"Settlements destroy chance for peace" - Caroline Glick's amazing reality-check

[Lipush]

Addressing the common issues of "Jewish ethnic cleansing of Palestinians" (Or is that the other way around?), civil rights and British hypocrisy.

A must-watch!

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yx_ML5oCtMU&feature=player_embedded]?"???????? ?? ?????? ???? ??????? ??? ??? ???????? ?????" - ????? ?? ?????? ????.?? - YouTube[/ame]

thoughts?

 

[P F Tinmore]

What resolution was she talking about?

 

[Lipush]

The one that includes settlements' removal without any guarantee of Israel's safety.

 

[P F Tinmore]

The one that includes settlements' removal without any guarantee of Israel's safety.

That does not tell me much. Got a link?

 

[Jroc]

Excellent..its never been about two states to the Arabs, it's always been about no Jews..That's just the way it is Lipush ..That's just the way it is.

 

[HistoryBefore67]

If I were to make a list of the top 100 things that are impeding peace, "settlements" wouldn't make the cut.

Of course, it makes a great talking point for the Arabs. "No, the problem isn't that we teach our children that they should martyr themselves to further the goal of destroying Israel in its entirety. The problem is that Netanyahu wants to construct a falafel stand on the wrong side of the Green Line."

 

[ForeverYoung436]

If I were to make a list of the top 100 things that are impeding peace, "settlements" wouldn't make the cut.

Of course, it makes a great talking point for the Arabs. "No, the problem isn't that we teach our children that they should martyr themselves to further the goal of destroying Israel in its entirety. The problem is that Netanyahu wants to construct a falafel stand on the wrong side of the Green Line."

Ma'ale Adumim and Ariel, etc. are thriving, expanding cities--not exactly falafel stands.

 

[Coyote]

If I were to make a list of the top 100 things that are impeding peace, "settlements" wouldn't make the cut.

Of course, it makes a great talking point for the Arabs. "No, the problem isn't that we teach our children that they should martyr themselves to further the goal of destroying Israel in its entirety. The problem is that Netanyahu wants to construct a falafel stand on the wrong side of the Green Line."

It's not a "talking point", it's a serious issue of contention. The continuous theft of land erodes any possibility of a two state solution.

 

[HistoryBefore67]

If I were to make a list of the top 100 things that are impeding peace, "settlements" wouldn't make the cut.

Of course, it makes a great talking point for the Arabs. "No, the problem isn't that we teach our children that they should martyr themselves to further the goal of destroying Israel in its entirety. The problem is that Netanyahu wants to construct a falafel stand on the wrong side of the Green Line."

Ma'ale Adumim and Ariel, etc. are thriving, expanding cities--not exactly falafel stands.

Yes, I know. I was exaggerating for dramatic effect.

 

[HistoryBefore67]

If I were to make a list of the top 100 things that are impeding peace, "settlements" wouldn't make the cut.

Of course, it makes a great talking point for the Arabs. "No, the problem isn't that we teach our children that they should martyr themselves to further the goal of destroying Israel in its entirety. The problem is that Netanyahu wants to construct a falafel stand on the wrong side of the Green Line."

It's not a "talking point", it's a serious issue of contention. The continuous theft of land erodes any possibility of a two state solution.

Only if you believe that Israel is located in Narnia.

In the real world, the "Palestinian" majority has no desire for a peaceful coexistence with Israel in any form. That's why, when Israel halted its "settlement" activities for 10 months, the "Palestinians" still refused to come to the table.

Besides that reality, its people like you that are the problem. By labeling Israel's actions "theft," you've changed the issue from one of contention to one of condemnation.

 

[Roudy]

Excellent..its never been about two states to the Arabs, it's always been about no Jews..That's just the way it is Lipush ..That's just the way it is.

And always will be.

 

[Coyote]

If I were to make a list of the top 100 things that are impeding peace, "settlements" wouldn't make the cut.

Of course, it makes a great talking point for the Arabs. "No, the problem isn't that we teach our children that they should martyr themselves to further the goal of destroying Israel in its entirety. The problem is that Netanyahu wants to construct a falafel stand on the wrong side of the Green Line."

It's not a "talking point", it's a serious issue of contention. The continuous theft of land erodes any possibility of a two state solution.

Only if you believe that Israel is located in Narnia.

In the real world, the "Palestinian" majority has no desire for a peaceful coexistence with Israel in any form. That's why, when Israel halted its "settlement" activities for 10 months, the "Palestinians" still refused to come to the table.

Besides that reality, its people like you that are the problem. By labeling Israel's actions "theft," you've changed the issue from one of contention to one of condemnation.

It is theft. Redefining theft doesn't alter what it is. And please, your OP is a prime example of condemnation labeling.

 

[HistoryBefore67]

So its "theft" because YOU say so?

YOU get to decide what land is "Palestinian land" as opposed to "disputed land"?

Your type of mindset is, as I said, the problem. You claim that you support negotiations, but you wish to predetermine the outcome (are you sure you don't work for the PA?).

Let's say, for the sake of argument, that Israel builds a town in Samaria and Jews move there. Let's assume further that one day the "Palestinians" truly accept Israel's existence and agree to a two state solution. Finally, let's presume that the Samarian town is in the territory that ultimately is agreed to be part of a "Palestinian" state.

What happens then?

Are the Jews required to leave, or could they choose to live in the "Palestinian" state (and, if they do, what rights will they have)?

I ask these questions becuase there's a type of "settlement" that nobody seems to talk about. Those are the settlements that exist throughout Israel that are populated by Arabs. In these settlements, the citizens are included in the democratic system of government that exists in Israel.

So what happens in your two state solution? Jewish "settlements" are to be evacuated, while Arab "settlements" in Israel continue with the status quo?

The bottom line is this: peaceful coexistence is an ideal. "Settlements" are a detail. To focus on the detail when the ideal is repeatedly rejected by the "Palestinians" is a classic example of putting the cart before the horse.

 

[P F Tinmore]

So its "theft" because YOU say so?

YOU get to decide what land is "Palestinian land" as opposed to "disputed land"?

Your type of mindset is, as I said, the problem. You claim that you support negotiations, but you wish to predetermine the outcome (are you sure you don't work for the PA?).

Let's say, for the sake of argument, that Israel builds a town in Samaria and Jews move there. Let's assume further that one day the "Palestinians" truly accept Israel's existence and agree to a two state solution. Finally, let's presume that the Samarian town is in the territory that ultimately is agreed to be part of a "Palestinian" state.

What happens then?

Are the Jews required to leave, or could they choose to live in the "Palestinian" state (and, if they do, what rights will they have)?

I ask these questions becuase there's a type of "settlement" that nobody seems to talk about. Those are the settlements that exist throughout Israel that are populated by Arabs. In these settlements, the citizens are included in the democratic system of government that exists in Israel.

So what happens in your two state solution? Jewish "settlements" are to be evacuated, while Arab "settlements" in Israel continue with the status quo?

The bottom line is this: peaceful coexistence is an ideal. "Settlements" are a detail. To focus on the detail when the ideal is repeatedly rejected by the "Palestinians" is a classic example of putting the cart before the horse.

Are the Jews required to leave, or could they choose to live in the "Palestinian" state (and, if they do, what rights will they have)?

The Palestinians say that the Jews can stay as citizens of Palestine.

Palestine has a constitution that is quite similar to, and in some cases more comprehensive than, the US constitution.

 

[HistoryBefore67]

So its "theft" because YOU say so?

YOU get to decide what land is "Palestinian land" as opposed to "disputed land"?

Your type of mindset is, as I said, the problem. You claim that you support negotiations, but you wish to predetermine the outcome (are you sure you don't work for the PA?).

Let's say, for the sake of argument, that Israel builds a town in Samaria and Jews move there. Let's assume further that one day the "Palestinians" truly accept Israel's existence and agree to a two state solution. Finally, let's presume that the Samarian town is in the territory that ultimately is agreed to be part of a "Palestinian" state.

What happens then?

Are the Jews required to leave, or could they choose to live in the "Palestinian" state (and, if they do, what rights will they have)?

I ask these questions becuase there's a type of "settlement" that nobody seems to talk about. Those are the settlements that exist throughout Israel that are populated by Arabs. In these settlements, the citizens are included in the democratic system of government that exists in Israel.

So what happens in your two state solution? Jewish "settlements" are to be evacuated, while Arab "settlements" in Israel continue with the status quo?

The bottom line is this: peaceful coexistence is an ideal. "Settlements" are a detail. To focus on the detail when the ideal is repeatedly rejected by the "Palestinians" is a classic example of putting the cart before the horse.

Are the Jews required to leave, or could they choose to live in the "Palestinian" state (and, if they do, what rights will they have)?

The Palestinians say that the Jews can stay as citizens of Palestine.

Palestine has a constitution that is quite similar to, and in some cases more comprehensive than, the US constitution.

You get more and more idiotic with each post. I could have a more meaningful discussion with this than with you:

HB67: "Hey, box of rocks, do you really think that the Palestinian Constitution, which makes Islam its official religion and Shari'a its main source of legislation (Article 4), is conducive to Jewish citizenship in the hypothetical State of Palestine?"

Box of rocks: "Well gee, I don't see how that would work. In fact, the same Constitution states that citizenship will be regulated by law, which necessarily means Shari'a law, so clearly that would be a problem."

See? The box of rocks gets it. What are you missing?

 

[Jroc]

If I were to make a list of the top 100 things that are impeding peace, "settlements" wouldn't make the cut.

Of course, it makes a great talking point for the Arabs. "No, the problem isn't that we teach our children that they should martyr themselves to further the goal of destroying Israel in its entirety. The problem is that Netanyahu wants to construct a falafel stand on the wrong side of the Green Line."

It's not a "talking point", it's a serious issue of contention. The continuous theft of land erodes any possibility of a two state solution.

"Theft"..... Please... only in the minds of ignorant. know nothing, people You cant steal what you have

 

[Jroc]

I posted this before. but I'll do it again for the ignorant

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_PwbkXLJ-eQ&]"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_PwbkXLJ-eQ&][/ame]

 

[Roudy]

So its "theft" because YOU say so?

YOU get to decide what land is "Palestinian land" as opposed to "disputed land"?

Your type of mindset is, as I said, the problem. You claim that you support negotiations, but you wish to predetermine the outcome (are you sure you don't work for the PA?).

Let's say, for the sake of argument, that Israel builds a town in Samaria and Jews move there. Let's assume further that one day the "Palestinians" truly accept Israel's existence and agree to a two state solution. Finally, let's presume that the Samarian town is in the territory that ultimately is agreed to be part of a "Palestinian" state.

What happens then?

Are the Jews required to leave, or could they choose to live in the "Palestinian" state (and, if they do, what rights will they have)?

I ask these questions becuase there's a type of "settlement" that nobody seems to talk about. Those are the settlements that exist throughout Israel that are populated by Arabs. In these settlements, the citizens are included in the democratic system of government that exists in Israel.

So what happens in your two state solution? Jewish "settlements" are to be evacuated, while Arab "settlements" in Israel continue with the status quo?

The bottom line is this: peaceful coexistence is an ideal. "Settlements" are a detail. To focus on the detail when the ideal is repeatedly rejected by the "Palestinians" is a classic example of putting the cart before the horse.

Are the Jews required to leave, or could they choose to live in the "Palestinian" state (and, if they do, what rights will they have)?

The Palestinians say that the Jews can stay as citizens of Palestine.

Palestine has a constitution that is quite similar to, and in some cases more comprehensive than, the US constitution.

You get more and more idiotic with each post. I could have a more meaningful discussion with this than with you:

HB67: "Hey, box of rocks, do you really think that the Palestinian Constitution, which makes Islam its official religion and Shari'a its main source of legislation (Article 4), is conducive to Jewish citizenship in the hypothetical State of Palestine?"

Box of rocks: "Well gee, I don't see how that would work. In fact, the same Constitution states that citizenship will be regulated by law, which necessarily means Shari'a law, so clearly that would be a problem."

See? The box of rocks gets it. What are you missing?

Even a box of rocks knows better than to make such as outlandish claim as "Palestinian Hamas constitution is more comprehensive than the US"!!!

I mean seriously, isn't there an asylum around where Tinmore is, looking for an escapee?

 

[SherriMunnerlyn]

Caroline Glick certainly shows the world the face of Zionism, as she passionately defends Zionists's continuing ethnic cleansing of Palestine. Hitler must be so proud of his progeny! He set the example for Zionists to follow. A woman after his own heart, filled with pride in her superiority to the rest of the human race! Sherri

 

[SherriMunnerlyn]

EI EXCLUSIVE: Palestinian population exceeds Jewish population says U.S. government

Michael F. Brown,*Ali Abunimah*and*Nigel ParryThe Electronic Intifada*1 March 2005 The population of Palestinians living in Israel, the Occupied Gaza Strip, Occupied East Jerusalem and rest of the Occupied West Bank combined now exceeds the number of Israeli Jews, a*U.S.government report has*revealed.The Palestinian population stands at over 5.3 million while the Jewish population stands at 5.2*million.The figures come from the*U.S.*State Department’s annual*Country Reports on Human Rights Practices*for 2004. The report provided population figures for each of these territorial units separately but failed to connect all the dots to arrive at the explosive new demographic reality that an Israeli Jewish minority now rules over a larger number of Palestinians living between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan*River.The section on Israel and the Occupied Territories states that the population of Israel stands at 6.8 million, of whom 5.2 million are Jews, 1.3 million Arabs and another 290,000 are other minorities. The Arabs who are citizens of Israel are Palestinians who are survivors and descendants of those Palestinians who were not forced out of the country or fled when Israel was*created. EI EXCLUSIVE: Palestinian population exceeds Jewish population says U.S. government | The Electronic Intifada. I post this article to confront demographic lies of Carolyn Glick in the video in the OP. Arabs in Palestine have been in the majority now since 2005. A minority cannot control a majority infinitely/indefinitely, we see that illustrated by South Africa and the struggle with Apartheid there. Sherri