The reality of who lacks interest in a reasonable compromise is crucial to achieving a just solution to this conflict, while unsubstantiated beliefs of such only serve to compromise the integrity of our grasp on that reality.
I agree with you and others who are arguing for a just solution to the Palestinians' plight. But the only way that it's going to happen is if the US government backs it. This will only happen if an overwhelming majority of US citizens back it in some form of civil action (supporting candidates who support the Palestinians, etc.).The reality of who lacks interest in a reasonable compromise is crucial to achieving a just solution to this conflict, while unsubstantiated beliefs of such only serve to compromise the integrity of our grasp on that reality.
By being on only one side the US has merely exacerbated the situation, add that to it vetoing everything that is not as it sees it "in Israel's interest" and you have a disparity of concerns that seems insoluble. The US thinks that it is the cause of Israel's existence as Truman decided on the partition plans two state option (after heavy lobbying from Zionist groups in the US), and so it has always been in it's corner; sadly as well the populous seem fed with propaganda accordingly by their TV media. To come to a conclusion the West needs to be in no ones corner, but, the corner of a resolution by means acceptable to both. The US in this respect sadly is often merely a third wheel.I agree with you and others who are arguing for a just solution to the Palestinians' plight. But the only way that it's going to happen is if the US government backs it. This will only happen if an overwhelming majority of US citizens back it in some form of civil action (supporting candidates who support the Palestinians, etc.).
This isn't going to happen. We just elected a President who has outspokenly aligned himself with Israeli interests. His election was heralded by most as a wonderful thing.
The truth is 'out there', but comfortable people tend to not want to know or admit truths that would obligate them to do things that would disturb their comfort. And uncomfortable people are generally too busy dealing with the daily circumstances of their lives to do what's necessary to learn the truth in the first place.
Anyway, the concept of justice, while beautiful and even utilitarian in some respects, will always be at odds with a deeper, natural truth which governs most of our actions.
The Palestinian problem is different than the South African one. Most notably, the US government has obligated itself to supporting Israeli violence against Palestinians. The information sources that most of us get all our 'news' and commentary from have effectively marginalized the interests of the victims, and villified and discredited those who support them. It would take a massive display of US public opinion in the form of demonstrations, letters and phone calls, financial and voting support for pro-Palestinian candidates, etc., to force the US government, and hence Israel, into doing justice by the Palestinians.Poles show that over 70% of the public favors our government taking an even handed role in the conflict, most simply don't understand the conflict well enough to see that our government is doing anything but. Then we have a strong support for Israel by people with bigotry against Arabs, along with people who are diluted into believing that Israel's conquest over Palestine is some path to salvation. However, those people are only a minority, and we simply need to bring society over the tipping point of outnumbering that minority and understanding will spread from there. South African apartheid is an excellent example of how the same challenges have been overcome before.
The 'inertia' of selfishness and greed?What "natural truth" do you suggest stands in the way here?
No, the Torah says that the Canaanites were descended from Canaan, who was one of the sons of Ham (and so were the Egytians and the Philisitines, btw).as Torah (Jews holy book) .. they were ordered to fight arab people (Kana'ani tribes they are sons of prophet Ishmael son of prophet Abraham "may blessing and peace be upon them" ) ..
According to the Torah, and I assume the Koran also, both Egypt and Palestine were populated by Hamites (Canaanites and Philistines) before the Israelites arrived, not Ishmaelites.i can't remember the whole story of (jews and Palestine) but believe that every body must have idea about it .. coz it proves that the very first people who lived there were Arabs .. exactly (Kana'ani tribes)
It it not that simple.I know exactly that truth is very clear .. and the solution is very easy .. israeli out back where they were living .. and Palestinian back to their homes
i read a lot of books on this issue exactly ... kana'an is one of prophet Ismael (may blessing and peace be upon him) sons .. and so r arabs ... trully arabs are Shemites .. and by the way .. all copies of Torah (regardless to their differences) say that the last prophet would be descent from the Ishmaelites .. and when the marks of That prophet apeared he was arabian exactly "Adnani" !! that means that arabs are Shemites ... even the old books of Torah -which are almost not available now adays- says that arabs and jews are both Shemites but arab are Ishmaelites and jews are Israelites (may blessing and peace be upon the both propherts Israel and Ishmael) ..No, the Torah says that the Canaanites were descended from Canaan, who was one of the sons of Ham (and so were the Egytians and the Philisitines, btw).
And I assume the Koran says the same.
It would be impossible to be less related to the Israelites or Ishmaelites than that!
The Israelites and Ishmaelites of course were cousins (and Shemites, not Hamites), and the Arabs claim descent from the Ishmaelites.
According to the Torah, and I assume the Koran also, both Egypt and Palestine were populated by Hamites (Canaanites and Philistines) before the Israelites arrived, not Ishmaelites.
now adays there are a lot of Torah .. and about Quran Egyption people were not netioned as arabs or not nor as Shemites or Hamites .. Islam says : "You all human are sons of Adam; and Adam is of mud and no arabian would have merit or better than non arabian but with his good work "wells" "According to the Torah, and I assume the Koran also, both Egypt and Palestine were populated by Hamites (Canaanites and Philistines) before the Israelites arrived, not Ishmaelites
Long time de facto apartheid in South Africa became state-sanctioned via laws enacted around the time that the state of Israel was being formed. It wasn't very long before South Africa's separatism was denounced by the international community. Right from the beginning, there was massive popular opinion against official South African apartheid. Only three decades passed before countries were imposing economic sanctions on South Africa to pressure it into changing its separatist policies. The South African struggle to end apartheid coincided with the struggle to end separatism in the US. I remember massive riots in this country over the civil rights of blacks. It was politically disadvantageous, in most areas, and especially nationally, for any US politician to support either apartheid in South Africa or separatism in the US.Greed is certainly the drive behind the leaders this conquest over Palestine, but the same was true for the conquest of whites over blacks in South Africa. Apartheid in South Africa went on for decades with tactile support of governments in the US and elsewhere. However, as public awareness of the wickedness committed in our names spread, and our self-indulgent leaders were eventually forced to conform to the standards of justice which are sacrosanct to the greater population. I see the same build toward a tipping point happening here, and am at a loss as to find any tangible basis for your pessimism to the contrary.
It is political posturing, in my opinion. "Good cop - bad cop" play in which she says that settlements are a hindrance to peace and is flatly slapped down a day later with a statement "from above" that more Jewish settlers should be allowed to occupy the West Bank.Is it even possible that Palestinian salvation could come from within Israel itself? This isn't a rhetorical question. Statements by the Israeli Foreign Minister, Tzipi Livni, seem encouraging -- or is it just political posturing?
I don't think you're right …i read a lot of books on this issue exactly ... kana'an is one of prophet Ismael (may blessing and peace be upon him) sons .. and so r arabs ... trully arabs are Shemites
And from Genesis 9:18 …Nebajoth; Kedar, Adbeel, Mibsam, Mishma, Dumah, Massa, Hadar, Tema, Jetur, Naphish, and Kedemah
Of course, the Koran may give different names … but so far as I know the Koran doesn't give any names at all.And the sons of Noah, that went forth of the ark, were Shem, and Ham, and Japheth: and Ham is the father of Canaan.
as Torah (Jews holy book) .. arab people (Kana'ani tribes they are sons of prophet Ishmael son of prophet Abraham "may blessing and peace be upon them" ) ..
erm … you mentioned it!why do we discuss such a things …
no it gave many names of prophets (25 of them) , good worshipers and one of prophet Mohammad's (blesing and peace be upon him) men his name is "Zaid ben Harethah"I don't think you're right …
From Genesis 25:13-15 in the Torah (or see http://www.guidedbiblestudies.com/topics/twelve_tribes_of_ishmael.htm), the 12 sons of Ishmael were named …
And from Genesis 9:18 …
Of course, the Koran may give different names … but so far as I know the Koran doesn't give any names at all.
and i'll bring u as soon as possible the book .. although it's in arabic but i'll try to translate some papers from it ... and i guess that there are othetr references in it's appendix .. and almost all books that teach Quran and Explain it say that Kana'ani tribes are arabian i can't .. i'll try to help u find an english bookSo far as both the Torah and the Koran are concerned, the Arabs are Shemites, descended from Ishmael (who was descended from Shem the son of Noah), and the Canaanites (who inhabited Palestine before Moses) were descended from Canaan, the son of Ham the son of Noah.
(Palestine, incidentally, is named after another pre-Moses tribe inhabiting Palestine, the Philistines, who are stated in Genesis 10:14 as descending from Mizraim, another son of Ham)
Do you have any reference (from one of the books you have read, or from the internet, or from the Koran) which supports your statement that there is a connection between the Arabs and the Kana'ani tribes, or that the Arabs have a pre-Moses connection with Palestine? …
erm … you mentioned it!
i agree with what u said (in green) and i know some of them one of them was my camp mate in a camp.. but i disagree with what in red ..First off, the religious claim isn't even what drove the Zionist movement in the beginning, but rather it was started by secular but ethnic Jews who rejected millenia of religious understanding that any attempt to forcefully establish any Jewish state is strictly forbidden. The theological arguments to support such a conquest only came later, and only started gaining popular support as the conditions in Europe grew worse for Jews under the rise of Nazism. Also note there is still is some religious Jews around the world who still reject the state as an affront to God. Furthermore, the majority of Jews in Israel and elsewhere today don't consider themselves religious, but rather only ethnically-Jewish, and many don't approve of Israel's conquest over Palestine either.
it's not fair at all to give people right to live in a land they stolen it .. suppose a thief who beaten a person and stolen his money for example u shall we give him the right to spend it and give it to his friends and family and once the victim asks for his rights we say that we must not make wrong over wrong !!1) Israel discards their ethnic nationalist nature and gives Palestinians equal rights, allowing refugees to return and incorporating Gaza and the West Bank into a truly democratic state.
2) Israel arranges fair compensation for the refugees they displaced, and allows a fully independent state of Palestine to exist thoughout Gaza and the West Bank, with East Jerusalem as it's capital.
#1 is the ideal solution, but #2 is far more realistically achievable as it doesn't require overcoming the ethnic nationalist mindset ingrained into the majority of Israelis, but only the lust for colonizing the West Bank shared by a small minority of zealots
sorry, I didn't mean i thought there were no names in the Koran, i only meant no names of the sons of Ishmael or of Noah.no it gave many names of prophets (25 of them) , good worshipers and one of prophet Mohammad's (blesing and peace be upon him) men his name is "Zaid ben Harethah"
i look forward to seeing this reference to the Kana'ani tribes …and i'll bring u as soon as possible the book .. almost all books that teach Quran and Explain it say that Kana'ani tribes are arabian …
any way this have no relation at all to the right of return .. and i think that discussing such a religious disagreements do never pay .. it just strengthen hate ..
and i wonder if u really read in Torah how couldn't u see that jews are not allowed by God to go palestaine …
There are many differences between various translations of Torah, just there are many differences between translations of Quran. However, the translations of Torah (and Tanakh as a whole) which are used by Jews and most Christians all come from the same ancient Hebrew Masoretic Text which was settled on around a millennium ago. Only some Christian Bibles are based on earlier Aramaic and Greek translations.i wanna comment that if u read Torah u will easily find the differences between it's copies.. !
The statement that the Israelites right to the Holy Land is conditional is straight out of out of Torah (Leviticus 18:28), and the loss of that right as well as the instructions for living in exile until that right is redeemed is detailed throughout Tanakh (notably Song of Songs 2:7, 3:5, 8:4). Even speaking strictly in a secular sense, the violation of those instructions is what brought the destruction of the Second Temple, revolting against Roman rule rather than maintaining limited autonomy under it.The rule you refer to is classified not as a commandment of God but as a commandment of the rabbis (a rabbinic commandment)...
http://bric.postech.ac.kr/science/97now/00_10now/001030a.htmlAs fighting continues in the Middle East, a new genetic study shows that many Arabs and Jews are closely related. More than 70% of Jewish men and half of the Arab men whose DNA was studied inherited their Y chromosomes from the same paternal ancestors who lived in the region within the last few thousand years.
The results match historical accounts that Moslem Arabs are descended from Christians and Jews who lived in the southern Levant, a region that includes Israel and the Sinai. They were descendants of a core population that lived in the area since prehistoric times.
The rule you refer to is classified not as a commandment of God but as a commandment of the rabbis (a rabbinic commandment)...and i wonder if u really read in Torah how couldn't u see that jews are not allowed by God to go palestaine …
The statement that the Israelites right to the Holy Land is conditional is straight out of out of Torah (Leviticus 18:29)
(… and the earlier verses limit those "abominations" to incest and other sexual practices.)29 For whosoever shall do any of these abominations, even the souls that do them shall be cut off from among their people.
כט כִּי כָּל-אֲשֶׁר יַעֲשֶׂה, מִכֹּל הַתּוֹעֵבֹת הָאֵלֶּה--וְנִכְרְתוּ הַנְּפָשׁוֹת הָעֹשֹׂת, מִקֶּרֶב עַמָּם.
Yes, rabbinical (and only until recently, for most rabbis).This is also why the Rabbinical consensus until recently opposed any suggestion of building a Jewish state …
hahaare you trying to spell "help" so that it can be seen from the air? :rofl:
Third time lucky, let's see if we can put this baby to rest, they might get the idea that Biblical claims are worthless even if they are followed to the letter. Let's face it even if it said in 1948 you will be given Israel back, that would be an amazing revelation, but still worthless.<snip>
So, again, the theological linages you two are discussing hold no weight in either side's claim to the land over the other.
My bad, I meant the verse just prior, Leviticus 18:28:uhh? Leviticus 18:29 says nothing of the sort …
I go back and edit my previous post now.that the land vomit not you out also, when ye defile it, as it vomited out the nation that was before you.
erm … http://www.mechon-mamre.org/p/pt/pt0318.htm" [Broken] says nothing of the sort, either …The statement that the Israelites right to the Holy Land is conditional is straight out of out of Torah (Leviticus 18:28)