• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Abbas sets conditions for direct talks with Israel

Status
Not open for further replies.
Indeed, let's just look at a more proximate example: the forcible expulsion of Arabs by Israel, which very much involved physical violence including murders. Benny Morris never suggested this did not occur even after he became more radical in his support for Israeli policy. In fact, he actually justified what Israel did by claiming these Arab populations constituted a possible fifth column. So there we have an example of the reverse, someone considering it acceptable to attack noncombatant Arabs and ultimately it is for the same reason, though under slightly different circumstances.

Benny Morris is a revisionist “new historian” whose works has been dedicated to blaming the Israeli Jews, totally, for any and all problems connected with the jihad the Islamic world is waging against Israel. Anyway, Benny Morris is a liar and after Dr. Efraim Karsh wrote a very detailed book exposing his lies to the light of day, Benny Morris publicly admitted it. Hence, you are using an admitted liar, Benny Morris, to make your absurd claims. Boy you have nerve.

Benny Morris's Reign of Error, Revisited: The Post-Zionist Critique :: Middle East Quarterly

Far from unearthing new facts or offering a novel interpretation of the Palestinian exodus, The Birth recycled the standard Arab narrative of the conflict. Morris portrayed the Palestinians as the hapless victims of unprovoked Jewish aggression. Israel's very creation became the "original sin" underlying the perpetuation of the Arab-Israeli conflict. Had there been an academic foundation to Morris's revisionism, such acclaim may have been warranted. But rather than incorporate new Israeli source material, Morris did little more than rehash old historiography. While laying blame for the Palestinian refugee crisis on the actions of the Israeli Defense Forces and its pre-state precursor, the Haganah, Morris failed to consult the millions of declassified documents in their archives, even as other historians used them in painstaking research.[3]

Once this fact was publicly exposed,[4] Morris conceded that he had "no access to the materials in the IDFA [Israel Defense Forces Archive] or Haganah archive and precious little to firsthand military materials deposited elsewhere.
 
Last edited:
that is so bogus and misrepresentative of you ... but sadly, it no longer surprises me that you would engage in such malicious spin

nowhere in that reasoning is there a call for the murder of noncombatant jews

but your attempt to mis-characterize it is so indicative of the dishonesty among some israeli adherents
this is but another in a series of overt attempts to falsely paint that forum member as someone who is in violation of the TOS. and certainly the intent is to have him, like the others whose debating points you cannot overcome on these boards, thread-banned

the hypocrisy is outrageous. when the israeli forces use civilians as human shields - that is found understandable as a method of self defense. but when those noncombatants who accompany and assist militant jews seeking to displace Palestinians from their rightful homeland, and those civilians become casualties of the Palestinian attempts to thwart the invaders, you deem that a call for murder
too clever by half


The usual barrelfull of spin, twist and fantasy. So just to touch on a few of them

Jews were native and had a continual presence for 2 millenia it was their homeland as well,,,,,hmmmmm why do you ignore that.
Jews purchased land and did not displace Arabs as contemporary reports of the time prove. In fact many more Arabs immigrated than Jews but its funny how you dont call them invaders,,,,hmmmmmm why is that.
Arabs were killing Jews for over a decade before any militant Jewish groups formed.,,,,,hmmmmmmm
 
The usual barrelfull of spin, twist and fantasy. So just to touch on a few of them

Jews were native and had a continual presence for 2 millenia it was their homeland as well,,,,,hmmmmm why do you ignore that.
Jews purchased land and did not displace Arabs as contemporary reports of the time prove. In fact many more Arabs immigrated than Jews but its funny how you dont call them invaders,,,,hmmmmmm why is that.
Arabs were killing Jews for over a decade before any militant Jewish groups formed.,,,,,hmmmmmmm

What you ignore:
- Massive illegal Jewish immigration occured for decades.
- The mandatory (Britain) had already said immigration was already taking a bad effect on the indigenuous population.
- Prior to European Jewish immigration, the Arab Christians and Arab Muslims enjoyed relative peace with the Arab Jews. In fact, there used to be a tradition of giving a Jewish family a siniyah (copper bowl), with bread, butter, and honey on the last day of Passover. In return, the Jewish family would usually give matzot and some jam.
 
Jews were native and had a continual presence for 2 millenia it was their homeland as well,,,,,hmmmmm why do you ignore that.

No one is ignoring it, but the fact a small population of Jews have persistently lived there does not mean people of the same general ethnicity have a rightful claim to any part of that territory.

Jews purchased land and did not displace Arabs as contemporary reports of the time prove.

They purchased most of the land from wealthy landowners from outside Palestine. Another substantial portion was bought from the British. Only about 10% of the land they bought came from the fellahin, the average Palestinians. This is naturally ignoring the parts that were awarded to the Jewish state that they had no legitimate claim to like most of the Negev that was awarded to the Yishuv primarily because they wanted it.

In fact many more Arabs immigrated than Jews but its funny how you dont call them invaders,,,,hmmmmmm why is that.

I like how people take things like this out of context. In fact, if you look at population estimates you will see it was was only in the 1920's that Arab population growth outpaced Jewish population growth and it is likely far less of the Arab growth was immigration compared to the Jewish population growth, especially since the percentage of growth was much higher for Jews.

Arabs were killing Jews for over a decade before any militant Jewish groups formed.,,,,,hmmmmmmm

Exactly what are we talking about here? Jewish militant organizations existed long before the 1920 riots and so I wonder if you are talking about something before this.
 
I wonder if there really was a interest in a peace between these two people, if Israeli's would be open to accepting the right of Palastinians , with out any disdaine, objection, to say after their prayers every day, to recite the same prayer, same statement as Jews had done for almost 2000 years, , till Jeruselum became a part of the State, 'Next year in Jeruselum " , believe recited during "Yom Kippor ", as long as they only worked peacefuilly for that occurence, or just said it in hope of devine interference and happening of the event, thus allowing them to have a hope.

I also wonder, if there ever is a peace between the two parties, the allowing of a sliver of Jeruselum , Arab area, given over to the Palastinian State, a place to have some government offices, possible a place built to welcome destinguished guests to the State, that gave the Palastinians a stake in this small but so important city.

Possible something worked out for the security of both sides..joint patrols of security forces, in certain sections..open movement in the city if it could be done safely, and if not , for all the Palastinians, security concerns, allowed free access, then at least for those elected representatives and leaders of their new State.

I am just mentioning because I am looking for a way that both parties , if really interested in a new beginning and peace with each other, not looking or expecting immediate "kam ba ya" between the two parties , but a way of co existing peacefully with each other, possible interacting, doing business together and in time a kind of toleration and even some interaction with each other beyond the type now only held between the leaders, but the averge Jill and Joe in the streets also taking part, just average people co mingling if wanted, possible visiting restaurants, cultural, sports events, just sight seeing.
 
Last edited:
Actually no Apocalypse, you made it particular to Jews

You say

In reality in the next line DoL makes a comparison with American Indians to try and make his point. I am not going to argue the in's and out's of killing civilians, but he was trying to illustrate a particular context not trying to suggest there was something ok about killing non combatant Jews.

Yes and the point was it is acceptable to kill non combat civilian in certain cases and he was using the American aboriginal reference as justification for that position and advancing the revisionist version of history which depicts Israelis as colonialists invading native peoples.

We can all read it. He made an arguement as to when the killing of non combatants is acceptable. He stated as a general rule it is not but it is acceptable in certain instances it is. The context ican niot be ckeaer. We can all read it.

What you say with due respect is illogical because if what I do is follow your arguement then what you are arguing is was acceptable for American Indians to kill civilians and theefore its acceptable as well for Palestinians to do the same with Israeli because the two are equivalent.

For me and many others this arguement is nothing but the same recycled condoning of violence against Jews who came to Israel as has been seen thousands of times on posts in this and other poltical forums.

This is part and parcel of the selective historic revisionism that depicts Jews as colonial invaders when in fact they were people escaping colonialist tormentors in Europe and the Arab world. That we just ignore and revise. After all we now know the holocaust is a myth. The Iranians had a seminar on that rememer?

Also in this revisionist take, we just throw out Jewish history. Jews who came to Palestinine had no porigins there. We just chose it on a map. Of all the places in the world we decided on a piece of sand in the middle of nowhere for no reason. Just skip our aboriginal ties to the land. Poof they don't exist. Yah we know how that revisioism works thanks.

We also know the double standard. Jews who came to Palestinian were all illegal but all the Arabs who flooded into Palestine just as illegally displacing land from Palestinians, they are all not foreigners, no no all all everyone one was a Palestinian even though they came from outside the area no different than Jews.

Oh we know how that double standard works. If you are an Arab you can do whatever you want in the Middle East and define yourself any way you want, but if you are a Jew the same standards will not apply. A Muslim is whatever nationality he wants to be, a Jew can't be. A Muslim can have a Muslim state, a Jew can't. Yah I get the drift of the double standard...all we Jews do.

Oh yes, and when we make a comment explaining when its acceptable to kill civilians, we can revise it to say since its referring to the killing of Jews its acceptable because as we all know they are foreigner colonialist invaders and deserve it.

Never mind they fleed a holocaust and dhimmitude and Arab forced ethnic cleansing-no Jews are not refugees entitled to a country. Arabs can have multiple Muslim countries, Jews want one tiny one, never. Christians have an Anglican state, a Catholic state and numerous countries that enshrine the protection of Christians in their constitutions and state insitutional values, but if a Jew does it, oh no that can't be.

If a Jew wants to express themselves through universal sufferage as a collective entity where religion is but one component, no that can not be but if Arabs want to do so, that's fine. Over 145 countries have laws of return for people defined as having blood ties to a certain nationality, if Jews do that-oh no can't be done.

Yah yah. Been there, done that.

Here's the point-Jews have a country. Its called Israel. Its not going anywhere. Palestinias can renounce violence and terrorism and indicate they will recognize it and live peacefully with it, or they can continue as is condoning terrorism and demanding Israel be dismantled and Jews turned back into dhimmis in a Muslim Palestinian state.

We can wax poetic until doomsday over it but it aint happening.

Not only that but Mr. Abbas is in no position to make any conditions. From the get go every pre-condition Arafat layed down the Israelis met and then Arafat pissed on the concessions.

Arafat was offered 98% of what he asked for and then turned around and said everything he said was a joke and the Israelis should have known he was bargaining in bad faith and his only agenda was the taking back of all of Israel and Jordan for a Palestinian state and nothing else would be acceptable.

So Mr. Abbas after that is in no position to demad or make conditions for anything. He at best represets a frige group of splintered corupt cronies of Arafat. He is despised by Hamas whose ageda is clear-the destructio of Israel by violence and any means necessary.

Pre-coditios from Abbas? Right. We are still playing the same song as in 1948 with the Arab world wanting Israel to go bye bye only now the couched reference for its destruction isn't with guns its by flooding the country with so called Palestinians-a new definition of Palestinian that includes any Arab wishing to call themselves that and a definition different then the definition for displaced refugee of any other refugee in the world.

Yah we know the game. We know the buzz words and couched references and coded words.

There is no doubt the expansion of settlements on the West Bank have exasperated tensions and they are an obstacle to peace, but lets get real-show me one Arab leader willing to denounce terror against Israel and say terrorists must disarm and Israel as a Jewish state must be recognized.

Not 1 exists at this time. Unless someone cares to provide the name of but 1 of these leaders and give me a source for their position.

I won't hold my breath.
 
Last edited:
"Arafat was offered 98% of what he asked for and then turned around and said everything he said was a joke and the Israelis should have known he was bargaining in bad faith and his only agenda was the taking back of all of Israel and Jordan for a Palestinian state and nothing else would be acceptable"
----------------------------------------------

I believe that Arafat didn't accept what was offered , what ever % of I think it was closer to 90 % of what he wanted, but why quibble, for one reason and one reason only.

If he had accepted that agreement, he knew it would only be a matter of time before he followed Sadat, being assasinated by one of the factions that want it all or nothing as a sell out in their minds, and to be fair to him, I belive the chance of him living out his natural life was probably slim to non exhistent if he did sign off on the agreement.

However , in retrospect as to how he did live out the rest of his life, basically in a run down compound in Ramalla I believe, almost in a state of incarceration by the Israeli's, better he took that chance.

His people would be in their own State now and he would be remembered and revered as the father of his country, another George Washington, a Ben Guerion, a Golda, a Mahot , a Men Dala..a Dali Lama.

He would have joined all those revered ones of other countrys and states and he would have been honored as a Statesman by so many for the rest of his days..all he had to do was what he asked young Palastinians who were strapping on those explosive vests, take one for his people, and he couldn't bring himself to do that.

Naturally the above is IMHO.
 
Arafat was no George Washington. He was a drug pusher. He ran heroin and hash hish caravans from Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Syria and Jordan to Marseilles, France all under the protection of Le Deuxieme Bureau for years. He took hundreds of millions of dollars from money ear-marked to assist Palestinians and placed it in Swiss bank accounts for he and his cronies.

The Western press created him for one simple reason-they had no other Palestinian spokesperson and needed a sound bite. That was all he was a media creation. At best he was a drug lord. He never ruled the PLO. The PLO was a loosely knit cell of hundreds of terror groups each with its own leader doing what the hell they wanted.

The only thing that kept the PLO together was sharing the bribes and profits from drug selling. So if this individual feared death at the hands of his people please do not in the same breath suggest he was George Washington or say let's be fair to him. Why?

Was he fair to his people? The fact they wanted to kill him for his coruption that is the reason we should understand why he ripped up the agreement-because he put his own selfish interests first and feared death by his own people? No I don't think so. No I don't concede sympathy or understanding to this pathetic excuse of a human.

Arafat was a liar. A chronic liar. He was born in Egypt and carried out this pretense he was Palestinian. He was a raving gay and the press covered that up because in the Muslim world of intolerance towards gays, this would not have gone over very well.

He was an out and out liar and manipulator. You check the land he was offered out. No it was nto 90% it was 97% and I argue 98% based on the borders he asked for.

Arafat admitted it was 97% of what he had asked for.

You want to quibble? Then let's not make this man out to be a George Washington or rationalize his bargaining in bad faith and lying to the world and pissing in Israel's face as understandable because he feared being killed by his own people. With due respect that is nonsensical.

The Western press defines Abbas as a moderate now. . This is someone who wrote his doctoral thesis at an Egyptian university saying the holocaust never happened and is a Zionist myth. That is what passes as moderate. Mr. Abbas was a crony and beneficiary of Arafat's bribes. That is who the West props now.

The fact is Palestinians have to dig deep and decide do they want corupt excrement left over from Arafat or do they want Hamas and violence and terror, or do they want to turn to a new generation of pragmatic, realistic individuals who have the ability to disarm terrorists, break the cycle of violence and terror and offer a middle of the road government that can work with Israel and Jordan in building a Palestinian state.

Of course blaming all their issues on Israel is a hell of a lot easier than looking in the mirror at their own failures

All that said, many Palestinians are sick and tired of their status quo and Abbas and Hamas. My response is only meant to counter the sweeping generalizations that Israel must do this and must do that and is the only problematic country in the region. My response is to say, before people lecture Israel on what it must do, they can start with Palestinians.

That said, it is up to Palestinians to decide their future. How they can do this when being constantly threatened by the coercion of Hamas or other terror cells like Intifadah flourishing in its midst is anyone's guess.

The dialogue as to the Middle East conflict about Israel and Palestine is about two groups of people each with their own baggage and mistakes.

This pretense that we start off with the assumption Palestinians are victims for me is b.s. To me they are equals not victims. They have victimized Israel as much as they have been victimzied by Israel and vice versa.

Both peoples have done wrong to each other and themselves

Both peoples have had opportunities that have been wasted.

This tendency to constantly point the accusatory finger at Israel and selectively ignore all of the Palestinian collective's own self destructive policies for me is b.s.
 
Last edited:
Mika I think you have to reread my post on Arafat..I never said he WAS a George Washington...I said he would have been LOOKED at as the Palastinians George Washington and the other famouse leaders of countrys IF he had accepted the deal given him , and no, I am not going to argue with you over 90 or 97, or 97 % of what he wanted.

That he was in the drug trade or what ever, stolen many funds, I believe that is true on the funds, no clue as to the drugs, if you say so, possible, , but not the point.

If he had signed the agreement, fact is the Palastinians would have had their State...what it would have been like I have no idea and how it would have acted against Israel, that too is unknown , but I believe if they had their State, who ever was the political leaders would have had the reponsibility to keep their diverse groups under control or Israel would have done so.. the possible end of their new State, there are responsibilities of a State that has to be kept by the leaders of, so I believe it would have been a semi going concern, and the Palastinians, not loving the Israeli's but I beleive business, trade would have been going on between the two and even aid and help possible between the two parties.

I agree with you here with out getting into the nuances..

"The dialogue as to the Middle East conflict about Israel and Palestine is about two groups of people each with their own baggage and mistakes.

This pretense that we start off with the assumption Palestinians are victims for me is b.s. To me they are equals not victims. They have victimized Israel as much as they have been victimzied by Israel and vice versa.

Both peoples have done wrong to each other and themselves

Both peoples have had opportunities that have been wasted.

This tendency to constantly point the accusatory finger at Israel and selectively ignore all of the Palestinian collective's own self destructive policies for me is b.s. "

both sides have made maistakes and it is the youth who will be the ones who will get Hamas and Fatah to deal with the Israeli's , if they can, and make the change..they are, majority I believe , tired of the status quo, and I don't believe they are looking for another infada..but a way to start getting on with their lives.

Whether the leaders of Fatah and Hamas will allow this, we will have to see. There also is the Iranian factor, they do not want any agreement betwen the P and I and are very influential and if they get true control of Hamas they have no compultion of not striking down any peaceful demonstrations or demands of the Palastinian moderates..as they are directing and influencing Syria and Assad now in the harsh methods against the Syrian dissidents.

Yes I beleive there are Palastinian moderates, not that they have a love of the Israeli, that is asking to much as it is for so many of the hard line Israeli's..to much duty over seeing the Palastinians on the West Bank..after all these years, ones eyes stop looking at thir charges as humans but more as dangerouse animals..that is why , IMHO, it is so important to get a agreement between these people, for the moral salvation of the Israeli populace, especially the young.
 
Last edited:
Arafat was no George Washington. He was a drug pusher. He ran heroin and hash hish caravans from Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Syria and Jordan to Marseilles, France all under the protection of Le Deuxieme Bureau for years. He took hundreds of millions of dollars from money ear-marked to assist Palestinians and placed it in Swiss bank accounts for he and his cronies.

The Western press created him for one simple reason-they had no other Palestinian spokesperson and needed a sound bite. That was all he was a media creation. At best he was a drug lord. He never ruled the PLO. The PLO was a loosely knit cell of hundreds of terror groups each with its own leader doing what the hell they wanted.

The only thing that kept the PLO together was sharing the bribes and profits from drug selling. So if this individual feared death at the hands of his people please do not in the same breath suggest he was George Washington or say let's be fair to him. Why?

Was he fair to his people? The fact they wanted to kill him for his coruption that is the reason we should understand why he ripped up the agreement-because he put his own selfish interests first and feared death by his own people? No I don't think so. No I don't concede sympathy or understanding to this pathetic excuse of a human.

Arafat was a liar. A chronic liar. He was born in Egypt and carried out this pretense he was Palestinian. He was a raving gay and the press covered that up because in the Muslim world of intolerance towards gays, this would not have gone over very well.

He was an out and out liar and manipulator. You check the land he was offered out. No it was nto 90% it was 97% and I argue 98% based on the borders he asked for.

Arafat admitted it was 97% of what he had asked for.

You want to quibble? Then let's not make this man out to be a George Washington or rationalize his bargaining in bad faith and lying to the world and pissing in Israel's face as understandable because he feared being killed by his own people. With due respect that is nonsensical.

The Western press defines Abbas as a moderate now. . This is someone who wrote his doctoral thesis at an Egyptian university saying the holocaust never happened and is a Zionist myth. That is what passes as moderate. Mr. Abbas was a crony and beneficiary of Arafat's bribes. That is who the West props now.

The fact is Palestinians have to dig deep and decide do they want corupt excrement left over from Arafat or do they want Hamas and violence and terror, or do they want to turn to a new generation of pragmatic, realistic individuals who have the ability to disarm terrorists, break the cycle of violence and terror and offer a middle of the road government that can work with Israel and Jordan in building a Palestinian state.

Of course blaming all their issues on Israel is a hell of a lot easier than looking in the mirror at their own failures

All that said, many Palestinians are sick and tired of their status quo and Abbas and Hamas. My response is only meant to counter the sweeping generalizations that Israel must do this and must do that and is the only problematic country in the region. My response is to say, before people lecture Israel on what it must do, they can start with Palestinians.

That said, it is up to Palestinians to decide their future. How they can do this when being constantly threatened by the coercion of Hamas or other terror cells like Intifadah flourishing in its midst is anyone's guess.

The dialogue as to the Middle East conflict about Israel and Palestine is about two groups of people each with their own baggage and mistakes.

This pretense that we start off with the assumption Palestinians are victims for me is b.s. To me they are equals not victims. They have victimized Israel as much as they have been victimzied by Israel and vice versa.

Both peoples have done wrong to each other and themselves

Both peoples have had opportunities that have been wasted.

This tendency to constantly point the accusatory finger at Israel and selectively ignore all of the Palestinian collective's own self destructive policies for me is b.s.
your bias is showing
israel has a state
Palestinians do not
the mandate anticipated each would
instead we have jews inflicting oppression upon the Palestinians
israeliandpalestinianch.gif

israeli children killed by Palestinians: 124
Palestinian children killed by israelis: 1,463 [FY2001 til present]
israelisandpalestinians.gif

israelis killed by Palestinians: 1,084
Palestinians killed by israelis: 6,430 [FY2001 til present]
israeliandpalestinianpr.gif

israelis now held prisoner: 1
Palestinians now held prisoner: 5,935
demolitionofisraeliandp.gif

demolition of israeli homes by Palestinians: 0
demolition of Palestinian homes by israelis: 24,813 [since 1967]
illegalsettlementsonpal.gif

Palestinian illegal settlements now on israeli land: 0
israeli illegal settlements now on Palestinian land: 236

your credibility is undermined when you make absurd statements to pretend the israelis have inflicted on them as much damage as israel inflicts on the Palestinians
 
Moderator's Warning:
The discussion has veered substantially from the OP (Abbas/talks/preconditions) and has devolved into a typical blame game. Thread closed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom