Palestinian Elections

[FeatherFall]

No. The Israelis started the war.

The establishment of a specifically Jewish state within the land of Palestine was a violation of the understanding that “nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine”. And it was contrary to fundamental principles of religious freedom and equal rights.

While Israel is officially a Jewish state, the government protects the rights of any individual, regardless of religion. I am curious as to why you think that they started “the war”. I am not all that sure I understand what war you are talking about. Is it the Israeli-Palestinian conflict? Or was it the Israeli action against the British occupation? Also, why do you believe the British had just authority in making the Balfour declaration in the first place?

Various Israeli terrorist groups operated against the British and the Arabs from the beginning of the conflict. So while many Palestinians today are as bad as you-all say they are, the Israelis are just as guilty in my opinion.

The links you gave have not convinced me that the organizations referenced are true “terrorist” organizations. Irgun’s stated goal was retaliatory in nature. Can you offer evidence that this was not the case?

From your link, regarding Lehi’s self proclaimed terrorism:

It is not directed against people, it is directed against representatives. Therefore it is effective.

Though I don’t like the Idea of Lehi dealing with Nazis, or the accusation that they were funded by extortion and bank robbing, the terrorism charges remain weak.

The only detailed descriptions of these two group’s (Lehi and Irgun) attacks were against the police, military and political leaders of Britain. They also sabotaged infrastructure. There are only short passages regarding bus bombs and the like. These passages lack enough context conclude that they were not necessary actions to achieve legitimate wartime objectives. I have no choice but to dismiss your recent opinion until you provide that context.

[StarBuck]

Also, why do you believe the British had just authority in making the Balfour declaration in the first place?

I don’t see where you are coming from. Are you saying the Balfour was not legit but the Revisionists had a “defensive” right to Palestine and Jordan anyway?

[FeatherFall]

I don’t see where you are coming from. Are you saying the Balfour was not legit but the Revisionists had a “defensive” right to Palestine and Jordan anyway?

Starbuck, I think I chose my words poorly. I didn’t make any claim regarding the legitimacy of the Balfour declaration. JRS used the following quote to support his claim that Isreal is the agressor in the conflict.

“nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine”.

It’s true any legitimate government needs to protect the rights of the non-Jewish. My point was that the Jews didn’t require any legitimization through British declaration, and that the JRS hadn’t offered a convincing argument to support his claim that the Zionist movement took action in conflict with the concept of rights.

[jrs]

The modern-day Israelis are just as guilty because of what they did 90 years ago?

I view the conflict as one long war with intermittent flare-ups. Each side justifies its acts of war or terrorism by claiming that they are just retaliating for acts by the other side. So to evaluate the situation today, it is necessary to go back to the beginning.

Israel has continuously engaged in collective punishment of the Palestinians (the non-Jewish population). You yourself have advocated “carpet bombing” them. Why are you so conscious of the violent acts of one side and not those of the other side?

Furthermore, the land that eventually became Israel already had a clear Jewish majority.

If this is true, it is irrelevant. A majority of Jews in Israel has no more right to establish a Jewish theocracy than the majority of Muslims in Iran have to establish a Muslim theocracy.

I also don’t see how forming Israel somehow violates the rights of Palestinians.

They were reduced to second-class citizens (if even that) in their own home-land with different identity cards and license plates. And many of them did lose their property holdings as individuals, families, and communities simply because of their ethnic or religious identity, not as punishment for any crime of which they had been convicted.

And don’t give me some bs about how they stole the land…there has never, in the history of mankind, been a nation called “Palestine”.

I am not an expert on history, so I cannot comment on whether the Philistines (= Palestinians) ever ruled that land. But it was being held by the British after World War I as “Palestine”, i.e. the British Mandate. Why were the Israelis not satisfied to live in that? Why were equal rights not enough?

Are you saying that today, in 2006, Israel does not have a right to exist?

No state should be founded on religious discrimination. Israel should give up its identity as a Jewish state and become a secular state.

Irgun’s stated goal was retaliatory in nature. Can you offer evidence that this was not the case?

Their avowed “goal” is not the point. The question is whether they attacked innocents.

After purchasing the tickets [at the Jerusalem Railway Station], Sima took a large cloth sign out of her handbag and placed it on top of the cases. On it, in three languages (Hebrew, English and Arabic), was written “Danger, mines” and the Irgun symbol. An Arab policeman who was standing nearby went over to Sima, gripped her by the dress and asked: “What’s this?” Sima hit him in the face and freed herself. One of the Irgun security men saw what had happened, aimed his sub-machinegun at the policeman and shot him.

…

When the police sapper tried to lift one of the suitcases, there was an explosion which destroyed the interior of the building and killed him.

Thus the Irgun confessed to terrorism.

[StarBuck]

Okay, so far I’ve heard that the Palestinians are just another lie to wipe out a theocratic Israel.

Please, if your going to talk about this get you noses out of Peters and Chomsky first.

[FeatherFall]

Starbuck, you don’t have the power of clairvoyance, so don’t guess at what other people are reading.

Israel has continuously engaged in collective punishment of the Palestinians (the non-Jewish population).

Jrs, please offer examples of this with an explanation that shows the Israeli action violated rights.

If this is true, it is irrelevant. A majority of Jews in Israel has no more right to establish a Jewish theocracy than the majority of Muslims in Iran have to establish a Muslim theocracy.

True.

[Palestinians] were reduced to second-class citizens (if even that) in their own home-land with different identity cards and license plates. And many of them did lose their property holdings as individuals, families, and communities simply because of their ethnic or religious identity, not as punishment for any crime of which they had been convicted.

Were Palestinians subject to different treatment because of their religious identity as such, or because their religious/ethnic identity was associated with a violent anti-Zionist movement?

No state should be founded on religious discrimination.

Also true, but do you realize that non-Jews can vote and be elected to public office in Israel? What rights does the Israeli government deny non-Jews that it acknowledges for Jews? It was my understanding that many Palestinians fled Jewish-controlled land because of propaganda spread by other Palestinians. Do you have examples of forced expulsion? I can think of a recent example of the forced expulsion of Jewish property owners. While Israel does have a state religion, you haven’t presented a powerful argument that it is a theocracy.

I am not an expert on history, so I cannot comment on whether the Philistines (= Palestinians) ever ruled that land. But it was being held by the British after World War I as “Palestine”, i.e. the British Mandate. Why were the Israelis not satisfied to live in that? Why were equal rights not enough?

The Brits denied the right to immigrate. I believe that the land was considered a part of Syria before British rule.

Israel should give up its identity as a Jewish state and become a secular state.

I agree.

Their avowed “goal” is not the point. The question is whether they attacked innocents.

Great. So let’s answer the question. You believe they did, so prove it.

Thus the Irgun confessed to terrorism.

The quote I presented leads me to believe that when Irgun used the word “terrorism” they were using it in a different context than we use it today.

It is proper for a country to use fear (read, terror) to defeat enemies during wartime, as well as deter enemies when not at war. The bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, while tactically good choices from an investment/destruction standpoint, were also great examples of terrorizing an enemy into submission.

When we use the word today, we are typically describing killing for killing’s sake. Even the quote you just presented does not offer enough context to conclude that Irgun was attempting this.

But killing for killing’s sake isn’t even what the Islamists are doing today. They have employed terror as a way to force others to submit to Sharia. It is simply a tactic they chose in a conflict, a conflict in which they happen to be the agressors.

[jrs]

Were Palestinians subject to different treatment because of their religious identity as such, or because their religious/ethnic identity was associated with a violent anti-Zionist movement?

The ethnic identity of white people is “associated with” the terrorist Ku Klux Klan. The ethnic identity of Hispanics (specifically Salvadorians) is “associated with” the extremely violent criminal gang “Mara Salvatrucha (MS-13)”. The religious/ethic identity of Jews is “associated with” the terrorist Jewish Defense League. And so on.

Guilt by association is an inappropriate reason to violate someone’s rights.

It was my understanding that many Palestinians fled Jewish-controlled land because of propaganda spread by other Palestinians.

Fleeing from war or natural disaster does not properly deprive one of one’s property rights or rights of movement or citizenship, even if one fled mistakenly. So why does not Israel allow them to return?

I believe that the land [Palestine] was considered a part of Syria before British rule.

The British took Palestine and Jordan (and perhaps other Arab lands) from the Ottoman Empire (Turkey) in World War I.