Gaza is an "Open Air Prison", Ghetto", "Refugee Camp"

[Winston Smith]

The reason why the opinion you name fact is being denied is because it has nothing to do with reality.
Israel has very little to do with the Gazan economic problem, and even now after the economic blockade on the Strip was removed you're not going to see the area prospering, from the simple reason that it is very ill-managed.
That's the main reason for the situation amongst the rest of the third-world countries, and the reason why they are considered to be third-world.


Well then you don't think at all. Since the holocaust was real and since the majority of the Jews of the world have indeed been systematically executed by the Nazis, to say that if I as a Jew express anger when people are ridiculing the holocaust it simply means I'm using it as a method of promoting my political agenda is absolutely disgusting, and I'm not saying this to take a jab at the "anti-Israeli camp", I'm saying this to describe my thoughts towards you at this moment, as an individual which I am disgusted with.

Well, I hope you can get over that. As I said, I'm not ridiculing the Holocaust--just the clumsy attempts to capitalize on it.

 

[CJ 2.0]

The OP deals with references to Gaza as an "open-air prison," "ghetto," or "refugee camp." All of these descriptions are accurate in one way or another. They're also probably all inconsistent with each other if you want to take them in an extremely narrow sense, but I think that approach muddies the water more than anything else. The real issues aren't clarified by quibbling over whether Gaza looks more like Venice or Fort Payne. It makes no difference how many square kilometers Israel has succeeded in isolating from commerce. The point is that they are isolated.

Which arguably they should be.

And which is entirely different than any of those descriptors in the thead title. Ghetto has been sufficiently dealt with, I think. "Open air prison" I think is also rank hyperbole given the size of the territory, and "refugee camp" is just generally a hyperbole-laden meme of the pro-Palestinian camp given the ... unique way Palestinians get to be defined as refugees that does not actually apply to descendants of displaced people anywhere else.

 

[Winston Smith]

Which arguably they should be.

And which is entirely different than any of those descriptors in the thead title. Ghetto has been sufficiently dealt with, I think. "Open air prison" I think is also rank hyperbole given the size of the territory, and "refugee camp" is just generally a hyperbole-laden meme of the pro-Palestinian camp given the ... unique way Palestinians get to be defined as refugees that does not actually apply to descendants of displaced people anywhere else.

That's probably because most descendants of displaced people don't live in conditions that resemble refugee camps.

 

[CJ 2.0]

That's probably because most descendants of displaced people don't live in conditions that resemble refugee camps.

no, it's because the definition of "refugee" used by the UNRWA (which is solely concerned with the Palestinians) is completely different than the definition applied by the UNHCR (which is concerned with all other populations of displaced persons).

of course, I would add, as noted above, that the reaosn the Palestinians are still in "refugee camps" is solely and entirely the conscious decisions made by Palestinian and Arab leaders to maintain them in these states to further their war against Israel's existence.

I would also add, in any event, that the vast majority of Palestinian "refugees" can hadrly be described as living in "conditions that resemble refugee camps". Slums, maybe, but not refugee camps.

Refugee camps don't have plumbing, appartment blocks, paved streets and the rest.

 

[Winston Smith]

of course, I would add, as noted above, that the reaosn the Palestinians are still in "refugee camps" is solely and entirely the conscious decisions made by Palestinian and Arab leaders to maintain them in these states to further their war against Israel's existence.

Solely and entirely? I don't think so. But once you cut through all the semantics, that is certainly the real issue.

 

[Tashah]

Moderator's Warning:

Demon of Light is banned from this thread.

 

[mbig]

This is utterly disgusting.
It is an insult to all the activists who risked their lives and even lost it at times in order to ease or remove the blockade of Gaza.

Whoever financed to build this piece of crap should not have the right to breathe. Instead of helping the unemployed and the poor in Gaza they opened a disgusting mall :2mad:

Shame on them !!!!!!

Once again... this string as hardly just the new "tacky mall"..not even close.
Yet those taking issue with me, can only Focus on it rather than everything else I posted (including the Untacky Olympic pool in just the same post), from the OP's videos and other posts they conveniently drop including articles from the NY Times, Economist, etc.

As to those who "risked their lives" it wasn't to prevent Gazans from starving to death.
They Aren't.
They were making a POLITICAL point with the Flotilla Stunt ... and if they had "Piorities" you say you believe in they would indeed get to the Myriad of other places Nearby where people ARE indeed starving.
-

 

[CJ 2.0]

Solely and entirely? I don't think so. But once you cut through all the semantics, that is certainly the real issue.

You are right. it is also a result of the work of the UN and various "relief agencies" to perpetuate the Palestinian refugee class.

Incidentally, where are the refugees from '47 in India and Pakistan? Where are the German refugees (millions originally) from the Sudetenland? Where are the Jewish refugees from the Arab world (originally equal or greater than the number of displaced Palestinians)?

Only the Palestinians still miantain refugee status and refugee claims. And this has nothing to do with Israel.

 

[Gardener]

Actually, when I started reading this thread, I had no opinion as to whether Gaza could validly be compared with Nazi ghettos. I did some research on employment patterns, since that seemed to be what most people were focusing on, and concluded that there was a valid comparison based on that criterion. Not that any of that matters, really.

Yep, like I've been saying -- you knew nothing, you went to some hate sites to fill the void in knowledge, and now you repeat their canards.

Some things in life are patently obvious.

 

[Mira]

Once again... this string as hardly just the new "tacky mall"..not even close.
Yet those taking issue with me, can only Focus on it rather than everything else I posted (including the Untacky Olympic pool in just the same post), from the OP's videos and other posts they conveniently drop including articles from the NY Times, Economist, etc.

As to those who "risked their lives" it wasn't to prevent Gazans from starving to death.
They Aren't.
They were making a POLITICAL point with the Flotilla Stunt ... and if they had "Piorities" you say you believe in they would indeed get to the Myriad of other places Nearby where people ARE indeed starving.
-

Your opinion, not mine

 

[Mira]

Moderator's Warning:

Demon of Light is banned from this thread.

did I miss something ?

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

Moderator's Warning:

Next personal attack or off topic comment gets consequences.

 

[Winston Smith]

You are right. it is also a result of the work of the UN and various "relief agencies" to perpetuate the Palestinian refugee class.

Incidentally, where are the refugees from '47 in India and Pakistan? Where are the German refugees (millions originally) from the Sudetenland? Where are the Jewish refugees from the Arab world (originally equal or greater than the number of displaced Palestinians)?

Only the Palestinians still miantain refugee status and refugee claims. And this has nothing to do with Israel.

I would say all of those people are in better shape than the Palestinians. What does that prove?

 

[CJ 2.0]

I would say all of those people are in better shape than the Palestinians. What does that prove?

Just fleshing out your point, is all.

Policies from governments and peoples outside of the area where the people were displaced from is the sole factor in the continued existence of this refugee class.

The Palestinians refugee problem is a direct result not of the original displacement (which, unlike the countless other displacements around that time and thereafter have already been addressed) but as a result of destructionist goals and the willingness of the people to be used as pawns towards those goals.

This, combined with the permanent welfare system set up to maintain these people in this state for perpetuity, is what has caused the continuation of this situation.

Not the "blockade", not the occupation (which could have totally ended in 2000 if the Palestinians would have taken the peace deal rather than launching a terror war against Israel's civilians) and not the Netanyahu government.

 

[Winston Smith]

Just fleshing out your point, is all.

Policies from governments and peoples outside of the area where the people were displaced from is the sole factor in the continued existence of this refugee class.

The Palestinians refugee problem is a direct result not of the original displacement (which, unlike the countless other displacements around that time and thereafter have already been addressed) but as a result of destructionist goals and the willingness of the people to be used as pawns towards those goals.

This, combined with the permanent welfare system set up to maintain these people in this state for perpetuity, is what has caused the continuation of this situation.

Not the "blockade", not the occupation (which could have totally ended in 2000 if the Palestinians would have taken the peace deal rather than launching a terror war against Israel's civilians) and not the Netanyahu government.

The Jewish and German refugees you refer to found sanctuary, mostly in Jewish and German states, where they had economic and political rights. As for India and Pakistan, the UN has been involved there from the time of the partition, as well. From this you conclude that the situation in Palestine is the UN's fault, even though Israel would seem to be the distinguishing factor. I don't follow that logic.

I think the welfare system has contributed to the problem by disguising the costs of the violence, but it's equally true that military aid to Israel has contributed for the same reason. The talks with Israel are more complicated than you imply, especially when you consider that Netanyahu was cynically undermining implementation of the Oslo Accords even as he ostensibly negotiated for an end to the occupation. And, of course, it goes without saying that failed negotiations don't relieve Israel of its humanitarian responsibilities as an occupier.

 

[CJ 2.0]

The Jewish and German refugees you refer to found sanctuary, mostly in Jewish and German states, where they had economic and political rights. As for India and Pakistan, the UN has been involved there from the time of the partition, as well. From this you conclude that the situation in Palestine is the UN's fault, even though Israel would seem to be the distinguishing factor. I don't follow that logic.

they found sanctuary all over because sanctuary was given to them. By contrast, in the Arab world (other than Jordan),Palestinians and their descendanrts have been systematically denied rights and kept in squalor for propaganda purposes. Meanwhile, the PA refused to build any new communities to resettle "refugees" within its own territory because that would reduce pressure on Israel on the phony "right of return".

Israel is only the distinguishing factor because its enemies are so intransigent, and so willing to use the Palestinians as pawns.

I think the welfare system has contributed to the problem by disguising the costs of the violence, but it's equally true that military aid to Israel has contributed for the same reason. The talks with Israel are more complicated than you imply, especially when you consider that Netanyahu was cynically undermining implementation of the Oslo Accords even as he ostensibly negotiated for an end to the occupation. And, of course, it goes without saying that failed negotiations don't relieve Israel of its humanitarian responsibilities as an occupier.

of course. Nothing like Arafat systematically p[reparing for a terror war while completely refusing to take any steps to prepare his people for any compromise while fanning the flames that he would trigger when it suited him.

Go figure Netanyahu didn't want to cooperate with him. We may forget, but the whole "we don't control the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade" was used repeatedly, to the same effect as with Black Septyember, to distance the PLO leadership from terrorist activities done under its direct instruction and supervision. But of COURSE Arafat was running the show and of COURSE they were following his instructions, which is pretty obvious now (though it was at the time as well).

Netanyahu was elected because the Israelis rightly ditrusted the Palestinian leadership. That he would act consistently with that mistrust should not be surprising.

 

[mbig]

Once again... this string as hardly just the new "tacky mall"..not even close.
Yet those taking issue with me, can only Focus on it rather than everything else I posted (including the Untacky Olympic pool in just the same post), from the OP's videos and other posts they conveniently drop including articles from the NY Times, Economist, etc.

As to those who "risked their lives" it wasn't to prevent Gazans from starving to death.
They Aren't.
They were making a POLITICAL point with the Flotilla Stunt ... and if they had "Piorities" you say you believe in they would indeed get to the Myriad of other places Nearby where people ARE indeed starving.

Your opinion, not mine

This is rather terse/empty 'reply'.

I stated a few people disingenuously just chose to use the 'mall' rather than the evidence I posted throughout the string.
I stated that Gazans aren't starving to death.
I stated the Flotilla was a Political stunt because there were/are indeed many places more needy nearby and if they had the priorities you claim...they could go to .. or elsewhere say for one... the place in Your signature, Hait!. Even before the quake.

 

[Mira]

This is rather terse/empty 'reply'.

No, this is a reply saying "I don't feel like debating the subject with you"

 

[Winston Smith]

they found sanctuary all over because sanctuary was given to them. By contrast, in the Arab world (other than Jordan),Palestinians and their descendanrts have been systematically denied rights and kept in squalor for propaganda purposes. Meanwhile, the PA refused to build any new communities to resettle "refugees" within its own territory because that would reduce pressure on Israel on the phony "right of return".

Israel is only the distinguishing factor because its enemies are so intransigent, and so willing to use the Palestinians as pawns.

So the argument always goes, but it's beside the point. If I drive someone from their home and someone else takes them in, that's super-duper. If no one else takes them in, it doesn't diminish my responsibility. I can't assume someone else will step in just because they're all brown people and they must all be willing to help a cousin out. If Arab nations are using the Palestinians as pawns, it makes Israel's responsibility to them greater, not less.

of course. Nothing like Arafat systematically p[reparing for a terror war while completely refusing to take any steps to prepare his people for any compromise while fanning the flames that he would trigger when it suited him.

Go figure Netanyahu didn't want to cooperate with him. We may forget, but the whole "we don't control the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade" was used repeatedly, to the same effect as with Black Septyember, to distance the PLO leadership from terrorist activities done under its direct instruction and supervision. But of COURSE Arafat was running the show and of COURSE they were following his instructions, which is pretty obvious now (though it was at the time as well).

Netanyahu was elected because the Israelis rightly ditrusted the Palestinian leadership. That he would act consistently with that mistrust should not be surprising.

Electing a tough negotiator isn't the same as electing a snake. There is a legitimate lack of trust on both sides, and Netanyahu wasn't just "acting consistently" with it. He was contributing to it.

 

[CJ 2.0]

So the argument always goes, but it's beside the point. If I drive someone from their home and someone else takes them in, that's super-duper. If no one else takes them in, it doesn't diminish my responsibility. I can't assume someone else will step in just because they're all brown people and they must all be willing to help a cousin out. If Arab nations are using the Palestinians as pawns, it makes Israel's responsibility to them greater, not less.

of course, there was not really any such thing as a distinct Palestinian people at the time, but whatever. Fascinating how because Israel absorbed the greater number of people systematically ethnically clensed from the Arab world the Arab world is completely absolved of that ethnic clensing, while displaced persons from Israel's war for survival (you cannot call it ethnic clensing in any conceivable sense as there were lots and lots of Arabs left in Israel following the war of independence) are used as an albatross around Israel's neck.

Kind of allows the Arab world to justify its policy of using the Palestiniqans like this - after all, it seems to have worked, at least as far as your views are concerned. In any event, Israel offered full peace and independence. The OPalestinians turned it down and started a terror war directed against Israel's civilian population.

Electing a tough negotiator isn't the same as electing a snake. There is a legitimate lack of trust on both sides, and Netanyahu wasn't just "acting consistently" with it. He was contributing to it.

Not nearly as much as Arafat, but why ever hold the Palestinians accountable for anything. After all, it isn't like they refused to make any concessions and systematically prepared their population for a sustained terror war against Israel's civilian population instead of taking steps to prepare for peace or anything.

Oh wait, that's exactly what they did ...

 

[Winston Smith]

of course, there was not really any such thing as a distinct Palestinian people at the time, but whatever. Fascinating how because Israel absorbed the greater number of people systematically ethnically clensed from the Arab world the Arab world is completely absolved of that ethnic clensing, while displaced persons from Israel's war for survival (you cannot call it ethnic clensing in any conceivable sense as there were lots and lots of Arabs left in Israel following the war of independence) are used as an albatross around Israel's neck.

Kind of allows the Arab world to justify its policy of using the Palestiniqans like this - after all, it seems to have worked, at least as far as your views are concerned. In any event, Israel offered full peace and independence. The OPalestinians turned it down and started a terror war directed against Israel's civilian population.

It has nothing to do with absolving "the Arab world." It has to do with Israel's responsibilities under the Geneva Conventions and other international law. And let's not pretend Israel didn't have strategic reasons for accepting those refugees. In fact, they were encouraging them to come to Israel and discouraging other states from accepting them.

Not nearly as much as Arafat, but why ever hold the Palestinians accountable for anything. After all, it isn't like they refused to make any concessions and systematically prepared their population for a sustained terror war against Israel's civilian population instead of taking steps to prepare for peace or anything.

Oh wait, that's exactly what they did ...

The Palestinians should be held accountable, but only for what they really did. It's simply not true that they refused to make any concessions. Among other things, they were prepared to let Israel keep half the land that it was occupying in violation of multiple UN resolutions. Israel made no serious offer in return, so it's not surprising that the Palestinians would "prepare" for war. No one really wants to go to war unprepared.

 

[Gardener]

Israel made no serious offer in return, so it's not surprising that the Palestinians would "prepare" for war. No one really wants to go to war unprepared.

No, ARABS attacked the new Jewish state.

They had not yet invented this brand new people called "Palestinians" for propaganda purposes.

 

[alexa]

"Gaza cannot and must not be allowed to remain a prison camp". David Cameron speaking in Turkey. Just heard hm a few moments ago.

http://www.haaretz.com/news/interna...n-gaza-must-not-remain-a-prison-camp-1.304393

 

[donsutherland1]

"Gaza cannot and must not be allowed to remain a prison camp". David Cameron speaking in Turkey. Just heard hm a few moments ago.

British PM Cameron: Gaza must not remain a prison camp - Haaretz Daily Newspaper | Israel News

Relevant excerpts from the Prime Minister's speech:

Let me also be clear that the situation in Gaza has to change. Humanitarian goods and people must flow in both directions. Gaza cannot and must not be allowed to remain a prison camp.

But as, hopefully, we move in the coming weeks to direct talks between Israel and the Palestinians so it is Turkey that can make the case for peace and Turkey that can help press the parties to come together and point the way to a just and viable solution.

It is clear from the speech that the Prime Minister is counting on a successful outcome of the Israeli-Palestinian talks to bring an end to the current situation in the Gaza Strip. He unveiled no new ideas for bringing Hamas to abandon violence (a necessary condition for the blockade to end) or otherwise addressing Israel's security needs. Instead, he referenced bilateral Israeli-Palestinian talks and suggested that Turkey has the potential to play a constructive role in facilitating "a just and viable solution." Hence, there has been no change in British foreign policy with respect to the Middle East in general and Gaza Strip in particular. In short, the British Prime Minister is not seeking the elimination of the blockade regardless of the resolution of other issues. He is calling for its end within the context of a two-state agreement.

 

[alexa]

Relevant excerpts from the Prime Minister's speech:

Let me also be clear that the situation in Gaza has to change. Humanitarian goods and people must flow in both directions. Gaza cannot and must not be allowed to remain a prison camp.

But as, hopefully, we move in the coming weeks to direct talks between Israel and the Palestinians so it is Turkey that can make the case for peace and Turkey that can help press the parties to come together and point the way to a just and viable solution.

It is clear from the speech that the Prime Minister is counting on a successful outcome of the Israeli-Palestinian talks to bring an end to the current situation in the Gaza Strip. He unveiled no new ideas for bringing Hamas to abandon violence (a necessary condition for the blockade to end) or otherwise addressing Israel's security needs. Instead, he referenced bilateral Israeli-Palestinian talks and suggested that Turkey has the potential to play a constructive role in facilitating "a just and viable solution." Hence, there has been no change in British foreign policy with respect to the Middle East in general and Gaza Strip in particular. In short, the British Prime Minister is not seeking the elimination of the blockade regardless of the resolution of other issues. He is calling for its end within the context of a two-state agreement.

Glad to hear you have no problem with him calling Gaza a 'Prison Camp'.