The Palestinian Solution: One State, or Two?

Posted by Anne Selden Annab
February 20, 2007

WOW - these Time Magazine blogs just keep getting better and better!

One State, or Two?

There is nothing at all right now- no viable state, no freedom- no future- no security anywhere and millions of Palestinians are suffering untold misery with no hope in view. So perhaps what is most important is quick chose one and somehow make this horrible situation better as soon as possible!

Personally I tend to like the one land- one people- one peace idea... with full and equal rights for all. A secular democracy.

Looks to me like it already is one state by default, an Apartheid State with Israel in full control of all borders and air space for most of its history. It's been that way for as long as I can remember and I have kids who will soon be on their way to college.

But I can understand why many might want two states with the remnant left of historic Palestine proudly bearing the name and the flag to honor all the many Palestinians who have dedicated themselves to "The Cause"... to real freedom, justice and equality.

But in any case, as there is nothing now, no sanctuary anywhere, one state or two does not matter as much as basic human rights and for everyone's sake the highest priority should be take the bull by the horns and start fully respecting the Palestinian refugees inalienable and sacred right to return.

If that dissolves the political entity that we call Israel then so be it. Might not be such a bad thing after all- I don't think any religion should be armed with lethal weaponry to 'defend' itself .

Posted by chris leadbeater
February 20, 2007

The two state concept was always essentially racist and has been rendered almost impossible by the continued expropriation by Israel of Palestinian land and the denial of the rights of the refugees, because they are not Jews.

A one state solution will not be easy but a two state solution is now impossible. Racism must finally be cast aside.

Posted by Basem Khader
February 20, 2007

In the twenty first century there is no place for any state that is exclusive and discriminatory on grounds of religion or ethnicity. The sooner we realize that fact, the less bloodshed there will be -- on all sides.

Posted by Farouk Al-Saad
February 20, 2007

One state solution is impractical for the time being, not because it is a wrong concept, but Israel will never agree on. This solutions contradict the logic that the Jewish state - religion or ethnicity- based its foundation on. There is no option other than building Palestinian state to live side by side peacefully with other countries in the Middle East.

Farouk Al-Saad
Damascus-Syria

Posted by Ed Opstein
February 20, 2007

Any resolution of the Israel/Palestine horror that does not serve the long term interests of all parties will be dismissed by the next holder of power. We now have a "one state solution" that condemns Palestinians to survival in Apartheid zones in their own land. The situation is no different from any other external domination in this area throughout history. The pendulum of violence against domination will swing again in 5 or 50 years if real justice is not the basis for peace.

Posted by Al Israel
February 20, 2007

Why is it that everyone brings up the Apartheid of Israel, but no one ever mentions the the Apartheid that exists in most of the Arab World. Have you ever heard of a Jew with the right to vote in Saudi Arabia or let alone even the right to practice religion openly. Those living in glass houses should not throw stones.

Posted by ray jicha
February 20, 2007

The quickest way to bring democracy to the Arab world would be to give the Palestinians the vote inside Israel. However, given the demographic "facts on the ground", I cannot imagine the Israelis ever agreeing to what they would see as the end of the Jewish state. Perhaps a push for the one-state solution will make the creation of a viable, sovereign Palestine more attractive to the Israeli leadership. What happens when the Palestinians then prove incapable of governing themselves and Palestine becomes the next "failed state"?

Posted by Mike
February 20, 2007

What a crock, most of the posters don't even know the history of the area. First off, Muslim leaders in the area told most of the people that this "Israel" will be wipe off the map by 1948, so just leave your homes temporarily and once we kill all the Jews, like the Koran orders us to do. You can safely return to your homes. This philosophy is what is causing the Arabs in the refugee camps to suffer. Close the camps, compensate the people who lost their land. Kick out all these idiot Arab leaders, who want only to fatten their pockets at the cost of their people. (This include Hamas) The question I ask anyone, and you pro-Palestine people should too. If a Jew was born in what is now Tel-Aviv in 1924, can you call him a Palestinian. The answer is yes. What do you can an Arab born in Tel-Aviv in 1980. The answer is an Israeli. Most of the fighting is over Koranic passages about a Muslim being under a Non-Muslim rule. The Koran forbids it. When The Prophet of Islam(PBUH) received this passage, Islam was not what it is now a major religion. As long as governments respect Islam and its Holy Sites, help maintain them, allow Muslims the ability to call for prayer 5 times a day, allow Muslims to serve in the government, what is the difference! Israel does all of this now. Most of the problems occur because Israel has an obligation to protect all its people (Jews, Christians, Muslims, and Polytheists) so most of what we see is just that.

Posted by William C DeMuth
February 20, 2007

Perhaps the time of the final Intifada is closer than Israel chooses to believe?

The advancement of technology is a death knell for Zionism. Within our lifetimes either the Jews and Arabs shall agree to share the land, or they shall slaughter each other.

Strange how well that meshes with the insanity of American Christian aspirations toward Armageddon! Perhaps there always has been a Christian / Jewish / Muslim conspiracy, one of ignorant superstition that will lead to our collective demise!

Posted by Sherman
February 20, 2007

The last time I checked the history books, there was never a sovereign state called Palestine. Prior to 1948, there was never an Arab people who called themselves "Palestinians." (Ironically, the only people who called themselves Palestininans prior to 1948 were the Jews of Palestine).

UN Resolution 181 in 1947 that partitioned Palestine specifically referred to separate Jewish and Arab states, not separate Jewish and Palestinian states.

Many Palestinians trace their ancestry to neighboring Arab states. Notable Palestinians such as Hanan Ashrawi, Edward Said and even Arafat can trace their lineage to Lebanon and Egypt.

The Jews built a powerful, prosperous and democratic nation in their ancestral homeland. Why should they surrender their tiny country to the Palestinians? This is especially true considering that the Palestinians have consistently rejected any attempt at a two state solution since the Peel Commission recomendations of 1936 through the Camp David accords of 2000. Furthermore, one only needs to look at Gaza to see what the Palestinians do once they gain control over a patch of land.

Posted by barry
February 20, 2007

Its hard to have a one state or two state policy with a group of people whose whole purpose is to destroy Israel and throw every Jew into the sea.
Sorry Im not buying it.

Posted by Sherif
February 20, 2007

"Have you ever heard of a Jew with the right to vote in Saudi Arabia or let alone even the right to practice religion openly"

I have never heard that Saudis vote, vote on what? I never heard that a jew got kicked out of HIS house into the streets because of his faith! Israel is THE ONLY country in the mid-east that is founded on religeon!

Posted by Bill Messina
February 20, 2007

I recently read a suggestion giving Israel British Columbia. May I suggest giving them Texas. Enough of this terrible nonsense. Giving Israel Texas would finally end this on-going madness.

To anyone who says what about the Temple, what about the Wailing Wall, I say phooey. My Jewish friends tell me that every Jew is precious and in that light, wouldn't a safe state where Jews would be safe from predjudice and this ungodly terrorism be more advantageous than this 59 year nightmare which is so destructive and evil?

Does God care if the chosen people live near Mt. Sinai? Franklin Mountain in El Paso could serve as the reminder of His gift of the Ten Commandents, which, by the way are violated everyday in the pursuit of an unrealizable dream when faced with the ignorance and barbarism that is rampant in the Middle East.

What frustration! In a world of 6 billion people, isn't there one person smart enough to solve this problem and stop the madnes?

Posted by Al Israel
February 20, 2007

Isreal is the only country that is founded on religion? So i guess you have never heard of a country called Iraq or Iran or Saudi Arabia. And you are right they arent kicked out into the street, they are more likely beheaded.

Posted by Sherif
February 20, 2007

"this "Israel" will be wipe off the map by 1948, so just leave your homes temporarily and once we kill all the Jews, like the Koran orders us to do. You can safely return to your homes."

Why didn't you go back more in history? Where were the Jews the faught in 1948 born? They were forigners to the land! "Invaders" is the word.

"even Arafat can trace their lineage to Lebanon and Egypt." Have you heard of the Ottoman empire? Have you heard about borders in the middle east in the 1800's? The "land" was mostly part of Egypt and Jordan ( states part of the Ottoamn empire). Jews were always under the rule of a system. How about before the Ottoman's? What jewish army faught who and where? They were there but never any cultural influence to the region.

Posted by Rob the Impaler
February 20, 2007

One state solution? Why don't we just merge Belgium and France. European Community? Why not a Pan-European superstate? It sounds great on paper, but it just isn't realistic....and it has absolutely nothing to do with the concept of one man and one vote. Take a look at Spain for example. There are 4 major autonomous communities in Spain and each of the 3 minority ones has a separatist movement associated with it. Canada is a perrenial top 5 candidate in the global quality of life rankings, and yet just under 50% of Quebecqois would like their independence. But the solution is to take the Palestinians and the Jews and smash them together and think that it will work. Those of you who favor a one state solution should have their head examined.

Posted by J. Steinle
February 20, 2007

This is ridiculous, the Jews are there, they have been there for generations and have built a prosperous community.

"Israel is THE ONLY country in the mid-east that is founded on religeon!"

This comment is also wihtout merit for several reasons, the most bovious being the numerous surroundign Muslim nations whose law is based on their faith, but perhaps the most glaring mistatement is that Israel is based on a religion. Jews are not just a faith they are a cultural and an indpendent ethnicity. Israel is a nation based on the Jewish cultural identity. Last time I checked they allow any Jew to immigrate to Israel, regardless of weether or not they profess the Jewish faith. The fact is that Israel is the closest thing to a seculatr state that you will find in the middle east. If you want to have a legitimate dialog its important that the foundation is based on fact and not on what sounds best for your cause.

Posted by Sherif
February 20, 2007

"Iraq or Iran or Saudi Arabia"

All the countries stated above have jews living peacefully together. All the above give all faith beleivers the right to exist. Rulling by the ethics of the Quran does not state that you have to be a muslim to live in the country, or have less rights than muslims. Their legislations do not state that any of the above is a muslim operating system! Iran's system is complicated, but you have two equal powers, one of them makes sure that no decision to be made against the "ethics" of the Quran, and the other is a pure western operating system with simillar legislations to most countries. AND they all allow every faith beleiver to live on their land.
It's funny you included Iraq!

Posted by Eric
February 20, 2007

Maybe Borat had the appropriate approach; "throw the Jew down the well". After all, that's what the Paestinains want. Let's see. In '48 the Arabs could have had a state per UN res. 187. Nope, they prefered to invade and destroy the nascent Jewish state. Between '48 and '67, Gaza was "occupied" by Egypt while the West Bank was "occupied" by Jordan. No out-cry for a Palestinian state then.

In '67 the Arabs were going to make things right again. Per Nassar; "Drive the Jews into the sea". Didn't quite work out the way he intended. Following the '67 war Israel expected to neotiate borders with the Arabs. The infamous reply from the Khartoum session was" No negtiation, No peace, No israel!". In the interim, the PLO had its "From the river to the sea" mantra. No room for a Jewish state in the ME. Here we are almost 40 years later with the HAMAS Charter ( Art. 7) citing " Destroy Israel & kill Jews. Delusional business-as-usual for the Arabs!

When the Arabs want peace and a real Palestinian state more that they want to destroy Israel and Kill Jews, there might be a starting-point for discussions. Until then, the Arabs, with their Jihadist martyrdom-complex, will continue to squander every chance to focus on nation-building and blame Israel for all their problems. "Throw the Jew down the well".

Posted by Sherif
February 20, 2007

"Last time I checked they allow any Jew to immigrate to Israel, regardless of weether or not they profess the Jewish faith"

I don't understand! Who is the"non jewish jew"? How can a seculiar state live in peace? I am not against Israel as a country with the right to exist in peace, and to get there we need to evaluate why they are not living in peace after all these years. Giving everyone equal rights to live and participate is a start.

Posted by Sherif
February 20, 2007

Eric why don't you read before 48 please, these people were reacting to an attack, and yes they have pride and alot of history and culture, you don't expect them to fight back? Not that I'm agreeing with their approach, but they were protecting their land, and that's what Hammas thinks they are there to do now.

Posted by Al Israel
February 20, 2007

Sherif you are truly delusional if you really believe what you are saying. In most of the countries you mention even so called "Palestinians" are treated as second or even third class citizens. In Afghanistan they still stone you for preaching other religions.

Posted by Eric
February 20, 2007

Sherif: It is in fact their "pride" and "culture" that's holding them back from acheiving statehood. As to HAMAS, the "land" they are "protecting" is present-day Israel. They are 60 years too late.

Get over it! NO, the Jews are NOT packing-up and leaving. Get a grasp on reality. Stop wasting time, money, and lives on the futile cause of destroying Israel.

It is self-evident that the Arab nations have abused, subjagated, and made the Palestinians second-class citizens while using these poor wretches as the cause de celebre and connon-fodder to prop-up their despotic and inept regimes.

Its a good thing the Arabs have Israel to use as the vehicle to distract their popultions from their miserable lives.That's why so-called Arab leadership continues to fund, support, and mislead the poor Palestinians to destroy Israel in a endless cycle of misfortune.

Look at the birdie....and ignore the elephant in the room.

Posted by Sherif
February 20, 2007

I never said Jews need to pack! Or that I support any arabic regime! I am giving the other side of the story, and wish my US government would be more fair in our policies if we acknowledge the Palestinian existance.

"Look at the birdie....and ignore the elephant in the room"

Are you suggesting Israel/(the US) needs to go after all the arabic regimes? What a fantastic idea! Lets nuke'em! Get rid of all of them! Then it's a world with no enemies! Sounds familliar anyone? A german dectator...

Posted by Fred Marsh
February 21, 2007

One day, if Israel is not careful, the Palestinians are going to demand the right to vote the same as Israeli Arabs. Once the Palestinians start demanding the right to be a part of Israel, look for the Israeli government to make real concessions towards a Palestinian state.

In truth, the idea of a separate state, given how much Israel expropriates Palestinian land is a joke. Is any Israeli government prepared to remove all those settlers? Even as things are at a standstill, Israel continues to build more settlements making a two state solution less viable.

In truth, the Israelis and the Palestinians are Siamese twins who continue to hit and punch one another. It maybe the only solution, in reality is to create a bi-national state, which separate houses of parliament and somehow allow the Palestinians to govern themselves while preserving Israel as the final arbitor of the border and international relations.

Posted by Chris
February 21, 2007

If Arabs expect that a Jewish majority will never respect them in Israel/Palestine, why would Jews expect otherwise of an Arab majority? A one-state solution can succeed only if the rights of minorities are guaranteed and protected. The primary problem in the Middle East is that NOBODY believes in such protection: from Iraq to Lebanon to Israel/Palestine, democracy is considered to be a 'winner-takes-all' proposition, while any criticism of which is considered to be, moreover, a 'Western' imposition. This tribal mentality can be discarded only by the peoples of the region. Alas, I have no hope for it in my lifetime.

Posted by Casey
February 21, 2007

First, let me compliment everyone involved thus far on the richness and diversity of the dialogue thus far. It is refreshing to hear ideas on this topic rather than the usual bantering of slogans and recriminations.
However, to my point: I cannot accept that the notion of a unified state solution would be in the interests of the current citizenry of Israel. Only the Palestinian community would stand to gain from such an arrangement. It is no secret that Palestinians are a plurality in Israel, and a unified state would automatically demote the citizenry of Israel to minority status, though the relative prosperity of the nation of Israel has been achieved through their governance and at the cost of their tax dollars. The fear would be, and in my analysis of the situation a quite justified fear, that they would rapidly begin to loose primacy and influence and become a marginalized minority in what would almost certainly transition to an Arab state.
This in an of itself would be a justifiable motivator for Israelis to decline a "one-state" solution. But you must also consider, from their point of view, the possibility of an Arab government which does not recognize the right of a ethnically-jewish minority to have equitable treatment under the law. Though the nations of the Levant have, in the past, show the ability to incorporate ethnic and religious minorities into government is has never proven successful in the long-term (cite as an example, for many years before the collapse of the central government the multi-ethnic and religious citizens of Lebanon enjoyed acceptable relations with one another in a government structured to ensure representation for all citizens). Such a system is inherently doomed by the biggoted nature of its power structure. If an office is restricted to persons of one religion or ethnicity, the system can never be truely fair to the population as a whole. The field will never be level to all players.
I believe that a true seperation of Israel and Palestine must occure before there can be a chance at peace for either people. A Palestinian state must not be merely a vassal state to an Israeli master, it must be sovereign and Independant, free to choose what ever manner of government and system of representation its people may desire without influence or interference from Israel.
As an independant state, Palestine would have to accept her position as a nation and behave accordingly. Choosing to deny the right of a powerful neighbor to exist could be done only at peril, and at risk of war.
The lands which Israel would choose to designate out of her own national territory to become the Palestinian state would have to be accepted. Israel has taken that land through force of arms, and held it. This practice has been known and accepted through history as "conquest", the idea is known and accepted in nearly every culture in the world. That which is won in martial conflict belongs to the victor. The United States has never had any notion of returning New Mexico, Arizona or California to the republic of Mexico no matter how many mexicans live there. Demands for Jerusalem to be the capital of a Palestinian state would have to cease, there could be no conditions. Receiving a state at all would be a gift.
Israel for her part would have to acknowledge the rights and borders of Palestine, there could be no incursions, no re-appropriation of lands or settlement of Israeli citizens into Palestinian territory.
However with all of the necessary restrictions, and devices which would have to accompany a two-state solution, I doubt that any Israeli politician has the willingness to accept such terms, and I equally doubt that any Palestinian politicina would have the courage to accept those terms if offered.
My final point on this issue, is the question of reliable Palestinian self-governance. Is it possible, are there leaders within the Palestinian community who have the savvy and skills to make a working nations from a state of refugees? I ask this question not to insult or demean the Palestian community, to as an honest inquiry. Do the political leaders of Palestine ability to run a state?

Posted by Sherif
February 21, 2007

I don't think so! It would be a disaster for Israel! The majority live under extreme condition of poverty and lack of proper education for 60 years, it would not be smart to take such a huge transition.
Israel will always have issues if the arabs don't have the holy mosque(how about the UN controlling Jerusalem?) Or nobody controlling and have a 5 year transition to have a Palestinian state?

Posted by Nadir Ahmed
February 21, 2007

Well, now I can see why so many Muslims are hostile to America/Israel. I mean think about it... how is supporting Israeli occupation morally justified while supporting terrorism is evil? Rediculous. The truth is, both are evil.

Posted by Casey
February 21, 2007

Perhaps a policy akin to that of Saudi Arabia, granting visas for religious travel to Mecca could be placed around Jerusalem.
I believe the concession of Jerusalem to be a necessity of the peace process. If there is to be a Palestine, it would have to be a Palestine that did not include Jerusalem.
Aside from the religious aspects of the city, there is a great economic interest to be considered when deciding who is to control Jerusalem.
The city resides within the borders of Israel, I cannot fathom a reason which would encourage her to part with it.
Perhaps the holy sites could be placed under the control of a contracted third party to ensure they are safeguarded and accessable to everyone.
I agree strongly with your point of requiring a transition period before a truely independant Palestinian state could be feasible. There would also have to be a partnership with the international community to assist in establishing political and civic institutions, and ensuring transparency in the use of funds.

Posted by Robert Higgins
February 21, 2007

What no world leader will ever admit is this one truth: there already is a Palestinian state. It's called the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan! Never mind that Golda Meir was right when she proclaimed that there is no such thing as a Palestinian. Such a concept didn't even exist until after the 1967 war.

Most like to forget that the British first partitioned Palestine in 1918, closing over half of Palestine to Jewish immigration in the newly created Transjordan. Those arabs who now live in the liberated territories won by Israel in the aftermath of the Six Day War who do not want to live in a Jewish state, do indeed deserve their own sovereign state. The only problem is, the Jordanian government wants nothing to do with these refugees, even though most of them held Jordanian passports up until the '80s.

Posted by Michael
February 21, 2007

Do you actually think Israel would let the "one state plan" work? Keep dreaming. The sides would only switch-- we would have Jewish suicide bombers.

Here's a plan... How about a secular Israel where the state exists without any interference from religion? It's a hell of concept-- the separation of church and state. Say what you will about America, but I would rather argue about prayer in school and Christmas nativity displays on public property than blowing each other up.

Posted by grumpy
February 21, 2007

Go back before 1948? OK lets go back to say.. 20 BC. Who was in control then? Gee the Romans, so how about we put Italy in charge?! Pick your place in history and you get a different answer. You need to separate the notion of a geographic state from an ethnic identity. If the parents in the region would let their kids mingle, date, marry other ethnicities instead of teaching them to kill each other then it would work itself out in time.

Posted by John
February 21, 2007

If we consider a one-state solution, we must also consider the "Jordan is Palestine" solution. Only when the British act of giving the Hashemite Arabian robber baron clan Palestine as a consolation prize to the House of Saud's gold trophy is recognized as folly and addressed will a just solution be found. Why is it that the minority Hashemites who slaughtered 20,000+ Palestinians in the 70s are never called to task?

Enough mental masturbation. Unfortunately I think this will all be resolved with a large war. Right, wrong or otherwise I simply cannot fathom Israel accepting a state as radicalized and dysfunctional as Palestinians show themselves to be. Would you? Of course not. Shame for all the decent folks who are caught up in that miasma.

Posted by joshua goldman
February 21, 2007

Are you people serious about this situation being Israel's fault. Apartheid? There is one statement that reveals who the real aggressor is. If the Palestinians and their terrorist backers put down their weapons, then there would be peace. If the Israeli's put down their weapons, there would be no Israel. Try and deny that.

Posted by Casey
February 21, 2007

Question: which is of more value having a Palestinian state or being right? Is there anything concrete to be gained from having the world at large recognize that the Palestinian people (and yes, there is a large disaffected group of refugee people known as the Palestinians they are composed of the same flesh and blood as you or I, thus ending any arguement that they do not exist.) have been wronged and that Israel is the obvious agressor? or is it of greater value to dispassionatley set aside these lesser issues of who is right and who occupies the moral high-ground and work with Israel towards a solution?
Nadir Ahmed made the comment earlier: "I can see why so many Muslims are hostile to America/Israel. I mean think about it... how is supporting Israeli occupation morally justified while supporting terrorism is evil? Rediculous. The truth is, both are evil..." which is indicitave of the problem. When did morality ever enter into the realm of State affairs? Why should it? What does a people, particularly a people relegated to refugee status and spread across several countries gain from morality? Wouldn't they be better served with a homeland?
The right and wrong of the matter is never going to affect the political and military realities that define the situation. Israel has territory. Palestine wants territory. Palestine holds the key to a secure Israel. Israel wants security. The equations seem to almost write itself.
Examination of the situation from the objective shows in very clear terms what the terms of compromise would have to be from both sides.
Palestine has to accept a compromise on the location of a State which would not include Jerusalem. It would have to offer security considerations, likely to include a transition period in which Israel was allowed to audit the progress of police and security forces ability to enfore the rule of law.
Israel has to accept the complete independance of Palestine. She will have to offer the new Palestinian state rather extensive and generous economic and trade concessions. Rights of Palestinian workers employed in Israel would have to be ensured and enforced. Access to holy sites would have to be ensured.
These points are all feasible, all able to be completed in the next ten years. Israel will have to relinquish a great deal of repressive authoritarianism in dealing with the Palestinian people and Palestine will have to learn to act as a responsible state.
Is it unfair to ask more of these two nations than to perform the functions which best serve the long term needs and interests of their respective peoples?
Is there something that I am misunderstanding which causes having a moral imperative to outweigh the possibility of concrete gains?

Posted by Steve McCulla
February 21, 2007

I think that ultimately there will be a 'two-state' solution, if the Palestinians ever choose to accept such a remedy. As other posters have pointed out, there existed no such creature as a 'Palestinian' prior to 1948, and, despite Israeli urgings during that war, they chose deliberately to leave their homes in order to return later for the spoils of victory...of which there were none, Israel being the decided victor.

That land assigned by the UN to Israel belongs to Israel. Israel has an absolute right of self-defence. If the Palestinians do not come to terms with that and choose to lay down their arms and come to diplomatic terms, then let them live in squallor, poverty, and misery. It is self-inflicted.

Posted by Sherif
February 21, 2007

Superb Casey, totally agree with every word!! God bless you.

Posted by Ben
February 21, 2007

I can hardly beleive that there are people in the world like Sherif, who think that Jews live in harmony in Saudi Arabia. What? Name just one Saudi Synagogue, Sherif. Where is it? All the Jews there were killed. All Dead, Sherif. And tell us please, why, with religious equality, a Muslim woman cannot marry a Jewish or Christian man in Egypt and convert if she feels like it. In Muslim nations, if a bi-cultural couple divorces, the Muslim is ALWAYS awarded custody of the children. Why? Why this bigotry? And where are the Jews of Libya? Their citizenship was actually REVOKED in mass in the 60's! Can you imagine a nation actually telling people that because of their religion, their citizenship is revoked? Yes, Sherif, it happened.

Tell us, Sherif, why in 1962 the government of Algeria declared that only those with Muslim fathers or paternal grandfathers could be citizens? Jews had lived in Algeria since Roman times, now a racist Arab government declares them non-citizens? You guys got a two-fer-one there, Sherif, racist AND sexist! So what do you think thousands of Algerian Jews did? They were as Middle Eastern as any Arab, they have a right to be free citizens in the Middle East.

And where are the Iraqi Jews today? They were chased out, all their posessions stolen. It's truth, it's history, get down with it. Across the Middle East, Jews were oppressed second class citizens, robbed, murdered, abused. They fled to Israel to escape Arab oppression.

The Arabs must stop ignoring the facts of their oppression of the Jews of the Middle East. Arabs always ignore the fact that many Jews were pushed out of Arab nations, or simply killed or forced to convert. In the USA, there is a famous document that spells out why, when one people has finally had enough oppression, when they desire freedom, they must become an independent nation. It starts out, "When in the Course of Human Events..." Arab bigotry justifies the existence of Israel. Now, those Arabs who profitted from stolen Jewish homes and goods should compensate the Palestinians, and both sides should call it square and even and leave each other in peace. Arabs thrown out of Jerusalem, Jews thrown out of Tripoli, it's time to call it a day and move on.

Ben

Posted by Nader
February 21, 2007

Casey and Sherif, the two of you have clearly been able to articulate the conditions and pre-requisites for peace in the middle east in the matter of a few posts. So obviously working out a plan is not rocket science. In fact a few years ago former members of the Israeli government and the Palestinian authority were able to chalk out a peace plan that even impressed Colin Powell.

So now the million dollar question remains: What's keeping rationality from prevailing? Is it the right-wing Israelis, the right-wing Americans, or the right-wing Palestinians? Either way you look at it, it's a minority getting in the way of a majority on either side of the table seeking peace. Is it then only a matter of time before public opinion sidelines the hawks?

Posted by Casey
February 21, 2007

Nader has brought to light the salient point of the entire situation. Why have rationality and necessity lost out in favor of zealotry and partisanship?
I will be the first to admit as a non-arab, non-muslim, non-jew there is an emotional undercurrent to these issues that I will never be able to understand and that there is certain incentive on my part for a solution to this problem to come sooner rather than later, which causes me to speak from a position of enlightened self-interest which may not be possible for many of the people more directly affected by the results of any such decision. So all of my statements from this point onward will be theory and should be taken as such:
As I see it, the largest impediments to the peace process and the acceptance of terms which would be mutually benificial to the people of Israel and Palestine alike can be divided into two categories: Ethno-Religious and Historical.
As was very aggressivly illustrated by Ben in his commentary about the treatment of Jews in the Arab world there is a long-standing need to be the victem on both sides of the issue. It seems the pervasive mentality on both sides is that the other should be making the Lion's share of the concessions because of the suffering they have endured at the hands of "The Jews" or "The Arabs". In point to this I ask, what value to the resolution of the coexistance of a Palestinian state with a Jewish Israel is the mistreatment of Jews in Lybia? Why is this even entering the equation? Historical differences and past-attrocities have to be set aside, certainly not forgotten as they are incumbern to the character of the peoples in question, but removed from the logical process of attaining a goal.
Much as the state of Israel is colored by the plight of the Jewish people, I would expect that a Palestinian state would also be shaded by the sufferings of the Palestinians. However the creations of such a state cannot be mired in the conflicts of the past.
Take as an example the creation of the American state. After a brutal war at the end of decades of perceived maltreatment by their colonial masters the people of the newly formed United States initiated trade and normalized relations with the Great Britian out of common necessity. Though there were further disagreements and even war between the two nations in the future, those ties which were too important to be neglected were maintained inspite of political discord. The lesson of necessity and interdependance needs to brough to the table in the Israel-Palestine issue as well.
The emotional indignance of Ben's comment is fine example of perfectly justified anger at historical events which plagues the peace process. These issues, while central to the culture of the people in question are irrational and unnecessary in the process of establishing a permanent solution to the central crisis of the region.
As for the Ethno-religious problems of the region, there is little I can offer as solution or even explination. All the great western democracies have suffered the effects of racial and religious intolerance. It seems to be inherent to the human condition. So I set to point a question: Is securing a seperate Palestine important enough to the Palestinian people to set aside their views on Zionism and the Jewish people? The answer in concensus voice from the Arab world seems to be "No". This has to change.
The Israelis also have been complicit in using the general mistrust of the Arab world as an excuse to back away from the negociating table. The war in 1948 is ancient history. There is little in the world today that remains the same as it was in 1948. Israel is the dominant military force in the region, they are one of the most influential economic players in the eastern mediterranian. The one thing they cannot have until they come to terms with their Arab neighbors is traquility. The question to Israel: Is the price of a secure Israel free of terrorism and strife worth setting aside past differences?
It, to my admittedly external view, comes down to one question addressed to both sides: Would you rather have your cross to bear or a chance at peace?
The answer, sadly, seems to be the former.

Posted by Sherif
February 21, 2007

Ben, all these incidents were after 48 right? I am not defending any side! It seems that we get one side of the story here and I wanted to reply to previous posts that's all.

The arabs do not agree because they have mistrust just like the Israeli's, but not ONLY in the opponent but with the judge also!

I don't agree with your conclusion Casey, I don't think its the end of the world yet! They are both wrong, and when this issue is resolved we won't have Ben Laden to worry about! All arabs would simply not support him anymore if the US helps both sides to respect eachothers existance,through the approval of the international community.

Posted by Ben
February 21, 2007

Casey,

The reason Libya is relevant is that:

1) It shows that Jews are native to the Middle East, and therefore deserve to live free in some part of it. An oppressed minority has a right to independence. Sherif notes that some (but not all) of the incidents I mentioned are after 1948- so? It shows that middle eastern Jews are not welcome as equals in all those nations. Where should they live?

2) It never was just an Israel/Palestine issue. It still isn't. All the Arab nations are against Israel, they just use the Palestinians as the somewhat expendable tip of the spear. (A few are no longer in a state of war, but even Bahrain, moderate, modern Bahrain, throws a guy off its national team because he actually visited Israel!) The Arabs play a game of being utterly unified in their solidarity with the Palestinians, and then treating the Palestinians as some kind of totally independent entity. They are not. There is far more cultural difference between New York and West Virginia than between Jordan and the West Bank- the Arabs would like the world to forget that while Jordan occupied the West Bank, for some reason, independence for the Palestinians there was not an issue.

What I am saying is this: Israel has a right to be. The Arab states have a right to be. Taking the Arab world (I counted the Arabian peninsula, Syria, Iraq, Jordan, and the nations on the south side of the Med sea) plus Israel as a whole, Israel has 2% of the population, and 0.2% of the land. The Arabs, 98% of the population, are not happy with 99.8% of the land. Well, they should be. They should take what they have, let Israel keep what it has, and let both groups go their own ways in peace. Israel should tell the Palestinians that lost homes- we're sorry, but its over, the Arab nations will be your home now, and the Arabs should tell the Israelis, we're sorry we treated you as second class citizens and expelled you from your homes, Israel will be your home now. And then it ends. Neither side owes a cent to the other. All the terror, the reprisals, the books are balanced, and its done. Finit. Not one more person is moved. Peace.

Ben

Posted by Casey
February 21, 2007

Damnably and against better judegement, I have to agree with you that the US has become an improtant dimension to this conflict. American foreign policy has alway been heavy-handedly in favor of Israel and thus the Arab nations have a just complaint that any American brokered peace initiave is intrensically designed with the secuirty of Israel as the primary focus rather than giving equal concern to the necessity of Palestinian statehood.
Unfortunately at present American credibility, especially in the Middle East has been decimated by our current administration. Which is why at present I cannot see a viable peace plan in the near future. There is no impartial, yet not uninterested party to mediate any type of a settlement which could be accepted by all involved parties.
Following election of new leadership in the United States, and allowing time for a new diplomatic corps to reestablish an American foreign policy that actually represents the interests of the people of the United States and serves the fundamental ideals of American democracy abroad, the United States can once again resume her role as a force for change and cooperation.
So, you are correct, it is not "the end of the world", but it is certainly a delay in any possible peace plan.
The woeful mismanagement and poor governance of the Palestinian Authority also serves to delay any settlement of Palestinian statehood. Israel now has a justifiable claim that the Palestinians cannot handle self-governance or provide for the necessary security considerations. Palestine will have to choose wiser leaders and adopt a more responsible path in their dealing both with Israel and the Arab world before they will again be able to raise the question of Statehood with any legitimacy.
On the Israeli side, it is important to recall the years from 1948 to 1967 in which severe lack of quality government and poor mismanagement of funds impaired the progress of Israel as a nation, and allow the Palestinians to find their stride as a new state. Israel would be the shepard, leading Palestine to functioning statehood. They would have to lessen their severe security-centered right-wing adgenda and offer assistance and hope to their new neighbor.
These are changes that will take time.
I don't think the idea of a two-state peace initiave is dead, but it will require time to recover from it's injuries. However, it seems that a two-state plan is the only viable model for peace in the region.

Posted by John S.
February 22, 2007

Realistically speaking, Israel/Palestine has been a de facto "one state" since 1967 - forty years in June - under the complete control of the Israeli Jewish population. There are no viable "two state solutions" on the table at all, just various schemes modelled on either the old Apartheid "Bantustans" or the East European ghettos and neither of these options are sustainable.

Ultimately, the options for a sustainable resolution come down to ethnic cleansing or one democratic secular state for all its people despite religion or ethnicity. While the ethnic cleansing notion has grown in popularity among the Israeli Right, even if ignores the ethical and moral problems, it really isn't a practical possibility for a number of pragmatic reasons. By default, the ultimate resolution will be one state for all its people.

For more reading of diverse views of the matter, see One State Online Bibliography Project @ http://www.onestate.org

Posted by Marwan
February 22, 2007

A two state solution is not a good idea, and anyone with common sense coming up with a long term solution can see that. Separation would keep the hatred between both groups, the Jews and the Palestinians, stagnant, the same way black people and white people hated each other during times of segregation. And besides, you just CANNOT divide the Holy Land. It's not right.

And by the way, Ben, The Palestinians don't represent Arabs, you a s s h o l e, they represent Palestine and Palestinians. And Arabs and Muslims never were against Israel before '48. In fact, in the Quran, the Jews are referred to as "children of the Torah". They just see the taking of the Holy Land as a crime against Islam and Muslims.

Posted by Casey
February 22, 2007

Ben, I see the point which you are making in reference to crimes committed against the Jewish populations of various Arab states. What I do not see is how reliving those atrocities can bring a solution to the problem to the Palestinian refugee population to an amacable settlement.
Israel's primary concern is security. It has to be. Palestinian terrorism has forced this. Israel as a nation has a responsibility to her citizens to resolve this national issue. The only way this will happen is be resolving the "refugee" status of the Palestinian people. There are only two ways to do this. Mass murder (and a consideration by the Jewish state to commit genocide is Hypocracy of the highest magnitude.) or a final structured settlement which both parties can live with and abide by.
Your notion that the Arabs should be happy with 99.8% of the land is overly idealistic as is the notion that the parties involved will simply "deal with it".
"Israel should tell the Palestinians that lost homes- we're sorry, but its over, the Arab nations will be your home now" -- Is pretty much exactly what Israel has told the Palestinians, and they have not been satisfied with this answer. Sitxy years of terrorism later, we still have a disaffected population who is willing to kill and to die in order to not be ignored and forgotten.
It is incumbent upon Israel to look to the interests of her citizens and arraive at a deal with the Palestinians which will at least partially satisfy both parties, the only alternative is to accept that Palestinian terrorists will continue to murder Israeli civilians.
I probably come off sounding strongly pro-Palestinian in all of the above points. Normaly this is not the case, I support (strongly) the premise that Israel is entiled to the gains claimed in war, and a right to self-defense. But the best course for the defense of Israel is to resolve the issue of Palestine as quickly and permanently as possible.

Posted by Eric
February 22, 2007

Marwan,

When the Quran says the jews are "Children of the Torah", and the christians are "People of the Book", it is meant in a deragatory way. The Quran even says that "jews and christias are not your friends and should be slayed".

Posted by Sherif
February 22, 2007

Why divide the holy land Marawan? The two states must take time to mature, which will need more backing from Israel to the Palestinians to get back on their feet and have an independent system with free access for them to the Mosque, Beit Laham and all.
How and why would Israel accept a one state? The palestinians would be a majority very quick, and then Israel would not exist anymore that's what I think when I put myself in the Israeli's shoes, I would defenitly fight against it.
Ben : you are so full of hatred towards arabs, I treat Jews as my cousins because Islam requires me to do so.
"It shows that Jews are native to the Middle East, and therefore deserve to live free in some part of it" : Sorry that's so childish/not mature!!All you wrote about incidents against Jews are after 48, do I need to bold it for you to see it? Before then they all lived together with no issues, till the (as much as I hate it REPEAT): OCCUPATION!INVASION! ROBBERY! I and alot of people moved beyond it, can not go backwards,and must forgive to live.
You are here to bash arabs and palestinians, do you listen to Michael Regan every day? I know who you voted for, and you are part of the chaos we're in right now! Here you force me to say it: if it wasn't for Israel's arrogance there would be no 9/11, we would have not faught in Iraq, and lost all that money and lives of soldiers and Iraqis that deserved to live, and that's REALLY why I pray there is a solution to this matter.

Man now I agree with Casey, this is decades away from a resolution! (Or maybe after the next election hopefully).

Posted by Casey
February 22, 2007

I am sorry that you find it so painful to agree with me Sharif. I think you make four excellent points in your last post:

One -- I agree, there is no division of the holy land. Though it doesn't hold exactly the same meaning to me that it does to Muslims and Jews, we Catholics also treasure the holy places of Jerusalem and would feel slighted if denied access to them. These cultural treasures have to be available to all of the peoples of the Great Faiths equally, regardless of what particular nation they reside in.

Two -- The failure of the involved parties to resolve the issue of a Palestinian state contributed directly to the attacks of September 11th. It is imperative to the state security of both Israel and The United States to resolve this issue if for no other reason than to reverse the polarization of the Muslim world away from extremism. (Though on a personal note, I cannot fathom an American who believes in the principles of freedom and democracy endowed to us by our visionary forfathers who does not feel for the suffering of the Palestinians. They have been abused and marginalized by the Arab world and Israel alike...Aiding these people to find their place in the world should be a National mandate and a moral obligation; isn't this the exact cause of Liberty that is central to the American character?)

Three -- A solution is going to be slow in the making. A Palestinian state will have to grow from the ground up, with no civic, social or security institutions in place from which to build. They will need assistance and guidance from the international community; funding, education, security assistance and oversight. Of course this means that they cannot be so stupid as to declare that they do not recognize the right of Israel to exist...they must learn to be a State, not a terrorist group or a resistance organization.

and Finally Four -- Petty hatred based on Religion and Ethnicity, driven by horrific events of the past will be the major stumbling block to the peace process. It is time to beat the swords into plowshares, and take aim at a resolution. Blaming eachother for misdeads in the past will not bring this crisis any closer to a solution.

The timetable for peace is going to be long. If they start in earnest in 2008, I believe there could be a viable Palestinian state by 2020.

Posted by Sherif
February 22, 2007

"People of the Book", it is meant in a deragatory way."
Do you understand arabic better than arabs? Did not think so! Who interpreted for you? Where did you hear that? It is very clear, you just have to use your mind alittle! "People of the book"/"Book Holders" : the bible and the Torah were created by God, everyone that beleives in God's ethics, is a follower of God(THE SAME GOD!), what more repect on equal terms can god force us to respect every BOOK HOLDER?

"jews and christias are not your friends and should be slayed" hahaha! I need to get a grasp on reality?!LOL How come like Ben said there where Jews living with arabs? How come there is alot of christian arabs living there? Enough with Nazzi stuff Mr. Eric Nuck'em! Enough with you.

"isn't this the exact cause of Liberty that is central to the American character?) Ghoose bumps!

I think the process will be initiated in 08 totally agree!! Cheerfully this time! But hopefully quicker than 2020 for PEACE. Ben is still out there you never know ! Why didn't we get rid of this guy? I thought that's why we went to war in Afghanistan! No they thought Sadam was more dangerous! Bush Bush Bush

Posted by Mehdi
February 22, 2007

Yes, there are jews and muslimins and christians living together, and the Quran DOES say "jews and christians are not your friends and should be slayed". God is great.

Posted by Eric
February 22, 2007

Sherif, et al: There seems to be a misperception being propagated here that Jew-hatred spontaniously appeared post '48. NOT THE CASE! Jihadism and pogroms pre-dates in creation of Israel. Example #1: In 1927 the Arabs in Hebron, at the urging of local Mullahs, turned on their Jewish neoghbors who had lived in the community for hundreds of years. Jewish shops were burned, women raped, and many were murdered. Example #2: As early as the 1930s Amin Al-Husseini formented Jihad against the Jews. Due to his Jihadist advcacy he found support and comfort with Hitler and Himmler in the run-up to and during WWII. He moved to Berlin as the Nazi's guest and was instrumental in creating an entire Muslim SS Division in WWII. They were amnogst the most fanatical Jew-Hunters the SS had (http://www.tellthechildrenthetruth.com/amin_en.html).So, to my point,Jew-hatred in Palestine was formented long before ' 48.

Regarding the egalitarian notion of a free and open Jeruselum, guess what, that is exactly what was proscribed by the original UN resolution that was accepted by the Jews. Unfortunately, when the Arabs rejected the notion of seperate and independant Jewish and Moslem states and attacked the "zionist entity", Jordan took-over Jeruselum. In classic Moslem fashion of SUPREMACY ( remember the Taliban blowing-up the Bhuddist statues)they denied Jews access to the Holy City and Jewish religous sites. Further, the Jewish headstones from Mt. Olive were removed and used as paving stones for roads. The area of the Western Wall was converted into a public urinal.

This concept of "one state" is no more than an extension of the Jihadist concept of "..From the River to the Sea..". What the Arabs have been unable to acheive through conventional warfare and 60 years of terror-attacks ( the PLO was formed prior to the ' 67 war)is now being advanced through the demonization and deligitimization of Isreal through a very effective PR campign. Whether it is "Zionism is Racisim" or the myopic focus of the so-called UN Human Rights group, Israel is the target of an unprecedentd global campaign to make it disappear. Never before in history has a nation faced such a challenge to continue its existance. Why? Because it is a Jewish nation.

Perhaps the world should reconsider reconsolidating Pakistan and India? How about N and S Korea. Why not return Poland to Russia? While we're at it, let's give Texas and California back to Mexico. Oh yes, one more, I want to start a global campaign to return America the the indiginous Indians. See my point?

What was once merely a murky Left-Wing / Progressive agenda-point has now become mainstream. The fact that Time/CNN would even broach the subject and invite comment is reflective of how far this unprecidented campaign has been advanced.

All that it is accomplishing is continuing to mislead the Palestinians to make-beleive that their quest for eliminating the "Zionist Entity" continues to be worthy of pursuit. This obsfucation of the facts distracts them from seeking peace and nation-building.

Posted by Ben
February 22, 2007

Sherif,

Sadly, you turn to crying and insult when confronted by fact. Before 1948, the Jews of the middle east were not free. Between the Arab invasion (and illegitimate occupations) of 636 and the creation of Israel in 1948, there were NO free Jews in the Middle East. There have been happier moments, but the whole history has been one of Arab rule and Jewish servitude.

Do you know what a House Nigger was? That was the best that Jews could hope for. Protected not because they were regarded as free, equal human beings in a free society, but because the masters had a few remaining touches of decency. A protected slave.

Understand it, Sherif: When you declare that Islam is the bedrock of the legal system of a nation, you declare that your legal system is beyond the reach of any non-muslims in the land. Therefore, in any such nation, a non-Muslim is a second class citizen, and has a human right to rebellion.

I see you try to blame Israel for 9-11. Very smart of you. Now try blaming them for 1801. Or 1834. 1837? Since 632AD, it has been constant warfare, and you try to say it is all Israel's fault?

I am not "bashing", Sharif, I am bringing up facts you would prefer stay hidden. The proof of it all is in this:

When I say, "UNCONDITIONAL Peace now, immediately," you say "Oh, no, we must consider past abuses and make up for them", yet when I bring up past ARAB abuses you say "oh, no, we must forget past abuses and live in the present!"

WHICH IS IT?

I say, forgive ALL past abuses, even today's Quassam rocket attack, and go forth from the present- no one moves, no one pays, no one kills. As Chief Joseph of the Nez Perce put it: "Fight no more forever."

Now, Casey, on the other hand, sort of gets it- he admits that the Arabs will not agree to a purely "Peace now!" settlement. Now, why is that? What is it in Arab society that must be fixed so they WILL accept a "Peace Now" approach- like people around the world have. Are they simply too bigotted, violent and hateful to forgive Israel's misdeeds, they can only forget their own misdeeds, and 99.8% is never enough, to an Arab? I would like to think that perhaps they are better than that. Even the USA has abandoned some old territorial claims in the interest of peace- ie, "54-40 or Fight!" Arabs must, NOW, abandon all claims on Israel and Israelis, and Israel must abandon all claims on the Arabs.

Arabs MUST teach that every Arab terrorist is JUST AS EVIL AND INSANE as Baruch Goldstein. Martyr Posters, off the walls. And everyone who thinks the Arab martyrs are "heros" is just as twisted as those who think Goldstein was a hero- but for reasons that escape me that's like what, 2% of Israelis and 58% of Arabs? Let's get some balance here.

You, on the other hand, think you know things you do not- like who I voted for! Ha!

You may choose to believe that everything was nice for everyone up to 1948, because it is now clear you are a bigot with nothing but "Arabs are perfect, blame the Jews!" on your mind, but read the words of a Jewish rabbi from Jerusalem, to President Grant, in 1869:

"The Israelites in Palestine possess no political or civil rights whatever, and often times... ... are exposed to violence and arbitrary rule."

1869, Sharif. Must have been Israel's fault, right? Or, the guy was lying, of course, because he was nothing but a filthy Jew, right? An uppity House Nigger.

That statement, alone, justifies the creation Israel, and ANY minority in the same boat has the same right to Independence, be they in Eritrea or East Timor.

Complete, total, unconditional PEACE NOW. END IT.

Ben

Posted by kyle welhouse
February 26, 2007

i like dogs :)

Posted by L'Afrique
February 28, 2007

The only solution to the Palestinians/Israelis crisis is to get the Israelis elsewhere. Israel is immigrant in Palestine, whether people accept the fact or not! I think is was too unjust to attempt to give away Palestinian land to immigrant Israel and not expect the ongoing conflict.

True Palestinians will never settle for anything less - it is simply human nature. You see, humans like wildlife animals are very territorial! Asking Palestinians to simply give away the rights to their land was indeed a setup: This is similar to asking one to give away one's rights to one's home to some nomad immigrant! No form of anything will suffice to the true Palestinian. Israel will have to move elsewhere, where it can rightfully defend itself, territory and have its own Jerusalem!

Are you aware that outside the Bible, Israel does not indeed exist? Israel came about simply by the accounts of the Bible and other holy books, although Israel seems to seek a solution to its land problems away from the holy books. Israel will have to move away from Palestinian land, if it truly expects no conflict with Palestine! I have proposed Antarctica several times as a very possible solution to this crisis between Palestinians and Israelis/Israelites; or better yet, Israel may want to start seeking out Ur, the homeland of its father Abraham.

Posted by pedrucho
March 1, 2007

Hello

What you thinking about it?

Vicodin side effect

Bye

Posted by Sherif
March 4, 2007

"Before 1948, the Jews of the middle east were not free. Between the Arab invasion (and illegitimate occupations) of 636 and the creation of Israel in 1948, there were NO free Jews in the Middle East. There have been happier moments, but the whole history has been one of Arab rule and Jewish servitude."

Freedom in 636? That's why I get a little deffensive Ben, what civilization at the time had freedom in the COMMON term used today? NO one was considered free at the time muslims were commonly slaved! It was not fair in alot of times, but was a much more advanced civilization later on that no one wanted to leave, funny you call it invasion(how many people died intentionally that were "Book Holders" in your so called invasion?Or how many churches or temples burnt?

" When you declare that Islam is the bedrock of the legal system of a nation, a non-Muslim is a second class citizen" I explained before our view of a system is toally different than at the time, and you make me bring a point I did not want to mention: WHAT TIME IN ANCIENT HISTORYAND WHAT COUNTRY WERE THE JEWISH PEOPLE SETTLED AND WERE NOT ASKED TO LEAVE? And don't say people were jealous of their success, they never had a civilization! And yes they were followers to arab rullers, but where else were they not? Does that give them the right to have a country in every continent? What a concept! To all Jews all the respect to your religeon, and who you are, Israel does not represent Jews to me, and I'm forced to use it to make a point against the unfair -one sided accusations.

This is very funny:
""The Israelites in Palestine possess no political or civil rights whatever, and often times... ... are exposed to violence and arbitrary rule."
Well what's political & civil rights in 1869? Who did they belong to? Who else in the area other than Egyptians had any rights at the time? They are always the victim!(Remember I'm replying to your statement!)

"the Arabs will not agree to a purely "Peace now!" settlement. Now, why is that? ":
That's why I thought someone writting this statement after all that's been said(50-70years is not like 1400 years ago) does not deserve a reply, and again Ben your ideology has been applied by our government for decades and has proven to be "unfairly dumb!", on the other hand it seems you never get the view of French, German, and alot of other european, african and asian countries because it's not to our liking!

"1869, Sharif. Must have been Israel's fault, right? " So using the same concept, African Americans should have had their own country in the 60's?!!! Or no we are a different story right? Ya fair forthem not for me! Great system!Go Bush go!

"That statement, alone, justifies the creation Israel, and ANY minority in the same boat has the same right to Independence" You are making childish sense, why don't Palestinians have their own country? Or no they are a different story ha? Racisim is what I understand from your patern!

And no Palestinians will not just go away, they have the right to live on the land JUST like the Israelis! You never get it because you belong to a different era, and that I would accept about you, and so, this is ova!

"Yes, there are jews and muslimins and christians living together, and the Quran DOES say "jews and christians are not your friends and should be slayed". God is great."

Mehdi , I recomend you go out and try to find a decent job instead of listining to people that will get you killed out of ignorance and you'll find yourself in HELL, it's a sin to quote from Quran without pointing the topic or the incident God is talking about. Yes God is the greatest, and he quotes you to live and to respect everyone elses faith, you have no right to declare who is rightous and who's not, read more about that before you give up!
GOD BLESS AMERICA. IN GOD WE TRUST.IN JUSTICE I TRUST.

Posted by Testerqye
March 10, 2007

Helloqgr - this is just a testing, don't worry about it

Posted by Anonymous
March 28, 2007

;

Posted by cheapvalium
March 30, 2007

http://www.easyfreeforum.com/zyban "> zyban [URL=http://www.easyfreeforum.com/zyban ] zyban [/URL]
http://pharma_online.kwikphp.com/cheap-valium.html "> cheap valium [URL=http://pharma_online.kwikphp.com/cheap-valium.html ] cheap valium [/URL] http://pharma_online.kwikphp.com/cheap-xanax.html "> cheap xanax [URL=http://pharma_online.kwikphp.com/cheap-xanax.html ] cheap xanax [/URL] http://pharma_online.kwikphp.com/depressio-zoloft.html "> depressio zoloft [URL=http://pharma_online.kwikphp.com/depressio-zoloft.html ] depressio zoloft [/URL] http://pharma_online.kwikphp.com/diet-pill-xanax.html "> diet pill xanax [URL=http://pharma_online.kwikphp.com/diet-pill-xanax.html ] diet pill xanax [/URL] http://pharma_online.kwikphp.com/diflucan.html "> buy diflucan [URL=http://pharma_online.kwikphp.com/diflucan.html ] buy diflucan [/URL] http://pharma_online.kwikphp.com/diflucan-online.html "> buy diflucan online [URL=http://pharma_online.kwikphp.com/diflucan-online.html ] buy diflucan online [/URL] http://pharma_online.kwikphp.com/diflucan-thrush.html "> diflucan thrush [URL=http://pharma_online.kwikphp.com/diflucan-thrush.html ] diflucan thrush [/URL] http://pharma_online.kwikphp.com/finasteride-propecia.html "> finasteride propecia [URL=http://pharma_online.kwikphp.com/finasteride-propecia.html ] finasteride propecia [/URL] http://pharma_online.kwikphp.com/generic-diflucan.html "> generic diflucan [URL=http://pharma_online.kwikphp.com/generic-diflucan.html ] generic diflucan [/URL] http://pharma_online.kwikphp.com/generic-valium.html "> generic valium [URL=http://pharma_online.kwikphp.com/generic-valium.html ] generic valium [/URL] http://pharma_online.kwikphp.com/generic-xanax.html "> generic xanax [URL=http://pharma_online.kwikphp.com/generic-xanax.html ] generic xanax [/URL] http://pharma_online.kwikphp.com/generic-zoloft.html "> generic zoloft [URL=http://pharma_online.kwikphp.com/generic-zoloft.html ] generic zoloft [/URL] http://pharma_online.kwikphp.com/loss-propecia.html "> loss propecia [URL=http://pharma_online.kwikphp.com/loss-propecia.html ] loss propecia [/URL] http://pharma_online.kwikphp.com/order-propecia.html "> order propecia [URL=http://pharma_online.kwikphp.com/order-propecia.html ] order propecia [/URL]

Posted by Testermlw
March 30, 2007

Hellocua - this is just a testing, don't worry about it

Posted by buyvicodin
April 2, 2007

http://pharma_online.kwikphp.com/vicodin.html "> buy vicodin [URL=http://pharma_online.kwikphp.com/vicodin.html ] buy vicodin [/URL] http://pharma_online.kwikphp.com/vicodin-addiction.html "> vicodin addiction [URL=http://pharma_online.kwikphp.com/vicodin-addiction.html ] vicodin addiction [/URL] http://pharma_online.kwikphp.com/vicodin-online.html "> vicodin online [URL=http://pharma_online.kwikphp.com/vicodin-online.html ] vicodin online [/URL] http://pharma_online.kwikphp.com/vicodin-without-prescription.html "> vicodin without prescription [URL=http://pharma_online.kwikphp.com/vicodin-without-prescription.html ] vicodin without prescription [/URL] http://pharma_online.kwikphp.com/xanax.html "> buy xanax [URL=http://pharma_online.kwikphp.com/xanax.html ] buy xanax [/URL] http://pharma_online.kwikphp.com/xanax-online.html "> xanax online [URL=http://pharma_online.kwikphp.com/xanax-online.html ] xanax online [/URL] http://pharma_online.kwikphp.com/xanax-side-effects.html "> xanax side effects [URL=http://pharma_online.kwikphp.com/xanax-side-effects.html ] xanax side effects [/URL] http://pharma_online.kwikphp.com/xanax-valium.html "> xanax valium [URL=http://pharma_online.kwikphp.com/xanax-valium.html ] xanax valium [/URL] http://pharma_online.kwikphp.com/zoloft.html "> buy zoloft [URL=http://pharma_online.kwikphp.com/zoloft.html ] buy zoloft [/URL] http://pharma_online.kwikphp.com/zoloft-side-effects.html "> zoloft side effects [URL=http://pharma_online.kwikphp.com/zoloft-side-effects.html ] zoloft side effects [/URL] http://pharma_online.kwikphp.com/zoloft-weight-gain.html "> zoloft weight gain [URL=http://pharma_online.kwikphp.com/zoloft-weight-gain.html ] zoloft weight gain [/URL] http://pharma_online.kwikphp.com/zyban.html "> buy zyban [URL=http://pharma_online.kwikphp.com/zyban.html ] buy zyban [/URL] http://pharma_online.kwikphp.com/zyban-online.html "> zyban online [URL=http://pharma_online.kwikphp.com/zyban-online.html ] zyban online [/URL] http://pharma_online.kwikphp.com/zyban-quit-smoking.html "> zyban quit smoking [URL=http://pharma_online.kwikphp.com/zyban-quit-smoking.html ] zyban quit smoking [/URL] http://pharma_online.kwikphp.com/zyban-smoking.html "> zyban smoking [URL=http://pharma_online.kwikphp.com/zyban-smoking.html ] zyban smoking [/URL]

Posted by tuttotesti
April 10, 2007

Thanks so very much for taking your time to create this very useful and informative site. I have learned a lot from your site. Thanks!!!
http://thedrugmarket.com

Posted by Testereqe
April 19, 2007

Hellovxz - this is just a testing, don't worry about it

Posted by Buy Zanaflex
April 28, 2007

Zanaflex a muscle relaxant i