Comment & Analysis
Why The Two-State ‘Solution’ Is A Farce & Not, A Solution
The two-state ‘solution’ is a farce and the ‘peace process’ an Israeli concept.
If you’ve ever had a discussion with a liberal, and by liberal I mean the Robert Frost definition of liberal, someone who is too broadminded to take his own side in a quarrel, or the Theodore White definition, someone who believes that water can be made to run uphill. And the conservative as someone who believes everybody should pay for the water. I well am neither, I believe water should be free, and that water flows downhill – and in fact bottled water and insurance is the biggest shams to date (however I won’t be getting into that today).
First of all the ‘peace process’ is an Israeli concept. It is an Israeli ideology based on Zionist supremacy of ‘we will have peace in return that you be quiet and live under our rule, our policies and our boots and agree to our demands – which includes your inevitable exile’. That essentially is what the peace process stands for, and I’m certain there is nothing anyone could produce, including a Knesset member to prove otherwise. And to talk about a genuine peace process, the one understood to be settling the ‘conflict‘ as a liberal would describe, is like kicking a dead horse rather than acknowledging that its dead. And that its not a horse, it’s a unicorn. Doesn’t exist.
Today, the number of Israelis and Palestinians living between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea is approximately about 5 million each. But most demographers agree that in less than a decade, Palestinians will greatly outnumber Israelis. That means that Israel will no longer be a Jewish majority state (unless some demographic miracle happens, like say a massacre). This is quite frightening for the state of Israel who already implements extreme ‘security measures’ which come in the form of 500 watchtowers, 100 fixed checkpoints, 130 settlements (with several more settlement plans being approved every few months), 500,000 aggressive settlers, night raids, violent repression of Friday protests, Gaza’s F-16 war planes and drones, denial of medical access, administrative detentions, demolition notices, bulldozers at 6am, high velocity tear gas, skunk water, and it goes on.
The peace process – the two-state solution, is farce because, yes Israel doesn’t want two states. Israel has never in the course of history supported two states. When the current Likud party in power happens to be founded by the terrorist Menachem Begin in 1973 who was part of the Irgun terrorist group responsible for the King David Hotel bombing (of British Forces) as well as Dier Yassin Massacre, and miraculously becomes prime minister and then awarded the noble peace prize jointly with Anwar Sadat, there was never the intention of a two-state solution. Israel was founded based on one principle and one principle only. An established homeland for the Jews. And to this day, they still dream of the ‘Great Land of (all) Israel’. They believe they made the ‘desert bloom’, because Palestine was ‘a land without a people, for people without a land’. There is no West Bank, it is ‘Judea and Samaria’. There are no ‘Palestinians’, they are only Arabs and Arabs have 23 states.
Now when a country emerges and builds upon the history of another history written by peoples of different creed and colour in harmony, and declares it sacred for themselves, when a country emerges based on the ideology that they are superior to every other human being based not on a race, but scriptural belief, when a country establishes its existence on stolen geography, stolen history and undrying blood, the word peace is as invalid as US being in Afghanistan for a feminist cause. It is just beyond absurd.
Once we understand that Israel has never been a supporter of co-existing and sharing what they had came to claim for themselves and themselves only, it becomes clear as day that obviously the Palestinians do not want a two state solution. The Palestinians do not want a two state solution, just as you wouldn’t if you had your home ransacked by a foreign group, settling in your fields, in your houses, treated you like a 4th class citizen, shot your mother and cut her stomach open to kill your unborn sister leaving her skirt hoisted by her waist, dragged your father by the head to execute him with your brother against a wall, shot your grandmother in the chest, made you beg for your life, forced you to escape into a neighbouring land after half of your population was exiled and killed, and now you remain ousted for the remaining of your existence, because they have forbidden your return, whilst your people still inhabiting parts of the land undergo daily humiliation and degradation, imprisoning the men, beating the women, kidnapping the children, bombing sleeping families, uprooting your trees, building their homes, erasing your history, rebuilding your geography, swallowing your culture. You too, would not want two states. You would want it all – back.
Of course, whenever I engage in a discussion with a liberal of some kind, or someone who isn’t entirely informed on the issue but is an apologist, but do happen to accept the points made above they ask, “well realistically, the only solution is to have two states. You can’t drive the Jews into the sea or push the Arabs off the land, so it wouldn’t it make sense to have two states?”
The answer is yes, it would make sense.
It would make sense to have two states (if we’re talking about realistic terms), no settlements, no checkpoints, no military presence in Palestine, the right of return for Palestinians in exile, a formal apology by the state (just for the sake of it), Israel’s apartheid laws abolished, the physical and economic siege on Gaza lifted, the apartheid wall and settlements demolished, freeing of all prisoners, giving back land to uphold the UN partition, basically the terminating the concept of Zionism. But how is that possible when the entire existence of Israel is solely based on Zionism? To expect a Palestinian-Israeli confederation wherein the two peoples share joint political and economic institutions while maintaining a sense of semi-autonomy and preserving their cultural and religious distinctions based on the peace process, on Israeli terms, is far-fetched. The two state solution becomes a floating paradox. It is here where the dead horse or unicorn, becomes a cloud of dust.
However I must insert here, Palestine isn’t based on the 1947 partition plan issued by the UN (they were useless even then). Palestine is Haifa, Palestine is Yaffa, Palestine is Jerusalem. So I will want it all back. And if you were Hanifa al-Najjar that lost her husband after a settler that cracked open his skull, and an Israeli soldier paralysed her 5 year old daughter, and indefinitely imprisoned her brother, I believe you would too.
Tagged Arab-Israeli Conflict, Israel, Palestine, Peace Process, Selin Kavlak, Two-state Solution
26 Comments
Leave a reply
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
LisaJanuary 18, 2012 at 11:36 pm
Acknowledging that it makes sense, yet you do not acknowledge that it is a solution? Seems illogical.
It must be acknowledged that there will be large numbers of either population that will not accept a jointly ruled state, nor a sole state for one or t'other. Unless you propose anarchy, I believe that just leaves the notion of two states, for two people. Unless we just wait it out. You quoted that the Palestinian population is growing (and, did you know that according to the World Bank, Gazan residents have a higher life expectancy than Glaswegians?) but so too is the Haredi population. In my opinion, this will only confound matters because it is elements of the Orthodox (Haredi) community that are adversely affecting policies (e.g. settlers, and racist/sexist elements in Israel)
There are many comments I disagree with, but I would mostly like to ask that sources be provided before making claims if anyone is to consider them seriously.
MattJanuary 18, 2012 at 11:38 pm
All Israelis and all Palestinians oppose a two-state solution? Fascinating. I imagine all the people who compiled the polls showing the precise opposite of that are feeling pretty sheepish right now.
SelinJanuary 19, 2012 at 12:19 am
@Lisa. Two state solution only makes sense without what is outlined at the end of the article. But Israel does not want a free state residing next to it. Especially if that state is the state you took over half of and building your own empire on. You kind of prove the liberal, apologist remarks mentioned here. Racist elements? Israel is an apartheid state. The elements are its security measures. For sources you may go on to BT'Selem. An Israeli Human Rights Org operating in Occupied Palestine.
@Matt. Oh because polls are the most accurate tools to measure public opinion right. Especially the Palestinians opinion when 2/3's of them are scattered across the world in exile. They especially are not acknowledged.
LisaJanuary 19, 2012 at 12:53 am
As you are the one quoting figures, I believe it's your responsibility to provide evidence before you list off a bunch of numbers. That also goes for the horror stories.
Israel is, unfortunately, not united. Neither are the Palestinian people. So what they 'want' is arbitrary.
MattJanuary 19, 2012 at 1:01 am
Right, opinion polls are useful in measuring public opinion. Take this poll (http://www.pcpo.ps/polls/poll176.htm) which shows Palestinians have a wide range of opinions on every single matter put to them – just like, you know, everyone does.
Yes, true, polls are imperfect. But I would certainly take polling data far more seriously than your questionable claim that all Palestinians hold your opinion.
Peter LainJanuary 19, 2012 at 10:18 am
Hamas doesn't want a free state, they want to exterminate the Jews and if they have their own state their attacks will lead to total war and them being wiped out.
Then the cycle would start again.
I'd like to see the Palestinians without funding and manipulation from the Arab league, like the Lebanese Palestinians, approach Israel for a state and peaceful solution.
Tasbiah AkhtarJanuary 19, 2012 at 10:26 pm
You are quite passionate about your opinion on the matter, and you seem to speak for both Israelis and Palestinians. You have very little evidence to back up your claims about Israel's resistance two a two-state solution, and neglect the claims made by Hamas of wanting to wipe out the Jews and claim all of Israel. You criticise liberals and conservatives, and then torture the idea of a two-state solution with little consideration for that fact that it is the only solution to avoid a full blown war. So what do you think is the correct solution? You fail to reconcile anything in this article.
Ruby DurantJanuary 21, 2012 at 9:34 am
Your second paragraph seems to be a bizarre combination of demographic issues facing Israel, then followed by a description of Israel’s extreme security measures and repressive apparatus in the Occupied Territories. This is wholly non sequitur; checkpoints don’t stop people having babies, I don’t see what you’re getting at. It strikes me that you couldn’t go a paragraph without finding a reason to bash Israel and had to put it in somewhere.
‘Today, the number of Israelis and Palestinians living between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea is approximately about 5 million each. But most demographers agree that in less than a decade, Palestinians will greatly outnumber Israelis. That means that Israel will no longer be a Jewish majority state’
No it doesn’t- this means that there will be more Palestinians in the Gaza Strip and West Bank than Israelis, which is currently the case anyway. The West Bank and Gaza are not part of Israel; they were never annexed by Israel nor is the occupation recognised as legal. In Israeli politics the only people who regard the West Bank and Gaza as an inalienable part of Israel, that could never be given up, is the far-right settler lobby. You’re not a settler, are you?
‘Israel has never in the course of history supported two states’.
Google ‘The Peel Commission’ or ‘Resolution 181’; I think you’ll find you’re just plain wrong…….
‘And to this day, they still dream of the ‘Great Land of (all) Israel’. They believe they made the ‘desert bloom’, because Palestine was ‘a land without a people, for people without a land’. There is no West Bank, it is ‘Judea and Samaria’. There are no ‘Palestinians’, they are only Arabs and Arabs have 23 states’.
This is 1st year undergraduate stuff. Who are ‘they’? All Israelis? Every single Israeli Prime Minister? Do you really think that Israeli government policy has remained constant for the last 70 years? How can you possibly believe that a PR democratic system, with scores of parties coming and going, in every Knesset, has the same, monolithic ideology?
‘The Palestinians do not want a two state solution’.
This is what really annoys me the most. You spent the majority of this paragraph building a collection of eccentric and bizarre analogies but are unable to quantify any claims, notably this one. You also spend most of the article claiming that Israel doesn’t want a two state solution, but again, beyond a soapbox rant, you don’t give any facts at all to prove this. You should write for Socialist Worker.
‘And if you were Hanifa al-Najjar that lost her husband after a settler that cracked open his skull, and an Israeli soldier paralysed her 5 year old daughter, and indefinitely imprisoned her brother, I believe you would too’.
When you neglect to put in facts in favour of anecdotes, you know there’s a problem with your argument.
AnonymousJanuary 22, 2012 at 2:07 pm
The fact of the matter is that Israel isn't even a State and therefore, should not be recognised as one.
The fact that Israel has as some commenters have stated doesn't really mean they REALLY wanted it though does it – I'm going to be sceptical and say that such things were all for show…that Palestine is the terrorist State and not them!!!
Anyways, great article Selin; keep up the good work – fighting for a peoples that generally have no voice unfortunately.
AnonymousJanuary 22, 2012 at 2:08 pm
***have "attempted" to bring about some sort of peaceful agreement
theriskyshift.comJanuary 22, 2012 at 9:27 pm
@Anonymous
Israel most definitely is a state. Whether or not you wish to recognise it as such is your choice.
AnonymousJanuary 22, 2012 at 10:01 pm
Well I choose not to for the simple factor that is that the powers that be "Israel" fail to recognise the Palestinians as Palestinians – and what is worse a people!!!
Not criticising your want (or anyone else's for that matter) to recognise Israel as a State, however.
As for Lisa and her referance to the 'horror stories' and lack of 'evidence' I believe that the author has provided the source of her information, so it is wrong to otherwise state!
Also many of these 'horror stories' are in fact a reality for the Palestinians – many of which will remain unreported – and if people wish to remian ignorant of such happenings then that is unfortunate.
Ruby DurantJanuary 23, 2012 at 7:48 am
Horror stories are no substitute for facts, they're what people put in arguments if they don't have facts to quantify their extreme opinions. Which is the case with this anecdote-ridden article. Anyone can find a horrible anecdote to quantify their opinion, especially in a bloody, long-term ethno-religious conflict like Israel-Palestine. Facts are a different matter……
AnonymousJanuary 23, 2012 at 8:18 pm
@Ruby – What "extreme opinions" are these?
Also I fail to understand how these are anecdotes, as these are undoubtedly real-life happenings; and therefore, quantify as facts!
Unfortunately, such incidents occur on such a large scale. As a result, the difficulties of pinpointing such "horror stories" which the author has included within their arguement(s), is understandable!
Israel may be a recognised State on paper or by the 'superpower' that is America – but I am of the belief that such a State is not so in that many of Israel's laws are flawed as a result of their uncodified constitution. Therefore, the non-Palestianian people of Palestine get away with a lot of morally abhorrent and what can only be described as atrocious actions that they commit towards the indegenous peoples of Palestine.
Furthermore, I do not see the point of critising the author for the supposed lack of factual basis with regards to the information included within the article – firstly, for the fact that this is no university essay which requires footnotes accompanied with on the ball citations, nor a bibliography. Secondly, it seems that in pointing such a thing out, you are trying to lessen the seriousness of such actions taken by 'Israel' against the Palestinians – like the 'collateral damage' that is the millions upon millions of deceased Afghanistani and Iraqi people – the truth hurts as some may say; sometimes remaining ignorant is the best option for such people!
Finally, I wish to say to the author of this article that your beliefs regarding this "bloody, long-term ethno-religious conflict" between 'Israel' and Palestine, are really humbling to see – and although (obviously) I do not know much about yourself or your involvement in the situation – Inshallah that whatever you and your friends/collegues wish to achieve regarding it will occur; basically keep up the good work :)!!!!!!!
Oh and sorry if I offended anyone in this post; these opinions are mine and mine alone, and recognise the fact that everyone is entitled to their own opinions!!!!!
The Pink PantherJanuary 23, 2012 at 9:19 pm
I don't want to interrupt your flow Ruby so just a small interjection.
1) Anecdotes are stories about things that have happened, thus the author most definitely used them. They are not facts.
2) Israel is recognised as a state by the vast majority of the world, including bodies such as the United Nations, European Union etc. therefore she is most definitely a state.
3) Great Britain has an unwritten constitution, are you actually trying to say that means it is not a state?
4) I have issues with anyone that uses the term "indigenous peoples" except for when describing a race that lived on an island before being 'found'. I do not think you can label Palestinians as the indigenous people of Palestine, similarly I don't think you can label Jews as such.
5) The author doesn't need to provide facts in her article, but you would have thought that after coming under such a barrage of criticism she would at least put up some form of factual, coherent, logical defence. Clearly she is not confident (and I wouldn't be if I were her) that her argument will stand up under scrutiny.
6)You have proven your complete and utter ignorance by suggesting that Israeli action against Palestinians has caused "millions upon millions" of Afghani and Iraqi deaths. Are you completely mad?
7) You are indeed entitled to your own opinion, however stupid and inept you are. Such is life in a democratic state. Don't you just love it.
AnonymousJanuary 24, 2012 at 8:31 pm
@The Pink Panther
1) I am not Ruby
2) I know what anecdotes are – however, thanks for the information. You may read what I said previously with more care!
3) I choose not to do so. Israel does not follow the United Nations Charter; this evident through their many horrific and downright appalling actions against the Palestinians. Also Israel isn't a part of the European Union so I hardly believe it is recognised by it – apart from Israel being allowed to participate in the Eurovision Song Contest.
4) State the obvious – I think everyone knows that the UK also has an uncodified constitution!!! You may read what I have said in my previous post, where you will find that I have not said that "Oh Israel cannot be a State because it has an uncodified constitution"!!!!!! The point I was wishing to make in that respect is that it is not as devleoped – evident through the lack of accountability for those who actually commit such disgusting actions against the Palestinians. This is not the case for the United Kingdom where it makes use of a common law system whereby Parliament and the executive do not hold sole law making powers; as is the fact the Britain makes use of the seperation of powers doctrine as well as adhering to the rule of law doctrine (although this is agruable regarding the manner Tony Blair responded to the events of 9/11).
5) In the matter you having "issues" with the use of the term "indigenous peoples", I believe I was right to do so because it was Arabs who lived around that area before being "founded" as Palestine!!!
6) The author actually did state her source in one of the previous comments – it's up to the commenter(s) who have such a problem to look more into it. Also as I have stated previously such incidents occur on such a large scale; making it difficult to pinpoint each case – so may not live up to many of your idea on what makes a 'perfect fact'!!! Additionally, it may just be the fact that the author does not wish to justify the examples given in her article to those who are evidently ignorant of the facts – nothing to do with lack of confidence!
7) With regards to your sixth point; once again, you should re-read what I have previously posted!!!!! (This point of yours actually made me laugh – I was merely comparing and contrasting the manner of which people view the innocent victims of such actions, whether it be the way in which the non-Palestinian people of Palestine treat the Palestinians or the way the Americans and British treat the Afghainstanis and Iraqis)
8)Your seventh point is just too funny considering the fact that you seem to have mis-read a whole lot of what I have previously posted – therefore, outlining how you are the "stupid and inept" one, no?! But of course I'm not going to trash you on the internet like some next keyboard warrior :)!!!!!
The Pink PantherJanuary 24, 2012 at 11:30 pm
1) I didn't say you were. I was rudely interrupting Ruby from putting you in your place and I wished to make her aware that she should continue to do so.
2) Your previous post stated 'I fail to understand how these are anecdotes' – the author most definitely used anecdotes thus it is apparent that you do not know what an anecdote is. The advice was free, I'll charge next time.
3) You do not have to be part of the European Union to be recognised by it as a state. Do you think that the E.U. doesn't recognise America? Or Russia? Or Australia? Many countries fail to abide by the UN charter, does that mean they are not states?
4) With you, my friend, nothing is obvious. I would not dream of mistakenly affording you sensibility so you shall have to excuse me if I say something that you happen to know. After re-reading your first response it appears that I did misread you – I do apologise. You did not claim that Israel is not a state because of her unwritten constitution, you claimed that her unwritten constitution has resulted in flawed laws. I'm struggling to get my head around that one.
5) Are you a complete nincompoop? Arabs are from Saudi Arabia. They left the Arabian peninsula around the time Mohammed died which was in 632 (if my memory serves me) – Israelites had been in Palestine a good few centuries before. Who was there first? Not the Arabs that's for damn sure. As I said before, the word indigenous is messy.
6) The author gave one source. Hardly convincing. Every fact is a perfect fact, for every fact must be fact for it to be fact, thus, objectively, it is a perfect fact. It is the author I would imagine who has limited knowledge of such facts, preferring to partake in nonsensical sensationalist rhetoric for the purpose of feeling rather more important than she is, in much the same way that I am using the English language to make myself feel rather more important than I am.
7) Once again it appears I have outdone myself and misread once more, and once more I apologise.
8) If by misreading something I am stupid and inept then I'm sure I hold esteemed company. Your ineptness, however, is apparent from your catastrophic failure to comprehend the remotest insignificance of a topic you revel in discussing. Personally I prefer to be half blind.
Oh and just so I don't feel bad about this, you are over 18 aren't you? I don't want to get in trouble for cyber-bullying.
MattJanuary 25, 2012 at 12:01 am
I'm disappointed Selin hasn't returned to address the many points people have raised about her article. She'd certainly have an enthusiastic audience.
Miss Anonymous, I'm intrigued by your contention that Israel is not a state because you do not recognise it. Could you please stop recognising crime, poverty and war to stop them existing too?
LudoJanuary 25, 2012 at 12:56 am
This is brilliant… *ahem*
AnonymousJanuary 25, 2012 at 2:18 pm
@The Pink Panther
1) You hardly made that one clear, causing myself quite a shock as she seems to share similar views to yourself!
2) These "anecdotes" you talk about are not actually so, for the simple fact that the incidents which the author has included within her article most definitely come from witnesses of such atrocities, even the victims of whom have suffered against "Israel"!!!!!! So seriously how can they NOT be deemed as facts?! If you were to go to Palestine you would witness for yourself (undoubtedly) that what was previously decribed as "horror stories" actually are (rather unfortunately) a common occurrence – Unfortunately I haven't been to the beautiful country that is Palestine!!!! However, God willing I shall be able to go over there and do my bit. Thank you very much for your 'kindness' Pink Panther; I am humbled :) (although I must admit your information [not advice] wasn't all that helpful, I was just trying to be polite)!!!
3) It's not a part of the European Union so has no links to it – whether or not it recognises Israel as a State is a different matter – of course all of the countries within the EU would recognise it as a State as they are the ones who do absolutely NOTHING (in the face of things) regarding the abuse that Israel hands onto the Palestinians on a day-to-day basis!!! Well what a State Israel is then were it cannot even allow the Palestinians basic rights set under the United Nations Charter!!! – Basically from the off you have tried to justify the fact that Israel IS a State like I myself do not know of this myself! Whenever and whereever I have stated that Israel IS NOT a State I say so as a matter of my own opinion not whether or not it IS actually recognised as a State, so really you have went off topic on that one.
4) Do some research on that yourself if you must! Israel's uncodified constitution has resulted in a flawed legal system as not all laws of the so called "State" are together and therefore, it seems that everything and anything goes. As a result, the "Israelis" legal system IS flawed due to the simple fact that not many people know what is and what isn't legal, regarding the actions of "Israel" outside of "Israel" or the actions of "Israel" against Palestine!!!! To me such a manner of law making and law keeping cannot be viewed as a legit legal system. This is unlike that of the American legal system where its courts have to adhere to the codified constitution; which was constructed in 1787 after gaining its independence from Britain after the American War of Independence 1775-83, as well as having to adhere to the 1791 Bill of Rights; protecting the fundamental freedoms and rights of the newly formed State's citizens from an arbitrary government. Israel on the other hand just creates new laws as it suits them with no apparent regulations (it can be said that the UK also do this; however, unlike Israel, Britain does have a means of regulating the laws created or wishing to be created). Also the fact that Israel enacts what can only be described as extremely perverse laws also shows how it lacking a codified constitution has led to its flawed legal system; a perfect example of which would be that when a Palestinian exercises their basic right to add an extension to thier house, the "Israelis" produce some scrap of paper stating that such a move is illegal and that they have to allow Jewish settlers to live in the extended part of the PALESTINAIN'S home; otherwise THEY are breaking the "law" – good joke (really it is extremely outrageous and essentially would be deemed an ILLEGAL act in any other unflawed legal system)!!!!!!!!!
AnonymousJanuary 25, 2012 at 2:19 pm
5) Arabs are the majority of people who reside in the Middle East, not just Saudi Arabia!!!! Admittingly you could say that, however, as Judaism is the oldest monolithic religion, then coming Christianity and lastly, Islam, it can be argued that of course such people were there beforehand because that was the only major religion present. In the case of now, however, just because the Israelites happened to be in the land of Palestine billions of years ago, doesn't in my view, make the Palestinians less indigenous to Palestine than the Israelis, who only got given the land (land which was NOT in the possession of the giver to actually give away!!!!) as a result of feeling bad about the atrocities committed against many millions of German Jews and others with Hitler in power!!!! This does in no way justify the creation of "Israel"; it would be completly idiotic to believe so otherwise!!!!!!!
6) Your flowery language will get you nowhere (a lesson which your English teacher must have taught you?!!!!); you just sound like an over-pompus idiot sadly. That one source is actually a recognised organistion who tells it as it is in Palestine – so how is it not convincing?! To satisfy yourself, you only really need to do a little bit of research on the internet to discover that what the author has written is not in fact "nonsensical sensationalist rhetoric for the purpose of feeling rather more important than she is" – but is simply highlighting the events which are constantly ocurring (as I have countlessly mentioned before).
7) Indeed.
8) I fail to comprehend how what I am discussing is an insignificant topic, therefore, making me "inept". What I began stating was of my own opinion on the matter – one where I have clearly set out from the beginning that I am not of the belief that Israel is in fact a State (be it recognised or not; such is my own opinion and my own opinion alone!) – how can it be a State if it got such "recognition" as one through a shocking use of force and thievery?!!!! I personally find it a morally abhorrent "State"!!! Also the fact that everyone else who commented on this article have stated that the author has not made use of "facts" (when evidently she has) shows to me that such are those people who wish to justify "Israel's" horrendous and dispicable actions against the Palestinians, under the safety of the misleading belief that Israel is the peaceful, democratic "State", whereas, Palestine is just full of terrorists that need to be exterminated before they do any more damage than they 'already have done'!!!!
9) A victim of cyber-bullying can be of any age you know?!!!!! So really if you're so worried about that then watch what you type. Also I believe I should be the one saying don't feel bad about what I am saying, since you seem to really hate the idea that not everyone is in love with the idea of "Israel" and are therefore, willing to happily remain ignorant of the FACTS!!!!! However, you have no reason to feel bad as I am a 47 year old house-husband with 29 kids :)!!!!
@Matt
That would be absolutely awesome wouldn't it?!!! However, such a thing is extremely far-fetched and in all seriousness such things are not related so the point you were trying to make is lost on me!!! That was my own opinion and I did not state is as fact, and it is not my problem that you were totally and utterly offended by it that you had to state such a thing!!!
I do not recognise "Israel" as a State because of the simple fact that it only became a "State" by force and thievery; as mentioned above, just to satisfy American and British guilt at what happened in Nazi Germany – which I find sickening!!!!!
MattJanuary 25, 2012 at 4:21 pm
Anonymous (might you choose a more interesting name?),
I think the Panther is, in part, frustrated at having to argue that the world is flat.
For instance, you say above: "It's not a part of the European Union so has no links to it – whether or not it recognises Israel as a State is a different matter"
Earlier, you saidL "Israel isn't a part of the European Union so I hardly believe it is recognised by it"
It is utterly beyond dispute that Israel has ties with and is recognised by the EU – and somehow you dispute it.
Please know that I am just offended by your questionable approach to facts and reason. I think we all understand that you choose not to recognise Israel's legitimacy, but it is a leap to therefore say that the state and its inhabitants do not exist. My intent was to show that, while we may not like certain things (for you, it's Israel; I chose poverty, crime and war, and I'm sure you'd agree on those being bad things), they exist nonetheless – and arguing that they don't is just a bit special.
AnonymousJanuary 25, 2012 at 7:59 pm
@Matt
Hahaha – I find that it is interesting enough as it is thank you very much! Or just to infuriate many of the people here I could have had my "name" as 'Israel = Is-NOT-rael" :)as people here get so offended with regards to my opinions.
To be completly honest with you I couldn't careless whether or not "Israel" is recognised by the European Union!!! That was a point raised by The Pink Panther in the belief (I reckon) that I actually thought that "Israel" doesn't exist at all to anyone – when in fact I was just "voicing" my opinion!
Of course the people exist, if the people didn't exist there would be no need for this article to be written and therefore, no reason for this discussion to exist!!!! Me not wishing to recognise "Israel's legitimacy" is the same thing as stating that the State itself does not exist – so ultimately I don't get that arguement that you are putting across.
As I have stated countless times previously, when I say that I (keyword) do not wish to recognise Israel as a State, is MY opinion; agree or disagree with it as you desire.
MattJanuary 25, 2012 at 10:22 pm
Anonymous:
"Me not wishing to recognise "Israel's legitimacy" is the same thing as stating that the State itself does not exist…"
That could not be further from how that works. I suggest you look up what 'exist' means – I think you'll find that your opinion and feelings have literally no bearing on whether something exists or not.
I don't think anyone is offended by your opinions so much as your reasoning. Constantly referring to the fact that the words you have used constitute your opinion is a bit like pointing out that water is wet.
AnonymousJanuary 27, 2012 at 10:08 pm
There have been many refugee populations in the world during the last century, all of them unfortunate and all of them with a tale to tell. including over 1 million volksdeutch forced to leave Polish territories after the II WW;Shia Muslims expelled by Saddam Hussein from Iraq, Kurds; Armenians, Greeks and Turks from their respective lands and about 500,000 Jews expelled/refugees from Arab lands and Iran. Most of these people and their descendants have made new lives for themselves are no longer refugees. Why are the majority of Palestinians the exception? Some self examination maybe in order.
theriskyshift.comFebruary 4, 2012 at 7:37 am
Posts have been deleted due to bad manners. Any further posts will suffer the same consequences – if it isn't constructive, don't post it.