tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2781379104401133933.post277185512682671327..comments2024-03-22T22:27:18.642-07:00Comments on The Hasbara Buster: "From 1948 to 1967 they didn't ask for a state"Ibrahim Ibn Yusufhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09839484683464457225noreply@blogger.comBlogger12125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2781379104401133933.post-32212840515895435222017-01-16T21:40:18.926-08:002017-01-16T21:40:18.926-08:00To answer all your questions yes JORDAN did all th...To answer all your questions yes JORDAN did all those things,PALESTINIANS are the majority in Jordan and treated as a second class citizens and let me remind you a little matter of BLACK SEPTEMBER Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02209680660498718749noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2781379104401133933.post-41637091637106824682009-06-14T11:33:25.328-07:002009-06-14T11:33:25.328-07:00I know this is slightly past the time when most pe...I know this is slightly past the time when most people are commenting, but I am just reading your excellent blog in detail!<br /><br />We Scots do in fact have a separate language, like Euskara for the Basque people. It is called Gaelic. Also, there's a discussion about whether Scots itself is a separate language (it uses different grammatical structures from English).<br /><br />Just to clarify the point, but please keep on keeping on :)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2781379104401133933.post-30284493049778491362009-05-17T14:24:00.000-07:002009-05-17T14:24:00.000-07:00The biggest difference between the time that Jorda...The biggest difference between the time that Jordan controlled the West Bank and now, when Israel controls the West Bank is that Jordan made every Palestinian living in the West Bank a citizen of Jordan with all the rights and privileges of citizenship. If Israel had granted the same rights to every Palestinian in the West Bank and treated them with full equality, then there would be no push for a separate Palestinian state. But Israel will never give them full citizenship status in Israel because that would mean that Jews would no longer be in the majority there, and could no longer privilege Jews to the detriment of non-Jews and remain a "democracy".treenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2781379104401133933.post-68345203755585079832009-05-17T13:03:00.000-07:002009-05-17T13:03:00.000-07:00Anon:
Of course the Palestinians will never accep...Anon:<br /><br />Of course the Palestinians will never accept the Bantustan solution (do you understand what it means?)<br /><br />You don't have to be British or anything else to understand that: to be human suffices.Gerthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07752117708821629614noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2781379104401133933.post-15933093145801073582009-05-16T14:09:00.000-07:002009-05-16T14:09:00.000-07:00"The armchair terrorists rant about the "injustice..."The armchair terrorists rant about the "injustice of the two state solution""<br /><br />Oh, this is quoting me above. Well, that particular sentence was referring to those who find it unjust because it deprives Israel of expansion. Depending on how its implemented, it may or may not be just.<br /><br />You might want to read Michael Oren's latest article in Commentary Magazine. He rules out both a two and one -state solution, sticking to the "status quo" it seems. Where you people are going with this, I can't imagine.andrew rnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2781379104401133933.post-67683264032979483382009-05-16T12:53:00.000-07:002009-05-16T12:53:00.000-07:00"Love it how silly british twits *decide* what is ..."Love it how silly british twits *decide* what is acceptable to the Palestinians in a negotiated solution."<br /><br />Except the passage you quote wasn't by a Brit. How did you make that slip up, I wonder.andrew rnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2781379104401133933.post-7814728549743298112009-05-14T22:51:00.000-07:002009-05-14T22:51:00.000-07:00There is also the main argument which proves that ...There is also the main argument which proves that the South Korea should not reunite with North Korea under the loving care of Dear Leader Comrade Kim Jong Il: the "He sucks" argument.Yitzchak Goodmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13478596798458473250noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2781379104401133933.post-25844127644292102492009-05-12T12:32:00.000-07:002009-05-12T12:32:00.000-07:00Eh, maybe it is. But you just know even the Germa...Eh, maybe it is. But you just know even the German-speaking Swiss wouldn't have it.<br /><br />That reminds me. My letter to a local hasbara paper got two responses, and I should probably finish reading them now. *deep breath*andrew rnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2781379104401133933.post-86466370792452864282009-05-12T09:05:00.000-07:002009-05-12T09:05:00.000-07:00Switzerland is a bad example: it's a quadrilingual...Switzerland is a bad example: it's a quadrilingual country! I lived there for about a year: traveling through the different cantons you can see the culture change before your very eyes!<br /><br />Most arguments made by Zionists against a state for the Palestinians fall into Gabriel Ash's 'They suck!' category, from his witty <A HREF="http://jewssansfrontieres.blogspot.com/2008/07/how-to-make-case-for-israel-and-win.html" REL="nofollow">How to make the case for Israel and win</A> guide to Hasbara, in four easy steps: We Rock! They Suck! You Suck! Everything Sucks!Gerthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07752117708821629614noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2781379104401133933.post-71660034229228673582009-05-11T15:00:00.000-07:002009-05-11T15:00:00.000-07:00I know that wasn't the best terminology but it was...I know that wasn't the best terminology but it was late. However, I don't think there are too many real-world examples of people tolerating occupation because the occupier had the same customs and language. One popular example is Syria-Lebanon but that is pretty shallow, even worse when the Shia are cast as pro-Syrian and the Maronites as anti-Syrian.<br /><br />It really depends on the circumstances. Austria accepted annexation by Germany, but they didn't try the same with Switzerland. Palestine was occupied by Egypt in the 1830's and that led to a revolt over conscription (originating from Nablus, no less). But when Jordan occupied the West Bank, there was an even worse occupation the other way. Also important to note is that Jordan did not allow arms to Palestinians.<br /><br />What makes me reluctant to address the issue is that it's about the identity politics of Zionist victims. It's just another case of scrutinizing their victims from an abstract viewpoint. Any argument against the two state solution doesn't deserve more than 'okay, one state it is'.andrew rnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2781379104401133933.post-57622934605266146652009-05-11T12:46:00.000-07:002009-05-11T12:46:00.000-07:00Andrew r:
"I think the arguement about being occu...Andrew r:<br /><br />"I think the arguement about being occupied by similar people is pretty weak, though."<br /><br />I don't think it is. The 'similar' people (an awkward term, I feel) do not behave the same as a foreign occupying power, like Israel does in the West Bank (and used to do in Gaza). In the West Bank, Israel is creating lebensraum for its Zionist population and laying the foundations for a Greater Israel, possibly Arab-free (if they can get away with it).Gerthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07752117708821629614noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2781379104401133933.post-37917598097952614112009-05-11T01:20:00.000-07:002009-05-11T01:20:00.000-07:00This is one of those nebulous non-issues brought u...This is one of those nebulous non-issues brought up to demonstrate the injustice of the two-state solution and signal their desire for one democratic state or expelling the Arabs, whichever you believe. Although Moshe Shemesh's <I>The Palestinian Entity</I> is a must-read for any one who really cares. Egypt was for a state in the remainder of Palestine, Jordan wasn't, this topic doesn't deserve a whole book but you have one by an Israeli intel officer/academic.<br /><br />The obvious answer is that Jordan took in refugees. Israel made them refugees. And it did again in 1967.<br /><br />It's also wonky to have us think there was a demand for a state after the six-day war. The PLO still focused on undoing Israel as a whole, not just liberating the occupied territories. Even now Palestinians are split on the two-state solution. Like you more or less said, the demand is really for the situation to get better.<br /><br />I think the arguement about being occupied by similar people is pretty weak, though. The only case it ever applied is maybe the anschluss.andrew rnoreply@blogger.com