Who is responsible for the recent violence in Palestine?

[Bilal]

This morning the Israeli attacked a Palestinian jail (under UK/USA controll)and killed a policeman and prisoner. Their goal is to arrest or to kill one of the prisoners who is a member in the Palestinian parliament.

According to a previous agreement, this jail is put under the control of USA/UK to watch those prisoners … but the American and British left the jail few hours before the Israeli attack!

Is that means no respect for any international agreements? What is the crime of the policemen and the other prisoners to be killed?

The most important question:

Who started the violence after more than a year of ceasefire!

 

[EL]

Do you have any refs?

I've seriously been wondering if people (on both sides) really want peace?
If the answer is positive, how come they have chosen the governments they have?

 

[Bilal]

Do you have any refs?

I've seriously been wondering if people (on both sides) really want peace?
If the answer is positive, how come they have chosen the governments they have?

Here is a reference

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/world/3722003.html

Palestinian elected in 1996 a government which wanted peace. They recognized Israel, but Israel did not recognize Palestine, instead they built more settlements, stole more land and destroyed the infrastructure...

 

[EL]

Here is a reference

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/world/3722003.html

Palestinian elected in 1996 a government which wanted peace. They recognized Israel, but Israel did not recognize Palestine, instead they built more settlements, stole more land and destroyed the infrastructure...

Thanks for the link. The news are also in Swedish newspapers by now.

I know what pain and destruction Israel has caused the palistinian people, but electing Hamas...that's just rediculus...like giving up all hope for peace...

… but the American and British left the jail few hours before the Israeli attack!

According to Swedish newspapers they had warned long time ago that they would leave if their security wasn't improved. It's not like they left without warning...
They also claim they didn't know anything about that Israel was planning an attack.

 

[Bilal]

They also claim they didn't know anything about that Israel was planning an attack.

There is an agreement between PA, Israel, UK and USA in 2002: Those people will stay in the jail, and Israel promised not to harm them. One of them is the leader of Palestinian Public Front (nationalist-left).

In 2001, Israel assassinated the leader of this organization, so they revenged by killing the Israeli Minister of tourism (extreme right wing). As intermediate solution, PA accepted to put the new leader of this organization in the jail under USA/UK control.

I know what pain and destruction Israel has caused the palistinian people, but electing Hamas...that's just rediculus...like giving up all hope for peace...

Even the Palestinian Christian gave their votes to Hamas … simply because Israel did nothing since Oslo agreement except bringing of 1 million Russian Jews and building 200 settlements on 60% of WB. They jailed Arafat in his office until his death.

According to Oslo agreement, Palestine will be Independence State in 1998, but this never happen because of the death of Rabin and the rise of the Israeli extreme right wing in 1996.

 

[EL]

There is an agreement between PA, Israel, UK and USA in 2002: Those people will stay in the jail, and Israel promised not to harm them. One of them is the leader of Palestinian Public Front (nationalist-left).

In 2001, Israel assassinated the leader of this organization, so they revenged by killing the Israeli Minister of tourism (extreme right wing). As intermediate solution, PA accepted to put the new leader of this organization in the jail under USA/UK control.

Sure, but if the Americans and British feared for palestinian extremists, and asked for better security from the Palistinian government but didn't get it, I can understand they wanted to leave.

Even the Palestinian Christian gave their votes to Hamas … simply because Israel did nothing since Oslo agreement except bringing of 1 million Russian Jews and building 200 settlements on 60% of WB. They jailed Arafat in his office until his death.

Do Palestinians actually think the situation will become better with Hamas in power? I do not see the logic?
Both sides just seem to be filled with hate...

 

[russ_watters]

The interim PM of Israel is continuing the unilateral pullout from the occupied territories in an effort to pin-down the borders by 2010. That's breathtakingly generous of them considering the recent advance of terrorism to public policy for the Palestinian people. The Palestinian people are soon going to get that homeland they have been fighting for generations to avoid.

 

[Art]

The interim PM of Israel is continuing the unilateral pullout from the occupied territories in an effort to pin-down the borders by 2010. That's breathtakingly generous of them considering the recent advance of terrorism to public policy for the Palestinian people. The Palestinian people are soon going to get that homeland they have been fighting for generations to avoid.

Have you ever given any thought as to why Israel decided to pull out of the Gaza Strip? Do you really think Ariel Sharon was the kind of man to make

breathtakingly generous

unilateral moves just to be nice??

Israel was worried about the high Arab population in the strip and the higher birthrate amongst the Palestinians and feared losing overall control of Israel through the ballot box.

 

[russ_watters]

Have you ever given any thought as to why Israel decided to pull out of the Gaza Strip? Do you really think Ariel Sharon was the kind of man to make unilateral moves just to be nice??

I'm one of those cynics who doesn't think anyone ever does anything just to be nice. Certainly it is to Israel's benefit to establish permanent borders. But that doesn't make it any less generous to force the Palestinians to have what they've always said they wanted.

 

[Bilal]

I'm one of those cynics who doesn't think anyone ever does anything just to be nice. Certainly it is to Israel's benefit to establish permanent borders. But that doesn't make it any less generous to force the Palestinians to have what they've always said they wanted.

We want 22% of Palestine (Gaza and WB) according to the UN resolutions, also we want to let our refugees to return back to their houses ... are you sure Israel accepted that? Did you look on the map before arguing about the generous Israeli withdrawal?

Is there any State in this world without border and constituent except Israel?


Israel will determine its ultimate borders in 2010, who knows where these borders will exist?

 

[Cyrus]

I thought the main reason he gave up the strip was so that he could take the better part of the land and keep that for Israel.

 

[Astronuc]

This morning the Israeli attacked a Palestinian jail (under UK/USA controll)and killed a policeman and prisoner. Their goal is to arrest or to kill one of the prisoners who is a member in the Palestinian parliament.

According to a previous agreement, this jail is put under the control of USA/UK to watch those prisoners … but the American and British left the jail few hours before the Israeli attack!

Is that means no respect for any international agreements? What is the crime of the policemen and the other prisoners to be killed?

The most important question:

Who started the violence after more than a year of ceasefire!

This morning, I heard an interview with Ambassador Arye Mekel, Consul General of Israel, who elucidated the issue with the attack on the jail in Jerico.

On October 17, 2001, Israeli Minister of Tourism Rechavam Ze'evy was assassinated and members of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), a faction of Arafat's PLO, took responsibility for the murder. Upon its successful election to power, Hamas promised to release the two men who were being held in the jail, under surveillance of US and British auditors, because Israel did not trust the Palestinian Authority to keep these two in jail. Ostensibly they were in jail because they were guilty of the murder. So, Israel decided to arrest these two who are now on trial in Israel for the murder.

As for what Israel wants. According to Mekel, Israel wants peace and peaceful coexistence with neighboring Arab peoples and states. That simple!

 

[Anttech]

As for what Israel wants. According to Mekel, Israel wants peace and peaceful coexistence with neighboring Arab peoples and states. That simple!

I don't doubt that, but they seem to have no clue how to go about getting peace!

 

[big man]

Here is a reference

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/world/3722003.html

Palestinian elected in 1996 a government which wanted peace. They recognized Israel, but Israel did not recognize Palestine, instead they built more settlements, stole more land and destroyed the infrastructure...

Come on now there is no need to lie.
All your comments are incredibly biased and are obviously fueled by hatred and it amazes me that you will blindly make these comments. I truly believe that there will never be any peace between Israel and Palestine. There happens to be this constant presence of intense underlying hatred that both sides attempt to mask in the public that will never cease. I'm well aware that there are people on both sides that want peace, but I strongly doubt that those people are a part of the present governments and they certainly don't represent the majority. Also your comments seem to extend to Israeli people as whole rather than a specific attack on the government.

I'm absolutely gobsmacked at your comments, which make it seem that the Palestinians (along with Arafat) are poor innocent victims. Both sides are guilty of some 'dodgy' actions to say the least. Arafat was by no means a great leader and he certainly did not want peace with Israel. I will refrain from presenting my opinions on him because I don't particularly want to initiate the pointless exchanging of insults that would most likely occur as a result.

To tell you the honest truth my sympathies lie with Israel. For Israelis to have to defend themselves against attacks from arabs of various surrounding nations (from the Arab League) is quite something. Especially after the mass persecution in Europe. The arab nations of the Arab League were quite intolerant when it came to accepting a reasonable proposal from the United Nations to divide Palestine (previously under British control) into two states. Before you say how it was Palestinian land and that they had the right to be mad about it, I want you to realize that people that want peace don't usually mount an alliance to exterminate the Jewish population that "stole" their land. While I say that my sympathies lie with Israel I don't want you to mistake that as "I'm against Palestinians" because I am most certainly not. I'm also aware that small groups of Israelis and Palestinians are working together for the sake of achieving peace, but again this is a minority unfortunately.

I mainly thought to reply to this thread because I want you to realize that your comments come across as extremely biased, and you seem to sugarcoat all Palestinian actions rather than accept that both sides have been at fault in some cases.

If this was out of line (in terms of the PF guidelines) I apologise, but I do get a bit shirty when I read, what I perceive to be, incredibly biased and false accusations. Also, I apologise if I have completely misinterpreted your statements Bilal, but that is how it looked to me.

These comments are all based on my readings of the history of Israel and Palestine and I want to emphasize that I know some books that I've read have been incredibly biased in favour of the Jewish. However, out of all the books I've read from "racially detached and objective" authors tend to support the above views. If you have any other literature from "objective" authors that are strongly against these views I'd appreciate the references.

 

[Cyrus]

He is born and raised in palestine, he does not need to 'read' about it.

 

[big man]

Yes, he is born and raised in Palestine...how astute of you.
I'm sure he'd know of books about the history even if he didn't have to read them

But even so I'd say he should be looking to a large variety of literature that documents the history from various perspectives to have an idea of the other side of the story. I was born and raised in South Africa and what is taught in Afrikaans schools of the Boer war (in some cases) is a great exaggeration of the facts, and in some cases, there are omissions of disgraceful events. Same would go for some British accounts of actions by the British military. So all you can do is vary your sources of information and make your own decision on the events, and even then, they will be inaccurate in some details.

 

[Anttech]

Come on now there is no need to lie.
All your comments are incredibly biased and are obviously fueled by hatred and it amazes me that you will blindly make these comments. I truly believe that there will never be any peace between Israel and Palestine. There happens to be this constant presence of intense underlying hatred that both sides attempt to mask in the public that will never cease. I'm well aware that there are people on both sides that want peace, but I strongly doubt that those people are a part of the present governments and they certainly don't represent the majority. Also your comments seem to extend to Israeli people as whole rather than a specific attack on the government.

I'm absolutely gobsmacked at your comments, which make it seem that the Palestinians (along with Arafat) are poor innocent victims. Both sides are guilty of some 'dodgy' actions to say the least. Arafat was by no means a great leader and he certainly did not want peace with Israel. I will refrain from presenting my opinions on him because I don't particularly want to initiate the pointless exchanging of insults that would most likely occur as a result.

To tell you the honest truth my sympathies lie with Israel. For Israelis to have to defend themselves against attacks from arabs of various surrounding nations (from the Arab League) is quite something. Especially after the mass persecution in Europe. The arab nations of the Arab League were quite intolerant when it came to accepting a reasonable proposal from the United Nations to divide Palestine (previously under British control) into two states. Before you say how it was Palestinian land and that they had the right to be mad about it, I want you to realize that people that want peace don't usually mount an alliance to exterminate the Jewish population that "stole" their land. While I say that my sympathies lie with Israel I don't want you to mistake that as "I'm against Palestinians" because I am most certainly not. I'm also aware that small groups of Israelis and Palestinians are working together for the sake of achieving peace, but again this is a minority unfortunately.

I mainly thought to reply to this thread because I want you to realize that your comments come across as extremely biased, and you seem to sugarcoat all Palestinian actions rather than accept that both sides have been at fault in some cases.

If this was out of line (in terms of the PF guidelines) I apologise, but I do get a bit shirty when I read, what I perceive to be, incredibly biased and false accusations. Also, I apologise if I have completely misinterpreted your statements Bilal, but that is how it looked to me.

These comments are all based on my readings of the history of Israel and Palestine and I want to emphasize that I know some books that I've read have been incredibly biased in favour of the Jewish. However, out of all the books I've read from "racially detached and objective" authors tend to support the above views. If you have any other literature from "objective" authors that are strongly against these views I'd appreciate the references.

You call him bias and a lier, then you come out with statements like "I want to emphasize that I know some books that I've read have been incredibly biased in favour of the Jewish"

Although you are way off base with you whole post, I don't think I will bother responding as the contridictions throughout your post are easy for anyone to see...

 

[big man]

yeah, sorry about the lie thing...it was meant as a tongue-in-cheek statement showing that i disagreed with his comments.

There are some contradictions in my post, but the point of my reply was to point out that everyone is biased so there is no point in trying to pass it off as the absolute truth. At the end of my post I tried to indicate that my views expressed were based on my readings and that I know in some places it will be biased.

Also I did write it over a bit of time, and therefore the beginning of my post was the more irrational and incoherent response to Bilal's posts, while towards the end I was trying to understand that he had reasons for his views and was trying to show him my reasons for my views.

You may say that the whole post was incoherent and, upon review, I'd agree to a certain extent, however I feel you can still identify the general point of the reply.

 

[sanchecl]

Peoples on both sides of the situation hold deeply rooted religious beliefs about their "right" to the lands in question. While publicly proclaiming to want peace, both sides want peace on their terms at the expense of the other.

Sadly, my own belief is that there will not be lasting peace in the region.

 

[Spirit]

I personally think the best solution is one state solution, since by then any violence will be resisted by police, and one army protect all. By looking at history, the region from River Jordan will the Mediterranian Sea was most stable when it was under the role of one goverment. Such as Kingdom of Israel, or Ottomans ..etc

Regarding what Israel wants, i can see by refusing to accept UN peace forces [hope terminology is right] there an implicit agenda to not respect the international law there.

and in an expilict sense, to continue unjustified violence on a state level against humans without state, by the excuse of unjustified actions by some of them. However, that excuse is not justified as well.

 

[dsky]

If this implication of Israel's national agenda is accurate, then I can see why the Germans have to exterminate their race during WW2,
I wonder what is the arab league for, if not to push arabic interest,
I'feel real sorry for Palestine coz with all the influence of its arabic brothers they can't seem to get their acts together, they keep silent on the fate of their brother.
What they need do, is to keep out western influence on their oil products & pricing, create non-oil dependent energy sources, maximize oil profits, maintain food sufficiency, "secure their own ability to design & build nuclear weapons" and blast the haughty & insolent oppressor of their brother. (if they want to keep their destiny)

 

[Bilal]

Peoples on both sides of the situation hold deeply rooted religious beliefs about their "right" to the lands in question. While publicly proclaiming to want peace, both sides want peace on their terms at the expense of the other.

Sadly, my own belief is that there will not be lasting peace in the region.

Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) is ‘’extreme secular” organization. They ask to establish “one democratic secular State in Palestine/Israel" where people from different religions and ideologies can live peacefully. It was established by two Palestinian Christian: George habash and Wadee’ haddad. They used to be nationalist-lefties extremists in the 70s. In 1988, they recognized the right of Israel to exist.

Accordingly, they have no involvement with religions, even many of their supporters are ‘’atheists or agnostic”. They also do not have any problem with Jews as community, but with Zionism as racist ideology.

Here you can find information about palestinian political parties:

http://www.mideastweb.org/palestianparties.htm#Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine

Religious factor in this conflict rise only in the last 20 years.

 

[Bilal]

I personally think the best solution is one state solution, since by then any violence will be resisted by police, and one army protect all. By looking at history, the region from River Jordan will the Mediterranian Sea was most stable when it was under the role of one goverment. Such as Kingdom of Israel, or Ottomans ..etc

Regarding what Israel wants, i can see by refusing to accept UN peace forces [hope terminology is right] there an implicit agenda to not respect the international law there.

and in an expilict sense, to continue unjustified violence on a state level against humans without state, by the excuse of unjustified actions by some of them. However, that excuse is not justified as well.

Through centuries different religions used to live in peace in Palestine, particularly after the fall of this country in the hand of Muslims in 622. Jews were allowed for the first time (since 2 centuries under Roman laws) to live in Jerusalem. Also the Christian rights were protected. In 1099, many Jews, Christian and Muslims were living in Palestine together, until the crusaders did ‘’ethic cleansing” against Muslims, Jews and eastern Christian. After 200 years of wars, people of ME succeed to kick out the crusaders, and then they allowed Jews and Muslims to return back … they live again together until the creation of Zionism in 1897, and then the establishment of Israel as ‘’national Jews homeland” in 1948. In that year they destroyed around 500 palestinian towns and they kicked out 60% of the Palestinian (Muslims and Christian). For example the Christian community used to be more than 20% of the total population since the 3rd century until 1948, but now they are less than 5% .

Currently, the Palestinian ask for one of two solutions:

- Establishing one state for the two nations and the three religions in the historical Palestine.
OR
- Israel should withdraw from the non Jews areas, so the Palestinian can establish one democratic State, while the Israel can secure the Jews majority.

The problem is that the Zionists want large lands with water resources to settle millions of Jews around the world who waiting to return back to what called ''the biblical promised land". They are not willing to think about the rights of other people who are living in this country since hundreds and thousands of years.

For this reason the UN called “Zionism” as a kind of racism from 1975 – 1990. They canceled this UN resolution under the American pressure to push the peace process.

 

[Bilal]

This morning, I heard an interview with Ambassador Arye Mekel, Consul General of Israel, who elucidated the issue with the attack on the jail in Jerico.

On October 17, 2001, Israeli Minister of Tourism Rechavam Ze'evy was assassinated and members of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), a faction of Arafat's PLO, took responsibility for the murder. Upon its successful election to power, Hamas promised to release the two men who were being held in the jail, under surveillance of US and British auditors, because Israel did not trust the Palestinian Authority to keep these two in jail. Ostensibly they were in jail because they were guilty of the murder. So, Israel decided to arrest these two who are now on trial in Israel for the murder.

As for what Israel wants. According to Mekel, Israel wants peace and peaceful coexistence with neighboring Arab peoples and states. That simple!

As usual, the Zionists put a wrong date for the starting of the problem! May be they do not believe that the Palestinian blood is important. PFLP is not supporters of Arafat. They are strong opposition since decades.

This problem between Israel and PFLP started in 27 August 2001. In that day, Comrade Abu Ali Mustafa (The elected General Secretary of PFLP) was killed in a direct Israeli missile attack on his office in Ramallah.

Abu Ali Mutafa retuned back to Palestine through agreement between PLO and Israel. He accepted in principle to join the peace process.

He is the second person – after Arafat- in the Palestinian leadership. After murdering of this leader, PFLP decided to kill an Israeli leader as a revenge. The target was Zaavi (who is not more important than Abu Ali Mustafa)

Zaavi “the Israeli former minister of tourism” is the leader of a radical racist Israeli party called “Muladit”. Here are quotes and information about Zaavi:

- His ideology is based on establishing a pure Jews homeland in all Palestine and to move all Arabs and Palestinians out of Israel (including West Bank, Gaza and the non Jews who have Israeli nationality)

- He described the Palestinian as "lice" and "crabs".

- In April 2001, Zeevi asked soldiers to demolish the house of the Palestinian president, Yassir Arafat, as a way to force him to re-evaluate whether or not he wanted to continue fighting Israel.

- The Israeli minister was one of seven national extremists who withdrew from Sharon's expansive governmental coalition in 2001.

- He fought against the Palestinian in all the Israeli wars

 

[sanchecl]

Religious factor in this conflict rise only in the last 20 years.

To say that the religious factors in this conflict have only been around since the mid 1980's is to ignore the history of the region. Why do you think the Jews returned to (successfully) re-form Israel in the first place? Religion. You aren't seriously making a statement like that with a straight face are you?

 

[Bilal]

To say that the religious factors in this conflict have only been around since the mid 1980's is to ignore the history of the region. Why do you think the Jews returned to (successfully) re-form Israel in the first place? Religion. You aren't seriously making a statement like that with a straight face are you?

Palestine

It is well known that Hamas was established in 1987 and Islamic Jihad in 1982, only from that date the religious Muslims joined the conflict. Since the existence of Israel, the Palestinian resistance was limited to secular organisations.

Israel and Zionism

Zionism was established in 1897 as a secular nationalist organization. All the first generations of Zionists were atheists or agnostic. The goal of the Zionism is to establish a “Jews homeland “in any suitable place. In their first conference in Switzerland 1897, they proposed one of three countries to be a Jews homeland: Uganda, Argentina and Palestine.

Religious Jews rejected the idea in the beginning and they considered the Zionism as anti-biblical rules. Only after the non-religious Jews succeeded to create Israel, a new fraction in Zionism is established and called religious Zionists.

Here you can find the response of the religious Jews in 1948 on Zionist leaders:

http://www.nkusa.org/Historical_Documents/tenquestions.cfm

Using religious/historical rights is just during the cold war after the end of colonial era.

For better understanding to the ideology of early Zionists, here are quotes of the greatest Zionists leaders:

Ze'ev Jabotinsky was born 1880 in Odessa-Tsarist Russia to a liberal Jewish family. He is considered to be the most important right-wing Revisionist Movement member (which eventually evolved into the post-1948 Herut Party, and later became the Likud Party):

"There is no justice, no law, and no God in heaven, only a single law which decides and supercedes all---- [Jewish] settlement [of the land]." (Righteous Victims, p. 108)

"Zionist colonization, even the most restricted, must either be terminated or carried out in defiance of the will of the native [Palestinian] population. This colonization can, therefore, continue and develop under the protection of a force independent of the local population --an iron wall which the native [Palestinian] population cannot break through. This is, in to, our policy towards the Arabs. To formulate it any other way would be hypocrisy." (Expulsion Of The Palestinians, p. 28)

"If you wish to colonize a land in which people are already living, you must provide a garrison for the land, or find a benefactor who will maintain the garrison on your behalf. ... Zionism is a colonizing adventure and, therefore, it stands or falls on the question of armed forces." (Expulsion Of The Palestinians, p. 45)

"There is no choice: the Arabs must make room for the Jews of Eretz Israel. If it was possible to transfer the Baltic peoples, it is also possible to move the Palestinian Arabs." (Expulsion Of The Palestinians, p. 29)

David Ben-Gurion Born in 1886 in Plonsk, Poland. He is considered one of the three founding figures of Zionism beside Chaim Weizmann and Herzl. He is the leader of independence of Israel and the first president:

"Jewish villages were built in the place of Arab villages. You do not even know the names of these Arab villages, and I do not blame you because geography books no longer exist. Not only do the books not exist, the Arab villages are not there either. Nahlal arose in the place of Mahlul; Kibbutz Gvat in the place of Jibta; Kibbutz Sarid in the place of Huneifis; and Kefar Yehushua in the place of Tal al-Shuman. There is not a single place built in this country that did not have a former Arab population."
-- David Ben Gurion, quoted in The Jewish Paradox, by Nahum Goldmann, Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1978, p. 99.

"Let us not ignore the truth among ourselves ... politically we are the aggressors and they defend themselves... The country is theirs, because they inhabit it, whereas we want to come here and settle down, and in their view we want to take away from them their country."
-- David Ben Gurion, quoted on pp 91-2 of Chomsky's Fateful Triangle, which appears in Simha Flapan's "Zionism and the Palestinians pp 141-2 citing a 1938 speech.

"Even the immigrant of North Africa, who looks like a savage, who has never read a book in his life, not even a religious one, and doesn't even know how to say his prayers, either wittingly or unwittingly has behind him a spiritual heritage of thousands of years. . . ." (1949, The First Israelis, p. 157)

"The Arabs cannot accept the existence of Israel. Those who accept it are not normal. The best solution for the [Palestinian] Arabs in Israel is to go and live in the Arab states---in the framework of a peace treaty or transfer." (Simha Flapan, p. 99)

 

[Spirit]

Bilal, i think its more accurate to say: "Religous muslims re-form their groups structures in the 1980's in the conflict"

Since i think the resistance forces in 1930's against the British colonizers and in 1940's against British and Zoinist invasion started by religous fighters want to defend their own farms, kids and houses.

As a matter of history, there was no nationalist resistance in Palestine at the beginning in 1930's. However, the resistance there allied with Arab Nationalist goverments in the middle east. The goverments there supported the resistance with weapons and training.

I believe after the PLO rising, the movement there was still but 'from within' the PLO, and in 1980's it was the return of the resistance groups with the same 'style' as in 1930's.

a point i want to say is regardless which the palestinians humans religion or ethincity. The have the right to survive in their own country. If religion, Islam mainly in this case, supports justice, and palestinians wants justice, then it IS a great factor for peace and a supportive card they should not ignore