The TSR Palestinian Society Watch

Liptease
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#2161
Report 9 years ago
#2161
(Original post by aeterno)
I'm already a member of PalSoc at uni, and so it makes sense to join here too - in fact I'm glad that there are others concerned about the whole Palestine/Israel conflict as it sometimes seems like people don't care unless it directly involves their own country.

What I wanted to ask is what you guys think of this quote by Nabil Abu Rdeina:

Israel is attempting to trick the Palestinian people into a cycle of violence in order to avoid international pressure to stop settlement expansion and restart peace talks.

Do you agree/disagree? Why? Are Palestinians only killing Israelis as revenge/because they are being provoked/to defend themselves?

Be as objective or subjective as you please.

(Also, I'm new here, so hi! )
I don't know if it's part of an Israeli master plan. Personally I doubt it. However, thay have no hope of fighting pro-Israeli propaganda and the Israeli military.

The Palestinians need to adopt the polices of Martin Luther King, Ghandi, and others in a new kind of civil rights movement which takes the high road. While the ANC did employ violence in their battle for civil rights and the abolition of apartheid they didn't take things to the extremes that Hamas and Fateh have.

I think only through a clean break with violent means will Palestinians have a hope of winning greater public support for their human rights and an end to occupation. There are plenty of people who are too afraid too publicly support Palestinians in the US for example. This would give them the opportunity to publicly declare their support.
0
reply
Rhadamanthus
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#2162
Report 8 years ago
#2162
(Original post by Liptease)
The Palestinians need to adopt the polices of Martin Luther King...
Y'know that Martin Luther King was very pro-Israel and pro-Zionist?
0
reply
Liptease
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#2163
Report 8 years ago
#2163
(Original post by JakePearson)
Y'know that Martin Luther King was very pro-Israel and pro-Zionist?
And Ghandi whose movement inspired Dr. King was a fierce critic of both, while Mandela remains a vocal champion of the Palestinian cause.

Your point being?
0
reply
Rhadamanthus
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#2164
Report 8 years ago
#2164
(Original post by Liptease)
And Ghandi whose movement inspired Dr. King was a fierce critic of both, while Mandela remains a vocal champion of the Palestinian cause.

Your point being?
I'm saying, don't start martyring the great Dr King for your cause until you know his real views.

"You declare, my friend; that you do not hate the Jews, you are merely 'anti-Zionist' ... And I say, let the truth ring forth from the high mountain tops, let it echo through the valleys of God's green earth: When people criticize Zionism, they mean Jews... Anti-Semitism, the hatred of the Jewish people, has been and remains a blot on the soul of mankind. In this we are in full agreement. So know also this: anti-Zionist is inherently anti-Semitic, and ever will be so."
0
reply
Liptease
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#2165
Report 8 years ago
#2165
(Original post by JakePearson)
I'm saying, don't start martyring the great Dr King for your cause until you know his real views.

"You declare, my friend; that you do not hate the Jews, you are merely 'anti-Zionist' ... And I say, let the truth ring forth from the high mountain tops, let it echo through the valleys of God's green earth: When people criticize Zionism, they mean Jews... Anti-Semitism, the hatred of the Jewish people, has been and remains a blot on the soul of mankind. In this we are in full agreement. So know also this: anti-Zionist is inherently anti-Semitic, and ever will be so."
I'm discussing peaceful protest as a means for civil rights. Not as you seem to have assumed the particular views of Dr. King who was only one of the men I mentioned.

Incidentally going by your quote, the man who inspired King's protest movement, would himself have been deemed an anti-Semite. Which probably speaks more to Dr. King as savvy politician than anything else.
1
reply
Saff123
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#2166
Report 8 years ago
#2166
(Original post by Liptease)
I think only through a clean break with violent means will Palestinians have a hope of winning greater public support for their human rights and an end to occupation. There are plenty of people who are too afraid too publicly support Palestinians in the US for example. This would give them the opportunity to publicly declare their support.
Proclaiming public support for Palestinian human rights, and expressing criticism for Israel is a long way off in the US. The punishments meted out, are just too severe. There is a change taking place in the US but the movement is glacial.

Non-violent protest would certainly be a step in the right direction and help Americans who sympathise with the plight of Palestinians further their cause, yet even that may not be enough.

Ultimately any hope of peace in the middle east really lies in Washington.

P.S nice to see a fellow American.
0
reply
Summer_fruits
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#2167
Report 8 years ago
#2167
:pal:
0
reply
~ABR~
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#2168
Report 8 years ago
#2168
Guys.


Today is the Palestinian Prisoners' Day

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/mi...625857813.html

0
reply
~ABR~
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#2169
Report 8 years ago
#2169
(Original post by JakePearson)
I'm saying, don't start martyring the great Dr King for your cause until you know his real views.

"You declare, my friend; that you do not hate the Jews, you are merely 'anti-Zionist' ... And I say, let the truth ring forth from the high mountain tops, let it echo through the valleys of God's green earth: When people criticize Zionism, they mean Jews... Anti-Semitism, the hatred of the Jewish people, has been and remains a blot on the soul of mankind. In this we are in full agreement. So know also this: anti-Zionist is inherently anti-Semitic, and ever will be so."
Wow. That made me sure that Martin Luther King is either ignorant of the many anti-Zionist Jews or willfully gives them a blind eye.

There were Palestinian Jews who were also anti-Zionist. Zionism is 100% colonialism by European extremist Jews, and it was influenced by ideas of Nationalism and founded long before the Holocaust even took place. The Holocaust in which many non-Germans were massacred, not only Jews.


Wasn't Albert Einstein, a Jew, a staunch critic of Zionism?

Oh wait, what's the new term? Self-Hater? HAHHAHAHAHAAAAA
0
reply
Rhadamanthus
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#2170
Report 8 years ago
#2170
(Original post by ~ABR~)
There were Palestinian Jews who were also anti-Zionist. Zionism is 100% colonialism by European extremist Jews.
Zionism is the national liberation movement of the Jews. It is nationalist, not imperialist.
0
reply
Summer_fruits
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#2171
Report 8 years ago
#2171
(Original post by ~ABR~)
Guys.


Today is the Palestinian Prisoners' Day

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/mi...625857813.html

700 children!

“Verily, with hardship comes ease.”(94:5-6).




That animal youtube clip was :rofl: btw
0
reply
~ABR~
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#2172
Report 8 years ago
#2172
(Original post by JakePearson)
Zionism is the national liberation movement of the Jews. It is nationalist, not imperialist.
It is colonial, and Jewish terrorist groups (Irgun, Lehi, Haganah, to name a few) were necessary to achieve the goals of ethnic cleansing and displacing Palestinian families, so that Jewish families can settle upon the rubble of destroyed Palestinian homes.

As I mentioned in my edited post, Zionism was founded longer before the Holocaust took place. And contrary to popular belief, the holocaust was not aimed at the Jews, it was aimed at non-Germans. Many polish, for example, were massacred.

In any case, I don't want to debate this here. I am merely stating that to say anti-Zionism = anti-Semitism is a load of garbage because clearly there are anti-Zionist Jews. Zionism is a political ideology, and religion was used to justify it and to gain support for it. Zionism is not only about having a homeland for Jews, it is about having a homeland for Jews in place of Palestinians, and this is what we all disagree with, including anti-Zionsit Jews. If it was only about allowing Jews to have a place to live then no-one would oppose it.

I worked with a Jewish girl in "Israeli Apartheid Week" here, and we invited holocaust survivors to speak. You would be surprised how many Jewish holocaust survivors are staunch critics of Israel and are deeply saddened by how Zionists have exploited their suffering and committed atrocities in their name. The Zionism that is adopted by the Israeli government makes committing atrocities and war crimes a necessary means to achieve their hegemonic ambitions and maintain the superiority of their power in the region.
0
reply
Rhadamanthus
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#2173
Report 8 years ago
#2173
(Original post by ~ABR~)
It is colonial
No it's not.

and Jewish terrorist groups (Irgun, Lehi, Haganah, to name a few) were necessary to achieve the goals of ethnic cleansing and displacing Palestinian families, so that Jewish families can settle upon the rubble of destroyed Palestinian homes.
Those groups killed about 200-300 combatants - hardly "ethnic cleansing" on the scale that the Jews faced prior to the creation of Israel.

As I mentioned in my edited post, Zionism was founded longer before the Holocaust took place. And contrary to popular belief, the holocaust was not aimed at the Jews, it was aimed at non-Germans. Many polish, for example, were massacred.
Yes, but Nazi policy from their election onwards made it quite clear that the Jews were the main target for discrimination and eventual genocide.

Zionism is not only about having a homeland for Jews, it is about having a homeland for Jews in place of Palestinians, and this is what we all disagree with, including anti-Zionsit Jews.
No it's not.

If it was only about allowing Jews to have a place to live then no-one would oppose it.
And that's exactly what it proposes. You're confusing Zionism with some of the current actions of the State of Israel.
0
reply
~ABR~
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#2174
Report 8 years ago
#2174
(Original post by JakePearson)
No it's not.
If you agree with the land grabbing that has taken place to form what Israel is today (including, for example, Sderot which used to be part of Gaza), then this statement is meaningless.


Those groups killed about 200-300 combatants - hardly "ethnic cleansing" on the scale that the Jews faced prior to the creation of Israel.
What a load of garbage. Do you know of the King David Hotel bombings masterminded by the Irgun Leader who was Tzipi Livni's father? Even a brief overview of the Nakba using wikipedia will show how blatanlty false this statement is.

I just got Ilane Pappe's book, the Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine. It's time I start reading it (had other higher priority readings)



Yes, but Nazi policy from their election onwards made it quite clear that the Jews were the main target for discrimination and eventual genocide.
So that makes it more justified for the European Jews to go into Palestine and punish the Palestinians for what the Nazis did?


And that's exactly what it proposes. You're confusing Zionism with some of the current actions of the State of Israel.
Actually, I'm equating Zionism with the actions of the state of Israel since 1948 - Since the nakba in which whole lands were annexed and tens upon tens of thousands of Palestinians were forced out. Also, the problem in the West Bank with the illegal, bantustan-like settlements is old. It's not current. So besides colonialism, you also have apartheid.
0
reply
Rhadamanthus
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#2175
Report 8 years ago
#2175
(Original post by ~ABR~)
If you agree with the land grabbing that has taken place to form what Israel is today (including, for example, Sderot which used to be part of Gaza), then this statement is meaningless.
No, as far as I can remember, Sderot was always in Israel. Israel claimed some of that land near Sderot after an offensive was launched against them though.

What a load of garbage. Do you know of the King David Hotel bombings masterminded by the Irgun Leader who was Tzipi Livni's father? Even a brief overview of the Nakba using wikipedia will show how blatanlty false this statement is.
I did know that. I also know that the death toll for the bombing of that hotel (which was a legitimate military target, as it housed the headquarters of the British Mandate) was 91. The Irgun were active during the Civil War, in which they were responsible for the deaths of 200-300 civilians (according to historian Martin Gilbert (2005) in the Routledge Atlas of the Arab-Israeli Conflict).

I just got Ilane Pappe's book, the Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine. It's time I start reading it (had other higher priority readings)


"It's one big lie.. its sources are suspect, incorrect, distorted, invented in part.. You cannot rely on one sentence or any quote [in 'The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine']"

So that makes it more justified for the European Jews to go into Palestine and punish the Palestinians for what the Nazis did?
Did I say that? I've never used the Holocaust as an argument for the creation of Israel. I have argued that it created many refugees who fled to the area for safety.

Actually, I'm equating Zionism with the actions of the state of Israel since 1948
Zionism is the national liberation movement of the Jews. Equating the actions of the State of Israel with Zionism is like equating conservatism with the USA under Bush's rule. Zionism is an ideology; Israel is a state.

Since the nakba in which whole lands were annexed and tens upon tens of thousands of Palestinians were forced out.
I wouldn't say that "whole lands were annexed" - there was an Arab majority state alongside a Jewish majority state, but the actions of the Arab neighbours and their invasion of Israel led to the eventual destruction of the Arab state. Yes there were refugees - but there was a place to go. There were one million Jews kicked out of Arab countries following the creation of Israel, and the only place they could go was Israel.

Also, the problem in the West Bank with the illegal, bantustan-like settlements is old. It's not current. So besides colonialism, you also have apartheid.
Again with the trendy buzzwords. Calling it "apartheid" does nothing to advance your argument. It only insults those who lived under the Apartheid regime in South Africa, and shows you have either no understanding of the definition of the word, or no understanding of the modern conflict in the region.

On the settlements - yes, they are wrong when it involves forcing people off their land, but let me quote UniOfLife's post on them...

Spoiler:
Show
"I'm not convinced that the settlement issue is as big as people make out. I think it is used as a red herring. So, to kick off the conversation I ask the simple question - When a Polish family buys a plot of land in the UK countryside and build a house there, is that an illegal settlement? I think the answer is obviously no. So I wonder, in the case of settlements in the West Bank, what is so different. Obviously, in the cases where the land has been stolen this is a different story and clearly the owners of the land require compensation and those who have stolen it must leave. However, this is not the case for all settlements.

The basic point here is this - an individual building a house on a plot of land they own (as an individual) is not the State from which that person originated occupying that land. We must be clear that there is a distinction between the individual and the State.

Now, I can understand that the existence of settlements is a cause of frustration for Palestinians but here also there are questions to be asked. Primarily is the question of what would happen to these settlements if Israel withdrew to the 1967 borders. I ask because there are only a few possible options:

1) The settlements remain - this seems right because the individuals who are living on the land have purchased the land they are living on from individual Palestinians. It is their land.
2) The settlements are evacuated of Jewish residents - this is ethnic cleansing and theft.

So, it seems to me that any deal ought to allow the settlements to remain (again, where those settlements are built on land bought by individual Jews or Israelis). In this case, why is the settlement issue the most important one?

Perhaps the problem lies in the security surrounding settlements which results in a two-tier system in the West Bank. But this is not a function of the settlements themselves but of the terrorism. Were the Palestinians and Israelis living peacefully then the settlements could exist without any security requirements bringing a two-tier system.

Therefore, I ask, why is the settlement issue claimed to be the most important one? Surely, it is unimportant. It is a red herring.

I think I can back this up. In the last year or so the security situation in the West Bank has improved significantly. The result of this is that the economy of the West Bank is growing rapidly and the security restriction are being eased. The impact, then, of the settlements is being reduced.

As a final thought. Perhaps the problem with the settlements is one of citizenship. Palestinians may feel that those living in settlements in the West Bank ought to be paying taxes to the Palestinian government not the Israeli one. This requires that their civic amenities are supplied by the Palestinians not the Israelis. Perhaps the concern about settlements is that they will remain Israeli territory. But then this too is not a function of the settlements per se. Israel ought not to have claim of sovereignty over an area merely because some of its citizens live there (see the example of the Polish family living here). If the settlements provide Israel with a claim to sovereignty it is only because lacking sovereignty would result in the expulsion of the settlers.

Therefore, I put it to you that all the problems surrounding the settlements stem from the reaction to the settlements and not them themselves. Indeed, if Palestinians accepted Israelis living in their country they would find that the settlements provide a good boost to their economy as the richer Israelis shop in Palestinian shops and hire Palestinian employees etc."
0
reply
~ABR~
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#2176
Report 8 years ago
#2176
(Original post by JakePearson)


"It's one big lie.. its sources are suspect, incorrect, distorted, invented in part.. You cannot rely on one sentence or any quote [in 'The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine']"
That's his view, and you can see that it is pretty extreme to conclude that it is "one big lie". It's obvious that not everything in his sources are what he states. In fact only some of it has some mistakes and is by no means perfect, but to label the whole thing as one big lie and that we cannot rely on one sentence or any quote in it is a rather extreme, and nonacademic review.

Zionism is the national liberation movement of the Jews. Equating the actions of the State of Israel with Zionism is like equating conservatism with the USA under Bush's rule. Zionism is an ideology; Israel is a state.
That's such an inaccurate analogy it's not even funny. That is not true at all.



I wouldn't say that "whole lands were annexed" - there was an Arab majority state alongside a Jewish majority state, but the actions of the Arab neighbours and their invasion of Israel led to the eventual destruction of the Arab state.
Actually, no. It was Israel that took the U.N. resolution as if it's a legally binding proposal and it started implementing it through force, when the approval of the Arabs states was required for this resolution to be enforced. The Arab armies came to stop Israel from taking over lands by force even though the U.N. resolution was not a legally binding proposal.
Yes there were refugees - but there was a place to go. There were one million Jews kicked out of Arab countries following the creation of Israel, and the only place they could go was Israel.
That's an exaggeration. They were fewer than a million (about 800,000) and many of them were not kicked out. Many of them were ideologically motivated to go to Israel.



Again with the trendy buzzwords. Calling it "apartheid" does nothing to advance your argument. It only insults those who lived under the Apartheid regime in South Africa, and shows you have either no understanding of the definition of the word, or no understanding of the modern conflict in the region.
Say that to the many South African leaders who suffered under the Apartheid Regime in South Africa, including Archbishop Desmond Tutu, who call what they have seen in the West Bank as Apartheid, some of them saying that it is even worse than what they suffered. I will spare you the embarrassment and let you do the most basic task of searching the several south African leaders who say that what is happening in the West Bank is Apartheid.


On the settlements - yes, they are wrong when it involves forcing people off their land, but let me quote UniOfLife's post on them...
Actually, the settlement problem is not merely that settlements are there just like UniOfLife would like it to be. It is when you have bantustan-like settlements, connected by Jewish-only highways, together with the Apartheid wall that cuts through many Palestinian farms, and the military "outposts" that were strategically located to take over 80% of the water resources in the West Bank that you have a criminal lack of proper distribution of water (Jewish settlers having swimming pools while neighbouring palestinian farmers suffering water shortages).

Besides, there are MANY settlements that were indeed taken by force, and most, if not all, of them have remained like that. The lands were not bought at all. They were taken by force by armed Jewish settlers.
0
reply
~ABR~
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#2177
Report 8 years ago
#2177
This is a must see, guys:



From http://australiansforpalestine.com

I repeat. Must see.
0
reply
striver17
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#2178
Report 8 years ago
#2178
DOWN WITH ISRAEL...BOYCOTT ALL ISRAELI GOODS if u can...lol

LET'S TRY AND FREE THE PALESTINIANS FROM THE HANDS OF INJUSTICE!

ISRAELIS HAVE TAKEN THE HOLY LAND FOR FAR TOO LONG AND CAUSED UNIMAGINABLE DAMAGE, IT'S TIME WE TOOK A STAND AND FREED THE ARABS FROM THIS ATROCITY.

IT IS OUR LAND AND WE WILL GET IT BACK AS SAID IN THE QUR'AN!

:pal2: :pal:

FREEFREEPALESTINE
0
reply
Carl
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#2179
Report 8 years ago
#2179
WE CAN ONLY FREE PALESTINE BY WRITING EVERYTHING IN CAPITALS. LETS DEFEAT ISRAEL WITH OBNOXIOUSLY HUGE TEXT :rolleyes:
0
reply
striver17
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#2180
Report 8 years ago
#2180
WELL YOU HAVE TO MAKE THE TEXT STAND OUT!

:p:
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Brexit: Given the chance now, would you vote leave or remain?

Remain (1043)
79.08%
Leave (276)
20.92%

Watched Threads

View All