The people of Gaza now have a new story that occupies the war-torn Strip and makes them ponder its significance. Few days ago, news reports by media outlets reported that the government of the UAE will be deporting a number of Palestinians especially those from the Gaza Strip to their home country. This came as odd news as the people and the government of the UAE have been among the best friends for Palestine—building whole cities to accommodate the widows and orphans of Palestinian killed by Israel. The moment my dad read me the news he explained this action as the beginning for a full Israeli normalization with the State of the UAE. I dismissed his analysis, but was surprised to find he is not alone in this theory, many residence of Gaza quote the same line about how the UAE wants to start working with Israel.
I first thought the UAE’s action is ordinary in light of the global financial meltdown that hit Dubai hard. I also know that the UAE when they deport other nationalities, they defer deporting the Palestinians to the last stage and occasionally just let them off the hook. Further, this is the trend in the Gulf to hire their people for the jobs that foreigners hold and this is also normal and should not be as a conspiracy against Gaza.
However, the news took an odd turn; the Palestinian ambassador denied the reports and said they were untrue. He made sure to thank the UAE for their generosity toward the Palestinians. Fine and dandy, but then I started reading the comments Palestinians in the UAE left on the ambassadors’ article. They were upset for his cover-up of the news of their deportations. As a native of the UAE who grew up there and went to school in Dubai, those comments made sense to me and I realized that they are indeed kicking out Palestinians form the UAE.
Here is my take other possible reason behind deporting those Gazans, fundraising. As I toured the Gaza Strip and met a number of organizations working in Gaza and I was suspired to learn on the amount of funding the Gaza charities receive from UAE foundations. It seems those Palestinians being deported are involved to some level with fundraising for Gaza. Needless to say, some of those donations go toward Gaza mosques and charities that are linked to Hamas by one way or another. In other words because the money made available by those UAE charities gives Hamas a breathing room and help them overcome the unjust embargo on them, some people weren’t happy. They really want to further choke Hamas and with it so go the needy in Gaza.
Obviously, there might be other reasons behind the sudden change of heart in the UAE government. One day, they built the massive Sheikh Zaid City in Northern Gaza where they generously spent money on to now deporting the Palestinian teachers and doctors to Gaza—the world’s largest mousetrap.
Related posts:
Any real surprise? The UAE has always followed the American line when it came to ME policy.
Posted by Arayus | September 8, 2009, 1:08 amYou just instantly believe anything you're told, don't you? From the report: "Khairy al-Aridi, Palestinian ambassador to the UAE, was quoted by the Ramallah-based official Palestinian news agency Wafa on Thursday as denying a deliberate policy of expulsion."
So has any of this been verified? Or are you just blindly jumping to conclusions?
The UAE has always followed the American line when it came to ME policy? Is that right? Can you provide one example of American policy supporting the expulsion of Palestinians from any other country? (Any other country means somewhere besides Palestine, in case you come up with some wacky idea about saying that American policy supports expulsion of Palestinians from their historical homeland… a homeland which centuries before the Arabs ever arrived was the homeland of the Jews.)
So where is this "American line" that the UAE are rumored to be following? Where is this American policy?
Posted by moron | September 8, 2009, 6:06 pmI know families and individuals who have been deported to Gaza from the UAE. I also know that my aunt lives an apartment provided by the government of the UAE, I know I was born there and I know that they provide lots of aid to people of Palestine. But politics is messy.
Posted by Hanitizer | September 9, 2009, 10:26 amnot suprised, arab states say they support palestine but they continue to have these policies to discriminate and conspire against the palestinians, all the way from egypt to jordan to lebanon to kuwait and now it seems like the UAE…stabbed in the back again
Posted by Knife in the back | September 8, 2009, 2:56 amMaybe its time that the Palestinians stop being the pathetic losers, and "man up" to make a real government and a real state? Maybe its time for Palestinians to stop being used as pawns against Israel. Aren't they tired of being pawns yet? Let them form a nice state, like Jordan or Egypt, and let someone else be brainwashed into thinking they must destroy Israel, or resist, or whatever.
Posted by common sense | September 8, 2009, 6:10 pmPlease tell me how you create your own country while being brutally occupied by one of the most powerful military's in the world.
Posted by Arayus | September 8, 2009, 8:39 pmAs a Palestinian I'm totally convinced now that the main reason why we lost our homeland in 1948 is Arab treachery and ignorance. Arab armies and leaders are totally inept and are breached by corrupt and collaborating criminals. Just look at the Jordanian army before '48 with their British general who called the shots, to the insisting of Arab regimes including the Gulf fiefdoms to go ahead with the first Gulf War despite the PLO and Arab popular demands to the opposite….
This is no news, the first and prime ennemy of the Palestinian people are Arab regimes who use us as bargainning chip with the intellectually and economically superior Israelis. Sad – but true!
Of course this is not to say we're absolved of any blame, in the contrary our own shortcomings including the Fatah / Hamas rift has ensured our suffering will, unfortunately, continue idefinitely.
In the meantime every Palestinian should ask himself, what are WE doing to alleviate our own problems? Are you speaking out? Are you sending money to Palestine? Are you actively promoting our just cause around the world?
Posted by Nour | September 8, 2009, 10:04 amThanks Nour, I really do not like to blame others for our shorcoming, we the Palestinians let that happen to us, let the Egyptians decide if Hamas and Fateh can talk, let the …..
However I do agree with you….I recorded an interview with my grandpa to hear the 1948 story form a guy who does not give a damn, one of the stories he told me of an Egyptian General who was part of the army to liberate Palestine. The General used to tell the young Palestinians who wanted to fight the Jewish settlers, "Let them go son, what they take at night, we take back during the day" well, the settlers took what they want during the night, but no one took anything back.
Posted by Hanitizer | September 8, 2009, 11:32 amdead on
Posted by starr | September 11, 2009, 2:35 pmFirst of all I am not convinced a valid reason(s) has been given for this alleged deportation.
Secondly, no official from the UAE has confirmed it. I really don't know what's going on.
No one here in Dubai is talking, dunno about AD.
Finally, let's not forget that the Zionist problem is not just a Palestinian problem. Israel has occupied Lebanon, Syria and Egypt as well. Their view is to take the land from the river (Al Furat) to the Nile as you know. Of course it's up to the Palestinians to resist, but I think it's a bit unfair since Zionism is a worldwide movement and Palestine is a tiny country.
Posted by BuJ | September 8, 2009, 4:45 pm"Khairy al-Aridi, Palestinian ambassador to the UAE, was quoted by the Ramallah-based official Palestinian news agency Wafa on Thursday as denying a deliberate policy of expulsion."
The Zionist problem is not just a Palestinian problem? What "Zionist problem"? Is it anything like the "Jew problem" in pre-WWII Germany?
"Of course it's up to the Palestinians to resist"? Resist what? The Palestinians are meant to be used as a weapon against Israel? They are to be a perpetual dagger aimed at the Israelis?
Why shouldn't the Palestinians form a real government and establish their own state, instead of serving as pawns against Israel?
Posted by fascism | September 8, 2009, 5:58 pmAgain do tell me how the Palestinians can "create their own state" when Israel enforces a brutal occupation over territories that are supposed to be their future state, steals more land from these territories to create more "living space" for other people, and continues to block and obstruct any form of economic development in the territories.
Not to mention the massacres, destruction of infrastructure, and the complete apartheid system that exists in the occupied territories.
Posted by Arayus | September 8, 2009, 8:42 pmPalestinian state 'in two years'
Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Salam Fayyad has set a two-year target for the creation of a Palestinian state, in a speech in Jerusalem.
Israel PM 'may back two states'
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu may be prepared to endorse a peace process leading to an independent Palestinian state, his defence minister has said.
US presses Israel over two states
US Vice-President Joe Biden has said Israel must back a two-state solution to the conflict with the Palestinians.
Pope calls for Palestinian state
Pope Benedict XVI has offered his support for the Palestinians' right to a homeland…
US to donate '$900m in Gaza aid'
The United States is preparing to donate some $900m (£621m) for Gaza, an Obama administration official said.
The aid would not go to Hamas, the group that controls the territory, but it would help the Palestinian Authority, the official added.
US in $80m Palestinian aid deal
US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has signed an agreement giving the Palestinian Authority $80m (£39m) to reform their security services.
Posted by eagle007blogger | September 9, 2009, 5:15 am"Palestinian state 'in two years"
How long have we been hearing that from corrupt Fatah cronies?
"Israel PM 'may back two states"
Again, how long have we been hearing that from mister "No Palestinian State EVER"
"US presses Israel over two states"
Yea, we've been doing that every since the Oslo accords in 1993, when the Israelis convinced the Palestinians to stop trying to obtain equal rights and Israeli citizenship. The only way Israel will listen to the US is if we cut off aid to Israel until they comply.
"Pope calls for Palestinian state"
Seriously, who hasn't?
"US to donate '$900m in Gaza aid"
Yea, but due to an Israeli blockade, none of that money is going to get in. In fact, rice, lentils, and school books (and any type of building material), and many other Israeli "deemed" luxuries are not allowed into the Gaza strip due to the illegal Israeli imposed blockade.
Posted by Arayus | September 9, 2009, 6:57 amObviously world leaders think there can be a Palestinian state, and they are promoting hope and progress.
You, on the other hand, disagree with them and promote a gloomy status quo/impossible demands approach.
Posted by eagle007blogger | September 9, 2009, 7:51 amComing from the person that says the 1967 border based solution is 'retarded'?
Have you even read about Netanyahu's proposal, which doesn't even call for a Palestinian state?
Posted by Shafiq | September 9, 2009, 1:24 pmHamas leader in talks over Fatah
The leader of the Palestinian faction Hamas has visited Egypt for talks with mediators brokering a reconciliation with political rivals Fatah.
They're working on it, whether you like it or not. They need a legitimate government first, then they will work with Israel and the international community. Of course, there are many who do not want the situation resolved – they want the Palestinian situation to be used as a tool against Israel.
And then there's Hamas – they are the biggest stumbling block to progress. They pump the Palestinian media full of propaganda and incitement, they cause problems, not to mention are supported by rogue states like Iran that do not want peace.
And then there's this:
Hamas leader denies Nazi genocide of Jews
Real nice.
Posted by eagle007blogger | September 9, 2009, 4:56 amYea, and Israeli leaders constantly deny the existence of the Palestinians, they also continue to deny ethnically cleansing them from their land despite the fact that every Israeli historian acknowledges that this is what happened. Also, one member of Hamas saying something, does not mean that this its a Hamas position, you should know better.
Anyway,
Hamas accepted the 1967 borders as a BASIS for a full peace with Israel. Israel has not.
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1035414.html
Hamas accepted the Arab Peace Initiative, Israel has not.
Hamas removed its clause for the destruction of Israel, Israel has yet to even acknowledge the Palestinian people as a people.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2006/jan/12/israe…
Hamas has called for an end to suicide bombing (its most destructive attack), a tactic that killed 300 Israelis. Israel has yet to end aerial bombardment, naval bombardment, artillery bombardment, tank shelling, using illegal weapons, or to stop attacking civilian centers and infrastructure.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2006/apr/09/israe…
Hamas is the most extreme of the mainstream Palestinian group. Yet their stance is far more lenient than even the most "peace" friendly group of the Israelis who continue to encourage more settler activity. The people in the West Bank are not even resisting Israel, yet Israel has rewarded them by creating more settlements, kicking more people off their land, and imprisoning even more Palestinians. Some peace process.
Please, spare the bullshit.
Posted by Arayus | September 9, 2009, 6:51 amYea, and Israeli leaders constantly deny the existence of the Palestinians, they also continue to deny ethnically cleansing them from their land despite the fact that every Israeli historian acknowledges that this is what happened. Also, one member of Hamas saying something, does not mean that its a Hamas position, you should know better.
Anyway,
Hamas accepted the 1967 borders as a BASIS for a full peace with Israel. Israel has not.
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1035414.html
Hamas accepted the Arab Peace Initiative, Israel has not.
Hamas removed its clause for the destruction of Israel, Israel has yet to even acknowledge the Palestinian people as a people.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2006/jan/12/israe…
Hamas has called for an end to suicide bombing (its most destructive attack), a tactic that killed 300 Israelis. Israel has yet to end aerial bombardment, naval bombardment, artillery bombardment, tank shelling, using illegal weapons, or to stop attacking civilian centers and infrastructure.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2006/apr/09/israe…
Hamas is the most extreme of the mainstream Palestinian group. Yet their stance is far more lenient than even the most "peace" friendly group of the Israelis who continue to encourage more settler activity. The people in the West Bank are not even resisting Israel, yet Israel has rewarded them by creating more settlements, kicking more people off their land, and imprisoning even more Palestinians. Some peace process.
Please, spare the bullshit.
Posted by Arayus | September 9, 2009, 6:51 amArayus listen (er, read) carefully… the 1967 deal is not even on the table. It is unrealistic and retarded.
The so-called Arab Peace Initiative was something dreamed up by some Arab states, without any negotiation of involved parties, namely Israel. But at least they are talking about peace and how to get there, and that is good.
You don't seem to understand that Hamas is the biggest roadblock right now. You try to make excuses for their terrorism and reprehensible acts, including flooding the Palestinian media with propaganda and anti-Israeli hate speech (and you were talking about racism?)
Hamas rejects Israeli recognition
Palestinian militant group Hamas will not recognise Israel, its political leader Khaled Meshaal has insisted.
Hamas rocket attacks 'war crimes
The firing of rockets into Israel by Hamas militants in the Gaza Strip amounts to a war crime, a prominent human rights group has said.
Human Right Watch (HRW) said Hamas should "publicly renounce" the attacks and hold those responsible to account.
Posted by eagle007blogger | September 9, 2009, 7:09 amErr…the 1967 solution is the only solution that is on the table. It's the one the Quartet supports and the one that's most likely to bring peace.
The Arab Peace Initiative (which was implicitly endorsed by Hamas) was a brief outline of a 67-based two state solution. It has been open for negotiation since 2002, but Israel has decided to ignore it completely, choosing to attempt to annexe more of the West Bank instead.
Posted by Shafiq | September 9, 2009, 1:22 pmThe 67 deal is NOT on the table – Israel has said repeatedly that it will not do that, and no one really expected them to. People such as Arayus like to pretend that the 67 war happened because Israel suddenly launched a surprise attack for no reason. That is not true…
On 13 May a Soviet intelligence report given the Soviets to the Egyptians claimed falsely that Israeli troops were massing along the Syrian border
In May 1967, Syria's Defense Minister declared: "Our forces are now entirely ready not only to repulse the aggression, but to initiate the act of liberation itself, and to explode the Zionist presence in the Arab homeland. The Syrian Army, with its finger on the trigger, is united… I, as a military man, believe that the time has come to enter into a battle of annihilation."
Nasser and Amer immediately ordered 4 Egyptian divisions to the sinai border with Israel, and they called up reserves (from the hundreds of villages in the Nile Delta). The mobilization orders went out to thousands of peasants. 4 divisions crossed into the Sinai in the first 48 hours – 40,000 soldiers, with 300 state-of the-art Soviet made tanks, 450 armored personelle carriers and several types of heavy Soviet artillery, all on the move to the Israeli border. Units that people had never heard of before suddenly appeared… the send-off of the troops was broadcast on radio and TV all over the Middle East. There was wide spread excitement and support for Nasser's move.
12 hours into the mobilization of his troops, Nasser found out that the Soviet intelligence warning about Israel's attack was wrong. He could have backed off from war, but he didn't dare dampen the excitement he created throughout the Arab world.
On the same day that the Egyptians entered the Sinai, Israel, a country of only 2.5 million people, is celebrating the 19th anniversary of it's founding. Although the public isn't aware, Israeli intelligence learns of the massive Egyptian build-up in the Sinai.
General Rabin to wanted to call up some reserves, but Prime Minister and Defense Mister Eshkol only authorizes him to call up one tank brigade, just 3000 men, because he fears a bigger mobilization will be seen as a provocation. The first Israeli reservists are called up that night. The next morning, the first Israeli reserve forces speed south toward the Israeli-Sinai border. The Egyptian and Israeli forces are seperated by a narrow buffer zone manned by U.N. peace keepers.
Two days after moving his troops into the Sinai, on May 16, Nasser demands that the U.N. peace keepers be removed within 48 hours. The first U.N. peace keeping mission ever deployed is terminated just when it seems to be needed the most. In the American Embassy in Tel Aviv, CIA Station Chief in Israel John Hadden reports to his superiors in Langley, Virginia, that Nasser is raising the stakes. With the U.N. gone, Ehkol hoped the super-powers would keep the situation in check – President JOhnson advises Eshkol to refrain from taking any step that would increase tension, but the Soviets do not restrain Egypt. Nasser and Field Marshall Amer decide to close the Straits of Tiran to Israeli shipping, an act of war.
Posted by eagle007blogger | September 10, 2009, 5:51 amEshkol meets with his Generals who are ready to go to war, but Eshkol postpones the decision. Meanwhile, the closing of the Straits of Tiran electrifies the Arab world. Radio Cairo beats the drums of war. Nasser dramatically revises his agenda, the looming conflict is no longer about deterring Israel from attacking Syria, or controlling the straights of Tiran, but he talks about turning the clock back 20 years to before the State of Isael was created. Radio Cairo broadcasts threats to Israelis in their own language. Israelis watch Egyptian television in Arabic and see celebrations in the streets, Nasser sitting in the Air Base in the Sinai with his pilots in combat suits, and massive amounts of tanks in the Sinai. The Arab press contributes to the frenzy with anti-Semetic cartoons showing caricatures of Jews and showing Israel being crushed. Israelis prepare for the worst, Rabbis consecrate public parks to be used for mass graveyards, civilians are called to donate blood and dig trenches, and most able-bodied men are called into service. Most factories and stores are closed. Jews everywhere fear that another Holocaust is in the making. Young Jewish volunteers begin pouring into Israel from all over. The Israelis begin to fear a threat to their existence.
The Israeli economy grinds to a halt. On May 23, the U.N. Secretary General Utant went to Cairo to try to prevent war. A day of meettings fail to resolve the crisis. Nasser was under tremendous political pressure to go war, and he indicated privately that he was afraid of a coup. Under pressure from his military to attack, Nasser sent his defense minister to Moscow to try to get Soviet to seek Soviet support for an Egyptian first strike. The Soviets who incited Nasser in the first place, seem to have a change of heart. Nasser postpones plans for a first strike. At the same time the Egyptians are in Moscow, Israel's foreign minister goes to Washington ask the Americans to force Egypt to open the Straits of Tiran. President JOhnson does not make a commitment – the Viet Nam war was going on. America will not act with the urgency Eshkol needs. The crisis stretches into a second week.
Posted by eagle007blogger | September 10, 2009, 5:51 amHamas leader denies Nazi genocide of Jews
Also, one member of Hamas saying something, does not mean that its a Hamas position
Do you think that Hamas will let anyone say anything they don't agree with? Wake up.
Hamas 'harming Gaza opponents'
A rights group has accused Palestinian organisation Hamas of killing or maiming alleged collaborators and political opponents in Gaza.
At least 20 people had been killed since the end of last year, Amnesty International stated in a report based on testimony from inside Gaza.
Scores of others had been beaten and injured, the rights group said.
"Hamas forces in Gaza have engaged in abductions, unlawful killings, torture and death threats against those they accuse of 'collaborating' with Israel," says the report.
It says the same violence has been inflicted on "opponents and critics" of the Hamas administration.
Many witnesses and victims are said to be too frightened to come forward.
But one victim told investigators how he had been taken from his home by masked men and shot in both legs.
Some of those killed are said to have been shot dead while receiving hospital treatment.
Amnesty has called for an end to the violence and is urging the Hamas leadership to set up an independent commission to look into its allegations.
Posted by eagle007blogger | September 11, 2009, 1:22 amWaaaah! Always the victims! lol
Posted by lmao | September 8, 2009, 5:50 pmArayus, I agree 100%. I believe Palestinians have been trying to have any kind of state for more than 60 years without success. This is because neither the USA nor Israel will allow it to.
The PA cannot even survive and it's no where near being a state.
Honestly, half the people here need elementary history lessons before being allowed to comment. Such a waste of time to even read some of the things said.
Posted by BuJ | September 8, 2009, 8:51 pmBuJ
Were the Palestinians trying to form a state when Hamas brutally tookover Gaza? Was launching all the rockets that brought a war down onto Gaza meant to create a state?
How has the USA stopped the Palestinians from having a state?
US presses Israel over two states
US Vice-President Joe Biden has said Israel must back a two-state solution to the conflict with the Palestinians.
Posted by eagle007blogger | September 9, 2009, 5:06 am"How has the USA stopped the Palestinians from having a state?"
By subsidizing Israels illegal and brutal military occupation of the Palestinian people.
Posted by Arayus | September 9, 2009, 6:59 amThat is just propaganda.
Posted by eagle007blogger | September 10, 2009, 5:54 amHow is sending Israel billions of dollars a year, free military hardware, making donations to Israeli settlements a tax deductible, and using our veto to prevent any condemnation of Israel not a subsidization of Israels occupation and ethnic cleansing of the Palestinian people?
If you have nothing to say on this issue please spare us the bullshit and troll somewhere else.
Posted by Arayus | September 15, 2009, 1:30 amEagle007,
I'm afraid that looking at the Arab Israeli conflict through a narrow window will not help understand the difficulties faced with creating a Palestinian state. The Palestinians were denied their land, identity, nationality, and everything tying them to Palestine since 1948, which if you read your history is many decades before Hamas even existed.
I am not a Hamas supporter, and I don't agree with firing rockets indiscriminantly at Israel. If you really want to fire rockets, then try to get your hands on high-tech GPS-directed equipment to make sure you do not hit civilians. However, Israel has that and more but they seem to kill more civilians than "terrorists". Terrorist being anyone who is vaguely against Israel.
"How has the USA stopped the Palestinians from having a state? "
I cannot believe that you can even ask this. I'll just give you a few words (rather than sentences) to make it easier: UN Veto, $$ Aid, military hardware, etc.
I'm sorry but quoting Joe Biden means nothing. The Israeli problem existed way before Biden knew what "two-states" meant!
Posted by BuJ | September 9, 2009, 7:30 pmThe Arab countries definitely should not treat Palestinians this way – whether or not this report is true – Arab countries claim to care so much about the plight of the Palestinians, but in reality, they could care less about the people themselves…. they want to keep the Palestinian situation as a festering sore to use against Israel.
For example, why are Palestinians living in Lebanon still classified as "refugees" – why is there all this red tape keeping them from having the same status as anyone else living there, being able to work at any jobs, ect? Why aren't Palestinians able to go into other Arab countries as have a status as citizens able to work and enjoy the same privileges as anyone else living there?
It's because a lot of the Arab leadership do not want the Palestinians to be OK as long as their old enemy Israel exists. Many people are figuring this out. And then there are people like Arayus and many others who just don't get it. The Palestinians are used as pawns, as was mentioned in an earlier comment.
Posted by eagle007blogger | September 9, 2009, 4:44 amThe Arab countries definitely should not treat Palestinians this way – whether or not this particular report is true – Arab countries claim to care so much about the plight of the Palestinians, but in reality, they could care less about the people themselves…. they want to keep the Palestinian situation as a festering sore to use against Israel.
Why aren't Palestinians able to go into other Arab countries and have a status as citizens able to work and enjoy the same privileges as anyone else ? Why is there all this red tape keeping them from having the same status as anyone else living there?
It's because a lot of the Arab leadership do not want the Palestinians to be OK as long as their old enemy Israel exists. Many people are figuring this out. And then there are people like Arayus and many others who just don't get it. The Palestinians are used as pawns, as was mentioned in an earlier comment.
Posted by eagle007blogger | September 9, 2009, 6:06 amWhy isin't Israel allowing the Palestinians to return to their homes? Why should the Arab countries pay the price for Israeli ethnic cleansing?
Yea it sucks that the Arab countries haven't been great to Palestinian refugee's but the truth is that they didn't create the Palestinian refugee problem, Israel did, and they are the ones who have to fix it.
Posted by Arayus | September 9, 2009, 7:00 amThe Arab regimes that attacked Israel, supported Palestinian fedeyeen attacks, and terrorism did create the problem.
The 1948 hostilities witnessed thousands of Palestinians fleeing their homes in Palestine to take refuge in the West Bank, Gaza Strip and neighbouring Arab countries.
The Arab-Israeli war of 1967 led to yet another displacement, this time of more than 500,000 Palestinians, nearly half of whom were refugees uprooted for a second time.
Posted by eagle007blogger | September 9, 2009, 7:25 amlol at managing to post a three sentence reply without answering any of the questions asked by Arayus.
Israel's creation led to the expulsion of Palestinians (let's use clear terminology instead of using words such as displacement/uprooted). In every other situation in the world, refugees return home, except that is, for the Palestinians. Why?
Posted by Shafiq | September 9, 2009, 1:27 pmIsrael's creation led to the expulsion of Palestinians… that is because Israel's creation led to the Palestinians attacking Israel. The Arab of Palestine attacked the Jews long before 1948, let's look at some history…
The 1920 Palestine riots, or Nebi Musa riots, were violent Arab disturbances against the Jews of Jerusalem under British rule on 4 and 7 April 1920 in and around the Old City of Jerusalem.
Jaffa riots 1921 – Dozens of British, Arab, and Jewish witnesses all reported that Arab men bearing clubs, knives, swords, and some pistols broke into Jewish buildings and murdered their inhabitants, while women followed to loot. They attacked Jewish pedestrians and destroyed Jewish homes and stores. They beat and killed Jews in their homes, including children, and in some cases split open the victims' skulls.
1929 Palestine riots – During the week of riots, 133 Jews were killed and 339 wounded (mostly by Arabs); 116 Arabs were killed and 232 wounded (mostly by British-commanded police and soldiers)
The Hebron Massacre refers to the mass murder of sixty-seven Jews in 1929 in Hebron, then part of the British Mandate of Palestine, by Arabs incited to violence by false rumors that Jews were massacring Arabs in Jerusalem and seizing control of Muslim Holy Places
The carnage had a deep effect on the Jewish community. The survivors were forced to flee Hebron, and their property was seized by Arab residents and occupied until after the Six Day War of 1967. It also led to the re-organization and development of the Jewish defense organization, the Haganah, which later became the nucleus of the Israel Defense Forces.
The 1929 Safed massacre took place on 29 August during the 1929 Palestine riots. Eighteen Jews were killed (some sources say twenty) and eighty wounded. The main Jewish street was looted and burned.
The 1936–1939 Arab revolt in Palestine was an uprising during the British mandate by Palestinian Arabs in Palestine which lasted from 1936 to 1939. It should not be confused with the Arab Revolt of 1916–18.
The revolt did not achieve its goals, although it is "credited with signifying the birth of the Arab Palestinian identity."
Another outcome of the hostilities was the disengagement of the Jewish and Arab economies in Palestine, which were more or less intertwined until that time.
Posted by eagle007blogger | September 9, 2009, 7:27 pmI love how you conveniently ignored all the terrorism committed by the Irgun, Stern Gang, and Haganah in the years prior to the creation of the state of Israel (King David Hotel Bombing, random market bombings that left hundreds if not thousands dead, and random destruction of Palestinian residential areas). Violence that greatly outweighs all the violence the Palestinians were able to muster before the British completely destroyed their society and left them leaderless post 1939.
You also fail to mention that the Palestinians were merely responding to the simple fact that Europeans were coming onto their lands saying that it belonged to "them" and not to the Palestinians. What would you do if someone showed up at your house and told you that it didn't belong to you but belonged to him because God told him so.
I also love how you conveniently ignore the simple fact, that the Palestinians who fought in 47, were fighting against the unfair partition of their country.
Despite the fact that Palestinians were the overwhelming majority of the people in Palestine and owned 90% of the land, the UN decided to give Israel 55% of the land to the state of Israel. However, Israel wasn't even satisfied with having 55% of the land, they decided to attack and illegally conquer more land, giving them 78% of historic Palestine. They also ethnically cleansed a million Palestinians in the process and reduced the rest of them to living as second class citizens in their own homes (this is after 2 decades of martial law).
Also, Eagle, I highly recommend you stop cut and pasting your arguments.
Posted by Arayus | September 9, 2009, 10:07 pmYou have been proven wrong, and you should learn from this.
You said that Palestinians did not fight against Israel in 47, 48, and 67 – they did.
You said that Arab countries restricting Palestinian rights was Israel's fault – it is not.
You claim that the U.S. does not want a Palestinian state – it does.
You think the Palestinian are not able to have a state, and you fail to understand that Hamas is the biggest obstacle to a Palestinian state.
You insinuated that Israel launched a surprise attack in 1967 for no reason – read THIS
Posted by eagle007blogger | September 10, 2009, 6:01 amYou have been proven wrong, and you should learn from this.
You said that Palestinians did not fight against Israel in 47, 48, and 67 – they did.
You said that Arab countries restricting Palestinian rights was Israel's fault – it is not.
You claim that the U.S. does not want a Palestinian state – it does.
You think the Palestinian are not able to have a state, and you fail to understand that Hamas is the biggest obstacle to a Palestinian state.
You insinuated that Israel launched a surprise attack in 1967 for no reason – read THIS
Posted by eagle007blogger | September 10, 2009, 6:01 amYou said that Palestinians did not fight against Israel in 47, 48, and 67 – they did.
Just saying something doesn't make it true. The Arabs armies fought against the Israelis – the Palestinians were more bothered about potentially losing their homes.
You said that Arab countries restricting Palestinian rights was Israel's fault – it is not.
Read the Kabobfest article.
You claim that the U.S. does not want a Palestinian state – it does.
Which is why the US congress voted to never recognise a Palestinian declaration of independence.
You think the Palestinian are not able to have a state, and you fail to understand that Hamas is the biggest obstacle to a Palestinian state.
So the fact that half the Palestinian territories are being occupied by Israel and the other half is being besieged does not matter at all?
You insinuated that Israel launched a surprise attack in 1967 for no reason – read THIS
Read my reply to your post.
Posted by Shafiq | September 10, 2009, 10:38 amYou said that Palestinians did not fight against Israel in 47, 48, and 67 – they did.
Just saying something doesn't make it true. The Arabs armies fought against the Israelis – the Palestinians were more bothered about potentially losing their homes.
You said that Arab countries restricting Palestinian rights was Israel's fault – it is not.
Read the Kabobfest article.
You claim that the U.S. does not want a Palestinian state – it does.
Which is why the US congress voted to never recognise a Palestinian declaration of independence.
You think the Palestinian are not able to have a state, and you fail to understand that Hamas is the biggest obstacle to a Palestinian state.
So the fact that half the Palestinian territories are being occupied by Israel and the other half is being besieged does not matter at all?
You insinuated that Israel launched a surprise attack in 1967 for no reason – read THIS
Read my reply to your post.
Posted by Shafiq | September 10, 2009, 10:38 amSome Palestinians fought along with the armies. Fact.
You said that Arab countries restricting Palestinian rights was Israel's fault – it is not.
That was in reply to Arayus who was falsely asserting that.
So the fact that half the Palestinian territories are being occupied by Israel and the other half is being besieged does not matter at all?
Of course it matters. There is much effort being made to resolve the issue… and the fact is that Hamas is one of the biggest obstacles right now.
Posted by eagle007blogger | September 11, 2009, 12:59 amSome Palestinians? In 67 yes. 47/48? No
How exactly is Hamas the biggest obstacle right now? The biggest obstacle to what? It's agreed to recognise Israel within 67 borders (as per International requirements) and will agree to any permanent solution if it passes in a Palestinian referendum.
And what steps are being taken to end the occupation or the siege?
Posted by Shafiq | September 11, 2009, 8:07 am47/48? YES. They did.
The 1947–1948 Civil War in Mandatory Palestine lasted from 30 November 1947, the date of the United Nations vote in favour of the termination of the British Mandate of Palestine and the UN Partition Plan, to the termination of the British Mandate itself on 14 May 1948.
This period constitutes first phase of the 1948 Palestine war, during which the Jewish and Arab communities of Palestine clashed, while the British, who supposedly had the obligation to maintain order, organized their withdrawal and intervened only on an occasional basis.
The next phase of the conflict was the 1948 Arab-Israeli War which began on the 15 May 1948, on the termination of the British Mandate of Palestine and the creation of the State of Israel, when the conflict in Palestine became an outright war between the new State of Israel and its Arab neighbours.
MORE HERE
The dramatically outnumbered Jews managed to defeat first the Arabs of Palestine [Palestinians], then the combined armies of Egypt, Jordan, Iraq and Syria, along with a smattering of Sudanese, Yemenites, Moroccans, Saudis, Lebanese and others.
Here is an interesting article from TIME magazine. Monday, Dec. 08, 1947 – International: We Will Fight
Posted by eagle007blogger | September 13, 2009, 7:15 amAfter the 48 war was over and done with, the Palestinian Fedeyeen kept on attacking Israel.
Posted by eagle007blogger | September 13, 2009, 9:31 am47/48? YES. They did.
The 1947–1948 Civil War in Mandatory Palestine lasted from 30 November 1947, the date of the United Nations vote in favour of the termination of the British Mandate of Palestine and the UN Partition Plan, to the termination of the British Mandate itself on 14 May 1948.
This period constitutes first phase of the 1948 Palestine war, during which the Jewish and Arab communities of Palestine clashed, while the British, who supposedly had the obligation to maintain order, organized their withdrawal and intervened only on an occasional basis.
The next phase of the conflict was the 1948 Arab-Israeli War which began on the 15 May 1948, on the termination of the British Mandate of Palestine and the creation of the State of Israel, when the conflict in Palestine became an outright war between the new State of Israel and its Arab neighbours.
MORE HERE
The dramatically outnumbered Jews managed to defeat first the Arabs of Palestine [Palestinians], then the combined armies of Egypt, Jordan, Iraq and Syria, along with a smattering of Sudanese, Yemenites, Moroccans, Saudis, Lebanese and others.
Here is an interesting article from TIME magazine. Monday, Dec. 08, 1947 – International: We Will Fight <– must read
Posted by eagle007blogger | September 13, 2009, 7:17 amAfter the 48 war was over and done with, the Palestinian fedayeen continued to attack Israel (and Israel retaliated)
Posted by eagle007blogger | September 13, 2009, 9:34 am"The dramatically outnumbered Jews managed to defeat first the Arabs of Palestine [Palestinians], then the combined armies of Egypt, Jordan, Iraq and Syria, along with a smattering of Sudanese, Yemenites, Moroccans, Saudis, Lebanese and others."
Uhm no Eagle, I'm sorry but repeating a lie does not make it true.
The Palestinians attempted to keep their homes and put up a measly resistance against Israeli attempts to cleanse them from their lands. This is mainly due to the fact that the British destroyed the fabric of Palestinian society during the Palestinian revolts of the late 30's.
Finally, after the Israelis had ethnically cleansed almost a million Palestinians, 5 Arab armies moved in to try to halt the situation (that was the public explanation, some of them moved in for ulterior motives of annexing Palestinian land). These 5 Arab armies were outnumbered 2:1 by the single Israeli Army.
I'm sorry Eagle, but cut and pasting from Wikipedia and other propaganda sites makes you look like a bigger idiot than usual. Also, linking us to articles that have absolutely nothing to do with what we are talking is not helping you at all either.
Anyway, the fact that you can sit here and defend the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians with a straight face is appalling.
Posted by Arayus | September 15, 2009, 12:13 amIt's agreed to recognise Israel within 67 borders
This is the demand made by the Arab League in the plan recently put forward by Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah. The UN rejected this formulation when it adopted Resolution 242 because the Security Council understood the ‘67 border was not secure or defensible.
Since the war, Israel has consistently said that in the context of a peace agreement it was prepared to withdraw to the 1967 border "with modifications"; that is, to a new border that meets Resolution 242's requirement of being secure.
After the 1967 War, President Lyndon Johnson also rejected the idea that Israel should withdraw to the pre-war frontier: "There are some who have urged, as a single, simple solution, an immediate return to the situation as it was on June 4….this is not a prescription for peace but for renewed hostilities."
The Joint Chiefs of Staff concluded in 1967: "From a strictly military point of view, Israel would require the retention of some captured territory in order to provide militarily defensible borders." More than three decades later, Lieutenant General (Ret.) Thomas Kelly, director of operations for the Joint Chiefs of Staff during the Gulf War, reiterated Israel's strategic concern: "It is impossible to defend Jerusalem unless you hold the high ground….An aircraft that takes off from an airport in Amman is going to be over Jerusalem in two-and-a-half minutes, so it's utterly impossible for me to defend the whole country unless I hold that land."
Anyway, withdrawal to the 1967 border would not satisfy the radical Islamists.
Posted by eagle007blogger | September 13, 2009, 7:35 amIt doesn't satisfy me for many logical -unIslamic – reasons.
In fact, most people I know who aren't religious at all disapprove of the state within the '67 borders…especially those of us from 1948 Palestine.
your last statement is ridiculous. Hamas has even agreed to 1967 borders and many people associate hamas with Islamic extremism.
Posted by lena | September 13, 2009, 3:30 pmHamas and Islamic Jihad have made clear that they will not end their terrorist campaign against Israel if it withdraws to the prewar frontier. These and other Muslim extremists have said they will not accept the existence of a Jewish state in the Islamic world.
Posted by eagle007blogger | September 14, 2009, 8:10 amActually this is a lie Eagle, and you have been proven wrong on this point so many times its ridiculous.
Hamas dropped its call for the destruction of Israel quite a while ago, when they transitioned into a political party.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2006/jan/12/israe…
Hamas also agreed to the 67 borders as a BASIS for a permanent solution to the I/P conflict in line with the quartet. The international position on the conflict.
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1035414.html
Hamas also called for an end to suicide bombing, and during its truces with Israel, actually managed to hold them despite the fact that Israel did not abide by any part of any of the truces that both sides agreed to.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2006/apr/09/israe…
Its time you accepted the reality on the ground and quite trying to sell your bigoted propaganda. Every mainstream Palestinian party is ready to make peace with Israel. All Israel has to do is end the occupation, its that simple.
Posted by Arayus | September 15, 2009, 1:09 amActually this is a lie Eagle, and you have been proven wrong on this point so many times its ridiculous.
Hamas dropped its call for the destruction of Israel quite a while ago, when they transitioned into a political party.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2006/jan/12/israe…
Hamas also agreed to the 67 borders as a BASIS for a permanent solution to the I/P conflict in line with the quartet. The international position on the conflict.
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1035414.html
Hamas also called for an end to suicide bombing, and during its truces with Israel, actually managed to hold them despite the fact that Israel did not abide by any part of any of the truces that both sides agreed to.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2006/apr/09/israe…
Its time you accepted the reality on the ground and quite trying to sell your bigoted propaganda. Every mainstream Palestinian party is ready to make peace with Israel. All Israel has to do is end the occupation, its that simple.
Finally, the I/P conflict has nothing to do with the existance of a "Jewish State in the middle of the Islamic world." The conflict exists because Israel insists on subjecting the indigenious people of Palestine to a brutal occupation, and refuses to acknowledge the rights of the refugee's it created during its ethnic cleansing spree's.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vKa1kRWX0AA
This conflict has nothing to do with hatred of the Jewish people Eagle. Its time you understood that.
Posted by Arayus | September 15, 2009, 1:12 amActually this is a lie Eagle, and you have been proven wrong on this point so many times its ridiculous.
Hamas dropped its call for the destruction of Israel quite a while ago, when they transitioned into a political party.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2006/apr/09/israe…
Its time you accepted the reality on the ground and quite trying to sell your bigoted propaganda. Every mainstream Palestinian party is ready to make peace with Israel. All Israel has to do is end the occupation, its that simple.
Finally, the I/P conflict has nothing to do with the existance of a "Jewish State in the middle of the Islamic world." The conflict exists because Israel insists on subjecting the indigenious people of Palestine to a brutal occupation, and refuses to acknowledge the rights of the refugee's it created during its ethnic cleansing spree's.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vKa1kRWX0AA
This conflict has nothing to do with hatred of the Jewish people Eagle, this conflict has to due with human rights being trampled upon everyday by a brutal military occupation.
Posted by Arayus | September 15, 2009, 1:13 amActually this is a lie Eagle, and you have been proven wrong on this point so many times its ridiculous that you continue to push this ignorant opinion.
Hamas dropped its call for the destruction of Israel quite a while ago, when they transitioned into a political party.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2006/jan/12/israe…
Hamas accepted the 2 state solution BASED on the 67 borders which is in line with what the international community has been calling for.
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1035414.html
Hamas also called for an end to suicide bombing.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2006/apr/09/israe…
Finally, Eagle, this conflict has nothing to do with your racist assertion that opposition to Israel from the Palestinians exists because "Arabs can't deal with a Jewish state in their midst."
This conflict exists solely because Israel continues to brutally occupy and ethnically cleanse the indigenous people Palestine. Once the human rights of the Palestinians are respected the conflict will be over, its that simple.
Even the spiritual leader of Hamas disagree's with your racist assertion.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vKa1kRWX0AA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vKa1kRWX0AA
Posted by Arayus | September 15, 2009, 1:24 amAnd what steps are being taken to end the occupation or the siege?
Just one example:
Fresh push for Middle East talks </a
The US has launched a new effort to finalise terms for fresh negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians.
Posted by eagle007blogger | September 14, 2009, 8:04 amAnd what steps are being taken to end the occupation or the siege?
Just one example:
Fresh push for Middle East talks
The US has launched a new effort to finalise terms for fresh negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians.
Posted by eagle007blogger | September 14, 2009, 8:04 amWhich is why the US congress voted to never recognise a Palestinian declaration of independence.
That never happened.
Palestinian Declaration of Independence
…was adopted by the Palestinian National Council, the legislative body of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), in Algiers on 15 November 1988. It unilaterally proclaimed the establishment of the State of Palestine but at that time the PLO had no control of any territory.
The declaration concerns the Palestine region, as defined by the British Mandate of Palestine, which includes the whole of Israel as well as the West Bank and the Gaza strip. It references the United Nations Partition Plan for Palestine from 1947 (which also serves as the basis for Israel's declaration of independence) and "UN resolutions since 1947" in general.
It does not explicitly recognize the State of Israel. However, an acompanying document that explicitly mentions UN Security Council Resolution 242 and Yasser Arafat's statements in Geneva a month later were accepted by the United States as sufficient to remove the ambiguities in the declaration. Based on these statements, the declaration can be interpreted to have recognized Israel in its pre-1967 boundaries.
Posted by eagle007blogger | September 13, 2009, 8:00 amI'm really convinced that hes a robot.
Posted by Arayus | September 9, 2009, 9:37 pmYour ad hominem attacks against me do not change the facts – the facts are not in agreement with your propaganda.
Posted by eagle007blogger | September 10, 2009, 6:30 amThis coming from the person that has stated that Israeli propaganda is a good thing, that continues to cut and paste Israeli propaganda, and has said that the Israeli occupation of Palestine is not an occupation.
Posted by Arayus | September 10, 2009, 9:13 pmOnce again, you are lying. I have never stated that "Israeli propaganda is a good thing."
I have never stated that "Israeli occupation of Palestine is not an occupation," another lie.
I provide you with FACTS. When will you get tired of your lies and propaganda? Why can't you handle the truth?
Posted by eagle007blogger | September 11, 2009, 12:53 amWhen discussing the way that Palestinians are treated by other Arab countries, you say that Israel should fix it. That is just silly.
Why should the Arab countries pay the price…
So you are saying that Arab countries shouldn't worry about the Palestinians as long as there is an "Israel problem". In other words, the Palestinian situation should be kept as a festering sore until something is done about the old enemy Israel. You are making this point exactly.
Posted by eagle007blogger | September 9, 2009, 7:15 pmNo Eagle, don't be a retard.
However, if another country created a refugee problem and then dumped those refugee's in a country that had nothing to do with the problem, the right and moral thing to do would be to have the "refugee creator" fix the problem they created.
Posted by Arayus | September 9, 2009, 9:32 pmYou fail to understand that those countries DID have something to do with the refugee problem.
Anyhow, no one is talking about dumping anything, the issue was the Arab treatment of Palestinians.
Posted by eagle007blogger | September 10, 2009, 6:04 amAnd no one is arguing that Arab treatment of Palestinians has been great either. Although it is leaps and bounds better than the way the Israelis have dealt with them.
However, the Arabs didn't create the Palestinian refugee problem, Israel did. Israel carried out the ethnic cleansing, and according to multiple UN Resolutions Israel has to take back those refugees. Yet Israel, has yet to comply with these resolutions. Meanwhile they allow unrestricted immigration of almost anyone that claims to be of Jewish descent, while not allowing those in refugee camps to come back to their villages.
Posted by Arayus | September 10, 2009, 9:17 pmAnd no one is arguing that Arab treatment of Palestinians has been great either. Although it is leaps and bounds better than the way the Israelis have dealt with them.
However, the Arabs didn't create the Palestinian refugee problem, Israel did. Israel carried out the ethnic cleansing, and according to multiple UN Resolutions Israel has to take back those refugees. Israel, has yet to comply with these resolutions. Meanwhile they allow unrestricted immigration of almost anyone that claims to be of Jewish descent, while not allowing those in refugee camps to come back to their villages.
Posted by Arayus | September 10, 2009, 9:17 pmwhile not allowing those in refugee camps to come back to their villages
Maybe you were not aware, there is a serious security issue in the Israeli/Palestinian conflict.
Posted by eagle007blogger | September 11, 2009, 1:02 amYes we are aware of the security issue Eagle.
Israels use of 2 ton bombs on civilian homes and infrastructure, illegal chemical munitions doused on girl schools, artillery bombardment of entire residential blocks and ice cream factories, blockades that prevent baby milk and books from reaching a population, embargoes that prevent other countries from exporting the essentials of a normal life to a beleaguered people, an illegal occupation that completely shuts down the Palestinian school system whenever it chooses, and an apartheid regime that treats people who were born into the wrong group as inferiors.
Yes we are all aware of the security issues of the I/P conflict.
The conflict wont end until Israel ends the occupation, its that simple. Every mainstream Palestinian group agreed to a peace with Israel based on the 2 state solution. Even Hamas agreed.
Hamas also dropped its call for destruction of Israel from its manifesto:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2006/jan/12/israe…
Hamas also agreed to the 2 state solution
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1035414.html
Hamas also called for end to suicide bombing.
What is Israel waiting for? The most extreme Palestinian group is willing to accept a state on less than 20% of its historic homeland and willing to allow the people that destroyed their lives to occupy the rest of their homeland, yet Israel has a problem with this for some reason, Why?
If Israel was even remotely interested in peace it would work towards that end. Yet, the settlements continue to grow larger, thousands of new units have been proposed despite the fact that the international community is calling on Israel to end settlement construction for just "6 months." The blockade on Gaza continues tighten, despite the fact that Hamas has repeatedly stated that they will end all attacks on Israel if Israel removes the blockade.
Of course you can't see through the propaganda you peddle Eagle. You believe that conquered people must willingly submit and do everything they are told. If they resist they deserve to have 2 ton bombs dropped on their children. Millions are dead because of the views you propagate Eagle. Maybe its time you looked in the mirror and took a good look at the bullshit you peddle.
Posted by Arayus | September 15, 2009, 12:35 amYes we are aware of the security issue Eagle.
Israels use of 2 ton bombs on civilian homes and infrastructure, illegal chemical munitions doused on girl schools, artillery bombardment of entire residential blocks and ice cream factories, blockades that prevent baby milk and books from reaching a population, embargoes that prevent other countries from exporting the essentials of a normal life to a beleaguered people, an illegal occupation that completely shuts down the Palestinian school system whenever it chooses, and an apartheid regime that treats people who were born into the wrong group as inferiors.
Yes we are all aware of the security issues of the I/P conflict.
The conflict wont end until Israel ends the occupation, its that simple. Every mainstream Palestinian group agreed to a peace with Israel based on the 2 state solution. Even Hamas agreed.
Hamas also dropped its call for destruction of Israel from its manifesto:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2006/jan/12/israe…
Hamas also agreed to the 2 state solution
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1035414.html
Hamas also called for end to suicide bombing.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2006/apr/09/israe…
What is Israel waiting for? The most extreme Palestinian group is willing to accept a state on less than 20% of its historic homeland and willing to allow the people that destroyed their lives to occupy the rest of their homeland, yet Israel has a problem with this for some reason, Why?
If Israel was even remotely interested in peace it would work towards that end. Yet, the settlements continue to grow larger, thousands of new units have been proposed despite the fact that the international community is calling on Israel to end settlement construction for just "6 months." The blockade on Gaza continues tighten, despite the fact that Hamas has repeatedly stated that they will end all attacks on Israel if Israel removes the blockade.
Of course you can't see through the propaganda you peddle Eagle. You believe that conquered people must willingly submit and do everything they are told. If they resist they deserve to have 2 ton bombs dropped on their children. Millions are dead because of the views you propagate Eagle. Maybe its time you looked in the mirror and took a good look at the bullshit you peddle.
Posted by Arayus | September 15, 2009, 12:36 amARAYUS YOU NEED TO WATCH THIS:
Hamas In Their Own Voices
and read this:
Taking Exception: Terrorism Prevents Palestinian State
The Washington Post
Tuesday, September 8, 2009
Second Generation Teenage Terrorist Killed in Attack at Beit El
Published: 09/01/09
From IICC report: Rocket and mortar shell fire from the Gaza Strip continues as the Palestinian terrorist organizations' preferred form of attack.
1,750 rockets and 1,528 mortar bombs fired from the Gaza Strip struck southern Israel in 2008.
WHAT YOU ARE SAYING JUST ISN'T TRUE.
Posted by eagle007blogger | September 15, 2009, 1:19 amYes we are aware of the security issue Eagle.
Israels use of 2 ton bombs on civilian homes and infrastructure, illegal chemical munitions doused on girl schools, artillery bombardment of entire residential blocks and ice cream factories, blockades that prevent baby milk and books from reaching a population, embargoes that prevent other countries from exporting the essentials of a normal life to a beleaguered people, an illegal occupation that completely shuts down the Palestinian school system whenever it chooses, and an apartheid regime that treats people who were born into the wrong group as inferiors.
Yes we are all aware of the security issues of the I/P conflict.
The conflict wont end until Israel ends the occupation, its that simple. Every mainstream Palestinian group agreed to a peace with Israel based on the 2 state solution. Even Hamas agreed.
Hamas also dropped its call for destruction of Israel from its manifesto:
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1035414.html
Hamas also called for end to suicide bombing.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2006/apr/09/israe…
What is Israel waiting for? The most extreme Palestinian group is willing to accept a state on less than 20% of its historic homeland and willing to allow the people that destroyed their lives to occupy the rest of their homeland, yet Israel has a problem with this for some reason, Why?
If Israel was even remotely interested in peace it would work towards that end. Yet, the settlements continue to grow larger, thousands of new units have been proposed despite the fact that the international community is calling on Israel to end settlement construction for just "6 months." The blockade on Gaza continues to tighten, despite the fact that Hamas has repeatedly stated that they will end all attacks on Israel if Israel removes the blockade.
Of course you can't see through the propaganda you peddle Eagle. You believe that conquered people must willingly submit and do everything they are told. If they resist they deserve to have 2 ton bombs dropped on their children. Millions are dead because of the views you propagate Eagle. Maybe its time you looked in the mirror and took a good look at the bullshit you peddle.
Posted by Arayus | September 15, 2009, 12:37 amthe Arabs didn't create the Palestinian refugee problem
The refugee problem was created as a result of going to war against Israel.
Your kind like to throw around words like "genocide" and "ethnic cleansing" and "racism" when they do not apply – ultimately you are trying to weaken the meaning of those words, in a failed attempt to make them suit your purposes.
Posted by eagle007blogger | September 11, 2009, 1:01 amRefugees are displaced and in this case REPLACED people. War or no war that is what happened because of the Jewish migration to populated land.
Posted by lena | September 13, 2009, 3:32 pmThe refugee problem was created as a result of going to war against Israel.
Posted by eagle007blogger | September 14, 2009, 8:01 am"The refugee problem was created as a result of going to war against Israel."
You mean as a result of the Israelis going to war against the indigenous people of Palestine right?
Or do you mean as a result of Israels deliberate policy of ethnically cleansing the Palestinian people from their homes? Or the continued ethnic cleansing of the Palestinian people that continues to this day?
Posted by Arayus | September 15, 2009, 12:14 amThe refugee problem is a result of the wars in 1948 and 1967. See above for the facts of those wars.
Posted by eagle007blogger | September 15, 2009, 1:22 amThe Israeli public begin to demand another military leader, they want Eshkol to step down as Defense Minister be replaced with Dayan – a military maverick and a hero from the Suez crisis of '56. Eshkol's Generals disagree with him about postponing the war.
Kuwait pledges its army to the Arab united command, along with Algeria, Tunisia, and Morocco. Even a bitter opponent of Nasser, King Fisal of Saudi Arabia, joins the cause. The Arabs want to destroy Israel. Jordan's King Hussein flies to Cairo on May 30 to sign a defense pact with Nasser. This alliance means that Israel will need to protect its border with Jordan, and more importantly, means that Jordan's alliances with Iraq and Saudi Arabia can bring more men and tanks into the war against Israel.
In just two weeks Nasser ejected the U.N. forces from the Sinai, blocked the Straits of Tiran, and given new life to the dream of eliminating Israel – the entire Arab world is behind him. There is a hysteria of excitement and expectation.
On June 1, Eshkol finally agrees to step down as Minister of Defense and Moshe Dayan becomes the new Minister of Defense. He projected a sense of confidence to the army and the nation. Eshkol was still looking for a way to avoid war – he sent Meir Amit of the Israeli Intelligence Agency to see the head of the CIA in Washington – to see once again if the U.S. Navy will force the opening of the Straits of Tiran – but the U.S. will not. With diplomatic options exhausted, focus turns to the new Minister of defense Moshe Dayan. On June 4, Eshkol conviened a critical cabinet meeting, but Dayan takes charge. The cabinet votes, 12 ministers are for a pre-emptive strike and only 2 are against. Dayan writes the official text of the decision. It reads: "It is therefore decided to launch a military strike, aimed at liberating Israel from encirclement, and to prevent an impending assault by the United Arab Command."
Posted by eagle007blogger | September 10, 2009, 5:51 amDo you live in the real world? All the two-state solutions are based on 1967 borders and this is something Israel accepts (sort of).
Did the Egyptians actually start the 1967 war, as Israel originally claimed?
“The former Commander of the Air Force, General Ezer Weitzman, regarded as a hawk, stated that there was ‘no threat of destruction’ but that the attack on Egypt, Jordan and Syria was nevertheless justified so that Israel could ‘exist according the scale, spirit, and quality she now embodies.’…Menahem Begin had the following remarks to make: ‘In June 1967, we again had a choice. The Egyptian Army concentrations in the Sinai approaches do not prove that Nasser was really about to attack us. We must be honest with ourselves. We decided to attack him.’“ Noam Chomsky, “The Fateful Triangle.”
Two divisions is a massive build-up? Israel attacks Egypt yet Egypt are the bad guys?
“I do not think Nasser wanted war. The two divisions he sent to The Sinai would not have been sufficient to launch an offensive war. He knew it and we knew it.” Yitzhak Rabin, Israel’s Chief of Staff in 1967, in Le Monde, 2/28/68
“Moshe Dayan, the celebrated commander who, as Defense Minister in 1967, gave the order to conquer the Golan…[said] many of the firefights with the Syrians were deliberately provoked by Israel, and the kibbutz residents who pressed the Government to take the Golan Heights did so less for security than for the farmland…[Dayan stated] ‘They didn’t even try to hide their greed for the land…We would send a tractor to plow some area where it wasn’t possible to do anything, in the demilitarized area, and knew in advance that the Syrians would start to shoot. If they didn’t shoot, we would tell the tractor to advance further, until in the end the Syrians would get annoyed and shoot.
And then we would use artillery and later the air force also, and that’s how it was…The Syrians, on the fourth day of the war, were not a threat to us.’” The New York Times, May 11, 1997
Posted by Shafiq | September 10, 2009, 10:32 amDid the Egyptians actually start the 1967 war
Yes.
In just two weeks Nasser ejected the U.N. forces from the Sinai, blocked the Straits of Tiran, and gave new life to the dream of eliminating Israel – the entire Arab world was behind him. There was a hysteria of excitement and expectation.
In 1967 Israel did not wake up one morning and decide to go to war – she woke up one morning and found she had to defend herself.
May 15th 1967 – “Israel wants to make it clear to the government of Egypt that it has no aggressive intentions whatsoever against any Arab state at all” – Israel’s Prime Minister Levi Eshkol
May 17th 1967 – “All Egypt is now prepared to plunge into total war which will put an end to Israel” – Cairo Radio
May 18th 1967 – “As of today, there no longer exists an international emergency force to protect Israel….The sole method we shall apply against Israel is a total war which will result in the extermination of Zionist existence”. – Cairo Radio’s Voice of the Arabs broadcast
May 19th 1967 – Israel [will] not initiate hostilities “…until or unless (Egyptian forces) close the Straits of Tiran to free navigation by Israel” – Prime Minister Levi Eshkol message to France’s President de Gaulle.
May 22nd 1967 – “The Israeli flag shall not go through the Gulf of Aqaba. Our sovereignty over the entrance to the Gulf cannot be disputed” – Egypt’s President Nasser
Also on May 22nd 1967 – "We want a full scale, popular war of liberation… to destroy the Zionist enemy" – Syrian president Dr. Nureddin al-Attasi speech to troops
May 26th 1967 – "Taking over Sharm el Sheikh meant confrontation with Israel (and) also meant that we were ready to enter a general war with Israel. The battle will be a general one and our basic objective will be to destroy Israel” – Gamal Abdel Nasser speech to the General Council of the International Confederation of Arab Trade Unions
May 28th 1967 – “We will not accept any…coexistence with Israel.…Today the issue is not the establishment of peace between the Arab states and Israel….The war with Israel is in effect since 1948”. – Gamel Abdel Nasser press conference
May 29th 1967 – “Now, eleven years after 1956 we are restoring things to what they were in 1956…The issue now at hand is not the Gulf of Aqaba, the Straits of Tiran or the withdrawal of UNEF, but the rights of the Palestinian people.” – Nasser speech to General Assembly in Cairo
May 30th 1967 – "The armies of Egypt, Jordan, Syria and Lebanon are poised on the borders of Israel … to face the challenge, while standing behind us are the armies of Iraq, Algeria, Kuwait, Sudan and the whole Arab nation. This act will astound the world. Today they will know that the Arabs are arranged for battle, the critical hour has arrived. We have reached the stage of serious action and not of more declarations." – Gamal Abdel Nasser speech
May 31st 1967 – “The existence of Israel is an error which must be rectified. This is our opportunity to wipe out the ignominy which has been with us since 1948. Our goal is clear – to wipe Israel off the map” – President Aref of Iraq
Also on May 31st 1967 – “Under the terms of the military agreement signed with Jordan, Jordanian artillery, coordinated with the forces of Egypt and Syria, is in a position to cut Israel in two at Qalqilya, where Israeli territory between the Jordan armistice line and the Mediterranean Sea is only 12 kilometres wide”. – Al Akhbar, Cairo's daily newspaper
June 1st 1967 – “Brethren and sons, this is the day of the battle to avenge our martyred brethren who fell in 1948. It is the day to wash away the stigma. We shall, God willing, meet in Tel Aviv and Haifa” – Radio broadcast by Iraqi President Abdel Rahman Aref
Posted by eagle007blogger | September 11, 2009, 12:39 amEgypt was within her legal rights to close the Straits and it was Israel who started the war. This has been established –> You attack a country, you start a war, you're responsible.
Posted by Shafiq | September 11, 2009, 8:12 amAre you denying Egyptian responsibility for causing the war? That just seems almost funny – but its not. And unfortunately a lot of people, particularly Arabs, have been convinced of the same thing – calling the 67 war the "Israeli war of aggression" ect.
You can plainly see who the aggressor was. Egypt was the aggressor. All that I've posted here is factual, and you can get this info for yourself (just avoid the agenda-driven propaganda sources).
The 1967 war is a well documented historical event. What the propagandists try to do now is misrepresent the events. I've read all sorts of propaganda, such as claims that all of Egypts forces were in defensive position, ect. That stuff is designed to mislead people for ideological reasons (people like Arayus become brainwashed by that stuff!)
Posted by eagle007blogger | September 11, 2009, 10:41 amI'm sorry that you are actually retarded enough to buy the propaganda that Israel fought a war of defense when it attacked 2 countries at the same time when neither of those countries was poised to invade Israel.
Even top Israeli generals (as Shafiq pointed out) didn't believe that the Arabs were going to attack Israel. Yet despite this Israel started a war of aggression and conquered territory that didn't belong to it, and continues to occupy that territory to this very day in defiance of international law. It also continues to move settlers onto occupied territory, something that is also illegal under international law.
“The former Commander of the Air Force, General Ezer Weitzman, regarded as a hawk, stated that there was ‘no threat of destruction’ but that the attack on Egypt, Jordan and Syria was nevertheless justified so that Israel could ‘exist according the scale, spirit, and quality she now embodies.’…Menahem Begin had the following remarks to make: ‘In June 1967, we again had a choice. The Egyptian Army concentrations in the Sinai approaches do not prove that Nasser was really about to attack us. We must be honest with ourselves. We decided to attack him.’“ Noam Chomsky, “The Fateful Triangle.”
Posted by Arayus | September 15, 2009, 1:46 am…neither of those countries was poised to invade Israel.
Once again, you are completely wrong. Learn what really happened.
Posted by eagle007blogger | September 15, 2009, 4:10 amBy the way, the first posts I made (with all the typos) I wrote from a documentary I have on DVD. It's a factual documentary. There's more I'll write out later.
After days of bombardment from Syria, Israel moved against Syrian forces in the Golan Heights… .Did you know that the Soviets mobilized forces to enter the war on Syria's behalf? They painted their Soviet migs with Syrian marking and sent them on a carrier. They didn't enter, thank goodness, because then the U.S. would've entered. It was the closest call of the Cold War besides the Cuban Missile Crisis.
Posted by eagle007blogger | September 11, 2009, 10:51 amAlso on June 1st 1967 – “Those who survive will remain in Palestine. I estimate that none of them will survive.” – Ahmed Shukairy, chairman of PLO in Jordanian Jerusalem, asked in news interview what will happen to the Israelis if there is a war
June 2nd 1967 – “We will coordinate efforts of the PLO with responsible authorities in Jordan in all fields – politically, militarily and materially…” "It was very probable that the Jordan army might start the battle.” – Ahmed Shukairy – The Times, Nicholas Herbert, Amman, June 1st
June 3rd 1967 – “You must not do anything to entangle Israel with the Jordanians…” – Israel’s newly-appointed Defence Minister Moshe Dayan, instructs the head of the Israeli Army Central Command
June 6th 1967 – "I have just come from Jerusalem to tell the Security Council that Israel, by its independent effort and sacrifice, has passed from serious danger to successful resistance.
Two days ago Israel's condition caused much concern across the humane and friendly world. Israel had reached a sombre hour. Let me try to evoke the point at which our fortunes stood.
An army, greater than any force ever assembled in history in Sinai, had massed against Israel's southern frontier. Egypt had dismissed the United Nations forces which symbolized the international interest in the maintenance of peace in our region. Nasser had provocatively brought five infantry divisions and two armoured divisions up to our very gates; 80,000 men and 900 tanks were poised to move."- Abba Eban, Israel's Foreign Minister addresses UN Security Council full text here
Posted by eagle007blogger | September 11, 2009, 12:44 amTWO DIVISIONS!!!
Posted by Shafiq | September 11, 2009, 8:12 amActually, 4 divisions – in the first 48 hours.
Nasser and Amer immediately ordered 4 Egyptian divisions to the Sinai border with Israel, and they called up reserves (from the hundreds of villages in the Nile Delta). The mobilization orders went out to thousands of peasants. 4 divisions crossed into the Sinai in the first 48 hours – 40,000 soldiers, with 300 state-of the-art Soviet made tanks, 450 armored personelle carriers and several types of heavy Soviet artillery, all on the move to the Israeli border.
Posted by eagle007blogger | September 11, 2009, 10:29 amDuring the early months of 1966, it became clear that Israel's neighbors were escalating activities against her. More and more Israeli civilians were killed in attacks coming from the Syrian and Jordanian borders. The Syrians, from atop the Golan Heights, shelled Israeli towns indiscriminately.
On May 15, 1967, Egyptian forces moved into the Sinai. Ironically, Egypts move was, in part, in reaction to false Soviet information passed to Syria according to which Israel had mobilized forces on her border with Syria in preparation for an invasion of Syria
On May 18, Egypt expelled the U.N. Peacekeeping forces from Israel's borders.
On the 22nd, the Egyptians closed the Straits of Tiran to Israeli shipping.
On the 25th, encouraged by Egypt – Syria, Jordan, Iraq and Saudi Arabia moved their troops to Israel's borders.
Two days later, on the 26th of May, President Nasser of Egypt declared, "Our basic goal is the destruction of Israel. The Arab people want to fight…. The mining of Sharm El Sheik is a confrontation with Israel".
Modelled after the November 1966 Egyptian-Syrian "defence" pact, other pacts were signed by Egypt with Jordan and Iraq on May 30th and June 4th, thereby completing the encirclement of Israel.
Posted by eagle007blogger | September 11, 2009, 1:20 amSo supposed encirclement allows you to attack other states and blame them?
Posted by Shafiq | September 11, 2009, 8:13 amDid you notice that the buildup started because of false Soviet intelligence?
But once the buildup started, Nasser couldn't quit – Amer and his military advisers were pressuring him, along with entire Arab world. It snowballed into a "destroy Israel" campaign with the Arab states all joining together in the United Arab Command. None of this was Israel's fault.
Posted by eagle007blogger | September 11, 2009, 11:02 amDid the Egyptians actually start the 1967 war, as Israel originally claimed? </I.
Yes (see above). And you can read what Israel declared to the Security Council on June 6, 1967, HERE
Posted by eagle007blogger | September 11, 2009, 7:16 amDid the Egyptians actually start the 1967 war, as Israel originally claimed?
Yes (see above). And you can read what Israel declared to the Security Council on June 6, 1967, HERE
Posted by eagle007blogger | September 11, 2009, 7:16 amYou can throw around words like racist and ethnic cleansing all you want. it doesn't change the facts which you obviously have wrong.
Hamas dropped its call for the destruction of Israel quite a while ago
Apparently you are not aware of what Hamas has been saying: Hamas In Their Own Voices
Hamas accepted the 2 state solution BASED on the 67 borders…
This is the demand made by the Arab League in the plan recently put forward by Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah. The UN rejected this formulation when it adopted Resolution 242 because the Security Council understood the ‘67 border was not secure or defensible.
Since the war, Israel has consistently said that in the context of a peace agreement it was prepared to withdraw to the 1967 border "with modifications"; that is, to a new border that meets Resolution 242's requirement of being secure.
After the 1967 War, President Lyndon Johnson also rejected the idea that Israel should withdraw to the pre-war frontier: "There are some who have urged, as a single, simple solution, an immediate return to the situation as it was on June 4….this is not a prescription for peace but for renewed hostilities."
The Joint Chiefs of Staff concluded in 1967: "From a strictly military point of view, Israel would require the retention of some captured territory in order to provide militarily defensible borders." More than three decades later, Lieutenant General (Ret.) Thomas Kelly, director of operations for the Joint Chiefs of Staff during the Gulf War, reiterated Israel's strategic concern: "It is impossible to defend Jerusalem unless you hold the high ground….An aircraft that takes off from an airport in Amman is going to be over Jerusalem in two-and-a-half minutes, so it's utterly impossible for me to defend the whole country unless I hold that land."
Posted by eagle007blogger | September 15, 2009, 1:31 amYou can throw around words like racist and ethnic cleansing all you want. it doesn't change the facts which you obviously have wrong.
Hamas dropped its call for the destruction of Israel quite a while ago
Apparently you are not aware of what Hamas has been saying: Hamas In Their Own Voices
Hamas accepted the 2 state solution BASED on the 67 borders…
This is the demand made by the Arab League in the plan recently put forward by Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah. The UN rejected this formulation when it adopted Resolution 242 because the Security Council understood the ‘67 border was not secure or defensible.
Since the war, Israel has consistently said that in the context of a peace agreement it was prepared to withdraw to the 1967 border "with modifications"; that is, to a new border that meets Resolution 242's requirement of being secure.
After the 1967 War, President Lyndon Johnson also rejected the idea that Israel should withdraw to the pre-war frontier: "There are some who have urged, as a single, simple solution, an immediate return to the situation as it was on June 4….this is not a prescription for peace but for renewed hostilities."
The Joint Chiefs of Staff concluded in 1967: "From a strictly military point of view, Israel would require the retention of some captured territory in order to provide militarily defensible borders." More than three decades later, Lieutenant General (Ret.) Thomas Kelly, director of operations for the Joint Chiefs of Staff during the Gulf War, reiterated Israel's strategic concern: "It is impossible to defend Jerusalem unless you hold the high ground….An aircraft that takes off from an airport in Amman is going to be over Jerusalem in two-and-a-half minutes, so it's utterly impossible for me to defend the whole country unless I hold that land."
Posted by eagle007blogger | September 15, 2009, 1:32 amYea, and Hamas agreed to a peace with Israel BASED on the 67 borders.
So whats your point?
Got any more propaganda for me to dismantle for ya?
Posted by Arayus | September 15, 2009, 2:37 amRepeating your propaganda like a parrot doesn't make it true.
US presses Israel over two states
US Vice-President Joe Biden has said Israel must back a two-state solution to the conflict with the Palestinians.
The U.S. has funded nothing meant to stop the Palestinians from having a state. America supports the security needs of an American ally, Israel, just like the Soviet Union supported Syria and Egypt.
Regarding U.S. policy on settlements, it's clear, it's the right policy to try to help bring about a political settlement between Israel and the Palestinians.
As far as your false "ethnic cleansing" claims are concerned… Transfer — or expulsion or ethnic cleansing — was never an explicit part of the Zionist program, even among its more extreme elements. Had the Israelis committed systematic ethnic cleansing, there would not be 1.4 million Arabs in Israel today. You do know that Arab leaders drove out Jews from Arab countries, right?
Posted by eagle007blogger | September 15, 2009, 1:49 amActually what I'm saying is true Eagle, the fact that Hamas agreed to a two state solution is true, that they dropped their call for the destruction of Israel is true, and that they called for and end to suicide bombing is also true. Now its time for you to take a deep breath and accept reality.
You should also ask yourself how many Palestinians Israel has killed in the past year alone. The death ratio this year is a hundred to one. (Israel killed a hundred Palestinians for every Israeli (mostly soldiers this year) that the Palestinians managed to kill).
Yet for some reason you continue to defend ethnic cleansing, illegal blockades, and a brutal military occupation.
You should also know that MEMRI (the site you continue to link us all to) is known amongst journalists and scholars as a propaganda source. You claim to be someone who is against propaganda, so I thought you should know.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2002/aug/12/world…
Posted by Arayus | September 15, 2009, 2:52 amSee posts below, read, and learn. Stop being so ignorant. The cause you take is just – the cause of Palestinian freedom – but you ruin it with all your lies, half-truths, and propaganda. Stop believing lies and work with the truth.
Posted by eagle007blogger | September 15, 2009, 4:16 amThe 1920 Palestine riots, or Nebi Musa riots, were violent Arab disturbances against the Jews of Jerusalem under British rule on 4 and 7 April 1920 in and around the Old City of Jerusalem.
Jaffa riots 1921 – Dozens of British, Arab, and Jewish witnesses all reported that Arab men bearing clubs, knives, swords, and some pistols broke into Jewish buildings and murdered their inhabitants, while women followed to loot. They attacked Jewish pedestrians and destroyed Jewish homes and stores. They beat and killed Jews in their homes, including children, and in some cases split open the victims' skulls.
1929 Palestine riots – During the week of riots, 133 Jews were killed and 339 wounded (mostly by Arabs); 116 Arabs were killed and 232 wounded (mostly by British-commanded police and soldiers)
The Hebron Massacre refers to the mass murder of sixty-seven Jews in 1929 in Hebron, then part of the British Mandate of Palestine, by Arabs incited to violence by false rumors that Jews were massacring Arabs in Jerusalem and seizing control of Muslim Holy Places
The carnage had a deep effect on the Jewish community. The survivors were forced to flee Hebron, and their property was seized by Arab residents and occupied until after the Six Day War of 1967. It also led to the re-organization and development of the Jewish defense organization, the Haganah, which later became the nucleus of the Israel Defense Forces.
The 1929 Safed massacre took place on 29 August during the 1929 Palestine riots. Eighteen Jews were killed (some sources say twenty) and eighty wounded. The main Jewish street was looted and burned.
The 1936–1939 Arab revolt in Palestine was an uprising during the British mandate by Palestinian Arabs in Palestine which lasted from 1936 to 1939. It should not be confused with the Arab Revolt of 1916–18.
The revolt did not achieve its goals, although it is "credited with signifying the birth of the Arab Palestinian identity."
Another outcome of the hostilities was the disengagement of the Jewish and Arab economies in Palestine, which were more or less intertwined until that time.
Posted by eagle007blogger | September 15, 2009, 4:02 am1947–1948 Civil War in Mandatory Palestine
The Jewish and Arab communities of Palestine clashed…
From January onwards, operations became increasingly militarized, with the intervention of a number of Arab Liberation Army regiments inside Palestine, each active in a variety of distinct sectors around the different coastal towns. They consolidated their presence in Galilee and Samaria. Abd al-Qadir al-Husayni came from Egypt with several hundred men of the Army of the Holy War. Having recruited a few thousands of volunteers, al-Husayni organised the blockade of the 100,000 Jewish residents of Jerusalem. To counter this, the Yishuv authorities tried to supply the city with convoys of up to 100 armoured vehicles, but the operation became more and more impractical as the number of casualties in the relief convoys surged. By March, Al-Hussayni's tactic had paid off. Almost all of Haganah's armoured vehicles had been destroyed, the blockade was in full operation, and hundreds of Haganah members who had tried to bring supplies into the city were killed. The situation for those who dwelt in the Jewish settlements in the highly-isolated Negev and North of Galilee was even more critical.
While the Jewish population had received strict orders requiring them to hold their ground everywhere at all costs, the Arab population was more affected by the general conditions of insecurity to which the country was exposed. Up to 100,000 Palestinians, from the urban upper and middle classes in Haifa, Jaffa and Jerusalem, or Jewish-dominated areas, evacuated abroad or to Arab centres eastwards
1948 Palestine war
At the issue of the war, the State of Israel kept most of the area it had been allocated by the partition plan. Israel also took control a significant portion of the area allocated to the proposed Arab State. Including Jaffa, Lydda and Ramle area, Galilee, Negev, a strip along the Tel-Aviv-Jerusalem road and some territories around Samaria (called today West Bank). No Arab Palestinian state was created: the remainder of the West Bank was annexed by Jordan and the Gaza Strip was placed under Egyptian military rule.
Due to the war, demographic changes occurred in the country. Between 700,000 and 750,000 Palestinian Arabs fled or were expelled from the area that became Israel but could not settle in the neighborhood Arab states and became what is known today as the Palestinian refugees. On the other side, around 10,000 Jews were also forced to leave their homes in Palestine. In the three years following the war, 700,000 Jews settled in Israel, mainly along the borders and in former Arab lands. Around 136,000 came from the 250,000 displaced Jews of World War II. Most others were part of the 758,000 to 900,000 Jews who left Arab countries between 1948 and the Six-Day War.
Posted by eagle007blogger | September 15, 2009, 4:03 amWhen the British Mandate expired, civil war raged in Palestine. The dramatically outnumbered Jews managed to defeat first the Arabs of Palestine, then the combined armies of Egypt, Jordan, Iraq and Syria, along with a smattering of Sudanese, Yemenites, Moroccans, Saudis, Lebanese and others.
Isolated and outnumbered as they were, the Jews were far better organized, motivated, financed, equipped and trained than their adversaries, who were so fragmented — by geography and tradition and clan — that the term “Palestinian” was either unwarranted or at least premature. The war became a rout once the Jews took the offensive, and the Palestinian refugee crisis began.
Transfer — or expulsion or ethnic cleansing — was never an explicit part of the Zionist program, even among its more extreme elements.
Matters took another turn in May 1948, when the British left, Israel declared statehood and the armies of Egypt, Jordan, Syria and Iraq marched in. Again, for all their numerical superiority, the Arabs were ill-equipped, inexperienced, unprepared. Some Arab leaders knew they were in over their heads. But given the anger over the Jewish state on their streets and their own tenuous hold on power, not to invade was even more perilous.
Within five and a half months, they were crushed, militarily and psychologically. But for international intervention, their defeat would have been still worse; the Egyptian army would have been annihilated. Only King Abdullah of Jordan, with the best (British-trained) army and limited objectives (not to destroy the Jewish state, but to annex the West Bank), got what he wanted. Meanwhile, Israel grew beyond the partition lines, and gained more defensible borders.
Posted by eagle007blogger | September 15, 2009, 4:03 amSix-Day War
Following numerous border clashes between Israel and its Arab neighbours, particularly Syria, Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser expelled the United Nations Emergency Force (UNEF) from the Sinai Peninsula in May 1967. The peacekeeping force had been stationed there since 1957, following a British-French-Israeli invasion of Egypt which was launched during the Suez Crisis. Egypt amassed 1,000 tanks and nearly 100,000 soldiers on the Israeli border and closed the Straits of Tiran to all ships flying Israeli flags or carrying strategic materials, receiving strong support from other Arab countries. Israel responded with a similar mobilization that included the call up of 70,000 reservists to augment the regular IDF forces. On June 5, 1967, Israel launched a pre-emptive attack. This claim was, however, disputed by Arab countries that asserted Israel's strike was an act of aggression. Jordan, which had signed a mutual defence treaty with Egypt on May 30, then attacked western Jerusalem and Netanya.
Posted by eagle007blogger | September 15, 2009, 4:07 amIn 1964, Israel began withdrawing water from the Jordan River for its National Water Carrier. The following year, the Arab states began construction of the Headwater Diversion Plan, which, once completed, would divert the waters of the Banias Stream before the water entered Israel and the Sea of Galilee, to flow instead into a dam at Mukhaiba for use by Jordan and Syria, and divert the waters of the Hasbani into the Litani River, in Lebanon. The diversion works would have reduced the installed capacity of Israel's carrier by about 35%, and Israel's overall water supply by about 11%.
The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) attacked the diversion works in Syria in March, May, and August 1965, perpetuating a prolonged chain of border violence that linked directly to the events leading to war.
Posted by eagle007blogger | September 15, 2009, 4:08 amDuring the early months of 1966, it became clear that Israel's neighbors were escalating activities against her. More and more Israeli civilians were killed in attacks coming from the Syrian and Jordanian borders. The Syrians, from atop the Golan Heights, shelled Israeli towns indiscriminately.
On May 15, 1967, Egyptian forces moved into the Sinai. Ironically, Egypts move was, in part, in reaction to false Soviet information passed to Syria according to which Israel had mobilized forces on her border with Syria in preparation for an invasion of Syria
On May 18, Egypt expelled the U.N. Peacekeeping forces from Israel's borders.
On the 22nd, the Egyptians closed the Straits of Tiran to Israeli shipping.
On the 25th, encouraged by Egypt – Syria, Jordan, Iraq and Saudi Arabia moved their troops to Israel's borders.
Two days later, on the 26th of May, President Nasser of Egypt declared, "Our basic goal is the destruction of Israel. The Arab people want to fight…. The mining of Sharm El Sheik is a confrontation with Israel".
Modelled after the November 1966 Egyptian-Syrian "defence" pact, other pacts were signed by Egypt with Jordan and Iraq on May 30th and June 4th, thereby completing the encirclement of Israel.
Posted by eagle007blogger | September 15, 2009, 4:11 amThe buildup started because of false Soviet intelligence.
But once the buildup started, Nasser couldn't quit – Amer and his military advisers were pressuring him, along with entire Arab world. It snowballed into a "destroy Israel" campaign with the Arab states all joining together in the United Arab Command. None of this was Israel's fault.
Posted by eagle007blogger | September 15, 2009, 4:11 am