Part 6: Israeli-Palestinian conflict

[AndHarry]

Sorry, lost the end of the thread there!

Thread 5

Sergeant, nice try! We haven't heard for a while about the israeli 'withdrawal' from gaza or that it's all the Palestinians' fault for having a rubbish government.

But, really, free Israeli press? (Reporters without Borders puts Israel 96th out of 180 in freedom of information rankings - UK 33rd, US 46th, East Timor 77th, Liberia 89th, but it'll surely plummet post protective edge, in the same way it slid down 20 places after cast lead.) Free access to all holy sites??? No policy of enlarging territory?????

I'm torn between thinking that i should stop wasting my energy on responding to this nonsense, but then I remember that actually everyone who can see through it is responsible for countering it: if we don't speak up, we're complicit. And god knows, there are enough people who will believe black is white if you just tell them it is enough times. Can you credit the level of ignorance (2004, admittedly) where a sizeable proportion of the UK thought (thanks to media bias) that Israel was 'occupied' by the 'terrorist' Palestinians? So, will (have to) keep up the rebuttals.

QnBoudi - I sincerely feel the same as you, but about the arguments put by the other side. I feel that I am finding factual rebuttals for blatant nonsense. The words 'black is white' have run through my head many times in reading this thread. I looked up Reporters without Borders, which you referenced, and it put Palestine way down the chart at 138: rsf.org/index2014/en-index2014.php ... why didn't you mention that? And it should make you cautious if that is the source for some of views.

Erm... Saddam was nice to his loyalists too.. He probably loved his wife and kids an all.. But that doesnt change the fact he was a monster that killed innocent women and children.

Same for assad.. Stalin gaddafi hitler... You miss the point entirely.. And i suspect its pretty deliberate.

If theres one israeli you should read.. Its gideon levy.

Sergeant you're right that I didn't mention that Palestine was way below Israel in the list. It just clearly isn't relevant to how free Israels press is. You don't offer any other comment on the substantive point though. Hmm.

Btw I found your response a bit 'gloaty' (oh, goody, another measure where Palestine falls below the mighty Israel). Does the fact that Palestinian journalists are not able to operate freely justify killing 13 of them, I wonder? (Stats from International Federation of Journalists)

As an aside, I note you again attempt to deflect attention. Firstly, there was no need to flip from defending the Israeli press to attacking Palestine's. (Quite frankly, given the circumstances in which they work, i think it's probably more of a surprise that they managed to get as high as 137!). Secondly, im more than happy for you to question my use of sources, but would prefer it if you could stick to facts rather than casting insidious aspersions.

Sadaam wasn't nice but he did tolerate other religions such as the christians in Mosul who have now been targeted by Isis, I don't know what he had against the Kurds tbh.

I agree with Sergeant, it is complex and not clear cut.

On the idea that "black is white" how do pro-Israelis answer my earlier point:

"If there was a state and a people that did exactly the same to people (stole their homes and land, and ethnically cleansed them away) simply because they were non-Jews, and to declare that the Jews had the right to take over the homes and land, then you could reasonably describe that state, and its people, and its policy, as racist, or perhaps as fascist. The state which is doing that is Israel.

Is there a way in which you can say it is not a racist, or fascist, policy?"

it appears not pigletJ unless you resort to ahh but we're specially deserving or they're especially foul and deserving of murder and brutality.

PigletJohn - just to humour you, India was partitioned in the 40's. Do those who fled have the right to return? Is Pakistan a racist state? How about the Silesian Germans? And the Jews who fled Arab states in the 40's and 50's? I think it's also been agreed that Greek Cypriots don't have the right of return to their homes in Turkish Cyprus. That's a lot of fascist states....

Sam

Are you telling me that India is to this day continuing to invade more and more of Pakistan and Bangladesh, to steal homes and land from the people on the basis of their religion, and to declare that people of a different religion are entitled to take it? And to donate it to immigrants based on their religion?

Samg - what utter nonsense to compare the partition of India and Pakistan to this situation. Those leaving India for Pakistan and vice versa had homes and autonomous nations to go to. They have not been living as refugees for the past 66 years. They have homes, livlihoods and are free to enter and leave their countries and trade with the rest of the world. As far as I know Pakistan is not stopping Indian fishermen from fishing in their own waters or stopping sick indians from having medical treatment outside of India or restricting the amount of calories indians are allowed to consume.

It has been a while since I have been on this thread but I see not much has changed, the same pathetic deflections and victim blaming.

Or are you perhaps trying to avoid claiming that Israel's actions, which I describe, are in your opinion for some reason not racist or fascist?

more with the apples and pears i see.

Your're right - India/Pakistan is a silly comparison - hundreds of thousands were killed in the rioting and ethic cleansing on the partition of India. Very few in the Middle East. As for the refugees, I'm not sure if the Muslim survivors had homes in Pakistan - I think the Pakistanis just accepted them. They could of course have made them sit in refugee camps for 66 years in order to prove some point, but they didn't, just as Israel didn't keep refugees in camps (although they started off in them). From what I recall, there have been various massacres of Sikhs and Muslims by Hindus, and the govt in India is run by a party which is to say the least ambiguous in its condemnation of such killings.

So are you trying to avoid claiming that Israel's actions, which I describe, are in your opinion for some reason not racist or fascist?

PJ - am I trying to avoid claiming that something is for some reason not something else? I don't think so, but am not sure. Which actions are you referring to in particular?

so you just want to divert the Israel/Palestine thread off topic and turn it into an India/Pakistan thread.

No, I'm saying that instead of just criticizing Israel it would be instructive to compare what happened there with what happened in other places around the same time. Similarly, when looking at the civilian/militant casualties in Gaza, for example, it's instructive to look at what the British and Americans manage, rather than just saying "outrageous/fascist/racist, etc..."

I think Sam is trying to get some perspective on it, why can't posters broaden the discussion?

I think Cyprus has some relevance, also what happened in Asia Minor beforw the 1st world war with Armenians being made to leave.

time.com/3399557/deaths-middle-east/

Can someone explain the 'relevance/instructiveness' of talking about everywhere except palestine/israel as Im afraid I just can't see it. Is the point that certain actions (eg kicking people out of their homes, bulldozing the land and and building new homes for others) are OK - from a wider perspective? Is it that such things happen/have happened elsewhere so why not in OPT?

Feel free to start a thread on Cyprus if you wish.

If you are lucky nobody will try to divert attention from whatever you have to say by trying to deflect the discussion onto something else.

i think this discussion is very one sided

You're absolutely right in your thinking Alemci. This thread should be renamed the 'hate Israel' post. Any other thinking is not allowed. Not a discussion at all. Unless you're entirely pro Gaza.