CNN drops Marc Lamont Hill after anti-Israel remarks

[Serenity]

nearly 3 million in the West Bank, nearly 2 million in Gaza, put in another 2 million from Jordan, and bingo.

Well gosh. I snooze, I lose. I hadn't read this response when I replied, so I've pretty much repeated what you have said. Yep, correct.

 

[CJ 2.0]

Fingers crossed the Netanyahu's are arrested, charged with corruption and thrown in jail. These 2 neo-nazis belong in jail.

Educated, nuanced position with a Nazi reference about 2 Jews thrown in. Thanks for your contribution.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[CJ 2.0]

B'tselem are on the ground in the illegally Occupied Territories just to cite one group I regularly read. As are Gisha along with many many others groups and individuals.

Before you condemn them I would just remind you that the claims you have made about them thus far have been based on an ignorance of their work and positions

You really should read Catch the Jew by Tuvia Tenenbaum. It has the benefit of being a very entertaining read as well and you might actually learn something. There really is something for everybody.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[CJ 2.0]

You really are a long way off the mark with those figures.

There's almost 5 Million Palestinians in just Gaza and the West Bank alone.

This is why the Right of Return is arguably, (apart from the status of Jerusalem), the most contentious issue in the whole I/P conflict.

Well, to be fair we don’t know of that’s true either. The PA Does the demographics and they have an incentive to inflate the numbers. My recollection was they omit emigration, for example, and the numbers are not based on any real census.

I know some on the Israeli right are so confident that the number of Palestinians in the WB is so inflated by the PA that they advocate for annexation of the whole west bank and extending citizenship to the Palestinians living there (Caroline Glick has a book advocating that).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Apocalypse]

Well, to be fair we don’t know of that’s true either. The PA Does the demographics and they have an incentive to inflate the numbers. My recollection was they omit emigration, for example, and the numbers are not based on any real census.

I know some on the Israeli right are so confident that the number of Palestinians in the WB is so inflated by the PA that they advocate for annexation of the whole west bank and extending citizenship to the Palestinians living there (Caroline Glick has a book advocating that).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think you're referring to area C.
No one in the hard-right advocates to annex areas A and B and to give the Palestinians there citizenship.

Bennet representing the hard-right had voiced his opinion numerous times of granting some form of an autonomy to the Palestinians in areas A and B of the West Bank and annexing area C giving the Palestinians there citizenship the same way that was done with East Jerusalem.

 

[Chagos]

You were the one that corrected his completely wrong view on the numbers of Palestinians involved but are supporting, in the above, his assertion and claiming it to be unquestionable ( " the truth " ) perhaps not knowing that in doing so you completely undermine your own argument :roll:

IT's not what he knows, or in this case what he evidently doesn't know , it is who he is against that imo prompted your comments and ultimately left you undermining your own proposition Always the best way to see it done imo

Okay, so you didn't understand what you read and thus didn't understand how it speaks against the blatantly naive one-state solution that you are, just as naively, propagating.

One might try to follow your logic if one could discern any as existing, yet as things stand.........................

Not to mention the English used in the 2nd paragraph, which renders it virtually incomprehensible .

 

[Chagos]

Well gosh. I snooze, I lose. I hadn't read this response when I replied, so I've pretty much repeated what you have said. Yep, correct.

One can question, rightly or wrongly, whether a fleeing population that numbered anything between 300,000 and 700,000 (depending on sources) in 1948 could actually multiply in 70 years to the extent cited today, but it's IMO totally besides the point.

Even if the figures cited today were considerably reduced, it would take nothing from the fact that in a bi-national one-state of Israel (or of any other name), the Jewish population would soon be outnumbered.

That's why that model would constitute suicide for any Jewish homeland and is not going to happen.

 

[Serenity]

One can question, rightly or wrongly, whether a fleeing population that numbered anything between 300,000 and 700,000 (depending on sources) in 1948 could actually multiply in 70 years to the extent cited today, but it's IMO totally besides the point.

Even if the figures cited today were considerably reduced, it would take nothing from the fact that in a bi-national one-state of Israel (or of any other name), the Jewish population would soon be outnumbered.

That's why that model would constitute suicide for any Jewish homeland and is not going to happen.

Well sure, but using a figure of 750,000 (outside) as Rising Sun did, would not soon outnumber the Jewish population.

That was my whole point.

 

[Chagos]

Well sure, but using a figure of 750,000 (outside) as Rising Sun did, would not soon outnumber the Jewish population.

That was my whole point.

Oh, agreed. Completely.:thumbs:

 

[Serenity]

That's why that model would constitute suicide for any Jewish homeland and is not going to happen.

Specifically on this part.

The right of return debate will continue to be one of the most contentious issues in the I/P conflict but it's over, let it go. Not a reasonable part of any solution. Won't happen. Compromise. If only the Palestinian "leaders" and I use that word loosely, would recognise that fact and actually focus on conditions that have some hope of gaining agreement by both parties.

 

[OlNate]

Of course you don't but thanks for admitting you've never been there.

Weak...snipping part of your opponents message to remove context? Booo…

 

[Chagos]

The problem is not "not knowing the facts on the ground", the problem is 'knowing' alternative ones created on countless of small websites maintained by very ill minded individuals, and pushing this alternative reality over that which we all live in.

Indeed, expecting (let alone demanding) that anyone forming an opinion on the issues of a geographical location needs to have been there first, would preclude any such opinion being formed.

Even where having gained personal experience would help.

It would however help any assessment to disseminate what's actually out there for everyone to work with (without having to travel). Rather than to unquestioningly work with anything that confirms a narrative one has already formed and from there on defends in the manner of discarding anything that might raise doubts.

Which, I suppose, is saying exactly the same as what you raised, critical appraisal ain't the rage these days.

 

[OlNate]

Of course you do, but I disagree since you've already proved to everyone your support for people like Marc wiping Israel off the map.

No he has not. He's explaining the situation to you. As you seem to need it.

Rule #1 when talking about the middle east - to find the person who doesn't know what they are talking about (or is specifically motivated to lie), look at the person saying one side or the other is exclusively to blame.

I don't think this guy (the reporter) should have interjected his opinion...though your 1A gives him the right to do so, if he's willing to lose his job over it. But let's not get carried away - the ME is more complicated than a binary judgement can navigate.

 

[Chagos]

Weak...snipping part of your opponents message to remove context? Booo…

When the snipped part bears absolutely no relevance to the question originally asked, I snip it myself with no problem.

Especially with those using any opportunity to go off on different tangents.

 

[OlNate]

When the snipped part bears absolutely no relevance to the question originally asked, I snip it myself with no problem.

Especially with those using any opportunity to go off on different tangents.

Except it made total sense, and was a perfectly appropriate rebuttal to the question that could equally be considered to be a deflection tactic.

 

[Chagos]

~...................... the ME is more complicated than a binary judgement can navigate.

Even with how I've made that a snippet here:2razz:, nothing anybody can (or should) find fault with in that above assessment.

 

[OlNate]

Even with how I've made that a snippet here:2razz:, nothing anybody can (or should) find fault with in that above assessment.

Ya, it doesn't take anything away from my point. :shrug: RS just debating the words he can debate and snipping the rest is different. But thank you for illustrating the difference for me, I was gonna, but figured it would be too preachy...hehehe....

And don't you Razz me, Chagos, I have no idea where you live. (Dang, that threat works better on non-anonymous venues).

 

[Chagos]

Except it made total sense, and was a perfectly appropriate rebuttal to the question that could equally be considered to be a deflection tactic.

Well, even where (as previously stated) I don't expect (let alone demand) that anybody needs "to have been there", I'll tend to favour those that have, over those that spout forth from the relative comfort of a faraway home, when the latter are clearly regurgitating something that fits a narrative already formed by the expediency of confirmation bias from an echo bubble.

That may not be particularly fair on my part but it's life.

As such one may see the demand of proof on personal experience as deflection of argument (which is quite okay with me), but it's in no way illegitimate.

What is subsequently made of it is what counts.

 

[Serenity]

Is being pro-Palestine automatically being anti-Israel?

Supporting the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination in reasonable ways, that obviously don't include anything that would deny Israel the right to exist in a peaceful manner, is more than fine.

The comments being discussed in the OP, "from the river to sea”, in this context, date back to the founding of the PLO in 1964, claiming a Palestinian state between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea and rejecting control by Israel of any land in the region, including areas controlled by Israel prior to 1967.

Difficult to interpret that as anything other than anti-Israel.

 

[Chagos]

Ya, it doesn't take anything away from my point. :shrug: RS just debating the words he can debate and snipping the rest is different. But thank you for illustrating the difference for me, I was gonna, but figured it would be too preachy...hehehe....

And don't you Razz me, Chagos, I have no idea where you live. (Dang, that threat works better on non-anonymous venues).

I'm not razzing on ya and I live in Spain (where as much razzing goes on as anywhere else).:mrgreen:

I've also lived in Israel for nearly a year and often visited it since, all over a period of nigh on 40 years.

That doesn't make my take on things any more valuable than anybody else's, but more informed than OW2's any day.

And if you ever make it down my way,let me know in advance and we can razz each other over a nice cold San Miguel and a paella.

 

[Chagos]

Supporting the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination in reasonable ways, that obviously don't include anything that would deny Israel the right to exist in a peaceful manner, is more than fine.

The comments being discussed in the OP, "from the river to sea”, in this context, date back to the founding of the PLO in 1964, claiming a Palestinian state between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea and rejecting control by Israel of any land in the region, including areas controlled by Israel prior to 1967.

Difficult to interpret that as anything other than anti-Israel.

This!!!!

 

[OlNate]

I'm not razzing on ya and I live in Spain (where as much razzing goes on as anywhere else).:mrgreen:

I've also lived in Israel for nearly a year and often visited it since, all over a period of nigh on 40 years.

That doesn't make my take on things any more valuable than anybody else's, but more informed than OW2's any day.

And if you ever make it down my way,let me know in advance and we can razz each other over a nice cold San Miguel and a paella.

Re: the San Miguel and paella, 100% down. If you ever make it up to Canada, it'll be Poutine and Labatt's...haha... but only whilst being stereotypical, after we get the selfies done and put the Mountie hats away, we'll get down to some real Canadian fare...

Re: boots on the ground experience being superior … not necessarily. The problem with boots on the ground experience is the emotional reaction attached...and the ME has had way too much emotional reaction over the years, that appears to be a big part of the problem. Statistics and numbers tell a different story, and are much easier to be objective with, when high emotion has clouded this issue for approaching a century. If you guys stopped trying to debate each other into the ground, and had an open minded conversation, I'm sure you'd reach a more accurate conclusion.

I also call out Israel for the lives they have taken, and the laws they have broken...and I've been called an anti-Semite by our resident propagandists here. But what they don't see, because we don't have a very strong Palestinian representation in this particular venue, are the times I've gone equally hard at the Arab propagandists claiming Israel is 100% to blame. And having read a lot of OW's stuff, I'd be surprised if he was any different. It's a mess down there, and no one is innocent...not the Jews, not the Arabs, and not the rest of us, who can't seem to help but meddle. After spending most of my life with this endless nonsense on the TV, that's the best version of the truth I can find, and no one, regardless of their statistics or first hand experience, has been able to convince me otherwise.

 

[Chagos]

Re: the San Miguel and paella, 100% down. If you ever make it up to Canada, it'll be Poutine and Labatt's...haha... but only whilst being stereotypical, after we get the selfies done and put the Mountie hats away, we'll get down to some real Canadian fare...

I don't have any plans to visit Canada (again) right now, nor for that matter anywhere else. But who knows, the day may come when I overcome my current exhaustion at having spent the greater part of life traipsing all over most of the world.

Re: boots on the ground experience being superior … not necessarily. The problem with boots on the ground experience is the emotional reaction attached...and the ME has had way too much emotional reaction over the years, that appears to be a big part of the problem. Statistics and numbers tell a different story, and are much easier to be objective with, when high emotion has clouded this issue for approaching a century. If you guys stopped trying to debate each other into the ground, and had an open minded conversation, I'm sure you'd reach a more accurate conclusion.

I agree that emotional detachment over the stuff one actually gets to see is a big challenge, nevertheless distance both by way of time and space leaves plenty of room to develop as much objectivity as possible. And on here as well as outside one can usually tell who has no distance at all. Primarily by the persistent refusal shown at being prepared to consider any other take than the one arrived at. Usually enhanced by demonstration of utter ignorance on what one spouts forth over

I also call out Israel for the lives they have taken, and the laws they have broken...and I've been called an anti-Semite by our resident propagandists here. But what they don't see, because we don't have a very strong Palestinian representation in this particular venue, are the times I've gone equally hard at the Arab propagandists claiming Israel is 100% to blame. And having read a lot of OW's stuff, I'd be surprised if he was any different. It's a mess down there, and no one is innocent...not the Jews, not the Arabs, and not the rest of us, who can't seem to help but meddle. After spending most of my life with this endless nonsense on the TV, that's the best version of the truth I can find, and no one, regardless of their statistics or first hand experience, has been able to convince me otherwise.

I've expressed elsewhere in this forum how one is damned down here if one does and damned if one doesn't. IOW taking any side will get one attacked, but refusing to take any will however get one accused of being too cowardly (for fear of being censored either way) to get on board of the individual criticism bus.

Happened just not so long ago to somebody else here.

Where I'm concerned, I don't profess to have any solutions on offer, all I know is what simply will NOT work. That I express and if it entails pulling the rug from somebody's pipe dream, so be it.

 

[OlNate]

I don't have any plans to visit Canada (again) right now, nor for that matter anywhere else. But who knows, the day may come when I overcome my current exhaustion at having spent the greater part of life traipsing all over most of the world.

I agree that emotional detachment over the stuff one actually gets to see is a big challenge, nevertheless distance both by way of time and space leaves plenty of room to develop as much objectivity as possible. And on here as well as outside one can usually tell who has no distance at all. Primarily by the persistent refusal shown at being prepared to consider any other take than the one arrived at. Usually enhanced by demonstration of utter ignorance on what one spouts forth overI've expressed elsewhere in this forum how one is damned down here if one does and damned if one doesn't. IOW taking any side will get one attacked, but refusing to take any will however get one accused of being too cowardly (for fear of being censored either way) to get on board of the individual criticism bus.

Happened just not so long ago to somebody else here.

Where I'm concerned, I don't profess to have any solutions on offer, all I know is what simply will NOT work. That I express and if it entails pulling the rug from somebody's pipe dream, so be it.

Of course, there is a side to take, and that is the side of all the innocent people getting killed between two organizations, one a so called terrorist organization that wants to be a government, the other a so called government that acts like a terrorist organization, neither of which seem able to get their **** together and do the right thing for the people they represent. I'm sure that damns me in one direction or another (or, more accurately both, from my experience), yet that's where my personal morals and ideologies lead me, given the cold hard facts presented by the numbers, and I believe that choosing to support one side or the other enables that side to continue their problematic and ultimately self defeating behavior.

Maybe the better way to say it is that I am "for" both sides...since advocating for both sides to stop this insanity is in the best interests of both.

 

[Chagos]

Of course, there is a side to take, and that is the side of all the innocent people getting killed between two organizations, one a so called terrorist organization that wants to be a government, the other a so called government that acts like a terrorist organization, neither of which seem able to get their **** together and do the right thing for the people they represent. I'm sure that damns me in one direction or another (or, more accurately both, from my experience), yet that's where my personal morals and ideologies lead me, given the cold hard facts presented by the numbers, and I believe that choosing to support one side or the other enables that side to continue their problematic and ultimately self defeating behavior.

Maybe the better way to say it is that I am "for" both sides...since advocating for both sides to stop this insanity is in the best interests of both.

singing from the same hymn sheet here, you and I.