BREAKING: The UN concludes that Israel has established an APARTHEID REGIME...

[P F Tinmore]

very ambiguous A/RES/3236 (XXIX) which Reaffirms the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people in Palestine.

(a) The right to self-determination without external interference;

(b) The right to national independence and sovereignty;

(c) The inalienable right of the Palestinians to return to their homes and property.

What is ambiguous? These are standard universal rights.

BTW, Israel violates all of those.

 

[RoccoR]

RE: The UN concludes that Israel has established an APARTHEID REGIME...
※→ Challenger, et al,

Good Exchange: There clear truths, emotions and misconception mixed in this exchange.

The Jewish people did and do want to return and live in their ancestral lands.

Really? Zionists may have done in the 19th century, but throughout their existance they were considered fringe whack-jobs by the Jewish populations around the world. In the centuries of no restrictions on Jewish travel, there was never a mass Jewish migration from Europe; even when Spain's Jewish population were expelled they chose en-masse to settle in Ottoman European provinces or in the major cities of Anatolia, rather then their so called "ancestral homelands".

(COMMENT)

OK, the example of the 1492 Expulsion of the Jews by the Catholic Monarchs gave the Jews very little options. While religious dogma was used to justify the expulsion, the real intent was to force the sell off their wealth and holdings at pawnshop prices. It was a way of divesting them of as much of their valuables as could be ripped from them under the color of law and religion.

The Sultan, observing the corrupt behaviors of both church and state, sent Sanjak Bey Fleet, and later the Ottoman Navy to help collect and evacuate as many Muslim and Jews as possible.

Some Jew wanted to escape, but others did not. In any case, the Sultan welcomed the new arrivals into the Ottoman Empire.

The international community at the time agreed with them.

Did they? Which time was that then?

(COMMENT)

Chronologically, this flipped-floped several times.

(And those States cemented the reality by cleansing themselves of their Jewish populations.)

Only in retaliation for Zionist ethnic cleansing of the native Palestinian population. It had nothing whatsoever to do with "self-determination"; that's yet another Zionist lie.

(COMMENT)

Yes, yes --- I have read the the stories from the likes of Alan Hart from Veteran's Today:

"On that day in 1948, two months before Israel’s unilateral declaration of independence in defiance of the will of the organized international community as it then was at the UN, Zionism’s in-Palestine political and military leaders met in Tel Aviv to formally adopt PLAN DALET, the blueprint with operational military orders for the ethnic cleansing of Palestine."​

This is merely a black media outlet that is attempting to incite violence in targeting the Jewish State. This is done by many such outlets using the "freedom of speech to spread various forms of propaganda which is either designed or likely to provoke or encourage and threat to the peace, breach of the peace, or act of aggression.

Remember the average lifespan of a Palestinian, born in the era of the War for Independence (1948), is about 75 years. They are but six years away and there will hardly be any West Bank, Gaza Strip, or refugee camp Arab Palestinians remaining that were born in Israel.

There is nothing either racist or supremacist about wanting to return to your ancestral lands.

No, but their is when you drive out the native incumbant population to create a "native free" state exclusively for your own little group; when you categorise your citizens into "Arab-Israeli" and "Jewish Israeli" so one group can be easily identified and discriminated against; that is racist and supremacist..,welcome to Zionist Israel!

(COMMENT)

Is this your fear? Are the Palestinians in Israel clamoring for a Ramallah style corrupt government?

Things you might not know from the Human Development Report 2016:

Israel ranks 19th on the Human Development Index and its components. That is higher than any of the member states within the Arab League. The next highest Middle Eastern Nation are:

Qatar Ranking 33
Saudi Arabia Ranking 38
United Arab Emirates Raking 42
Kuwait Ranking 51​

Now the neighboring adjacent states to Israel:

Lebanon Ranking 76
Jordan Ranking 86
Egypt Ranking 111
​

Israeli has more Scientific Nobel Laureates than the entire Arab League combined.

I'm sure that the Israeli Palestinians want to drop their life-style and assume the life of one of the neighboring developing Arab League States because Israel is just so bad and unacceptable.

Why don't you label that as being racist and supremacist?

It's neither racist nor supremacist when Palestinians want to return to the homes they were forced out of and want to be free from foreign occupation, domination and colonisation. Once upon a time they were happy to accept Jewish immigration, but the Zionist plan to disposess them changed their minds.

(COMMENT)

Well:

From the UN Site:

"The Special Committee on the Situation with regard to the Implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples (also known as the Special Committee on decolonization or C-24), the United Nations entity exclusively devoted to the issue of decolonization, was established in 1961 by the General Assembly with the purpose of monitoring the implementation of the Declaration (General Assembly Resolution 1514 (XV) of 14 December 1960)."
See the Table of Non-Self Governing Territories​

While the 24 Committee lists the US as a colonial power (of which there are only four in the world), it does NOT list Israel as a colonial power. The Palestinians are not under colonial rule. Yes they are under an occupation of sorts. Sovereignty is a matter of having a certain amount of power over a territory. Since the time of the Ottoman Empire (8 centuries), the indigenous population we call (today) "Palestinians" have never held sovereignty over any territory; with the possible exception of Area "A" under the Oslo Accords.

You might have been reading some propaganda.

In 1967, Israel in pursuit of hostile Jordanian Forces, occupied the territory that Jordan annexed in April 1950. It was not Palestinian Territory. Now some argue that the annexation of the West Bank was illegal; but that is not how customary law sees it. (Texas Annexation Resolution of Mexican Territory, China and Tibet, Russian Federation annexation of the Crimea) That is an example of Customary Law spanning more than a century.

∑ I agree with some of the exchange. but I also see plenty of room for debate.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[RoccoR]

RE: The UN concludes that Israel has established an APARTHEID REGIME...
※→ Challenger, et al,

OK, you can call that anything you want. It does not change the reality into an Arab Palestinian Fantasy.

In the case of Palestine (Gaza Strip + West Bank) such Treaties would help establish the define International Borders with Egypt and Jordan. If, successful, the Border Crossings and associated terminals might become more accessible.

Palestine already has international borders with Egypt and Jordan.

I don't see any sabre rattling between Palestine and its neighbors.

(COMMENT)

There are two treaties. Read the International Boundary Articles. Then ask yourself, why the Allenby Bridge Crossing is controlled by Israel?

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Indeependent]

In the case of Palestine (Gaza Strip + West Bank) such Treaties would help establish the define International Borders with Egypt and Jordan. If, successful, the Border Crossings and associated terminals might become more accessible.

Palestine already has international borders with Egypt and Jordan.

I don't see any sabre rattling between Palestine and its neighbors.

Like Syria & Lebanon?
Like Iran & Iraq?

 

[P F Tinmore]

There are two treaties. Read the International Boundary Articles. Then ask yourself, why the Allenby Bridge Crossing is controlled by Israel?

Occupying powers can control anything they want.

 

[Roudy]

Originally posted by Shusha
The Jewish people did and do want to return and live in their ancestral lands.

Originally posted by Challenger
Really? Zionists may have done in the 19th century, but throughout their existance they were considered fringe whack-jobs by the Jewish populations around the world. In the centuries of no restrictions on Jewish travel, there was never a mass Jewish migration from Europe; even when Spain's Jewish population were expelled they chose en-masse to settle in Ottoman European provinces or in the major cities of Anatolia, rather then their so called "ancestral homelands".

This is a joke that circulated among the european jewish communities during the first decades of the 20th century, mocking what was widely regarded by them as the tiny lunatic zionist fringe:

A Zionist is a Jew who gives money to a second Jew in order to send a third Jew to Palestine.

What is a "Palestinian"...an IslamoNazi who gets money from from other IslamoNazis to commit terror and kill Jews in their own holyland?

 

[José]

Who am I to question the memories of Uri Avnery, Roudy?

Call him a self-hating Jew, a far-left israeli all you want.

Call Gush Shalom (Peace Bloc) Gush Shoah, as some people in Israel do...

Whatever you may think of him, he and his family witnessed what european Jews thought and said about the zionist movement in the 20's and 30's and the guy participated in the process of creation and development of the state of Israel.

____________________________________________________________________________________________________

MY FATHER was a Zionist. When he married my mother, a pretty young secretary, one of the wedding presents was a printed document stating that a tree had been planted in the name of the couple in Palestine.

At the time, the Zionists were a tiny minority among the Jews in Germany (and elsewhere). Most Jews thought that they were a bit crazy. A current joke had it that a Zionist was a Jew who gave money to a second Jew in order to send a third Jew to Palestine.

Why did my father become a Zionist? He certainly did not dream of going to Palestine himself. His family had been living in Germany for many generations. Since he had learned Latin and Ancient Greek at school, he imagined that our family had arrived in Germany with Julius Caesar. That's why our roots were in a small town (I have forgotten its name) on the banks of the Rhine.

So what about his Zionism? My father was a "Querkopf", a contrarian. He did not like to run with the herd. It suited him to belong to a lonely little group. The Zionists.

A Confession - Gush Shalom - Israeli Peace Bloc

 

[Roudy]

"Gush Shalom". What, you thought Israel doesn't have leftist retards like the morons we have here in the US?

Ya gotta love it. Ha ha ha!

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: The UN concludes that Israel has established an APARTHEID REGIME...
※→ Challenger, et al,

Good Exchange: There clear truths, emotions and misconception mixed in this exchange.

The Jewish people did and do want to return and live in their ancestral lands.

Really? Zionists may have done in the 19th century, but throughout their existance they were considered fringe whack-jobs by the Jewish populations around the world. In the centuries of no restrictions on Jewish travel, there was never a mass Jewish migration from Europe; even when Spain's Jewish population were expelled they chose en-masse to settle in Ottoman European provinces or in the major cities of Anatolia, rather then their so called "ancestral homelands".

(COMMENT)

OK, the example of the 1492 Expulsion of the Jews by the Catholic Monarchs gave the Jews very little options. While religious dogma was used to justify the expulsion, the real intent was to force the sell off their wealth and holdings at pawnshop prices. It was a way of divesting them of as much of their valuables as could be ripped from them under the color of law and religion.

The Sultan, observing the corrupt behaviors of both church and state, sent Sanjak Bey Fleet, and later the Ottoman Navy to help collect and evacuate as many Muslim and Jews as possible.

Some Jew wanted to escape, but others did not. In any case, the Sultan welcomed the new arrivals into the Ottoman Empire.

The international community at the time agreed with them.

Did they? Which time was that then?

(COMMENT)

Chronologically, this flipped-floped several times.

(And those States cemented the reality by cleansing themselves of their Jewish populations.)

Only in retaliation for Zionist ethnic cleansing of the native Palestinian population. It had nothing whatsoever to do with "self-determination"; that's yet another Zionist lie.

(COMMENT)

Yes, yes --- I have read the the stories from the likes of Alan Hart from Veteran's Today:

"On that day in 1948, two months before Israel’s unilateral declaration of independence in defiance of the will of the organized international community as it then was at the UN, Zionism’s in-Palestine political and military leaders met in Tel Aviv to formally adopt PLAN DALET, the blueprint with operational military orders for the ethnic cleansing of Palestine."​

This is merely a black media outlet that is attempting to incite violence in targeting the Jewish State. This is done by many such outlets using the "freedom of speech to spread various forms of propaganda which is either designed or likely to provoke or encourage and threat to the peace, breach of the peace, or act of aggression.

Remember the average lifespan of a Palestinian, born in the era of the War for Independence (1948), is about 75 years. They are but six years away and there will hardly be any West Bank, Gaza Strip, or refugee camp Arab Palestinians remaining that were born in Israel.

There is nothing either racist or supremacist about wanting to return to your ancestral lands.

No, but their is when you drive out the native incumbant population to create a "native free" state exclusively for your own little group; when you categorise your citizens into "Arab-Israeli" and "Jewish Israeli" so one group can be easily identified and discriminated against; that is racist and supremacist..,welcome to Zionist Israel!

(COMMENT)

Is this your fear? Are the Palestinians in Israel clamoring for a Ramallah style corrupt government?

Things you might not know from the Human Development Report 2016:

Israel ranks 19th on the Human Development Index and its components. That is higher than any of the member states within the Arab League. The next highest Middle Eastern Nation are:

Qatar Ranking 33
Saudi Arabia Ranking 38
United Arab Emirates Raking 42
Kuwait Ranking 51​

Now the neighboring adjacent states to Israel:

Lebanon Ranking 76
Jordan Ranking 86
Egypt Ranking 111
​

Israeli has more Scientific Nobel Laureates than the entire Arab League combined.

I'm sure that the Israeli Palestinians want to drop their life-style and assume the life of one of the neighboring developing Arab League States because Israel is just so bad and unacceptable.

Why don't you label that as being racist and supremacist?

It's neither racist nor supremacist when Palestinians want to return to the homes they were forced out of and want to be free from foreign occupation, domination and colonisation. Once upon a time they were happy to accept Jewish immigration, but the Zionist plan to disposess them changed their minds.

(COMMENT)

Well:

From the UN Site:

"The Special Committee on the Situation with regard to the Implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples (also known as the Special Committee on decolonization or C-24), the United Nations entity exclusively devoted to the issue of decolonization, was established in 1961 by the General Assembly with the purpose of monitoring the implementation of the Declaration (General Assembly Resolution 1514 (XV) of 14 December 1960)."
See the Table of Non-Self Governing Territories​

While the 24 Committee lists the US as a colonial power (of which there are only four in the world), it does NOT list Israel as a colonial power. The Palestinians are not under colonial rule. Yes they are under an occupation of sorts. Sovereignty is a matter of having a certain amount of power over a territory. Since the time of the Ottoman Empire (8 centuries), the indigenous population we call (today) "Palestinians" have never held sovereignty over any territory; with the possible exception of Area "A" under the Oslo Accords.

You might have been reading some propaganda.

In 1967, Israel in pursuit of hostile Jordanian Forces, occupied the territory that Jordan annexed in April 1950. It was not Palestinian Territory. Now some argue that the annexation of the West Bank was illegal; but that is not how customary law sees it. (Texas Annexation Resolution of Mexican Territory, China and Tibet, Russian Federation annexation of the Crimea) That is an example of Customary Law spanning more than a century.

∑ I agree with some of the exchange. but I also see plenty of room for debate.

Most Respectfully,
R

While the 24 Committee lists the US as a colonial power (of which there are only four in the world), it does NOT list Israel as a colonial power.

Perhaps it was because it was relatively new and was not one of the old classic colonial powers and they just didn't know. Or perhaps it was overlooked for political reasons.

But look at the facts. Both the British and the Zionists spoke openly about colonialism. History shows it to be colonialism. The facts on the ground show it to be colonialism.

 

[Shusha]

The world really has gone mad when an indigenous peoples are called colonialists.

 

[Challenger]

The world really has gone mad when an indigenous peoples are called colonialists.

That's because the European Zionist colonisers are not indigenous, and no Zionist propaganda will ever make them so.

 

[Shusha]

The world has gone mad to claim that the Jewish people are not indigenous to Israel, Judea and Samaria.

 

[RoccoR]

RE: The UN concludes that Israel has established an APARTHEID REGIME...
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

Many in the Arab Community, and good percentage of Arab Palestinians use such outrageous allegations and claims as "apartheid" and "colonialism" as primer in the ever ongoing and escalating anti-Israeli/anti-Semitic war of propaganda.

• Security Council Presidential Statement Seeks Counter-Terrorism Committee Proposal for ‘International Framework’ to Curb Incitement, Recruitment SC/12355 11 May 2016 •​

As many knowledgeable professionals see, such public emphasis on the spreading of such rhetoric is merely a thinly disguised and passive support campaign → encouraged by the psychopathology and narcissistic narratives used in recruitment and incitement to violent acts. The mentality that drives the effort is rooted in the belief that they were special; that they are the very few enlightened to disseminate the answers to Israeli-Palestinian Conflict, and that they represent a regional community segment holding an exaggerated sense of entitlement → that is being persecuted by the evil Jewish cabal. They direct such pejorative language as "apartheid" and "colonialism" towards the Jewish State, trying to generate sympathy for a much larger and unproductive culture; a culture that has been stagnant for the past three generations (or more).

[Perhaps it was because it was relatively new and was not one of the old classic colonial powers and they just didn't know. Or perhaps it was overlooked for political reasons.

But look at the facts. Both the British and the Zionists spoke openly about colonialism. History shows it to be colonialism. The facts on the ground show it to be colonialism.

(COMMENT)

There is a grave difference in the practical establishment of a distant colony (a group of persons self-institutionalized away from other predatory cultures) and that of colonial interests (body of people living in a new territory but retaining ties with the parent state). The technique is to make concentrate on the weak of mind and make one thing sound like another. A group of Jews going to the Middle East to establish themselves new under San Remo concept is not the same as a major power sending a group of people to establish a political foothold in a distant land. The Jewish Immigrants (Article 6 of the Mandate) did not owe political allegiance to a parent Allied Power; rather they owed an allegiance to themselves. Many Hostile Arab Palestinians would want you to believe that there was a very sinister motive behind the use of the term "colony" by Article 6 Immigrants; some secret conspiracy by a foreign power to install a controlled political entity. But that is simply not the case at all. The words sound the same, the intent and meaning are entirely different.

Similarly, there are those that would have you believe that the separations of the Arab Palestinians from Jewish Immigrants was the plan; a plan from the very first decision of the Allied Powers San Remo (1920), the Jewish Immigrants to systematically oppress and dominate the Arab Palestinians → wanting you to believe that it is the case that one racial group is the intentional dominant over any other racial group. That was not the case in 1920, it wasn't the case in 1948, and it is not the case today. The separation was not an instrument of racism. One look at the two sides today (the Israeli side and the Arab Palestinian) and you will find that there is no evidence of a disparate impact. There is little or no evidence of an serious trend in the development of prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism between any of the ethnic or religious segments in the Israeli general population.

ISRAEL

Ethnic groups:

Jewish 80.1% (Europe/America-born 32.1%, Israel-born 20.8%, Africa-born 14.6%, Asia-born 12.6%), non-Jewish 19.9% (mostly Arab) (1996 est.)


Religions:

Jewish 80.1%, Muslim 14.6% (mostly Sunni Muslim), Christian 2.1%, other 3.2% (1996 est.)
​

WEST BANK

Ethnic groups:

Palestinian Arab and other 83%, Jewish 17%

Religions:

Muslim 75% (predominantly Sunni), Jewish 17%, Christian and other 8%
​

No country is prefect. There will be issue that will surface domestically from time to time; but that is a matter for the Israeli people to solve. And as you all know, by Charter Article 2(7), "Nothing contained in the present Charter shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state or shall require the Members to submit such matters to settlement under the present Charter; but this principle shall not prejudice the application of enforcement measures under Chapter Vll."

I've seen, many, many times, the attempt to discredit the Jewish State by criticizing internal domestic matters. This is an attempt by the anti-Israeli/anti-Semitic activists to suggest or imply that the Arab Palestinians not only believe their way of life is the better way of life but that they have a much better handle on their internal self-control.

(EPILOG)

I found the commentary by Fred Maroun 05/17/2015 "The pro-Palestinian activists are not pro-Palestinian" very interesting. It stars with a series of question based observations:

What have “pro-Palestinian” activists done for the Palestinians?

Did they help Palestinians achieve national independence? Did they help them build an economy? Did they help them build a civil society? Did they help them grow talent and integrity among their leaders? Did they help them define their identity as anything other than victims and terrorists?​

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: The UN concludes that Israel has established an APARTHEID REGIME...
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

Many in the Arab Community, and good percentage of Arab Palestinians use such outrageous allegations and claims as "apartheid" and "colonialism" as primer in the ever ongoing and escalating anti-Israeli/anti-Semitic war of propaganda.

• Security Council Presidential Statement Seeks Counter-Terrorism Committee Proposal for ‘International Framework’ to Curb Incitement, Recruitment SC/12355 11 May 2016 •​

As many knowledgeable professionals see, such public emphasis on the spreading of such rhetoric is merely a thinly disguised and passive support campaign → encouraged by the psychopathology and narcissistic narratives used in recruitment and incitement to violent acts. The mentality that drives the effort is rooted in the belief that they were special; that they are the very few enlightened to disseminate the answers to Israeli-Palestinian Conflict, and that they represent a regional community segment holding an exaggerated sense of entitlement → that is being persecuted by the evil Jewish cabal. They direct such pejorative language as "apartheid" and "colonialism" towards the Jewish State, trying to generate sympathy for a much larger and unproductive culture; a culture that has been stagnant for the past three generations (or more).

[Perhaps it was because it was relatively new and was not one of the old classic colonial powers and they just didn't know. Or perhaps it was overlooked for political reasons.

But look at the facts. Both the British and the Zionists spoke openly about colonialism. History shows it to be colonialism. The facts on the ground show it to be colonialism.

(COMMENT)

There is a grave difference in the practical establishment of a distant colony (a group of persons self-institutionalized away from other predatory cultures) and that of colonial interests (body of people living in a new territory but retaining ties with the parent state). The technique is to make concentrate on the weak of mind and make one thing sound like another. A group of Jews going to the Middle East to establish themselves new under San Remo concept is not the same as a major power sending a group of people to establish a political foothold in a distant land. The Jewish Immigrants (Article 6 of the Mandate) did not owe political allegiance to a parent Allied Power; rather they owed an allegiance to themselves. Many Hostile Arab Palestinians would want you to believe that there was a very sinister motive behind the use of the term "colony" by Article 6 Immigrants; some secret conspiracy by a foreign power to install a controlled political entity. But that is simply not the case at all. The words sound the same, the intent and meaning are entirely different.

Similarly, there are those that would have you believe that the separations of the Arab Palestinians from Jewish Immigrants was the plan; a plan from the very first decision of the Allied Powers San Remo (1920), the Jewish Immigrants to systematically oppress and dominate the Arab Palestinians → wanting you to believe that it is the case that one racial group is the intentional dominant over any other racial group. That was not the case in 1920, it wasn't the case in 1948, and it is not the case today. The separation was not an instrument of racism. One look at the two sides today (the Israeli side and the Arab Palestinian) and you will find that there is no evidence of a disparate impact. There is little or no evidence of an serious trend in the development of prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism between any of the ethnic or religious segments in the Israeli general population.

ISRAEL

Ethnic groups:

Jewish 80.1% (Europe/America-born 32.1%, Israel-born 20.8%, Africa-born 14.6%, Asia-born 12.6%), non-Jewish 19.9% (mostly Arab) (1996 est.)


Religions:

Jewish 80.1%, Muslim 14.6% (mostly Sunni Muslim), Christian 2.1%, other 3.2% (1996 est.)
​

WEST BANK

Ethnic groups:

Palestinian Arab and other 83%, Jewish 17%

Religions:

Muslim 75% (predominantly Sunni), Jewish 17%, Christian and other 8%
​

No country is prefect. There will be issue that will surface domestically from time to time; but that is a matter for the Israeli people to solve. And as you all know, by Charter Article 2(7), "Nothing contained in the present Charter shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state or shall require the Members to submit such matters to settlement under the present Charter; but this principle shall not prejudice the application of enforcement measures under Chapter Vll."

I've seen, many, many times, the attempt to discredit the Jewish State by criticizing internal domestic matters. This is an attempt by the anti-Israeli/anti-Semitic activists to suggest or imply that the Arab Palestinians not only believe their way of life is the better way of life but that they have a much better handle on their internal self-control.

(EPILOG)

I found the commentary by Fred Maroun 05/17/2015 "The pro-Palestinian activists are not pro-Palestinian" very interesting. It stars with a series of question based observations:

What have “pro-Palestinian” activists done for the Palestinians?

Did they help Palestinians achieve national independence? Did they help them build an economy? Did they help them build a civil society? Did they help them grow talent and integrity among their leaders? Did they help them define their identity as anything other than victims and terrorists?​

Most Respectfully,
R

The difference between classic colonialism and settler colonialism was explained in my video.

You are ignoring the part that they admitted to colonialism. You are arguing with the horses mouth.

 

[RoccoR]

RE: The UN concludes that Israel has established an APARTHEID REGIME...
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

Well, it seems that you may have missed the point.
Israel is a Settler Colonial State - and that's OK
Remember, settlers, in Area C are in a portion of the territory that the Palestinians AGREED to Israeli full administration.
___________________________________________________________________________________
Excerpt of the Israel-PLO agreement signed at the White House September 28. The accord was signed by Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and PLO Chairman Yasir Arafat, and witnessed by President Clinton, President Mubarak, King Hussein, and other world leaders.

WASHINGTON, SEPTEMBER 28, 1995 → Oslo II The Interim Accord

ARTICLE XII
Arrangements for Security and Public Order

5. For the purpose of this Agreement, "the Settlements" means, in the West Bank--the settlements in Area C; and in the Gaza Strip-the Gush Katif and Erez settlement areas, as well as the other settlements in the Gaza Strip, as shown on attached map No. 2.​

[
The difference between classic colonialism and settler colonialism was explained in my video.

You are ignoring the part that they admitted to colonialism. You are arguing with the horses mouth.

(COMMENT)

He said that Palestine is not analyzed a settler colonialist paradigm movement; but as a conflict between two national movements (Time Index 5:30); that dictates a solution which is a compromise between two national movements. You will notice that the suggestion that probably BOTH movements have the same right to that country. (Stop Time Index 6:40) He is attempting to apply a Hegemonic Paradigm (the main perspective); that is not a reality present today. He is speaking "academically" and readily acknowledges that. He is trying to make the argument that the mainstream media, mainstream academia, and politicians --- ALL --- do not analyze the Israel-Palestinian Conflict as a colonialist movement.

Like many academicians that I have had a close association with, especially those that pubish frequently, a fresh approach is being presented for your consideration. (Very Important) I advise you to that notice of the commentary about the business association and those thing which a divisible and invisible. (Time Index 5:45 → 7:42).

What is said in your selected video in these few opening moments sets the introduction to what the presentation frames as significant.

NOTE: The presentation describes a viewpoint of colonialism (Time Index 9:05 → 10:05) in much the same language I used in Posting #353 of this discussion thread. Except that I did not have an 40 minutes to express my concern. But, rest assured in the notion that I am not "Repulsed by UC Berkeley’s 'Palestine: A Settler Colonial Analysis' course." See Haaretz - Arnon Degani Sep 13, 2016

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

NOTE: The presentation describes a viewpoint of colonialism (Time Index 9:05 → 10:05) in much the same language I used in Posting #353 of this discussion thread. Except that I did not have an 40 minutes to express my concern. But, rest assured in the notion that I am not "Repulsed by UC Berkeley’s 'Palestine: A Settler Colonial Analysis' course." See Haaretz - Arnon Degani Sep 13, 2016

From your link:

Repulsed by UC Berkeley’s 'Palestine: A Settler Colonial Analysis' course? ‘Settler colonialism’ may have been eagerly adopted by the BDS movement – but early Zionist leaders weren't shy about identifying with it either.
read more: Israel is a Settler Colonial State - and that's OK

Edit:

Berkeley Resumes Palestine Course

Less than a week after the University of California, Berkeley, suspended a student-run course on Palestine, the administration reversed its decision and brought it back.

The one-credit course, called Palestine: A Settler Colonial Analysis, was suspended last Tuesday after members of pro-Israel groups accused it of having “anti-Israel bias.”

The course was reinstated Monday morning after a committee from the Department of Ethnic Studies reviewed the course, which has the purpose of examining “key historical events that have taken place in Palestine … through the lens of settler colonialism,” according to the syllabus.

Palestine course at Berkeley is reinstated after criticisms of violating academic freedom

 

[P F Tinmore]

• Security Council Presidential Statement Seeks Counter-Terrorism Committee Proposal for ‘International Framework’ to Curb Incitement, Recruitment SC/12355 11 May 2016 •​

Why did you post this? What is the relevance?

 

[Shusha]

He said that Palestine is not analyzed a settler colonialist paradigm movement; but as a conflict between two national movements (Time Index 5:30); that dictates a solution which is a compromise between two national movements. You will notice that the suggestion that probably BOTH movements have the same right to that country. (Stop Time Index 6:40)

Yes. Thank you.

 

[fanger]

The world has gone mad to claim that the Jewish people are not indigenous to Israel, Judea and Samaria.

Do you claim to be indigenous?

 

[Shusha]

The world has gone mad to claim that the Jewish people are not indigenous to Israel, Judea and Samaria.

Do you claim to be indigenous?

I am Canadian. I am of Irish, Scottish and German descent. I am not indigenous to Canada.