PDA

View Full Version : First step to the Road Map to Peace


David2004
02-09-2004, 12:22 PM
Peace Reform Initiative in the Middle East

The first step to the Road Map to Peace is for the State of Israel to start to remove the Jewish Settlers from the West Bank and Gaza Strip. With International peace keeping forces helping the Palestinian people establish the Rule of Law. The words of both sides have to be match by their deeds and actions as we move toward implementing the Peace Plan. One of the major problems of the Oslo Accords was what was being said at the negotiating table did not reflect the actions on the streets. During the Oslo Accords the size of the Israeli settlements in the West Bank and Gaza Strip nearly doubled. The mantra of both side has to change as it does the extremist on both side will become inflamed.
The State of Israel and the United States have to come to terms with the United Nations and the global community of nations. Realizing the only way the Road Map to Peace has a chance is on a multi-lateral platform. It is the make up of this platform that has to be decided and implemented. With NATO, United Nations, Arab Legion of Nations, Israel, and the United States developing a plan of action. With Egypt and Jordan having diplomatic connections with Israel they should be the founding members with this new group (MEP) with the United States being a supporting member.
A new organization (MEP) Middle East Peace will be established from nations in the Middle East and the global community that are committed to peace and coexistences among their neighbors. The primary focus of the MEP will be network with other international organizations on implementing a regional master plan. The make up of the MEP board will be 1/3 Israeli, 1/3 Palestinian, and 1/3 International with half of them being Americans. Some of the same people that are on the Commission of the Old City of Jerusalem will also work for MEP.
All of the member nations of MEP agree to normalize relations with the State of Israel as a non-occupying country living within International Laws and regional treaties. Israel will normalize relations with the members of MEP. MEP will be the platform for regional issues and areas of disagreements between MEP members. The Primary Members will be counties from the Middle East Region and Supporting Members will be other nation from outside the Middle East region.
The Israeli government will agree to the following conditions with the United States guarantying the State of Israel security within their international recognized boarders.

· The Israelis will demilitarize their society and live within the conditions of the Middle East Non-Nuclear Proliferation Treaty.

· Israel will follow the guide lines (MEP) Middle East Peace

· The Israeli settlers must move back to Israel proper or apply for a Settlement Stay that will be consider on individual cases.

· The Jewish people migration to Israel will be limited to the number of Palestinian people Right to Return. In both cases the applicant will have to go before a review board.

· The State of Israel will agree to recognize the Old City of Jerusalem as an International City for the foreseeable future.

· Israel will revise their Property Laws and zoning within the State of Israel including the un-recognized Palestinian Villages.

· The State of Israel will help in the re-construction of the infrastructure Palestinian State.

· The State of Israel will leave the de-populated Israeli Settlements in tack as part of their contribution.

The Palestinian Right to Return must be changed to Privilege to Return with two different ways. The first will be the privilege to return to the State of Palestine and the second will be the privilege to the State of Israel. In each case the applicant must apply for citizenship and go before one of two boards for approval. The Palestinian Board of Return and the Israeli Board of Return will be similar in make up with two Palestinian members and two Israeli members and one international member. The Boards will review the applicant?s application taking into consideration of the reason one wants to return. If an applicant is denied they have the right to go before the Board of Appeal that will review the case.

There should be a moratorium place on the migration of Jewish people migrating to the State Israel until the resettlement of the Jewish Settlers from the West Bank, Gaza Strip and the settlements surrounding Jerusalem. When the moratorium is lifted then the Jewish people who were born in Israel and those who have first families move to the top of the list. Those who have citizenship to Palestine and Israel that are abroad will not be effected by the moratorium. Once the moratorium is lifted the number of new Jewish emigrates to the State of Israel will be determined by the formula to keep all in balance. Stabilizing the population in Israel and Palestine is very important because of the lack of fresh water in the region as well as developing a peaceful two state solution.

The case why the Old City of Jerusalem should be an International City as outline in the United Nation Security Council Resolution 181of 1948 is clearer than ever before. Resolution 181 was the first step the international community of nations took towards the two state solution between the Moslems and Jewish people. Going on the premise ?What is right for one side should be for the other side too?. For one side to control the religious sites of the other would be unfair and wrong. With the recent actions of both sides and the current level of tension between the people it has become quite apparent that only with international intervention that is fair and neutral can peace and security have a chance. An international commission 1/3 Jewish, 1/3 Muslim, 1/3 Christen, with a 50% local people and 50% people from outside the region should be set up to run the Old City of Jerusalem.

The Old City of Jerusalem Charter should be established and approve by the commission. This Charter should include some of the following;

· The Old City of Jerusalem will be a weapon free zone.

· All faiths will be able to practice their religion?s believes as long as it does not cause harm to others or themselves.


· The politics of the Old City of Jerusalem will remain neutral between the State of Israel and the State of Palestine.

· The Israeli government and Palestinian government will have representatives part of the International Old City of Jerusalem.


The Jewish Settlements surrounding Jerusalem will be divided between the State of Israel and the Old City of Jerusalem. The former Jewish Settlements of Jerusalem that become part of the Old City of Jerusalem will have a different charter than the rest. Most of the Jewish Settlers will have to move back to the State of Israel. With 25% of the Jewish people staying, willing to live under the new coming conditions, with the Housing Boards approval. 25% of the housing will be opened to Palestinians who apply to the Housing Boards and get approved. For the foreseeable future the other 50% will be Internationalists that are part of the team to bring peace to the region. The Housing Board will be made up of three internationalists, one Israeli and one Palestinian. All may retain their respective country?s citizenship.

The Israeli government will be responsible for the removal of the Jewish Settlers from Palestine and the Old City of Jerusalem. The Israeli government will establish new settlements within Israel for the settlers to relocate. The Jewish Settlers who cooperate in the re-settlement will have first priority in new housing and reimbursements. The Jewish Settlers that fight the changing times and ways will be handled by Israeli authorities until the agreed upon deadline. The State of Israel will be reasonable for any of the damages to the settlements until they are turned over to the International Forces.

An International base for Peace Keeping Forces needs to be set up in East Jerusalem with the main base adjacent outside the city. The Old City of Jerusalem and East Jerusalem will become an International zone (weapon free) under international control. An airport under the control by the international forces will be setup for the humanitarian aid and workers that are needed. The international peacekeepers will then setup other bases throughout the West bank to help in creating safety zones for the international relief workers. The Israeli government will remain in control of their pre 1967 borders. The International forces will take over control of the Israel military post in the Golan Heights as well as the territory of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. Any intelligence that the Israeli Government get or have on criminal activities of any Palestinians will be acted on by a special elite international forces.

An international court has to be set up for the prosecution of personal non-criminal matters on both sides. Creating a platform to resolve disputes among the people on the different sides. The Israelis will need to set up a court to compensate the Israel settles that do no want to live in a Palestinian state under their laws. The Israeli Settles in the West Bank and Gaza Strip that do not recognized the new State of Palestine will be forcibly removed by the Israeli Government under the observation of the international monitors.

The international force will monitor the governments on both sides to make sure they live within the treaties and resolutions of the global community. There will be a need for all side to change and compromise before there will be a long lasting peace between the two sides.

There is much work, help and aid that is needed to help the Palestinian people rebuild their society. The International Charity will coordinate their aid threw the United Nation with some of the governments of the world assisting with transportation and logistics.

Realizing than no final plan will be fare to all people but it must be fair to both greater societies as a whole. What is fair for one side should be for the other side as well. Logic and common sense have not been heard only a repeating of the same old rhetoric by the extremists on both sides. The conditions and circumstances combined with the religious indoctrination on both sides are what make it such a volatile situation silencing the voice of the moderates. There are no solutions that will right the wrongs of the past, only the possibility of changing the wrongs of today creating a chance for a better tomorrow for future generations to come. -David

Sierra Mike
02-09-2004, 12:55 PM
Wow, can't wait for Sir J to read this one...

SM

LissaKay
02-09-2004, 12:59 PM
I keep reading it trying to find what the Pali's will concede ... considering there is no valid historical, legal or even religious claim by a people that call themselves Palestinians to the lands of Israel.

Load of horseshit, if ya ask me ... links to who thought this up, please?

LissaKay
02-09-2004, 01:03 PM
Wow, can't wait for Sir J to read this one...

SM
Or Leon ... and I don't dare share that with my Israeli expat colleague across the hall here.

Copzilla
02-09-2004, 01:15 PM
David, I'd love to discuss these ideas on a point by point basis, but not if your posts are just drive-by indoctrination. Is this going to be a two way discussion, or are you just handing out literature?

Sierra Mike
02-09-2004, 01:20 PM
Looks like a lit handout to me. And it appears it's just another diatribe where the Palestinians get everything, but the Israelis have to give it all up.

David, are you perhaps related to someone named Basilio?

SM

ethics
02-09-2004, 01:23 PM
The first step to the Road Map to Peace is for the State of Israel to start to remove the Jewish Settlers from the West Bank and Gaza Strip. I believe that's what Israel should do and will do, eventually.


During the Oslo Accords the size of the Israeli settlements in the West Bank and Gaza Strip nearly doubled. The mantra of both side has to change as it does the extremist on both side will become inflamed.
I notice, David, that you don't mention the countless of terrorist attacks -- the REAL reason peace initiative failed -- but just how the Jews are at fault here? Why is that?



· The Israelis will demilitarize their society and live within the conditions of the Middle East Non-Nuclear Proliferation Treaty.
Being surrounded by enemies, to rid of the nuke factor would be suicide.


· Israel will follow the guide lines (MEP) Middle East Peace
What's in it for Israel, to join this MEP?


· The Jewish people migration to Israel will be limited to the number of Palestinian people Right to Return. In both cases the applicant will have to go before a review board.
This is the biggest flaw in your proposal thus far. The same mandate was attempted to halt Jewish immigration during the thirties and WWII. It failed miserably. Not even the moderate Palestinians think the "right of return" is plausible, viable, or would be even thought of as such.

· The State of Israel will help in the re-construction of the infrastructure Palestinian State.

Ah, yah, right. What fairy tale is this from? Here's my enemy, the one that's been propagating killing of my own innocent people and I have to help you rebuild?

The rest of your post is of the same angle. Concession of the Jews and nothing, zilch, nada, from the Palestinians.

You know what Jews have to do? Whatever they feel like they need to do in order to have a safe, secure country.

ethics
02-09-2004, 01:25 PM
David, I'd love to discuss these ideas on a point by point basis, but not if your posts are just drive-by indoctrination. Is this going to be a two way discussion, or are you just handing out literature?
Looks like he is doing the same thing over the other forums.

http://www.google.com/search?q=%22The%20Jewish%20Settlements%20surrounding%20Jerus alem%20will%20be%20divided%20between%20the%20State%20of%20Is rael%22

Sierra Mike
02-09-2004, 01:31 PM
Great. Clearly someone who is interested in discussion... :rolleyes:

SM

ethics
02-09-2004, 01:49 PM
Great. Clearly someone who is interested in discussion... :rolleyes:

SM
Out of all those forums there was only this response:


What do you think of the idea of giving Palestinians in the occupied territories Israeli citizenship while changing Isreal's political structure to provide equality for Palestinians where Jews and Palestinians both control half of the government?

To which David replies:

Peace

Let there be more love
World leaders that are doves

A world with fewer guns
More mothers with their sons

Instead of fighting war
We help the poor

With all of our might
We are not always right

People have to care
To make things fair

Let there be more flowers
With all of our powers

Let there be peace
In the Middle East

David

LissaKay
02-09-2004, 02:01 PM
Sounds like a bad case of delusional thinking ...

There's nothing in that plan to make the Pali's stop blowing themselves up and killing Israelis. Until that directive is made AND enforced by the terrorist leaders, there will be no peace in Israel.

Sadly, the Palestinians and the rest of the Arab world will not allow peace as long as there is a single Jew alive in Israeli lands. One-tenth of one percent of the Middle East land mass is what Israel sits on ... and that's too damned much for the Muslim Arabs.

ethics
02-09-2004, 02:06 PM
Thumbs up, Demi. I don't understand why many people, mostly in ME and EU do not understand this very basic, and simple idea. Jews want peace, the Jews are willing to sit down and negotiate lands, they have done it before. But they will never be threatened to do this via terrorism.

Robert Harris
02-09-2004, 02:14 PM
The Arabs have one clear roadmap to peace in the back of their minds -- and have had it for quite some time. It is a roadmap for Jews to follow and it leads into the sea. I don't think they will sell it to the Israelis.

ShinyTop
02-09-2004, 02:22 PM
When the Palestinians want to sit down and discuss the issues as befitting between nations they will begin to behave as a responsible nation. We will know when that time comes because they will quit killing school children and wedding attendees. Until then they have not earned any right to sit down and be treated as if they were a responsible member on the world stage.

Sorry, Dave, I googled your wording and found you are just putting this out to make yourself feel good. There is no difference in selling this load than a penis enlarger or Viagra equivalent. Anytime Leon wants to ban forum spammers I will support him.

David2004
02-11-2004, 12:11 AM
From 1973 to 2003 the United State veto twenty-four United Nations Security Resolutions pertaining to the Palestine-Israeli Crisis. The United States did this without any support from the other fourteen nations on the UN Security Council. The United States arrogant position within the United Nations has put us outside the rest of the global community of nations. This and our irrational oil and energy policies have made us more enemies than friends straining our relationship with our international allies. Our current military foreign policies are threatening peace and security around the world making us the enemy in the eyes of many nations.

Before we will have peace and security in the Middle East we will have to make major changes in our foreign policies with a better understanding of this region. Our policies of the pass have not achieved peace or security for the State of Israel and have only alienated us from the rest of the nations in the world. Both the State of Israel and the United States have to come to terms with the global community of nations. Then and only then can steps towards peace and security can be made.

Coot
02-11-2004, 12:21 AM
Dude, you're a little late. Israel is in the midst of declaring their own unilateral peace. (http://www.globalaffairs.org/forum/showthread.php?t=19438)

ShinyTop
02-11-2004, 12:21 AM
David, this is a discussion forum. You can mail letters to the editor anywhere. Here when you post you are expected to discuss issues and respond to other posters. Are you in or just looking for another outlet to post your propaganda? Are you actually afraid to discuss?

Sierra Mike
02-11-2004, 12:23 AM
From 1973 to 2003 the United State veto twenty-four United Nations Security Resolutions pertaining to the Palestine-Israeli Crisis. The United States did this without any support from the other fourteen nations on the UN Security Council. The United States arrogant position within the United Nations has put us outside the rest of the global community of nations. This and our irrational oil and energy policies have made us more enemies than friends straining our relationship with our international allies. Our current military foreign policies are threatening peace and security around the world making us the enemy in the eyes of many nations.

Before we will have peace and security in the Middle East we will have to make major changes in our foreign policies with a better understanding of this region. Our policies of the pass have not achieved peace or security for the State of Israel and have only alienated us from the rest of the nations in the world. Both the State of Israel and the United States have to come to terms with the global community of nations. Then and only then can steps towards peace and security can be made.
Clearly, you've not read any other entries on this matter in this forum. I doubt you even read the messages in this thread.

You are a nimrod. Out here.

SM

LissaKay
02-11-2004, 12:23 AM
David ... here is a challenge for you. Find for me, if you will, just one piece of legit documentation that validates the "Palestinians'" claim to any of the land within Israel. Just one. And please ... make it something other than the histrionics I have grown so weary of.

If you want to play propaganda machine with your drive by postings, that's fine. You are talking to yourself. If you wish to engage in intelligent discussion and debate on this matter, by all means, grab your favorite beverage and join right in. Be warned though ... this is not a propaganda and rhetoric forum. We'll hit everything you post here with hard facts. Bring it on ...

ethics
02-11-2004, 02:00 AM
From 1973 to 2003 the United State veto twenty-four United Nations Security Resolutions pertaining to the Palestine-Israeli Crisis.

MYTH

"The United States has always supported Israel at the UN and can be counted upon to veto any resolutions that are critical."

FACT

Many people believe the United States (http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/ustoc.html) can always be relied upon to support Israel with its veto (http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/UN/usvetoes.html) in the UN Security Council (http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/UN/sctoc.html). The historical record, however, shows that the U.S. has often opposed Israel in the Council.

In 1990, for example, Washington voted for a Security Council resolution (http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/UN/unres672.html) condemning Israel's handling of the Temple Mount (http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Society_&_Culture/geo/Mount.html) riot earlier that month. While singling out “the acts of violence committed by Israeli security forces,” the resolution omitted mention of the Arab violence that preceded it.

In December 1990, the U.S. went along with condemning Israel (http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/UN/unres681.html) for expelling four leaders of Hamas (http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Terrorism/hamastoc.html), an Islamic terrorist group. The deportations came in response to numerous crimes committed by Hamas against Arabs and Jews, the most recent of which had been the murders of three Israeli civilians in a Jaffa factory several days earlier. The resolution did not say a word about Hamas and its crimes. It described Jerusalem as “occupied” territory, declared that Palestinians needed to be “protected” from Israel and called on contracting parties of the Geneva Convention to ensure Israel's compliance. It was the first time the Security Council (http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/myths/mf13.html#f) invoked the Convention against a member country.

In January 1992, the U.S. supported a one-sided resolution (http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/UN/unres726.html) condemning Israel for expelling 12 Palestinians, members of terrorist groups that were responsible for perpetrating violence against Arab and Jew alike. The resolution, which described Jerusalem as “occupied” territory, made no mention of the events that triggered the expulsions — the murders of four Jewish civilians by Palestinian radicals since October.

In 1996, the U.S. went along with a Saudi-inspired condemnation (http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/UN/unres1073.html) of Israel for opening a tunnel in "the vicinity" of the al-Aksa mosque (http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Society_&_Culture/geo/Mount.html#Aksa). In fact (http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/UN/sc1073a.html), the tunnel, which allows visitors to see the length of the western wall of the Temple Mount (http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Society_&_Culture/geo/Mount.html), is nowhere near the mosque. Israel was blamed for reacting to violent attacks by Palestinians who protested the opening of the tunnel.

The United States did not cast its first veto until 1972, on a Syrian-Lebanese complaint against Israel. From 1967-72, the U.S. supported or abstained on 24 resolutions, most critical of Israel. From 1973-2003, the Security Council (http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/UN/sctoc.html) adopted approximately 100 resolutions on the Middle East, again, most critical of Israel. The U.S. vetoed (http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/UN/usvetoes.html) a total of 37 resolutions and, hence, supported the Council's criticism of Israel by its vote of support, or by abstaining, roughly two-thirds of the time.<SUP>12</SUP> (http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/myths/mf13.html#12)

In July 2002, the United States shifted its policy and announced that it would veto any Security Council (http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/UN/sctoc.html) resolution on the Middle East that did not condemn Palestinian terror (http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Terrorism/palterrortoc.html) and name, Hamas (http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Terrorism/hamastoc.html), Islamic Jihad (http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Terrorism/PIJ.html) and the Al-Aksa Martyrs Brigade (http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Terrorism/terror_report_orgs.html#Martyrs) as the groups responsible for the attacks. The U.S. also said that resolutions must note that any Israeli withdrawal is linked to the security situation, and that both parties must be called upon to pursue a negotiated settlement (Washington Post, July 26, 2002). The Arabs can still get around the United States by taking issues to the General Assembly (http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/UN/gatoc.html), where nonbinding resolutions pass by majority vote, and support for almost any anti-Israel resolution is assured.


MYTH

“The United Nations has demonstrated equal concern for the lives of Israelis and Palestinians.”

FACT

While the UN (http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/parttoc.html) routinely adopts resolutions critical of Israel’s treatment of Palestinians, it has never adopted a single resolution unequivocally condemning violence against Israeli citizens. One of the most dramatic examples of the institution’s double-standard came in 2003 when Israel offered a draft resolution (http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/UN/israel_un.html) in the General Assembly (http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/UN/gatoc.html) for the first time in 27 years.

The resolution called for the protection of Israeli children from terrorism (http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Terrorism/terrortoc.html), but it did not receive enough support from the members of the General Assembly to even come to a vote. Israel had introduced the resolution in response to the murder of dozens of Israeli children in terrorist attacks, and after a similar resolution had been adopted by a UN committee (later adopted (http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/UN/unga58_155.html) by the full Assembly) calling for the protection of Palestinian children from “Israeli aggression.” Israel's ambassador withdrew the proposed draft after it became clear that members of the nonaligned movement were determined to revise it in such a way that it would have ultimately been critical of Israel.<SUP>16</SUP> (http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/myths/mf13.html#16)

-- Source (http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/myths/mf13.html)

Adding another

Myth: Israel enjoys being an equal member

Fact: Only since May 2000, has Israel been allowed a TEMPORARY seat on the Security Council

Let me also point out that Israel votes with US more than Britain does. http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/UN/votetoc.html

You were saying David? More of your drive by postings and lack to get in to debates will force us to nudge you over to the forums that care more about the Member Count than the quality of their said members.

Stiofán
02-11-2004, 02:22 AM
Leon, I applaud your attempt at expending energy on this guy, but I fear it won't accomplish much.

Advocat
02-11-2004, 06:51 AM
David ... here is a challenge for you. Find for me, if you will, just one piece of legit documentation that validates the "Palestinians'" claim to any of the land within Israel. Just one. And please ... make it something other than the histrionics I have grown so weary of.

Some years back, the CBC (and reporters I know personally) did a documentary on the valid ownership question. To make a long story short, they did find some people in the refugee camps who had fully documented deeds to homes/land/businesses in Israel.

The contentions of these Palestinians is that they fled Israel for fear of personal safety, either just after it was created, or during the various conflicts aftwards, often at the urging of religious or political leaders who told them they were going to be slaughtered (yes, I know, I know... don't shoot the messenger... I'm just saying what they said). Many of the elders say they thought they were only going to be away for a few weeks.

The Israeli contention is that they abandoned their property, which was then sold to other Israelis, so the property in question is no longer theirs. In an interview appearing in the documentary, the Israeli official in charge of Palestinian claims said Israel would be glad to return the property to the Palestinans in question provided they have full documentation (many only had part of what the officials wanted... how often do you get a copy of your morgage notarized before leaving town?), can prove they left due to an authentic threat to personal harm, and are willing to pay the present owners for upkeep and improvements for the last 50 years or so.

This shouldn't be taken to suggest that evey Palestinian had such proof. The reporters in question only found a few with the papers in question... often it was "great great grandma" who had them, but the adult great-great-grandchildren who were active terrorists. The threat has grown with the myth. Many men claimed land in Israel, but "the deeds have been lost"... let's face it, this an empty claim in the middle east, where bluster is part of everyday life.

LissaKay
02-11-2004, 08:40 AM
Yes, Advocat ... I do understand that there are a number of individuals with possibly valid claims to parcels of land in Israel. However, the "Palestinians" are claiming that all of Israel is theirs and the Israelis have no right to be there.

Prior to 1948, no one wanted the Gaza Strip or the West Bank. That was where Arab nations shipped off their "unwanted" and outcast. It was only after Israel became a nation-state populated by Jews that the Arabs of the Middle East decided that they did want that land, and the named the Palestinians as the "rightful owners." The record will show that the Israelis were quite willing to let the "Palestinian" individuals stay on their land, in their homes. It was Arabs that told them to flee ... and once they did, told them to go back and fight for that land, promising that they would be backed up in that fight. That never came to pass. The Palestinians took up arms against Israel and lost.

There is, and never has been, a Palestinian state. Prior to 1918, there was not even a Palestinian people. There is no Palestinian language, culture or history. They took on that name when they settled in the lands no one else wanted after the British abdication of the Ottoman Empire at the end of WW I. It was only after Israel was granted statehood and officially governed by Jews that anyone cared.

Myths of the Middle East (http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=15066)

mikepd
02-11-2004, 09:47 AM
Well, a nice set of marching orders you listed there. A pity they are completely lacking in real world reality and common sense but then total idealism usually is.

This forum is supposed to debate a topic and not be a 'drop box' where you drive by and toss a post containing nothing but orders on how something must be then leave in a swirl of electrons.

Bad manners and at least with this member, I find it very offensive. I know you have not taken the time to find out about this site and could not care less about me or my feelings.

That is fine with me but I do care about the fellow members of this site as I consider them to be among the finest individuals I have had the pleasure of knowing.

If you cannot be bothered to give us simple courtesy then maybe another site would be more suitable where they would be conducive to your messy, missive directives.

David2004
02-11-2004, 03:18 PM
The Big Lie Hiding the Truth

They hate us because of our freedom. The American people understand the Muslim culture less than they than understand us and that is a fact. We are an open and transparent society for the world to see. It is our foreign policies that many people loathe and the greed of our international corporations. It is saying one thing and doing another that we say is in the name of our national security while it is at their expense. An example of this would be our government support of Saddam Hussan during 1988 while he was killing 100 thousand Kurds, some of his own country?s people. We suppressed the global community of nation condemnation of Saddam because he was fighting the Iranians who we perceived to be a bigger threat to our national security. Then in 1989 we supported a United Nations Conference on Human Rights to be held in Baghdad.

Another example would be our government?s support of the Israeli government persecution of the Palestinian people. The worst the Israelis treat the Palestinian people the more money we give to the Israeli government. The historical record is clear for the world to see while our mass media hides the truth from the American people. Yet we toot our own horn while suppressing the truth that the whole world sees. It is our double standard of one set of rules for our allies and another set for our foes that the rest of the world hates.

Wouldn?t the State of Israel be a safer place if Israel?s economy were based around tourism instead of the export and sales of military weapons? As long as the Palestinian people have nothing to lose besides their dignity and lives the people of Israeli and rest of the world will live under the threat of global terror. While the State of Israel is conditioned to live this way much of the world is not. If we follow the State of Israel trying to solve our differences by military means we will not have the resources for the humanitarian needs that are at the root of many of these conflicts. By destroying the infrastructure of our opponents we are making the divide worst creating more people that will want to retaliate later.

The right-wingers in Israel and the United States have polarized the global community of nations and people separating us from them because of our military policies. By starting off on the wrong foot the further we go the deeper the divide between our foreign policies and the rest of the global community of nations. Unless the United States and Israel make major changes in the direction they are going we are heading for World War III.

If we had peace and security through out the world then who is going to buy our weapons of protection and destruction from our military industrial complex one of our most profitable industrial export. Often what is a weapon of protection to one nation is a threat to another. We claim we want to stop nuclear weapons proliferation around the world yet the State of Israel possesses these very same weapons. It is acceptable to us for our allies to possess nuclear weapons while threatening a region of our foes. This is another one of the double standards that is threatening global peace.

It is part of the United States foreign policy to separate leaders of other nations from their own people so they have to rely on us for their personal security. While we use tyrants and dictators to threaten people of other nations then we go to war against them when they are no longer useful to our policies and goals. These are some of the main double standards that are the biggest threat to global peace that brought 9-11 onto us. -David

ethics
02-11-2004, 03:25 PM
More propaganda (http://www.unol.org/forums/mideast/posts/304.html)?

You will be welcome in forums where they care about member count. Here, where quality debates, dialogue, and at the very least an attempt at one, is what counts.

Having said that, it's clear that you are not the right fit for the forum, and I bid you adieu.

Sir Joseph
02-11-2004, 03:30 PM
Dude, I'll have what you're smoking.

Prior to 1967, East-Jerusalem was under Jordanian control. According to the UN Resolution, access to holy sites were to be afforded to all people. Guess how many Jews were allowed to pray at the Western Wall?
Also, the same International Law that created Iraq, Iran, Lebanon, Syria and Saudi Arabia also created Israel. Why the big fuss?
Thirdly, Israel is ready for peace. Say the word and Israel is there, but they're not stupid. They're not going to give back everything while getting nothing in return. Besides the fact, what type of people are the Muslims that they're big selling point is that "we won't blow you up if you make peace with us?" I'd rather kill them and be 100% certain that they won't blow me up.

Bottom line: even taking out the whole anti-Semitic bit that comes into play:
We won, you lost. neener, neener, neener.

ethics
02-11-2004, 03:33 PM
Guess how many Jews were allowed to pray at the Western Wall?
.
Guess how many Christians had access to THEIR holy sites when the rule was under EgyptoJordanians?

Sir Joseph
02-11-2004, 03:35 PM
You can't upset the Muslims by praying. You never know what they're going to do. Even today, Jews are not allowed to pray on the Temple Mount.

Advocat
02-11-2004, 04:37 PM
Yes, Advocat ... I do understand that there are a number of individuals with possibly valid claims to parcels of land in Israel. However, the "Palestinians" are claiming that all of Israel is theirs and the Israelis have no right to be there.

I think you might find the two arguments have bled and morphed into each other... the fact that there are a few people with provable legitimate claims has slowly been taken to argue/mean that "all" the Palestinians have legitimate claims, and vice versa.

Sierra Mike
02-11-2004, 05:21 PM
More propaganda (http://www.unol.org/forums/mideast/posts/304.html)?

You will be welcome in forums where they care about member count. Here, where quality debates, dialogue, and at the very least an attempt at one, is what counts.

Having said that, it's clear that you are not the right fit for the forum, and I bid you adieu.
Took you long enough, you spineless liberal. :haha:

SM (currently in search of an agenda to adopt)

ShinyTop
02-11-2004, 05:51 PM
Damn, did somebody get the number of that hit and run driver? Oh, I see Leon got his number. :thumbsup:

Debt Consolidation | Mortgages | Credit Card Consolidation | Guitar Books | Bankruptcy