Palestine's racial desegregation.

Common morality itself demands that this kind of racially exclusionary state is peacefully dismantled and replaced by modern liberal-democratic states that are not based on the dehumanisation of any ethnic group.

Ya, send all those Israeli Arabs a ballot and have a vote on whether they want to be in Israel or in a Arab State.

 

[jillian]

Ya, send all those Israeli Arabs a ballot and have a vote on whether they want to be in Israel or in a Arab State.

They were actually asked thaat... they said "HELL NO, we're not leaving Israel".

 

[HelloDollyLlama]

Well, we can listen to the voices of the under-informed, as they jump up and down on tables hollering about what they see as the moral imperatives.

Or we can build the only thing that works: the same Middle East peace plan that's been on the table for decades.

There is nothing so misguided, and counterproductive, as the guy who is positive that his views on morality are indisputable.

And rightfully so.

It is morally repugnant to have an ethnic state carved out of a territory that is the historical homeland of more than one ethnic group.

19th century America and 20th century South Africa were white homelands that discriminated against minority/native ethnic groups.

21th century Israel is a jewish racial dictatorship that faithfully reproduces the racist policies of those two white ethnocracies.

But I don't even need to invoke any big words from political science to advocate Palestine's racial desegregation.

Common morality itself demands that this kind of racially exclusionary state is peacefully dismantled and replaced by modern liberal-democratic states that are not based on the dehumanisation of any ethnic group.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Well, we can listen to the voices of the under-informed, as they jump up and down on tables hollering about what they see as the moral imperatives.

Or we can build the only thing that works: the same Middle East peace plan that's been on the table for decades.

There is nothing so misguided, and counterproductive, as the guy who is positive that his views on morality are indisputable.

You can not have peace in the middle east until the elimination of groups like Hamas. They state for the record they will not stop until Israel no longer exists.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

As you well know sissy boy.

I answered your simpleton questions over a week ago straight out of the Quran.

Since you are too retarded to understand my answer. It is Not my fault.

Ask me again a thousand times and you will be ignored a thousand times

Well there is only one answer to those questions and the answer to both is DECIDEDLY: NO.

Human rights are endowed BY GOD and come with sacred responsibilities...

There is NO RIGHT to take human life EXCEPT where there is a moral justification and the ONLY justification in taking a human life IS IN THE DEFENSE OF INNOCENT LIFE.

Planting yourself in a bomb and taking that bomb to where one can reasonably expect innocents to be effected by it is: MURDER.

Islamic terrorism has one tactic and one tactic ONLY: MASS MURDER and as such is anathema to GOD and stands wholly antithetical to the sacred responsibilities inherent in HUMAN RIGHTS: Thus Islamic terrorists have FORFEITED THEIR RIGHTS... meaning they HAVE NO HUMAN RIGHTS BECAUSE THEY HAVE REJECTED THE RESPONSIBILITY TO NOT EXERCISE THOSE RIGHTS TO THE DETRIMENT OF THE RIGHTS OF OTHERS...

This means that it is the sacred duty of all free men to seek out Islamic terrorists, wherever they may hide and KILL THEM... and where they are taken alive and it is reasonable to believe that said terrorist is in possession of time sensitive information which is critical to saving the life of innocents; one is duty bound to coercise that terrorist, by whatever means is necessary to be forthcoming in a timely manner with said information.

There's nothing particularly difficult in this equation...

 

[HelloDollyLlama]

You can not have peace in the middle east until the elimination of groups like Hamas. They state for the record they will not stop until Israel no longer exists.

We will always have terrorist groups, no matter what. Eliminating Hamas may not be necessary, but it would be good if they weren't running the freakin Palestinian government. That's pretty much a deal-breaker.

 

[Red Dawn]

Israel’s ‘Right to Exist’

July 29, 2008

I have heard it for the entirety of my 61 years of life–Israel’s ‘Right To Exist’. In fact, in recent memory I have heard this phrase more than I’ve heard ‘Happy Thanksgiving’ or ‘Merry Christmas’ or even ‘Have a Good 4th of July’.

Israel seems to exist quite well. Her people have a very high living standard compared to the rest of the world. Israel has the most sophisticated armed forces in the Middle East, if indeed not the world. According to one of our former presidents, Israel is said to possess several hundred nuclear weapons and if we are to believe some of the things said by Israel’s leaders in recent years she is ready to destroy mankind if her leaders choose to do so.

Israeli’s live a very good life style, second to none. A swimming pool in every back yard on stolen land, plenty of food, jobs, stocks, cash, you name it. Their quality of life continues to grow and prosper every month of every year.

Now what I have a problem with is this–doesn’t the United States of America also have a ‘Right to Exist’?

Yes we do, but unfortunately that right is being taken away from us every second, every minute, every hour, every month and every year and all for the sake of Israel’s ‘Right To Exist’. What’s wrong with this story? Well, I’ll explain what’s wrong with it and believe me, its not that hard to figure out.

Crescent And Cross

I don't understand why you and william joyce hate jews so much.

Did some jewish boy beat you up in middle school and take your lunch money?

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Well, we can listen to the voices of the under-informed, as they jump up and down on tables hollering about what they see as the moral imperatives.

Or we can build the only thing that works: the same Middle East peace plan that's been on the table for decades.

There is nothing so misguided, and counterproductive, as the guy who is positive that his views on morality are indisputable.

Well, actually, you're position rests in the warmth of moral certainty... so your argument is an oxymoronic non sequitur.

Moral certainty is IMPERATIVE... and what's more, those who are most certain in their moral underpinnings will most likely prevail in a given conflict...

The single thing which has precluded a successful resolution to the Middle East is the addle-minded secularism which requires that 'BOTH SIDES MUST BE RIGHT... ' this is a formula which can ONLY result in the PROLONGED PAIN inevitably associated with conflicting courses of treatment.

The ideological left has foolishly bolstered the Palestinian farce at every turn; chronically feeding them the misguided assessment which declares THEM AS THE VICTIMS, despite the absolute CERTAINTY that THEY ARE THE AGGRESSOR... and war will ALWAYS continue as long as the aggressor exists... The resolution is not a comfortable thing to consider, but that doesn't change the fact that it IS the resolution...

Destroy the aggressor and the war will stop; the Palestinians are the aggressor... and they must be destroyed; where the Palestinistans are being bouyed, we must destroy those bolstering them and THAT is the addle-minded IDEOLOGICAL LEFT.

Which means that to destroy the Palestinians and resolve this conflict, we're faced with destroying the ideological left and THAT friends is coming in the form of war which will make the world wars look like a walk in the park...

Brace yourselves... the left is the aggressor and this conflict, like all conflicts, will not end until they're destroyed.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Israel’s ‘Right to Exist’

July 29, 2008

I have heard it for the entirety of my 61 years of life–Israel’s ‘Right To Exist’. In fact, in recent memory I have heard this phrase more than I’ve heard ‘Happy Thanksgiving’ or ‘Merry Christmas’ or even ‘Have a Good 4th of July’.

Israel seems to exist quite well. Her people have a very high living standard compared to the rest of the world. Israel has the most sophisticated armed forces in the Middle East, if indeed not the world. According to one of our former presidents, Israel is said to possess several hundred nuclear weapons and if we are to believe some of the things said by Israel’s leaders in recent years she is ready to destroy mankind if her leaders choose to do so.

Israeli’s live a very good life style, second to none. A swimming pool in every back yard on stolen land, plenty of food, jobs, stocks, cash, you name it. Their quality of life continues to grow and prosper every month of every year.

Now what I have a problem with is this–doesn’t the United States of America also have a ‘Right to Exist’?

Yes we do, but unfortunately that right is being taken away from us every second, every minute, every hour, every month and every year and all for the sake of Israel’s ‘Right To Exist’. What’s wrong with this story? Well, I’ll explain what’s wrong with it and believe me, its not that hard to figure out.

Crescent And Cross

"Rights" cannot "be taken away"... Rights are inalienable and all one can do is forfeit those rights, in and of their own actions... OR the means to exercise those rights can be usurped, by a given power with the means to do so...

The ideological left is on a tear, to promote the interests of such a power and the ideological left is steadfastly in support if Islamic terrorism, which most decidely includes the Palestinians...

You clammer around complaining about your means to exercise your rights and threats specific to that usurpation, then in the next breath you steadfastly run to promote the interests of those directly working to usurp your rights.

Try being consistant... it might ease your confusion.

 

[Modbert]

Well there is only one answer to those questions and the answer to both is DECIDEDLY: NO.

Human rights are endowed BY GOD and come with sacred responsibilities...

Really now, well I guess when he was drawing up the Bill of Rights that a couple of things just fucking slipped his mind. Like ohhh slavery.

 

[toomuchtime_]

We will always have terrorist groups, no matter what. Eliminating Hamas may not be necessary, but it would be good if they weren't running the freakin Palestinian government. That's pretty much a deal-breaker.

I agree. What's necessary is for the Palestinian government and Israel to both fight against terrorism, which brings nothing but misery to both peoples, and this is already beginning to happen in the West Bank.

 

[Sunni Man]

I don't understand why you and william joyce hate jews so much.

There were No jews where I grew up.

I Do Not hate or dislike Jews.

I am only opposed to Zionism

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Really now, well I guess when he was drawing up the Bill of Rights that a couple of things just fucking slipped his mind. Like ohhh slavery.

The Bill of rights within the US Constitution does NOT 'GIVE RIGHTS;' the Bill of Rights serves to extend LIMITATIONS UPON THE POWER OF GOVERNMENT; limitations which prevents that awesome power FROM INFRINGING UPON THE INALIENABLE RIGHTS OF THE INDIVIDUAL; Rights... WHICH LONG PRE-EXISTED THE US CONSTITUTION.

It should be noted THAT IT WAS THE BILL OF RIGHTS WHICH INEVITABLY LEAD TO THE OUTLAWING OF SLAVERY IN THE US... This a result of the inevitable recognition that Black-men are HUMAN BEINGS; a concept which had yet to come to fruition at the time during which the US Constitution was being debated and drafted ratified into law...

Thus your argument is, as it usually is... a specious ad hoc trainwreck of no discernable intellectual depth...

The simple fact IS: SLAVES WERE ENDOWED BY THEIR CREATOR WITH CERTAIN INALIENABLE RIGHTS... as are all other human beings... they ALWAYS enjoyed the SAME RIGHTS as everyone else... what they did NOT ENJOY were the LIMITATIONS UPON POWER WHICH PROTECTED THEIR MEANS TO EXERCISE THOSE RIGHTS... which ironically, is the same condition which we're all being driven towards today; driven by the collective farce of the ideological left, which is determined to promote greater and greater power unto the Federal government which is limited by fewer and fewer limitations to infringe upon our means to EXERCISE OUR INALIENABLE INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS.