• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons 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!

Free Documentary: "Palestine is Still the Issue"

Jucon

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 9, 2010
Messages
787
Reaction score
222
Location
USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
:: Download Palestine is Still the Issue for Free. Watch Palestine is Still the Issue Online with Other Documentary Films and Free Movies. ::

John Pilger returns to the Occupied Territories of the West Bank and Gaza where, in 1974, he filmed a documentary with the same title about the same issues, a nation of people - the Palestinians - forced off their land and later subjected to a military occupation by Israel. This was an occupation condemned by the United Nations and almost every country in the world, including Britain. But Israel is backed by a very powerful friend, the United States. Pilger finds that 25 years later the basic problems remain unchanged: a desperate, destitute people whose homeland is illegally occupied by the world's fourth biggest military power. What has changed is that the Palestinians have fought back. Stateless and humiliated for so long, they've risen up against Israel's huge military machine, although they themselves have no arms, no tanks, no American planes and gun ships or missiles.

He hears extraordinary stories from Palestinians, though most of his interviews are with Israelis whose voices are seldom heard, including the remarkable witness of a man who lost his daughter in a suicide bombing. But for Palestinians, the overriding, routine terror, day after day, has been the ruthless control of almost every aspect of their lives, as if they live in an open prison. This film is about the Palestinians and a group of courageous Israelis united in the oldest human struggle - to be free.
After watching the documentary, post your thoughts.
 

Gardener

free market communist
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 5, 2005
Messages
26,661
Reaction score
15,927
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
After watching the documentary, post your thoughts.

My thoughts are that this represents the very lowest form of yellow journalism intended for a very ignorant and bigoted audience.
 

Jucon

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 9, 2010
Messages
787
Reaction score
222
Location
USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
My thoughts are that this represents the very lowest form of yellow journalism intended for a very ignorant and bigoted audience.
Seeing as you posted your comment within 45 minutes of me starting this thread, I am betting you didn't watch but are basing your judgement off of the description.

However, I hope you will further explain your comment.
 

Gardener

free market communist
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 5, 2005
Messages
26,661
Reaction score
15,927
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Seeing as you posted your comment within 45 minutes of me starting this thread, I am betting you didn't watch but are basing your judgement off of the description.

However, I hope you will further explain your comment.
I've seen this tripe before. He uses every hackneyed framing mechanism in the book, omits anything that does not jibe with his radical agenda, and is indulging in nothing but propaganda.

If you were an actual moderate you would not be promoting him.
 

Jucon

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 9, 2010
Messages
787
Reaction score
222
Location
USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
I've seen this tripe before. He uses every hackneyed framing mechanism in the book, omits anything that does not jibe with his radical agenda, and is indulging in nothing but propaganda.

If you were an actual moderate you would not be promoting him.
My mistake.

I'm not promoting him, I'm asking for people's opinions one way or the other.

And I certainly don't appreciate the personal attack.

Thanks for the comments that were on topic though.
 
Last edited:

Gardener

free market communist
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 5, 2005
Messages
26,661
Reaction score
15,927
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I'm not promoting him, I'm asking for people's opinions one way or the other.
You have brought his videos into this forum and asked people to spend their time watching it. That is promotion by very definition since you are advertising his views.

And I certainly don't appreciate the personal attack.
No personal attack, but a statement of fact. This man is an uber extremist. He has actually aided a Palestinian terrorist organization in a cross border raid, and his invective is so over the top that any true moderate would have taken notice. IF you agree with him THEN you are not an actual moderate. His views are so extreme and his rhetoric so manipulative by nature that he defines the antithesis of moderation.
 

Renae

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
48,389
Reaction score
18,084
Location
San Antonio Texas
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Conservative
Why would anyone watch a biased propaganda piece by a Truther???

Flying into Philadelphia recently, I spotted the Kean congressional report on 11 September from the 9/11 Commission on sale at the bookstalls. "How many do you sell?" I asked. "One or two," was the reply. "It'll disappear soon." Yet, this modest, blue-covered book is a revelation. Like the Butler report in the UK, which detailed all the incriminating evidence of Blair's massaging of intelligence before the invasion of Iraq, then pulled its punches and concluded nobody was responsible, so the Kean report makes excruciatingly clear what really happened, then fails to draw the conclusions that stare it in the face. It is a supreme act of normalising the unthinkable. This is not surprising, as the conclusions are volcanic.
The most important evidence to the 9/11 Commission came from General Ralph Eberhart, commander of the North American Aerospace Defence Command (NORAD). "Air force jet fighters could have intercepted hijacked airliners roaring towards the World Trade Center and Pentagon," he said, "if only air traffic controllers had asked for help 13 minutes sooner ... We would have been able to shoot down all three ... all four of them."


Why did this not happen?
John Pilger on the 9/11 Stand-down

ITV - John Pilger - The 'good war' is a bad war
Two years ago a project set up by the men who now surround George W Bush said what America needed was "a new Pearl Harbor". Its published aims have, alarmingly, come true.

The threat posed by US terrorism to the security of nations and individuals was outlined in prophetic detail in a document written more than two years ago and disclosed only recently. What was needed for America to dominate much of humanity and the world's resources, it said, was "some catastrophic and catalysing event -- like a new Pearl Harbor". The attacks of 11 September 2001 provided the "new Pearl Harbor", described as "the opportunity of ages". The extremists who have since exploited 11 September come from the era of Ronald Reagan, when far-right groups and "think-tanks" were established to avenge the American "defeat" in Vietnam. In the 1990s, there was an added agenda: to justify the denial of a "peace dividend" following the cold war. The Project for the New American Century was formed, along with the American Enterprise Institute, the Hudson Institute and others that have since merged the ambitions of the Reagan administration with those of the current Bush regime.

One of George W Bush's "thinkers" is Richard Perle. I interviewed Perle when he was advising Reagan; and when he spoke about "total war", I mistakenly dismissed him as mad. He recently used the term again in describing America's "war on terror". "No stages," he said. "This is total war. We are fighting a variety of enemies. There are lots of them out there. All this talk about first we are going to do Afghanistan, then we will do Iraq... this is entirely the wrong way to go about it. If we just let our vision of the world go forth, and we embrace it entirely and we don't try to piece together clever diplomacy, but just wage a total war... our children will sing great songs about us years from now."
Bush Terror Elite Wanted 9/11 to Happen, by John Pilger, 12/12/02

Crackpot lunatic. No need to watch his trash.
 

alexa

DP Veteran
Joined
May 14, 2009
Messages
4,684
Reaction score
1,340
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
My mistake.

I'm not promoting him, I'm asking for people's opinions one way or the other.

And I certainly don't appreciate the personal attack.

Thanks for the comments that were on topic though.
I haven't watched it though I will. John Pilger is one of the view journalists who believes in saying things as he sees them rather than as he is supposed to see them so I value him for keeping freedom of speech in journalism alive - along with some others.

Sorry you have so soon experienced a Gardiner attack. It is a kind of bullying and happens to all with opposing views to him. Your character will be slurred and so on.
 

Jucon

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 9, 2010
Messages
787
Reaction score
222
Location
USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Why would anyone watch a biased propaganda piece by a Truther???

John Pilger on the 9/11 Stand-down

ITV - John Pilger - The 'good war' is a bad war

Bush Terror Elite Wanted 9/11 to Happen, by John Pilger, 12/12/02

Crackpot lunatic. No need to watch his trash.
Alright, you've made your point about the biasness of this reporter. To be honest I was hoping more of a discussion on the suffering of the Palestinians rather than the documentary itself.

There are clearly some good reasons why the Israelis have such mistrust of Arab-Palestinians and impose such strict rules on the Arab-Palestinians... the suicide bombings, constant threats from Hamas and other surrounding countries, the history between the Jews and Arabs since the founding of Israel as a state (to name a few reasons)... but people should still realize that many Palestinians would love to live their lives normally and should not be subjected to humiliation.

This documentary is clearly biased... the majority of it only shows one side's views... but I believe people should realize that the Arab-Palestinians are suffering in the middle east. And I feel this documentary shows a few examples of how the Arab-Palestinians have been suffering. If you want to hear about how the Israelis have suffered in their past and present, I encourage you to look up other documentaries or find information online. I am not picking sides... but my hope is to bring to light that neither side is innocent in this struggle.

I firmly believe all sides deserve to have their voices heard and people should constantly seek out all side's views.
 
Last edited:

Renae

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
48,389
Reaction score
18,084
Location
San Antonio Texas
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Conservative
Alright, you've made your point about the biasness of this reporter. To be honest I was hoping more of a discussion on the suffering of the Palestinians rather than the documentary itself.
The suffering would end tomorrow if the Palestinian people would do three things:

A: Embrace Israel as a friend, a partner for Prosperity.

B: Kick out the radical's that believe violence is the answer.

C: Accept that the land they got, is the land they got.


Now, A would require Israel to in turn embrace Palestine, however I feel that is a far easier task to accomplish then the reverse.


Till then, my pity for the Peoples of Palestine is limited to feeling bad for those that realize the hell they live in, is of their own making.
 

Tashah

wʜɪтe яussɪaи
DP Veteran
Joined
May 25, 2005
Messages
18,379
Reaction score
9,227
Location
ישראל • אמריקה
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Centrist
I haven't watched it though I will. John Pilger is one of the view journalists who believes in saying things as he sees them rather than as he is supposed to see them so I value him for keeping freedom of speech in journalism alive - along with some others.

Sorry you have so soon experienced a Gardiner attack. It is a kind of bullying and happens to all with opposing views to him. Your character will be slurred and so on.
Moderator's Warning:
Alexa - You are banned from this thread. Do not post in this thread again. Any and every further post by you in this thread will result in a 5 point DBAJ Infraction.
 

Jucon

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 9, 2010
Messages
787
Reaction score
222
Location
USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
The suffering would end tomorrow if the Palestinian people would do three things:

A: Embrace Israel as a friend, a partner for Prosperity.

B: Kick out the radical's that believe violence is the answer.

C: Accept that the land they got, is the land they got.


Now, A would require Israel to in turn embrace Palestine, however I feel that is a far easier task to accomplish then the reverse.


Till then, my pity for the Peoples of Palestine is limited to feeling bad for those that realize the hell they live in, is of their own making.
Good point, though the Israelis need to also stop making it seem as though they will never give the West Bank back to the Arabs. They continue to build settlements on occupied / disputed (depending on who you talk to) land, and that sends the message that they intend to either carve out pieces of the West Bank, or don't intend on giving the West Bank in the first place. I think a good first step would be for the Israelis to stop building settlements on this land. Perhaps tensions will lower to a level where both sides can work with each other. This issue has thwarted previous talks in the past as have violent actions by the Palestinians. Both sides need to listen to the other side's concerns.
 
Last edited:

Apocalypse

DEATH TO ANTARCTICA!!!
DP Veteran
Joined
May 14, 2009
Messages
19,755
Reaction score
6,217
Location
Israel
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Good point, though the Israelis need to also stop making it seem as though they will never give the West Bank back to the Arabs. They continue to build settlements on occupied / dispute (depending on who you talk to) land, and that sends the message that they intend to either carve out pieces of the West Bank, or don't intend on giving the West Bank in the first place. I think a good first step would be for the Israelis to stop building settlements on this land. Perhaps tensions will lower to a level where both sides can work with each other. This issue has thwarted previous talks in the past.
Israel hasn't been building new settlements in the West Bank for years now, and it does not intend on doing so in the future.
What you're referring to is building within existing settlements, or as it is called, "natural growth".
That was frozen for 10 months by Benjamin Netanyahu, nearly 10 months ago. The freezing order is about to expire.
 

Jucon

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 9, 2010
Messages
787
Reaction score
222
Location
USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Israel hasn't been building new settlements in the West Bank for years now, and it does not intend on doing so in the future.
What you're referring to is building within existing settlements, or as it is called, "natural growth".
That was frozen for 10 months by Benjamin Netanyahu, nearly 10 months ago. The freezing order is about to expire.
Thanks for the correction.

However, the approval of new building projects (even if they are months / years off) is just as damaging to peace talks as building them.

BBC News - Joe Biden steps up pressure on Israel over E Jerusalem

US Vice-President Joe Biden has again condemned Israel over a controversial building project, saying its approval undermined trust in the peace process.

Mr Biden was speaking after meeting the Palestinian Authority President, Mahmoud Abbas, in the West Bank.

Mr Abbas also said the approval of another 1,600 homes in occupied East Jerusalem threatened the peace process and demanded the plans be scrapped.
"Yesterday, the decision by the Israeli government to advance planning for new housing units in East Jerusalem undermines that very trust - the trust that we need right now in order to begin as well as produce profitable negotiations."
It appears to me that Israel does intend to keep parts of the West Bank. I just hope that is something the Palestinians can live with.
 
Last edited:

Apocalypse

DEATH TO ANTARCTICA!!!
DP Veteran
Joined
May 14, 2009
Messages
19,755
Reaction score
6,217
Location
Israel
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Thanks for the correction.

However, the approval of new building projects (even if they are months / years off) is just as damaging to peace talks as building them.

BBC News - Joe Biden steps up pressure on Israel over E Jerusalem





It appears to me that Israel does intend to keep parts of the West Bank. I just hope that is something the Palestinians can live with.
East Jerusalem is not the West Bank.
Israel has conquered East Jerusalem in the Six-Days war, June 1967, from the Jordanian state.
Israel sees it just as it sees Tel-Aviv, West Jerusalem, Haifa, and every other city in Israel.
 

Jucon

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 9, 2010
Messages
787
Reaction score
222
Location
USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
East Jerusalem is not the West Bank.
Israel has conquered East Jerusalem in the Six-Days war, June 1967, from the Jordanian state.
Israel sees it just as it sees Tel-Aviv, West Jerusalem, Haifa, and every other city in Israel.
The international community recognizes the areas seized by Israel during the Six-Day War as occupied Palestinian territory, including East Jerusalem. The U.N. has condemned the occupation and they have required Israel to withdraw from these territories.

United Nations Resolution 242 Calling On Israel to Withdraw from Occupied Territories and Palestinian Recognition of Israel - UN Resolution 242 (1967)

United Nations Resolution 252 (1968) Condemning Occupation of East Jerusalem and Arab Territoties - UN Resolution Condemning Israel



United Nations Resolution 446 (1979) on Israeli West Bank Settlements

Affirming once more that the Fourth Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War of 12 August 1949 1/ is applicable to the Arab territories occupied by Israel since 1967, including Jerusalem,

1. Determines that the policy and practices of Israel in establishing settlements in the Palestinian and other Arab territories occupied since 1967 have no legal validity and constitute a serious obstruction to achieving a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East;

2. Strongly deplores the failure of Israel to abide by Security Council resolutions 237 (1967) of 14 June 1967, 252 (1968) of 21 May 1968 and 298 (1971) of 25 September 1971 and the consensus statement by the President of the Security Council on 11 November 1976 2/ and General Assembly resolutions 2253 (ES-V) and 2254 (ES-V) of 4 and 14 July 1967, 32/5 of 28 October 1977 and 33/113 of 18 December 1978;

3. Calls once more upon Israel, as the occupying Power, to abide scrupulously by the 1949 Fourth Geneva Convention, to rescind its previous measures and to desist from taking any action which would result in changing the legal status and geographical nature and materially affecting the demographic composition of the Arab territories occupied since 1967, including Jerusalem, and, in particular, not to transfer parts of its own civilian population into the occupied Arab territories;
Palestinians are not alone in their condemnation of Israel's occupation.

Israel should refrain from building settlements and buildings on this land until the disputes over the land are settled between all parties.
 
Last edited:

Tashah

wʜɪтe яussɪaи
DP Veteran
Joined
May 25, 2005
Messages
18,379
Reaction score
9,227
Location
ישראל • אמריקה
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Centrist
Palestinians are not alone in their condemnation of Israel's occupation.
If Jordan had refrained from participating in the War of 1967, the West Bank would never have been captured and occupied. The Jordanians gambled and lost the gambit.

Israel should refrain from building settlements and buildings on this land until the disputes over the land are settled between all parties.
Although I disagree with the settlements, the Palestinians have had 40+ years to settle accounts from 1967. Egypt and Jordan settled all territorial disputes with Israel decades ago. Israel and Abbas/Fatah are currently engaged in talks to reach a final agreement regarding the permanent borders.
 

Red_Dave

Libertarian socialist
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 23, 2005
Messages
6,879
Reaction score
1,715
Location
Staffs, England
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
The suffering would end tomorrow if the Palestinian people would do three things:

A: Embrace Israel as a friend, a partner for Prosperity.

B: Kick out the radical's that believe violence is the answer.

C: Accept that the land they got, is the land they got.


Now, A would require Israel to in turn embrace Palestine, however I feel that is a far easier task to accomplish then the reverse.


Till then, my pity for the Peoples of Palestine is limited to feeling bad for those that realize the hell they live in, is of their own making.
Fatah did the first two by going to war against Hamas, where did that get those on the West Bank?

As regards C if you living in the most densely populated place in earth (Gaza) where refugees from Israel proper make up the bulk of the population then accepting the 'land you got' isnt an attractive option.
 
Last edited:

Apocalypse

DEATH TO ANTARCTICA!!!
DP Veteran
Joined
May 14, 2009
Messages
19,755
Reaction score
6,217
Location
Israel
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Fatah did the first two by going to war against Hamas, where did that get those on the West Bank?
You are mistaken and misleading Dave, Hamas has went to war with Fatah, not the other way around.
Besides that, and besides the fact that there are still hostile groups and major radical figures operating within the West Bank, the situation in the area is actually good and the West Bank's economy is actually prospering, so that's where it got them.
As regards C if you living in the most densely populated place in earth (Gaza)
Can you back that claim up?
where refugees from Israel proper make up the bulk of the population
That's actually quite obviously false, but back that up anyway.
then accepting the 'land you got' isnt an attractive option.
He didn't say it is attractive, he said that's what they should do and clearly that's correct, they're not going to get more land than the 67' border.
 

Jucon

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 9, 2010
Messages
787
Reaction score
222
Location
USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
You are mistaken and misleading Dave, Hamas has went to war with Fatah, not the other way around.
Besides that, and besides the fact that there are still hostile groups and major radical figures operating within the West Bank, the situation in the area is actually good and the West Bank's economy is actually prospering, so that's where it got them.
Can you back that claim up?
That's actually quite obviously false, but back that up anyway.
He didn't say it is attractive, he said that's what they should do and clearly that's correct, they're not going to get more land than the 67' border.
It's not just Gaza. Refugees were expelled from or fled from Israel to all over the middle east after the Palestinian War and the Six-Day War. I consider it a legitimate demand to be able to return to their rightful properties in Israel.

CNN.com - Palestinian refugees and the 'right of return' - January 5, 2001

Palestinian refugees and the 'right of return'


January 5, 2001
Web posted at: 4:16 p.m. EST (2116 GMT)

(CNN) -- Israel's declaration of independence in 1948 triggered an invasion by several Arab countries -- and a war that forced hundreds of thousands of Palestinians from their homes in what was to be Israel.

Despite a United Nations resolution recognizing the Palestinians' right to return to their homes, Israeli law barred those Palestinians from re-entering Israel at the end of the war.

The Palestinians became refugees, taken in by other Arab states -- some of which were ill-equipped to support them.

The United Nations promptly established the U.N. Relief and Works Agency for Palestinian Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) to help care for those Palestinians. By June 30, 2000, more than 3.7 million Palestinians -- the refugees and their descendants -- were registered with the agency in Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, the West Bank and Gaza.

More than a million of those refugees live in 59 U.N.-operated refugee camps -- 27 of them in the West Bank and Gaza. Almost half of the roughly 3 million Palestinians living in the West Bank and Gaza are refugees, and more than 600,000 of them live in the camps. Gaza's population has particularly increased: U.N. figures indicate 824,000 out of 1.1 million are refugees.

Jordan hosts the most refugees -- 1.6 million, of which 280,000 live in 10 camps. Another 376,000 live in Lebanon, with 210,000 of those living in 12 camps. And in Syria, 112,000 of the country's 383,000 refugees live in 10 camps.

Al-Awda -- the Palestinian Right of Return Coalition (PRRC) -- says there are an additional 2 million refugees unregistered and living in other neighboring countries, such as Iran and Iraq, but those refugees are not directly covered by U.N. resolutions and programs.

Clinton's proposal:

Clinton has proposed that the Palestinians accept sovereignty over east Jerusalem -- and the holy sites located there -- in return for dropping the right of return.

Israeli reservations:

The proposal reflects the basic Israeli position that the right of return is unacceptable. It does not affect other proposals that have suggested allowing a certain number of Palestinians to rejoin their families inside Israel as a "humanitarian gesture" or financial compensation funded by Western donor.

Palestinian reservations:

The issue cuts to the core of Palestinian national identity -- the displacement of Palestinians that was integral to the creation of a Jewish state in 1948. Many Palestinians say their right to return goes beyond the U.N. resolution, stemming from a right of a people to live in their homeland.

Additionally, the refugees abroad represent an economic drain and, in some cases, a political dilemma for their hosts. Lebanon, for example, has flatly rejected the idea of allowing the refugees currently living within its border to permanently settle there. Objections like Lebanon's -- which fueled the Arab League foreign ministers when they said after a January meeting that the right of return was "sacred" -- create additional pressure on Arafat not to compromise on this issue.

The rising opposition to the Palestinian leader's authority in the West Bank and Gaza also works against compromise; Arafat is well aware that signing away the refugees' claims would all but invite them to recreate the Palestine Liberation Organization in exile with the backing of more hostile states such as Iraq, Syria and Libya, and to further challenge Arafat's authority in his own back yard. And after three months of bloodletting, the Palestinian leader knows such opposition may find a receptive audience.
St. Petersburg Times - Google News Archive Search
 
Last edited:

Apocalypse

DEATH TO ANTARCTICA!!!
DP Veteran
Joined
May 14, 2009
Messages
19,755
Reaction score
6,217
Location
Israel
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
It's not just Gaza. Refugees were expelled from or fled from Israel to all over the middle east after the Palestinian War and the Six-Day War. I consider it a legitimate demand to be able to return to their rightful properties in Israel.

CNN.com - Palestinian refugees and the 'right of return' - January 5, 2001



St. Petersburg Times - Google News Archive Search
I'm not speaking about the refugees issue, but his claim that most of Gaza are refugees from the Israeli-independence war, where the Palestinians and their Arab allies have tried to annihilate the Israeli state.
 

mbig

onomatopoeic
DP Veteran
Joined
May 14, 2009
Messages
10,350
Reaction score
4,989
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
The international community recognizes the areas seized by Israel during the Six-Day War as occupied Palestinian territory, including East Jerusalem. The U.N. has condemned the occupation and they have required Israel to withdraw from these territories.

United Nations Resolution 242 Calling On Israel to Withdraw from Occupied Territories and Palestinian Recognition of Israel - UN Resolution 242 (1967)
[/url]
.....
Palestinians are not alone in their condemnation of Israel's occupation.

Israel should refrain from building settlements and buildings on this land until the disputes over the land are settled between all parties.
You've already been answered on Res 242 which does not call for Complete withdrawal from the territories.
http://www.debatepolitics.com/middl...-illegal-even-occupied-30.html#post1058800862

Not that listing (probably 100) UN resolutions against Israel is an indication of Justice nor final settlement.

You should also know/learn Israel offered back the Occupied teriritories right after the 1967 War in exchange for mere recognition.
The Arabs Refused. (Google 'Khartoum three nos')
Only thus "Occupation".
 
Last edited:

mbig

onomatopoeic
DP Veteran
Joined
May 14, 2009
Messages
10,350
Reaction score
4,989
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Fatah did the first two by going to war against Hamas, where did that get those on the West Bank?

As regards C if you living in the most densely populated place in earth (Gaza) where refugees from Israel proper make up the bulk of the population then accepting the 'land you got' isnt an attractive option.
1. Gaza is Not the most densely populated place on earth.
Population Density per Square Mile of Countries — Infoplease.com

2. Do Gazan's "live in" or did they Create this density?
Gaza's population grows 40% every 10 years. Doubling every 20. Median age.. 17.
Yes, more than half the population are 'Children'.
http://www.debatepolitics.com/middle-east/65725-demography-and-radicalism-martin-kramer.html

Birth control is their problem, Not Israel.
Unoccupied Gaza won't get bigger, they'll have to learn to live in it or migrate-- like other People export countries.

There are now Absurdly 4.5 Million Palestinian 'refugees' (from the original 700k) even tho there are probably only a few thousand real ones left; and WE, the USA, EU, etc are paying for this Nursery called palestine and their care thru our UN/UNRWA contributions.
 
Last edited:

mbig

onomatopoeic
DP Veteran
Joined
May 14, 2009
Messages
10,350
Reaction score
4,989
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
As I thought, he was completely wrong.
Thanks for clarifying this, mbig.
And Gaza is just the more crowded Part of a future country.
If you look further down the chart to #23, you'll see the West Bank with 1/8th the Density of Gaza. And Further down to Israel at #40, with ¾ the Density of the West Bank.
But as with the 'Gaza trick', if you subtract out the near empty Negev Desert which is ½ of Israel, it's 50% more densely populated than the West Bank.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom