Is the green party starting to regret it's association with Islamists?

[mids2019]

The green party, ostensibly about climate protection and general progressive values seems to have gotten into bed with Islamist sympathisers and the amount of anti semitism and basic hatred of their own country is now obvious.

The green party now at least locally are known as a party that has sympathies towards all manner of Islamist causes including Hamas's objective to wipe Israel of the face of the Earth.

Wouldn't be surprised if they produce a motion declaring climate change a Jewish conspiracy........

What are the Arabic words used currently in Palestine then?
(In Roman letters if you can as I'm fairly good at guessing cognates but don't know Arabic writing).

"Muslim people do too of course but there already exist lots of Muslim majority countries." I've already stated I find that statement offensive as it implies all Muslims are simply the same. It is irrelevant how many Muslim countries there are as Palestinians are not Egyptians, Pakistanis, Iranians or Albanians. They are a people with their own identity so declaring they are the same as other Muslims is bigoted. If I have misinterpreted your comment I apologise but that is how I read it.

A two state solution as per the 1967 borders is dead, Israel has made sure of that. Not only has there not been a freeze on West bank settlements, they have accelerated. Development of the E1 plan is still going ahead and will no matter who wins the next election as every viable possible new government have all said an emphatic no to a two state solution. When Israel pulled out just 9000 Israelis from Gaza in 2005, the ensuing riots brought the country to a standstill. Can you imagine if somehow a government came into power and agreed to the UN resolution and tried to pull back 750,000 settlers back to the Green line, what would happen. It wouldn't be riots, it would be civil war. From that perspective, it is why I believe the only moral solution is the single state solution. Of course, the other solution is the genocide of the Palestinian people by ethnically cleansing them from the whole of Israel. If anyone has another solution, I'd love to hear it.

I'll give you an exact translation when you translate what Israelis regularly chant.

It's factual that there already exist lots of Muslim majority countries.

And I made no suggestion that Muslims are all the same so yes I think you should apologise for implying that I did.

Then I do apologise but did you understand my point.

@Squeezingwildoranges A two state solution as per the 1967 borders is dead, Israel has made sure of that.

For the time being yes, Hamas and the current Israel leadership have made sure of that. Ignoring one side of the equation makes your argument weaker not stronger because it's important to acknowledge fault on both sides.

The hope for the future is that Hamas could be dismantled and more moderate leaders in Israel take over. Even then, it will take a very long time for both sides to forgive the other side enough to start to build trust.

No I don't understand your point because I never said or implied that all Muslims are the same.

I know well that they are not, having worked with moderate Muslims in the past who were thoroughly decent people.

I thank you for your apology.

You told me 😂 I can only admire your self confidence. God God.

Yes I know it was paid by non Muslims - I mention Christians and Jews several times. I don’t have the insecure need to demonstrate my knowledge at every given point.

No facts to back up Jewish persecution https://jewishvirtuallibrary.org/the-treatment-of-jews-in-arab-islamic-countries this offer a very different view to yours.

Clearly, this source is from a different perspective. Obviously, you won’t agree with it. However, there are different views and opinions who have valid experiences. You dismiss anyone not agreeing with you as ignorant. I have a tendency to think if the Jewish Virtual Library is telling me the Jewish people were oppressed then I have to engage with that without dismissing it out of hand. You will I am sure dismiss it out of hand, it is clearly biased but based on well referenced primary sources. There is truth in it.

I am seeking balance and trying to dig for truth. You have decided what is right, there is no alternative and we all must bow down to your superior knowledge and correctness. This way of arguing turns people against you, you win no one over.

I think you missed my point. Even if Fatah got better leadership, Hamas were gone and by some miracle The Unified Front of Hadash, Ta'al, and Balad managed to become a government, there is no way Israel would be able to pull 750,000 settlers back to the Green line.

Yes I am sure. If not in current Israel area, then in the other countries in the region. Or are you saying there were no Jews in the Middle East before the formation of Israel?

That's not what you were asked.

@Squeezingwildoranges though its quite clear from your messages what your views are. I would go as far as say you are one of those people I mentioned earlier, or "Israel should not exist" type.

Thanks for that. I'll have a proper look at it later. Bit busy at the moment but just on a quick scan, the recounting of Joseph HaNagid is a bit one sided shall we say. There is a bit more to his fall from grace and murder which did result in the slaughter of thousands of Jews. It wasn't just because he was Jewish though.

@Twiglets1, do you agree with their comment about me being the Israel should not exist type?

I don’t know. Maybe you aren’t explaining yourself well enough.

You have been one of the few on MN to openly say you want a one state solution and for the one country to no longer be called Israel.

In that sense “Israel” would no longer exist as a state would it? And with the different birth rates, Jewish people would eventually become a minority in Israel.

It wasn’t ‘just’ because he was Jewish but his Judaism played a part - that’s the point. As a result of this many Jews decided they needed a state of their own = Zionism. A place where being Jewish was not relevant it was how you acted.
It is even more apparent today that Jews can not live safely anywhere in the Middle East and although Azerbaijan may be welcoming it’s a bit of a long way away. Therefore there is a need for a Jewish state = Zionism.

Actually I'm glad you mentioned that. I was thinking about it after I made a post earlier. I think it should stay Israel. If it were going to become a one state solution with freedom for all, as I said in that post earlier, it is the Israelis who are going to compromise when they don't really need to. I think that at the very least the Palestinians should accept the name, especially as it is mentioned in the Quran. They can still be recognized as Palestinian Israelis.

The issue isn't that there is a Jewish state, although I'm not sure you read my other posts where I'm a strict secularist who doesn't believe any countries should be defined by religion, but let's leave that. The issue is, there was already a population living in the land and had been for centuries. It is the dispossession and subsequent brutalisation of the indigenous Palestinians that is the issue, not a Jewish state.

And yet you only complain about one of them.

Once you see the antisemitism in the double standard, you cannot unsee it.

I don't live in Israel and haven't heard masses of British citizens who are non-Muslim non-Jewish chant anything other than "from the river to the sea".
Unless you mean portions of the Jewish scriptures that refer to Israel? Do you think the majority of the Israeli population think it means "us and nobody else should live in Israel"? If they do why are there large numbers of non-Jewish Israeli citizens?

You are the one who started out by asking me what the original translation was. I told you and then asked you to translate an Israeli chant. You ignored me and then asked me to translate the current version which I said I would do if you translate the Israeli version first. Still waiting.

Jesus, she's back with the same repetitive ridiculous mantra.

Except the reality is that the UN set up the Jewish state perfectly legally in 1948 and that if the neighbouring Arab countries had accepted that, instead of attacking the brand new state, there would most likely have been few to no forced displacements.

In fact the very worst case scenario would have been what happened when Pakistan (a purely religiously motivated act) was set up, namely a terrible period of displacements including murders and rapes - followed by the establishment of an uneasy status quo where neither state attacks the other’s citizens though there are occasional military skirmishes.

Or Turkey a couple of decades earlier which attacked and genocided perfectly inoffensive Greek and Armenian civilians in order to ensure a homogenous Muslim nation. Or Jordan etc etc.

The point being that this is not a unique event but that only Israel is deemed (by some) to have its very existence delegitimised by the violence around its inception. If that were a valid point, half the countries on the planet would be invalid.

When did the Deir Yassin massacre happen?

After the 1947 UN resolution for the existence of Israel and as part of the civil war that was happening at the time. It was an attempt by the Jewish forces to break the siege of Jerusalem by opening the road to Tel Aviv.

It’s a war crime because Deir Yassin itself was full of civilians, but it’s not evidence that the Israelis were going to commit ethnic cleansing in the absence of military attacks on them: the high ground around DY had been used to launch attacks on convoys so there was a clear military strategy in taking control of DY. Unlike, say, Oct 7th which was purely a terror attack on civilians with no achievable military goal.

Yes - people were also displaced all over Europe after the world wars - boundaries were redrawn etc. And no one disputes the legitimacy of those countries - Turkey, Pakistan, Jordan etc