Idea: Nakba day turns Sulhah day (poll)

[rylah]

Replacing Memorial day with Sulhah for both to come together, in the way you state, is a wonderful idea. A unifying idea, and a way to move forward.

For whatever reason, I read it as replacing Nakbah, but Nakbah has nothing to do with it.

I like your idea a great deal...it has a healing quality.

Well, let's be clear about a couple things:

I do suggest replacing both Israel's Memorial day and Nakba day with the Sulhah ceremony.

But:

I'm not in a position to "replace Nakba",
or force anyone on an individual level what they want to do or commemorate.

So:

All I can do is suggest a ceremony
that fuses both into something bigger - a common future.


So even if you still see this as 'replacing' or 'eliminating',
there's still something which you liked about the idea - it's healing capacity and equality.

We have to separate issues to examine the idea on it's own - the things we disagree from those we agree, let's at least try to make it clear and constructive like that - disagreement on an aspect doesn't not equal to disagreement of the whole idea, else you actually think there's nothing good about it, which doesn't seem to be the case.

So let's examine those things - how did you envision Sulhah as a whole?
And more specifically how do both Nakba and Sluhah relate to each other?

 

[rylah]

RE: Idea: Nakba day turns Sulhah day (poll)
⁜→ et al,

On the innocent face value of any "Celebratory Assemblies" and "Remembrance Days" is not really the question in the "Nakba Commemoration." What is at issue is the "latent agenda" and the "issue of incitement" that is associated with this particular commemoration.

On the surface, the issue of the twin freedoms (assembly and speech) will always fold in favor of the Arab Palestinians. The twin freedoms are written in the "innocent frame" that they will not be used, designed or likely to provoke or encourage any threat to the peace, breach of the peace, or justify criminal activity to avenge perceived wrongs. AND, of course, those that argue in favor of the Commemoration → will never suggest that there is a sinister purpose of endorsing the Commemoration (something other than that date which is to dredge-up grievances of the past).

What I see every time the Arab Palestinians bring forward the issue of what they term the "Nakba" (catastrophe) is the mental manipulation that attempts to control the fervor of the participants and twist the audience state of mind to incite violence. Such events are nothing more than a tool used by the Hostile Arab Palestines to influence the will of the audience through the use of deceptive techniques as a backdrop for certain speech to reach the threshold of incitement to hatred.

To off-set, such outcomes, in which the Arab Palestinians can exploit the events - Articles 19 and 20 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (CCPR) attempts to establish limits on permissible (and that which is not permissible) speech. This, in the broader sense, would include the totality of the "Nakba Celebratory Assemblies" and "Remembrance Days."

Article 19​

3. The exercise of the rights provided for in paragraph 2 of this article carries with it special duties and responsibilities. It may therefore be subject to certain restrictions, but these shall only be such as are provided by law and are necessary:​

(a) For respect of the rights or reputations of others;​

(b) For the protection of national security or of public order (order public), or of public health or morals.​

​

Article 20 ​

1. Any propaganda for war shall be prohibited by law.​

2. Any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence shall be prohibited by law.​

Again, those that advocate for the Nakba Events will argue that there is no reason for concern. In which case, they should have no trouble meeting any oversight involving the "Rights of the People" protected by the CCPR (supra).

Just My Thought.

Most Respectfully,
R

So, history is incitement?

No justice, no peace!

It is in a Neo-Nazi rally.

Also when saying 'justice', do you mean for both sides, or really just revenge?
And what is this 'peace' you're talking about, anything Arabs have among
themselves to give anyone?

Because all these slogans sound awfully similar to street racket.

 

[rylah]

Nakba is just a stupid, made up term invented by propagandists long after the fact to try to create the impression that Arab aggression was actually some sort of victimization.

In 1948, there was no "Palestinian" people and no "Nakba" -- just Arabs and the war they initiated. . By1968, however, voila! -- a brand new people called "Palestinian" replete with their phony tale of woe called "Nakba".

What if we separate two issues:

• Mourning
• Political narratives

Making a National Sulhah Day to mourn the casualties of the war on both sides,
doesn't necessary mean accepting accepting the Palestinian political narrative.

It literally means MOURNING together,
no Sulhah ceremony is one sided.

Do You see a problem in that? Is there anything You agree?

 

[rylah]

RE: Idea: Nakba day turns Sulhah day (poll)
⁜→ et al,

On the innocent face value of any "Celebratory Assemblies" and "Remembrance Days" is not really the question in the "Nakba Commemoration." What is at issue is the "latent agenda" and the "issue of incitement" that is associated with this particular commemoration.

On the surface, the issue of the twin freedoms (assembly and speech) will always fold in favor of the Arab Palestinians. The twin freedoms are written in the "innocent frame" that they will not be used, designed or likely to provoke or encourage any threat to the peace, breach of the peace, or justify criminal activity to avenge perceived wrongs. AND, of course, those that argue in favor of the Commemoration → will never suggest that there is a sinister purpose of endorsing the Commemoration (something other than that date which is to dredge-up grievances of the past).

What I see every time the Arab Palestinians bring forward the issue of what they term the "Nakba" (catastrophe) is the mental manipulation that attempts to control the fervor of the participants and twist the audience state of mind to incite violence. Such events are nothing more than a tool used by the Hostile Arab Palestines to influence the will of the audience through the use of deceptive techniques as a backdrop for certain speech to reach the threshold of incitement to hatred.

To off-set, such outcomes, in which the Arab Palestinians can exploit the events - Articles 19 and 20 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (CCPR) attempts to establish limits on permissible (and that which is not permissible) speech. This, in the broader sense, would include the totality of the "Nakba Celebratory Assemblies" and "Remembrance Days."

Article 19​

3. The exercise of the rights provided for in paragraph 2 of this article carries with it special duties and responsibilities. It may therefore be subject to certain restrictions, but these shall only be such as are provided by law and are necessary:​

(a) For respect of the rights or reputations of others;​

(b) For the protection of national security or of public order (order public), or of public health or morals.​

​

Article 20 ​

1. Any propaganda for war shall be prohibited by law.​

2. Any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence shall be prohibited by law.​

Again, those that advocate for the Nakba Events will argue that there is no reason for concern. In which case, they should have no trouble meeting any oversight involving the "Rights of the People" protected by the CCPR (supra).

Just My Thought.

Most Respectfully,
R

Sans criminal activity or violence, they have every right to commemorate a defining moment in their people's history. I don't see that being denied to others, why deny it to the Palestinians?

Ok, 2 issues here:

I think we agree on the criminal activity and violence,
which is what our friend RoccoR clarified.

Now if Nakab day wasn't used mostly for that, which is what seems to be the contention,
then is the theme of Nakba really to mourn and commemorate the casualties of war,
or rather to exploit them and mourn the independence of Israel?

Because those two are completely different things - one thing is to commemorate the loss of the Confederacy, another thing is to mourn the 4th of July and incite to further war.

Would that be allowed in the US, or any other country? Doubt so.

We can disagree on that, but we can still agree on mourning in a humane way - together, which is what I think you liked at the core of this idea.

Question - is this where the line draws?

 

[RoccoR]

RE: Idea: Nakba day turns Sulhah day (poll)
⁜→ et al,

BLUF: And again, you imply something that was not said, attempting to twist the intention of the International Convention on Civil and Political Rights. This is merely one example of why Arab Palestinians are not trustworthy.

So, history is incitement?

No justice, no peace!

(COMMENT)

ANY speech, event, or program that promotes racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence shall be prohibited by law.

But then, on nearly a daily basis, somewhere in the unincorporated territory in dispute between Israeli Sovereign Territory and Jordanian or Egyptian Sovereign Territory, the Arab Palestinians promote something that is intended to incite hostility or violence prohibited by law.

Such activities like the Celebration of the Nakba is no less inciteful than IF Israel were to establish a day of mourning for the 1972 attack on the Summer Olympics. Or better yet, Israel selects a day to celebrate the kill or capture of the many Palestinian Terrorists that intentionally targeted women and children on buses.


Most Respectfully,
R

 

[rylah]

RE: Idea: Nakba day turns Sulhah day (poll)
⁜→ et al,

BLUF: And again, you imply something that was not said, attempting to twist the intention of the International Convention on Civil and Political Rights. This is merely one example of why Arab Palestinians are not trustworthy.

So, history is incitement?

No justice, no peace!

(COMMENT)

ANY speech, event, or program that promotes racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence shall be prohibited by law.

But then, on nearly a daily basis, somewhere in the unincorporated territory in dispute between Israeli Sovereign Territory and Jordanian or Egyptian Sovereign Territory, the Arab Palestinians promote something that is intended to incite hostility or violence prohibited by law.

Such activities like the Celebration of the Nakba is no less inciteful than IF Israel were to establish a day of mourning for the 1972 attack on the Summer Olympics. Or better yet, Israel selects a day to celebrate the kill or capture of the many Palestinian Terrorists that intentionally targeted women and children on buses.


Most Respectfully,
R

Seems the fundamental question is - do Arabs commemorate to mourn casualties of war,
or their political defeat to incite for further war, hostility?

When we in Israel commemorate and mourn casualties,
we commemorate our losses with life, without inciting to revenge.

If we were to exploit our tragedies to incite revenge - no nation would left out.
If we were to go that all the way - Arabs would easily fit the Nazi category, and addressed accordingly, but we don't that, neither with Germans nor with Arabs in spite them now putting Swastikas on their flags.

But there's a certain point of no return where they can turn exactly that, if for the next 20 years we keep hearing this zero-sum game delusions, at least in our narrative - and boy I don't wish them that, but it's their choice.

Things change, the commonly accepted demographic paradigms with them,
and I think that's the beauty of this idea - it's a constant, either by itself as a concept of mutual mourning being essentially a good healing experience. As we as we don't have to actually move an ayotta towards the uncharted territory of possibility of "Palestinian statehood" that doesn't exist beyond something on paper. Israeli sovereignty is a clear enough trajectory on which to base such a vision, as for PA and Hamas that is highly questionable - again central Israel area is already overpopulated, Judea Samria is right in front of Gush Dan and Tel-Aviv, and much more appealing, in many aspects, affordable.

Simultaneously the next frontier is the Negev desert, meaning more Jewish presence and direct friction with the Hamas ideology than falsely perceived trajectory of further disengagement. They usually threaten with attacks on Tel-Aviv, not understanding we're going to bring Tel-Aviv to them, to engage a larger population and force a paradigm shift on the ground, with simple demographics - that's essentially the antagonist scenario they themselves repeat - inevitable expansion of Israel's sovereignty in all territory from the river to the sea.

It kinda has a reverse psychological response,
because by definition they can't reach such a goal without being trampled by their own.

It's an imperialist goal veiled in nationalist veneer - a unified Arab space stretching from Africa to south Arabia, too big by definition to be accounted for a local nationalist ideology, let alone so fundamentally dysfunctional in respect to governmental and geo-political aspects to be accounted in such vast enterprise.

In neither scenario will anyone actually entertain that, neither Iranians, nor Arabs,
at best they could be vassals, as Chechens, only Arabs are nothing like Chechens,
and Iranian leaders are not really Putin...or much fond of Arabs as a rule.

There're ethnic realities to wide middle east that are not PC,
but very much shape geopolitics.

Therefore - Sulhah,
instead of 3rd party 'peace plans',
or Iranian delusions Lebanon style.

 

[rylah]

Palestinian & Israeli Activists Finally Come Together

Now I think there's something fundamentally correct that we can learn from Rudy,
and the format created by Weinerb:

• Focusing on the agreements that are usually overlooked
• The "if you're against one side, you're eventually against both" conclusion

This has less to do with this specific conflict, rather the current culture of debate almost in all political issues on the map, in the west, and here in the middle east.

What becomes clear are two conclusions, that I'd like to discuss:

• The need to separate issues in order to look at specific ideas on their own, and spot the agreements upon which they can be further developed, rather than outright shut discussion on a single disagreement.

• Clearly - there're agents of sabotage and polarization, it's evident in many of Rudy's and other contextually close debates in such gatherings - activists literally come telling people to stop taking part in conversations with people on the other side of the political spectrum. Because they can find they actually agree on more than they disagree. Have you asked yourself where is the PLURALITY of voices, self-criticism on the pro-Pali side? Because look, Jews can disagree virtually on anything, say the most outrageous taboo stuff outloud and argue on high notes, that is not hidden to say the least. What I'm leading to is the conclusion that in order to have a conversation, in any political landscape, there will be those who's interest is to sabotage any possibility of agreement, or even engaging in a conversation - those need to be spotted because they play HUGE role in polarization that might otherwise not naturally exist. And I suspect most are 3rd parties exploiting the conflict for their selfish ends, or amusement, without being there to experience the consequences.

Here's what I'm talking about, it's a whole other culture of discussion, communication.
And the optimistic part is that a shift doesn't require overwhelming majorities,
the main point is not to chase those who spread polarization, but create an
atmosphere to encourage independent voices on the Arab side.

They kinda drift off a bit to the usual history points,
but mostly the discussion emphasizes EXACTLY what I mean.

As Rabbi Kook ztzvk"l said (paraphrase):
"The righteous do not complain about the darkness, they increase light".

 

[rylah]

Question: can votes be changed along the discussion?

Would be interesting to watch.

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: Idea: Nakba day turns Sulhah day (poll)
⁜→ et al,

BLUF: And again, you imply something that was not said, attempting to twist the intention of the International Convention on Civil and Political Rights. This is merely one example of why Arab Palestinians are not trustworthy.

So, history is incitement?

No justice, no peace!

(COMMENT)

ANY speech, event, or program that promotes racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence shall be prohibited by law.

But then, on nearly a daily basis, somewhere in the unincorporated territory in dispute between Israeli Sovereign Territory and Jordanian or Egyptian Sovereign Territory, the Arab Palestinians promote something that is intended to incite hostility or violence prohibited by law.

Such activities like the Celebration of the Nakba is no less inciteful than IF Israel were to establish a day of mourning for the 1972 attack on the Summer Olympics. Or better yet, Israel selects a day to celebrate the kill or capture of the many Palestinian Terrorists that intentionally targeted women and children on buses.


Most Respectfully,
R

the Arab Palestinians promote something that is intended to incite hostility or violence prohibited by law.

Pffft, slime.

 

[rylah]

RE: Idea: Nakba day turns Sulhah day (poll)
⁜→ et al,

BLUF: And again, you imply something that was not said, attempting to twist the intention of the International Convention on Civil and Political Rights. This is merely one example of why Arab Palestinians are not trustworthy.

So, history is incitement?

No justice, no peace!

(COMMENT)

ANY speech, event, or program that promotes racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence shall be prohibited by law.

But then, on nearly a daily basis, somewhere in the unincorporated territory in dispute between Israeli Sovereign Territory and Jordanian or Egyptian Sovereign Territory, the Arab Palestinians promote something that is intended to incite hostility or violence prohibited by law.

Such activities like the Celebration of the Nakba is no less inciteful than IF Israel were to establish a day of mourning for the 1972 attack on the Summer Olympics. Or better yet, Israel selects a day to celebrate the kill or capture of the many Palestinian Terrorists that intentionally targeted women and children on buses.


Most Respectfully,
R

the Arab Palestinians promote something that is intended to incite hostility or violence prohibited by law.

Pffft, slime.

May I ask,
that if you have no mature response, argument or constructive material to contribute the discussion,
to refrain from further derailing this conversation?

Is that too much to ask?

 

[rylah]

Well in the meantime,
the only ones opposing the idea,
are 3rd party actors with clearly hostile motives.

And neither directly involved in the conflict,
or to face the consequences of their positions.

All fits - the most polarizing voices, are usually the least informed.

 

[Sunni Man]

The zionist juden here want to structure all the parameters of the debate according to their biased perception, and disregard the other sides view of the events under discussion.
Which is the same way they approach the peace process. ...

 

[rylah]

The zionist juden here want to structure all the parameters of the debate according to their biased perception, and disregard the other sides view of the events under discussion.
Which is the same way they approach the peace process. ...

Don't you have a counterargument without these parameters?

Sunni even you understand that you cannot simply define your opinions
by default opposition to anything a Zionist Jew says.

If you don't have that counterargument,
then you probably agree with the idea itself.

So what is it, the lust for revenge?

 

[Sunni Man]

Nakba is just a stupid, made up term invented by propagandists long after the fact to try to create the impression that Arab aggression was actually some sort of victimization. In 1948, there was no "Palestinian" people and no "Nakba" -- just Arabs and the war they initiated. . By1968, however, voila! -- a brand new people called "Palestinian" replete with their phony tale of woe called "Nakba".

The so called Holocaust is just a made up name invented by zionist propagandists to create the impression of some sort of victimization. A mythical tale of woe used to justify any inhumane criminal act the newly minted state deemed necessary to engage in. ...

 

[rylah]

Remember we were once discussing Dr. Kedar's Emirate solution,
and I've mentioned Judean communities building cooperation with the sheikhs of Arab tribes?
You might think it takes huge platforms and polished optics, but it actually works better without.

The Home is an organized infrastructure inclusively open to all identities across the land. Its initial aims are to develop and promote inter-communal connections between the Palestinian and the Jewish residents in Judea, Samaria and Jerusalem

The Home is an Israeli-Arab-Palestinian grassroots platform for the humanization of the other, normalization, reform and alliance between the people.

 

[RoccoR]

RE: Idea: Nakba day turns Sulhah day (poll)
⁜→ Sunni Man, et al,

BLUF: You have it wrong. Your entire comment is merely propaganda to downplay the historical context. (Do you fact check anything? RHETORICAL)

The so called Holocaust is just a made up name invented by zionist propagandists to create the impression of some sort of victimization. A mythical tale of woe used to justify any inhumane criminal act the newly minted state deemed necessary to engage in. ... ​

The etymology of the word dates back to the 12th Century used by an English Historian. However, it is a Biblical term. It is NOT a word " invented by zionist propagandists."

holocaust (n.)​

mid-13c., "sacrifice by fire, burnt offering," from Old French holocauste (12c.), or directly from Late Latin holocaustum, from Greek holokauston "a thing wholly burnt," neuter of holokaustos "burned whole," from holos "whole" (from PIE root *sol- "whole, well-kept") + kaustos, verbal adjective of kaiein "to burn" (see caustic).​

​

Originally a Bible word for "burnt offerings," given wider figurative sense of "massacre, destruction of a large number of persons" from 1670s. The Holocaust "Nazi genocide of European Jews in World War II," first recorded 1957, earlier known in Hebrew as Shoah "catastrophe." The word itself was used in English in reference to Hitler's Jewish policies from 1942, but not as a proper name for them.​

​

English chronicler Richard of Devizes in his contemporary account of the coronation of Richard I in 1189 used the word holocaust when he described the mass murder of the Jews of London, although he meant it as "a sacrificial offering."​

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[rylah]

RoccoR what do You think would be the worth mentioning advantages and disadvantages,
if we discussed this more as long term policy, a trend to engage in public/political discourse,
for the next 10 years. As in to align more with the natural demographic development,
while these new shifting attitudes settle a bit, rather than in the framework of
a typical international 'peace accord' signed on a paper?

 

[rylah]

Palestinian: Fighting for justice means challenging our own prejudices | MORAL COURAGE EP. 38

Palestinian John Elias Dabis and Israeli Inon Dan Kehati are amplifying the unpopular ideas of the silent majority. And for John, that means calling out injustice wherever he sees it - among Israelis *and* among Palestinians.

 

[Ria_Longhorn]

Nakba is just a stupid, made up term invented by propagandists long after the fact to try to create the impression that Arab aggression was actually some sort of victimization. In 1948, there was no "Palestinian" people and no "Nakba" -- just Arabs and the war they initiated. . By1968, however, voila! -- a brand new people called "Palestinian" replete with their phony tale of woe called "Nakba".

The so called Holocaust is just a made up name invented by zionist propagandists to create the impression of some sort of victimization. A mythical tale of woe used to justify any inhumane criminal act the newly minted state deemed necessary to engage in. ...

Learn to be a human being.

 

[RoccoR]

RE: Idea: Nakba day turns Sulhah day (poll)
⁜→ rylah, et al,

BLUF: Not very many people see such discussions on questions lasting for a decade.

RoccoR what do You think would be the worth mentioning advantages and disadvantages, if we discussed this more as long term policy, a trend to engage in public/political discourse, for the next 10 years.

(COMMENT)

While in reality, regional and world-wide conditions will be everlasting issues in the future, other policies will be dynamic. Dynamic policies (like a Dynamic IP address) will change to something new each time it surfaces. Before I went to Vietnam (RVN), I held certain ideas as to what was right and wrong in the conflict. When I returned from RVN I had different ideas based on exposure. When I graduated college I had understood the politics better. And by the time my post-grad work was done, I had even more refined ideas. What I might have said in the beginning of the discussion on the policies concerning the RVN Conflict and what I might have said a decade later are something entirely different. The very same thing happened to me in the interval between between my experience in Iraq (2004) and at the conclusion of my Middle East experience (2011) after my time, which included time in Afghanistan and Yemen.

While I never actually spoke to any of the Commanders, Multi-National Force – Iraq (MNF-I)(GENs Casey, Petraeus, Odienro), I did get to see and listen to the O-6 level staff officers over that period. And if you compared those staff officers, one against the other, what they said and what they considered as important, did not very much. But what they implemented was much different (not that any of it worked). One night we discussed the meaning of the "truth" and I asked them if they were telling the "truth?" There were four Academy graduates there, and each remembered the "honor code." What the meaning of quibbling, when they were cadets and the meaning now when the were staff offices to a four-star, was different.

As in to align more with the natural demographic development, while these new shifting attitudes settle a bit, rather than in the framework of a typical international 'peace accord' signed on a paper?

(COMMENT)

Yes, it is very important that we are able to appreciate change; but, also important to understand that you cannot retroactively evaluate decisions of the past with the standards, morals, ethics, and attitudes of today. In a comment in reference to the 1922 White Paper (25 years earlier), the UK Staff said:

"When it is asked what it meant by the development of the Jewish national Home in Palestine, it may be answered that it is not the imposition of a Jewish nationality upon the inhabitants of Palestine as a whole, but the further development of the existing Jewish community, with the assistance of Jews in other part parts of the world, in order that it may become a centre in which the Jewish people as a whole may take, on grounds of religion and race, an interest and a pride." (Source: A/AC.14/8 UK History of Administration 2 October 1947)​

​

Compare this statement (supra) to what various participants of the discussion understand today.

(∑ SUMMATION)

It is tremendously important to keep a record of the pulse relative to the impact of contemporary thinking.


Most Respectfully,
R