Executive Member
Posts: 9,136 
March 29th, 2007, 12:37 PM
Arab leaders at their summit Thursday agreed on a call for Israel to accept their land-for-peace offer and open direct negotiations with the Arabs. Unlike past summits that at times saw overt feuds break out, the gathering of Arab kings, emirs and presidents showed unusual public unity as it revived the peace offer, which they first made in 2002 only to meet rejection from Israel. But still unknown is how the Arabs will persuade Israel to accept the initiative, which the United States and Europe hope can help build momentum for a resumption of the long-stalled peace process. Israel has said it could accept the offer with some changes, but the Arab leaders refused the amend it.
Instead, they created "working groups" that will seek to drum up support for the deal from the U.S., UN and Europe. U.S. allies Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Jordan hope the smaller groups will be able to be more flexible in promoting the offer to win acceptance, despite the summit's rejection of changes.
Saudi Arabia should head working groups
"The Palestinian people is sincere in extending its hand of peace to the Israeli people, and I call on that people and its leaders to share that dream with us," Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas told the summit in a speech Thursday.
Continue Article
http://ad.doubleclick.net/ad/aolc.cb...ord=123456789?
He said Saudi Arabia should head the working groups, which should have "freedom to move according to the circumstances to achieve our national goals."
The initiative offers Israel recognition and permanent peace with all Arab countries in return for:
Arab allies of the U.S. painted the peace offer as key to achieving progress at a time of mounting crises across the Mideast, including the bloodshed in Iraq. The Arab summit was to call on Iraq's Shia-led government to change its constitution and military to give a greater role to Sunni Arabs.
Arab League Secretary General Amr Moussa rejected amending the peace offer, saying, "They tell us to amend it, but we tell them to accept it first, then we can sit down at the negotiating table."
But he said the Arabs must "do more to convince" the Israelis on the offer.
http://tinyurl.com/239lgh
Arab leaders at their summit Thursday agreed on a call for Israel to accept their land-for-peace offer and open direct negotiations with the Arabs. Unlike past summits that at times saw overt feuds break out, the gathering of Arab kings, emirs and presidents showed unusual public unity as it revived the peace offer, which they first made in 2002 only to meet rejection from Israel. But still unknown is how the Arabs will persuade Israel to accept the initiative, which the United States and Europe hope can help build momentum for a resumption of the long-stalled peace process. Israel has said it could accept the offer with some changes, but the Arab leaders refused the amend it.
Instead, they created "working groups" that will seek to drum up support for the deal from the U.S., UN and Europe. U.S. allies Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Jordan hope the smaller groups will be able to be more flexible in promoting the offer to win acceptance, despite the summit's rejection of changes.
Saudi Arabia should head working groups
"The Palestinian people is sincere in extending its hand of peace to the Israeli people, and I call on that people and its leaders to share that dream with us," Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas told the summit in a speech Thursday.
Continue Article
http://ad.doubleclick.net/ad/aolc.cb...ord=123456789?
He said Saudi Arabia should head the working groups, which should have "freedom to move according to the circumstances to achieve our national goals."
The summit, which ends later Thursday, was to call on Israel to "accept the Arab peace initiative" and reopen "direct and serious negotiations," according to a draft resolution.Palestinian Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh, left, talks to Saudi Foreign Minister Saud Al-Faisal after the opening session of the Arab Summit in Riyadh on Wednesday.
(Awad Awad/Associated Press)
The initiative offers Israel recognition and permanent peace with all Arab countries in return for:
- Israeli withdrawal from lands captured in the 1967 Middle East war.
- Setting up a Palestinian state with East Jerusalem as its capital.
- A "just solution" to the issue of Palestinian refugees forced out of lands in what is now Israel.
Arab allies of the U.S. painted the peace offer as key to achieving progress at a time of mounting crises across the Mideast, including the bloodshed in Iraq. The Arab summit was to call on Iraq's Shia-led government to change its constitution and military to give a greater role to Sunni Arabs.
Arab League Secretary General Amr Moussa rejected amending the peace offer, saying, "They tell us to amend it, but we tell them to accept it first, then we can sit down at the negotiating table."
But he said the Arabs must "do more to convince" the Israelis on the offer.
http://tinyurl.com/239lgh
Executive Member
Posts: 9,136
March 29th, 2007, 01:16 PM
Quote:
A chance for all Arab countries to agree to peace and Israel will find a way to disagree. Israel already has all of what once was Palestine and they want more.
Israel has sought to water down the provisions, in particular those dealing with refugees. It opposes the influx of Palestinian refugees into the Jewish state and rejects a full withdrawal from the West Bank and East Jerusalem.
March 29th, 2007, 05:41 PM
I read your article with wide eyed enthusiasim. I was thinking of ways to push Israel to remain calm, I was thinking of the US thinning financial and military support until Israel began to negotiate openly and not be as defiant as they have in the past.
But from your comment, but I may be wrong, please correct me if I am, I take it dissagreeing is not an option, it's all Arab or nothing.
If that's the case, as I am sure it is with many, if I was an Israeli negotiator, I'ld tell you to stuff it too.
Quoting #juan
So there realy is no negotiation in your mind set is there, it is what the Arabs want and nothing less will do?
A chance for all Arab countries to agree to peace and Israel will find a way to disagree. Israel already has all of what once was Palestine and they want more.
I read your article with wide eyed enthusiasim. I was thinking of ways to push Israel to remain calm, I was thinking of the US thinning financial and military support until Israel began to negotiate openly and not be as defiant as they have in the past.
But from your comment, but I may be wrong, please correct me if I am, I take it dissagreeing is not an option, it's all Arab or nothing.
If that's the case, as I am sure it is with many, if I was an Israeli negotiator, I'ld tell you to stuff it too.
House Member
Posts: 4,492
Location: Minnesota: Gopher State
Location: Minnesota: Gopher State
March 29th, 2007, 10:49 PM
Very interesting initiative by the Saudis:
"The Saudis brokered a deal between the two main Palestinian factions last month but one that both Israel and the United States found deeply problematic because it added to the power of the radical group Hamas rather than to the more moderate Fatah. On Wednesday, the king called for an end to the international boycott of the new Palestinian government. The United States and Israel want the boycott continued.
In addition, King Abdullah invited President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran to Riyadh earlier this month while the Americans want him shunned. And in trying to settle the tensions in Lebanon, the Saudis seem willing to negotiate with Iran."
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/28/wo...udicnd.html?hp
The Saudis could have and should have done much more to promote the peace process. Unfortunately, it chose to kiss up to Bush in order to get higher oil prices. Perhaps it has seen the light and now realizes that peace is a lot more profitable in the long term.
Very interesting initiative by the Saudis:
"The Saudis brokered a deal between the two main Palestinian factions last month but one that both Israel and the United States found deeply problematic because it added to the power of the radical group Hamas rather than to the more moderate Fatah. On Wednesday, the king called for an end to the international boycott of the new Palestinian government. The United States and Israel want the boycott continued.
In addition, King Abdullah invited President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran to Riyadh earlier this month while the Americans want him shunned. And in trying to settle the tensions in Lebanon, the Saudis seem willing to negotiate with Iran."
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/28/wo...udicnd.html?hp
The Saudis could have and should have done much more to promote the peace process. Unfortunately, it chose to kiss up to Bush in order to get higher oil prices. Perhaps it has seen the light and now realizes that peace is a lot more profitable in the long term.
Executive Member
Posts: 9,136
March 30th, 2007, 12:35 AM
Quoting gopher
A few questions Bear: Who has been the aggressor, and who has received the bulk of U.S. foreign aid since 1947? It sure as hell was not Palestine.
Very interesting initiative by the Saudis:
"The Saudis brokered a deal between the two main Palestinian factions last month but one that both Israel and the United States found deeply problematic because it added to the power of the radical group Hamas rather than to the more moderate Fatah. On Wednesday, the king called for an end to the international boycott of the new Palestinian government. The United States and Israel want the boycott continued.
In addition, King Abdullah invited President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran to Riyadh earlier this month while the Americans want him shunned. And in trying to settle the tensions in Lebanon, the Saudis seem willing to negotiate with Iran."
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/28/wo...udicnd.html?hp
The Saudis could have and should have done much more to promote the peace process. Unfortunately, it chose to kiss up to Bush in order to get higher oil prices. Perhaps it has seen the light and now realizes that peace is a lot more profitable in the long term.
"The Saudis brokered a deal between the two main Palestinian factions last month but one that both Israel and the United States found deeply problematic because it added to the power of the radical group Hamas rather than to the more moderate Fatah. On Wednesday, the king called for an end to the international boycott of the new Palestinian government. The United States and Israel want the boycott continued.
In addition, King Abdullah invited President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran to Riyadh earlier this month while the Americans want him shunned. And in trying to settle the tensions in Lebanon, the Saudis seem willing to negotiate with Iran."
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/28/wo...udicnd.html?hp
The Saudis could have and should have done much more to promote the peace process. Unfortunately, it chose to kiss up to Bush in order to get higher oil prices. Perhaps it has seen the light and now realizes that peace is a lot more profitable in the long term.
Council Member
Posts: 1,496
March 30th, 2007, 07:25 AM
This effort has little chance of success. Israel will settle for nothing less than all of Palestine.
The debate in Israel is not about land for peace but transfer of the remaining non-Jews out of what used to be Palestine and is now Israel:
So I doubt Israel will accept leaving non-Jews where they are and giving them their own country within what most Israelis consider to be Israel.
This effort has little chance of success. Israel will settle for nothing less than all of Palestine.
The debate in Israel is not about land for peace but transfer of the remaining non-Jews out of what used to be Palestine and is now Israel:
Quote:
Most Israelis support the idea of transferring non-Jews out of Israel and the occupied territories: Sep. 11, 2006 10:10 | Updated Sep. 12, 2006 9:26
MK Eitam calls for 'removal' of Arabs
By SHEERA CLAIRE FRENKEL
MK Effie Eitam called Sunday for the expulsion of Arabs from the West Bank and the removal of Israeli Arabs from the political scene, igniting the most recent in a series of clashes between Arab and Israeli Knesset members.
"We have to expel most Arabs from Judea and Samaria," Eitam said at a memorial service for Lt. Amihai Merhavia, a soldier who was killed in the battle for Bint Jbail in South Lebanon. "We can't deal with all these Arabs, and we can't give up the territory, because we've already seen what they do there. Some of them might have to stay under certain conditions, but most of them will have to go." Eitam also launched a pointed attack at Arab Knesset members, whom he labeled "traitors."
"We've got to remove Israeli Arabs from the political scene. We've allowed a fifth column to grow here - a group of traitors. We can't have a hostile group like this in our political system," said Eitam...
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satelli...=1157913603080
MK Eitam calls for 'removal' of Arabs
By SHEERA CLAIRE FRENKEL
MK Effie Eitam called Sunday for the expulsion of Arabs from the West Bank and the removal of Israeli Arabs from the political scene, igniting the most recent in a series of clashes between Arab and Israeli Knesset members.
"We have to expel most Arabs from Judea and Samaria," Eitam said at a memorial service for Lt. Amihai Merhavia, a soldier who was killed in the battle for Bint Jbail in South Lebanon. "We can't deal with all these Arabs, and we can't give up the territory, because we've already seen what they do there. Some of them might have to stay under certain conditions, but most of them will have to go." Eitam also launched a pointed attack at Arab Knesset members, whom he labeled "traitors."
"We've got to remove Israeli Arabs from the political scene. We've allowed a fifth column to grow here - a group of traitors. We can't have a hostile group like this in our political system," said Eitam...
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satelli...=1157913603080
Quote:
The Israeli position is that Arab and Muslim nations should absorb the remaining non-Jews in Israel and the occupied territories. Transfer Means Peace
Boris Shusteff November 18, 2003
The verdict is in. An unprecedented majority of Israelis supports transfer for the purpose of achieving peace between the Arabs and the Jews. In case you missed them, let us briefly recapture the highlights of the events that must inevitably bring us to this conclusion. Polls conducted in February 2002 in Israel demonstrated that 46% of respondents supported the transfer of Arabs from Judea, Samaria and Gaza while 60% were inclined towards the transfer of Arabs from Israel proper. In October 2003 the Israeli left announced the drafting of the so-called "Geneva Initiative," which is supposed to be officially signed on December 1. The core idea of the document is to facilitate the transfer of 4.5 million Arabs and half a million Jews in an attempt to separate Jewish and Arab populations for the sake of peace. Yossi Beilin, the ideologist of the Geneva transfer initiative, plans to distribute the document to every Israeli household. According to the latest polls 25% already support the initiative. Since most of them are situated on the left flank of Israel's political spectrum, knowing the ratio between left and right in Israel, it is safe to assume that the number will grow to 30-35%. That means that more than 90% of Israelis in one way or another support the transfer idea. The only difference is that the majority of them prefer for the transferees to be only Arabs, and the minority sees both Arabs and Jews among the transferees. Disregarding for a moment the ethnic origins of the people subject to relocation, let us stress again the great importance of this point. Israelis both "left" and "right" are overwhelmingly keen on the idea of transfer....
http://www.gamla.org.il/english/article/2003/nov/b1.htm
Boris Shusteff November 18, 2003
The verdict is in. An unprecedented majority of Israelis supports transfer for the purpose of achieving peace between the Arabs and the Jews. In case you missed them, let us briefly recapture the highlights of the events that must inevitably bring us to this conclusion. Polls conducted in February 2002 in Israel demonstrated that 46% of respondents supported the transfer of Arabs from Judea, Samaria and Gaza while 60% were inclined towards the transfer of Arabs from Israel proper. In October 2003 the Israeli left announced the drafting of the so-called "Geneva Initiative," which is supposed to be officially signed on December 1. The core idea of the document is to facilitate the transfer of 4.5 million Arabs and half a million Jews in an attempt to separate Jewish and Arab populations for the sake of peace. Yossi Beilin, the ideologist of the Geneva transfer initiative, plans to distribute the document to every Israeli household. According to the latest polls 25% already support the initiative. Since most of them are situated on the left flank of Israel's political spectrum, knowing the ratio between left and right in Israel, it is safe to assume that the number will grow to 30-35%. That means that more than 90% of Israelis in one way or another support the transfer idea. The only difference is that the majority of them prefer for the transferees to be only Arabs, and the minority sees both Arabs and Jews among the transferees. Disregarding for a moment the ethnic origins of the people subject to relocation, let us stress again the great importance of this point. Israelis both "left" and "right" are overwhelmingly keen on the idea of transfer....
http://www.gamla.org.il/english/article/2003/nov/b1.htm
So I doubt Israel will accept leaving non-Jews where they are and giving them their own country within what most Israelis consider to be Israel.
House Member
Posts: 3,063
March 30th, 2007, 07:27 AM
And what is the Guarantee the Arab summit would hold onto their bargain, they didn't in the past.
not a very convincing arguement. "Give us back the land we lost fighting you, and we promise that this time we won't try and jump on you when your guard is down again"
Quoting #juan
Well, funny thing. While Palestine wasn't a nation then, the nations who did comprise it were in fact aggressors on several occassions. I also notice the Arab proposal calls for letting descendants of Palestians who once lived in Israel a chance to live there..but didn't offer anything to the Jewish populations they expelled and took the property of.
A few questions Bear: Who has been the aggressor, and who has received the bulk of U.S. foreign aid since 1947? It sure as hell was not Palestine.
And what is the Guarantee the Arab summit would hold onto their bargain, they didn't in the past.
not a very convincing arguement. "Give us back the land we lost fighting you, and we promise that this time we won't try and jump on you when your guard is down again"
House Member
Posts: 3,063
March 30th, 2007, 07:29 AM
Ok, so seriously, where do you pull these stats "most jews want this", "most jews want that".
What you mean is "It would be nice if most jews wanted this, then we could more easily paint them as bad guys"
Quoting earth_as_one
This effort has little chance of success. Israel will settle for nothing less than all of Palestine.
The debate in Israel is not about land for peace but transfer of the remaining non-Jews out of what used to be Palestine and is now Israel:
Most Israelis support the idea of transferring non-Jews out of Israel and the occupied territories:
The Israeli position is that Arab and Muslim nations should absorb the remaining non-Jews in Israel and the occupied territories.
So I doubt Israel will accept leaving non-Jews where they are and giving them their own country within what most Israelis consider to be Israel.
The debate in Israel is not about land for peace but transfer of the remaining non-Jews out of what used to be Palestine and is now Israel:
Most Israelis support the idea of transferring non-Jews out of Israel and the occupied territories:
The Israeli position is that Arab and Muslim nations should absorb the remaining non-Jews in Israel and the occupied territories.
So I doubt Israel will accept leaving non-Jews where they are and giving them their own country within what most Israelis consider to be Israel.
Ok, so seriously, where do you pull these stats "most jews want this", "most jews want that".
What you mean is "It would be nice if most jews wanted this, then we could more easily paint them as bad guys"
Council Member
Posts: 1,496
March 30th, 2007, 03:10 PM
My references are the Jerusalem Post and Gamla, both of which are Israeli sources.
I interpreted that as most Israelis supported transfer of Arabs out of Israel.
But maybe Gamla isn't the most reliable source so here are some other sources:
My references are the Jerusalem Post and Gamla, both of which are Israeli sources.
Quote:
Polls conducted in February 2002 in Israel demonstrated that 46% of respondents supported the transfer of Arabs from Judea, Samaria and Gaza while 60% were inclined towards the transfer of Arabs from Israel proper.
I interpreted that as most Israelis supported transfer of Arabs out of Israel.
But maybe Gamla isn't the most reliable source so here are some other sources:
Quote:
I also found this: 41% of Israel's Jews favour segregation
· Poll reveals widespread anti-Arab sentiment
· Academics warn of racism 'becoming mainstream'
Chris McGreal in Jerusalem
Friday March 24, 2006
The Guardian
A poll of attitudes among Israel's Jews towards their country's Arab citizens has exposed widespread racism, with large numbers favouring segregation and policies to encourage Arabs to leave the country.
The poll found that more than two-thirds of Jews would refuse to live in the same building as an Arab. Nearly half would not allow an Arab in their home and 41% want segregation of entertainment facilities.
The survey also found 40% of Israel's Jews believe "the state needs to support the emigration of Arab citizens", a policy advocated by some far-right parties in the run-up to next week's general election. The poll was conducted by a respected Israeli organisation, Geocartographia, for the Centre for the Struggle Against Racism, founded by Arab-Israeli academics. "Racism is becoming mainstream," said the centre's director, Bachar Ouda. "When people talk about transfer [removal] or about Arabs as a demographic timebomb no one raises their voice against such statements....
http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/Sto...738508,00.html
· Poll reveals widespread anti-Arab sentiment
· Academics warn of racism 'becoming mainstream'
Chris McGreal in Jerusalem
Friday March 24, 2006
The Guardian
A poll of attitudes among Israel's Jews towards their country's Arab citizens has exposed widespread racism, with large numbers favouring segregation and policies to encourage Arabs to leave the country.
The poll found that more than two-thirds of Jews would refuse to live in the same building as an Arab. Nearly half would not allow an Arab in their home and 41% want segregation of entertainment facilities.
The survey also found 40% of Israel's Jews believe "the state needs to support the emigration of Arab citizens", a policy advocated by some far-right parties in the run-up to next week's general election. The poll was conducted by a respected Israeli organisation, Geocartographia, for the Centre for the Struggle Against Racism, founded by Arab-Israeli academics. "Racism is becoming mainstream," said the centre's director, Bachar Ouda. "When people talk about transfer [removal] or about Arabs as a demographic timebomb no one raises their voice against such statements....
http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/Sto...738508,00.html
Quote:
Sounds like many if not a majority of Israelis support the idea of cleansing Israel of non-Jews.
Israeli expulsion idea gains steam
The Moledet party's media blitz for the mass expulsion of Palestinians is gaining momentum.
By Ben Lynfield | Special to The Christian Science Monitor
JERUSALEM - Spurred on by public despair, Israeli advocates of a mass expulsion of Palestinians are gaining strength and legitimacy as the toll of Palestinian attacks inside Israel continues to rise.
Tourism Minister Benny Elon of the far-right Moledet party this week launched a campaign advocating "transfer," a euphemism for expulsion, which he says can also connote an agreed relocation of Palestinians.
In addition to Mr. Elon's push for transfer in a series of interviews on Israel's television channels and in major newspapers, Moledet has put up billboards in Tel Aviv saying that "Only transfer will bring peace."
The idea of a removal of Arabs - voluntary or otherwise - is almost as old as Zionism itself, but today it is taking on fresh legitimacy with the collapse of the Oslo peace process and the demise of the implicit bargain of land and eventual Palestinian statehood for peace.
Elon says that under conditions of war, Israel has the right to bring upon the Palestinians "another nakba," or catastrophe, similar to 1948, when an estimated 700,000 of them were expelled or fled during the Arab-Israeli war....
http://www.csmonitor.com/2002/0206/p05s01-wome.html
The Moledet party's media blitz for the mass expulsion of Palestinians is gaining momentum.
By Ben Lynfield | Special to The Christian Science Monitor
JERUSALEM - Spurred on by public despair, Israeli advocates of a mass expulsion of Palestinians are gaining strength and legitimacy as the toll of Palestinian attacks inside Israel continues to rise.
Tourism Minister Benny Elon of the far-right Moledet party this week launched a campaign advocating "transfer," a euphemism for expulsion, which he says can also connote an agreed relocation of Palestinians.
In addition to Mr. Elon's push for transfer in a series of interviews on Israel's television channels and in major newspapers, Moledet has put up billboards in Tel Aviv saying that "Only transfer will bring peace."
The idea of a removal of Arabs - voluntary or otherwise - is almost as old as Zionism itself, but today it is taking on fresh legitimacy with the collapse of the Oslo peace process and the demise of the implicit bargain of land and eventual Palestinian statehood for peace.
Elon says that under conditions of war, Israel has the right to bring upon the Palestinians "another nakba," or catastrophe, similar to 1948, when an estimated 700,000 of them were expelled or fled during the Arab-Israeli war....
http://www.csmonitor.com/2002/0206/p05s01-wome.html
House Member
Posts: 3,063
March 30th, 2007, 04:16 PM
I wasn't aware under half was a majority.
Even if the number were true that is, if the Jerusalem post is right with their polls, then a vast majority of Palestinians want to commit genocide on the Israelis.
If the post is right (thus about both) I would actually see the Expulsion as pretty rational, if EVERYONE wants to murder children, maybe you should ask them to leave?
Of course, its far more likely the JP is just fear mongering to sell newspapers.
I wasn't aware under half was a majority.
Even if the number were true that is, if the Jerusalem post is right with their polls, then a vast majority of Palestinians want to commit genocide on the Israelis.
If the post is right (thus about both) I would actually see the Expulsion as pretty rational, if EVERYONE wants to murder children, maybe you should ask them to leave?
Of course, its far more likely the JP is just fear mongering to sell newspapers.
March 30th, 2007, 06:07 PM
And the clarity I requested was...
Quoting #juan
The question you failed to answer was...
A few questions Bear: Who has been the aggressor, and who has received the bulk of U.S. foreign aid since 1947? It sure as hell was not Palestine.
Quoting CDNBear
So there realy is no negotiation in your mind set is there, it is what the Arabs want and nothing less will do?
And the clarity I requested was...
Quote:
You seem to be suffering from some affliction that prevents you from answering questions or clarifying your position, strange illness you have.
But from your comment, but I may be wrong, please correct me if I am, I take it dissagreeing is not an option, it's all Arab or nothing.
Quoting earth_as_one
This effort has little chance of success. Israel will settle for nothing less than all of Palestine.
The debate in Israel is not about land for peace but transfer of the remaining non-Jews out of what used to be Palestine and is now Israel:
Most Israelis support the idea of transferring non-Jews out of Israel and the occupied territories:
The Israeli position is that Arab and Muslim nations should absorb the remaining non-Jews in Israel and the occupied territories.
So I doubt Israel will accept leaving non-Jews where they are and giving them their own country within what most Israelis consider to be Israel.
The debate in Israel is not about land for peace but transfer of the remaining non-Jews out of what used to be Palestine and is now Israel:
Most Israelis support the idea of transferring non-Jews out of Israel and the occupied territories:
The Israeli position is that Arab and Muslim nations should absorb the remaining non-Jews in Israel and the occupied territories.
So I doubt Israel will accept leaving non-Jews where they are and giving them their own country within what most Israelis consider to be Israel.
Quoting Zzarchov
Only when confirring with hardline Conservatives and Hard left supporters of Arab nazi's.
I wasn't aware under half was a majority.
Council Member
Posts: 1,496
March 30th, 2007, 07:54 PM
That sounded like a majority to me.
Here is another Israeli source which indicates most Israeli Jews would like to cleanse their country of non-Jews
Quoting Zzarchov
60% were inclined towards the transfer of Arabs from Israel proper.
I wasn't aware under half was a majority.
Even if the number were true that is, if the Jerusalem post is right with their polls, then a vast majority of Palestinians want to commit genocide on the Israelis.
If the post is right (thus about both) I would actually see the Expulsion as pretty rational, if EVERYONE wants to murder children, maybe you should ask them to leave?
Of course, its far more likely the JP is just fear mongering to sell newspapers.
Even if the number were true that is, if the Jerusalem post is right with their polls, then a vast majority of Palestinians want to commit genocide on the Israelis.
If the post is right (thus about both) I would actually see the Expulsion as pretty rational, if EVERYONE wants to murder children, maybe you should ask them to leave?
Of course, its far more likely the JP is just fear mongering to sell newspapers.
That sounded like a majority to me.
Here is another Israeli source which indicates most Israeli Jews would like to cleanse their country of non-Jews
Quote:
More Israeli Jews favor transfer of Palestinians, Israeli Arabs - poll finds
By Amnon Barzilai
Some 46 percent of Israel's Jewish citizens favor transferring Palestinians out of the territories, while 31 percent favor transferring Israeli Arabs out of the country, according to the Jaffee Center for Strategic Studies' annual national security public opinion poll.
In 1991, 38 percent of Israel's Jewish population was in favor of transferring the Palestinians out of the territories while 24 percent supported transferring Israeli Arabs.
When the question of transfer was posed in a more roundabout way, 60 percent of respondents said that they were in favor of encouraging Israeli Arabs to leave the country.
http://www.haaretz.co.il/hasen/pages...ubContrassID=0
By Amnon BarzilaiSome 46 percent of Israel's Jewish citizens favor transferring Palestinians out of the territories, while 31 percent favor transferring Israeli Arabs out of the country, according to the Jaffee Center for Strategic Studies' annual national security public opinion poll.In 1991, 38 percent of Israel's Jewish population was in favor of transferring the Palestinians out of the territories while 24 percent supported transferring Israeli Arabs.
When the question of transfer was posed in a more roundabout way, 60 percent of respondents said that they were in favor of encouraging Israeli Arabs to leave the country.
http://www.haaretz.co.il/hasen/pages...ubContrassID=0
March 31st, 2007, 05:39 AM
The First Nations begins a campaign of aggression against Non natives.
Firing rockets and such into residential Non native neighbourhoods, repetedly and consistantly killing noncombattants. They begin sending Natives with suicide vests into cafes and bistros killing innocents in the hundreds.
Then you can take a poll of the Non natives in that region, about what should be done with the Natives and then we'll see how the numbers turn out.
Quoting earth_as_one
Here's an idea earth... 60% were inclined towards the transfer of Arabs from Israel proper.
That sounded like a majority to me.
Here is another Israeli source which indicates most Israeli Jews would like to cleanse their country of non-Jews
That sounded like a majority to me.
Here is another Israeli source which indicates most Israeli Jews would like to cleanse their country of non-Jews
The First Nations begins a campaign of aggression against Non natives.
Firing rockets and such into residential Non native neighbourhoods, repetedly and consistantly killing noncombattants. They begin sending Natives with suicide vests into cafes and bistros killing innocents in the hundreds.
Then you can take a poll of the Non natives in that region, about what should be done with the Natives and then we'll see how the numbers turn out.
The Padre
Posts: 4,558
Location: Ontario
Location: Ontario
March 31st, 2007, 07:32 AM
Quoting CDNBear
Exactly. The Palestinian cause is not helped by wanton acts of murder upon innocent people. It is very difficult, I think, to get around their campaign of aggression to take them seriously as a people seeking a peaceful resolution to the issue of their proposed nation.
Here's an idea earth...
The First Nations begins a campaign of aggression against Non natives.
Firing rockets and such into residential Non native neighbourhoods, repetedly and consistantly killing noncombattants. They begin sending Natives with suicide vests into cafes and bistros killing innocents in the hundreds.
Then you can take a poll of the Non natives in that region, about what should be done with the Natives and then we'll see how the numbers turn out.
The First Nations begins a campaign of aggression against Non natives.
Firing rockets and such into residential Non native neighbourhoods, repetedly and consistantly killing noncombattants. They begin sending Natives with suicide vests into cafes and bistros killing innocents in the hundreds.
Then you can take a poll of the Non natives in that region, about what should be done with the Natives and then we'll see how the numbers turn out.
Time Out
Posts: 23
March 31st, 2007, 07:44 AM
Apart from the kids, the rest of them need a serious lesson. We in the west should let Israel off the leash.
The middle east would be a whole new ball game.
Isarel is well equiped to deal with these muzzie hords and are willing to take it to the hole. It's high time we let them. It's time to let the dogs off the proch. They got the sent of blood, let them at the kill.
I tell you what, if some ass backwards crowd of half backed religious slacked jaws pulled this **** in my backyard, I can garautee death and destruction would be swift and without remorse.
Quoting sanctus
That's some clear thinking there sanctus. You give them to much credit though. I can't even give them credit as people.
Exactly. The Palestinian cause is not helped by wanton acts of murder upon innocent people. It is very difficult, I think, to get around their campaign of aggression to take them seriously as a people seeking a peaceful resolution to the issue of their proposed nation.
Apart from the kids, the rest of them need a serious lesson. We in the west should let Israel off the leash.
The middle east would be a whole new ball game.
Isarel is well equiped to deal with these muzzie hords and are willing to take it to the hole. It's high time we let them. It's time to let the dogs off the proch. They got the sent of blood, let them at the kill.
I tell you what, if some ass backwards crowd of half backed religious slacked jaws pulled this **** in my backyard, I can garautee death and destruction would be swift and without remorse.
March 31st, 2007, 07:58 AM
Quoting sanctus
There's no convincing the highly enlightend left leaning types of this though Padre. So long as the Palestinians have them on their side, this won't end, they are just fodder for the cause.
Exactly. The Palestinian cause is not helped by wanton acts of murder upon innocent people. It is very difficult, I think, to get around their campaign of aggression to take them seriously as a people seeking a peaceful resolution to the issue of their proposed nation.
Quoting BlackOp_Sniper
A lil harsh there BlackOp, but you are on the same line of thought I am. The left stand and cry about how Isarel is so bad, while they sit on land they did the same thing to get and call their own.
That's some clear thinking there sanctus. You give them to much credit though. I can't even give them credit as people.
Apart from the kids, the rest of them need a serious lesson. We in the west should let Israel off the leash.
The middle east would be a whole new ball game.
Isarel is well equiped to deal with these muzzie hords and are willing to take it to the hole. It's high time we let them. It's time to let the dogs off the proch. They got the sent of blood, let them at the kill.
I tell you what, if some ass backwards crowd of half backed religious slacked jaws pulled this **** in my backyard, I can garautee death and destruction would be swift and without remorse.
Apart from the kids, the rest of them need a serious lesson. We in the west should let Israel off the leash.
The middle east would be a whole new ball game.
Isarel is well equiped to deal with these muzzie hords and are willing to take it to the hole. It's high time we let them. It's time to let the dogs off the proch. They got the sent of blood, let them at the kill.
I tell you what, if some ass backwards crowd of half backed religious slacked jaws pulled this **** in my backyard, I can garautee death and destruction would be swift and without remorse.
The Padre
Posts: 4,558
Location: Ontario
Location: Ontario
March 31st, 2007, 08:13 AM
But what is odd is how inconsistent they are. I am somewhat "left" in many of my political views, as you probably already know. I am an avowed pacifist, for example. My point being, most of the left claim to be pacifists as well. That being the case, how can they lend support to a group that regularly condones violence on its adversaries???
Quoting CDNBear
There's no convincing the highly enlightend left leaning types of this though Padre. So long as the Palestinians have them on their side, this won't end, they are just fodder for the cause.n.
But what is odd is how inconsistent they are. I am somewhat "left" in many of my political views, as you probably already know. I am an avowed pacifist, for example. My point being, most of the left claim to be pacifists as well. That being the case, how can they lend support to a group that regularly condones violence on its adversaries???
The Padre
Posts: 4,558
Location: Ontario
Location: Ontario
March 31st, 2007, 08:17 AM
Quoting BlackOp_Sniper
Well, they are a people. That is not my issue. My issue is their agenda and means of gaining attention. Let Israel off its leash? No, I'm sorry, acts of violence do not justify further acts of violence. Israel, frankly, is not terribly much better in that department. It's treatment of the Palestinians has been too high handed. Mind you, one wonders what would be an alternative for them considering the random acts of violence the PLO participates in? I know myself that, in the scenario Bear presented, I would not feel too kindly towards our own natives if they employed the same tactics on our city streets. Imagine sitting in an outside cafe in downtown Windsor and a Metis strapped to a bomb came in to blow the hell out of the place.....!
That's some clear thinking there sanctus. You give them to much credit though. I can't even give them credit as people..
