Yeah democracy like in Lebanon. Or in Gaza/WB. BTW democracy and nation/state are not mutually exclusive concept. If you think jews will agree for one state after this:
haha a western style democracy with majority of moslem palestinians in charge the problem is this is a oximoran is like fire and water it never works, 2ed she lacks historical insight it was palestinians who rejected partition and attacked the only problem was that they lost and continue to loose. there is a 2 state solution and jordan is palestine
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
We could debate this ad infinitum. The bottom line is isreal will never committ suicide by letting palestinians take over their country by becoming a majority, so a one state solution is out of the question. As long as the palestinians vow to always make war on isreal, a two state solution is out of the question. So either the status quo will contintue or an all out war will occur. Bottom line is I tire of the middle east's complete dysfunctionality. Let them kill each other if they desire.
You tire of it? Oh please, you live in the United States, how could you possibly get tired of it? You're not one who has to live under occupation, nor am I.
If Israel won't commit "suicide" as you put it, then why did White South Africa commit suicide? Similar arguments were made to justify maintaining South Africa's Apartheid regime. On a related note, South African cleric and activist Desmond Tutu has stated that life for the Palestinians is WORSE than it was for Black South Africans.
Are you fucking kidding me? Have you heard not a word that this woman, and millions of others, have said? Do you think the Palestinians chose to have their land stolen? Do you think the Palestinians love to be slaughtered by the IDF? Do you really think that the Palestinians enjoy that their home has been turned into a massive prison, a testing ground for Israel's collective punishments?
You are absolutely despicable, a slimy little racist.
You are a master of personal insults and using profanity. Did you get those traits from you mother, father or both? Do some research on the arab conquests. The arabs stole all the land that is not egypt, syria, lebanon, palestine, iraq and northern africa. When they vacate those lands, then and only then, can they or the "millions of others" demand the isrealis leave. Hypocrites, the lot of you!
Yeah, OK, but that happened hundreds of years ago. There is literally nothing anybody can do about that, because there is no longer a dispossessed population of those lands. There is, however, a dispossessed population of Palestine that have been rooted out of their land in RECENT history. You are the hypocrite, for you refuse to apply to your kin the same standards you apply to all others.
Again, I am not proposing anyone return from where they originated, in fact very few people do. Either you support returning land to the dispossed of the world or you don't. If the Jews should return land so should every other nation that was founded by conquest of others.
Actually you are incorrect, loads of people propose that people return to where they originated. It's called Zionism. The core Zionist principle is that the Jews should return to their original homeland from 2,000 years ago.
Actually the Canaanites were the first to lose that spot of land. But once again, ancient history is far less valuable than what is going on right now, because there is literally nothing anybody can do about ancient history other than study it. Current events can be changed.
To demonstrate your hypocrisy, since we are both Americans, would you advocate that the United States and its population be vacated because this land belonged to the natives? The conquest of America is much more recent in history than the conquest of what are now Arab lands. Surely if you should uphold your standards that is what you would advocate.
No hypocrisy here. I am not suggesting that all non native-americans vacate the USA, and unlike the Palestinians, the native americans are not launching rockets at us daily nor sending suicide bombers among us. But it is hypocritical for the arabs to point the finger at the isrealis and call them land stealers when the arabs themselves stole the majority of land they now inhabit.
Well actually one of the biggest excuses used to defend the genocide of the natives was that they were violent, because they did in fact use violence to repel the invaders.
The point is this: there are two events of land stealing we are mentioning. There is the Arab conquest, which happened over a thousand years ago, and there is the Israeli conquest, which is happening now. Precisely zero can be done about the Arabs' conquest anymore, but a lot can be done about Israel's.
The Arabs inhabited the Arabian peninsula and conquered most of the land they live in now. Do a little research on the arab conquests. They should leave Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Egypt, Palestine, Jordan and all of North Africa for they stole those lands from others you Idiot.
Yes I know they conquered large parts of the middle east idiot. But they didn't expel and replace the native population. Most of the people in these areas are descended from populations before the Arab conquest. Idiot!
the U.S. conquered all of the land they live on now, do you think it would be reasonable to give it back to Mexico or the Native Americans? or if Mexico expelled the American population in old Mexican lands because they had an historic claim to them it would be justified? Or perhaps Saddam Hussains invasion of Iran was justified because Iran held lands that once were part of Iraq? The old Arab conquests have nothing to do with the current debates, and do not justify further settlement building.
I agree with you. It is silly to expect people to leave the lands they conquered, including the jews. I am just suggesting that it is hypocritical of the arabs to demand the jews leave the lands "they stole" while the arabs remain in the lands "they stole".
by your logic then the US cannot condemn or act on any act of aggression or occupation because that would be "hypocritical." also the Arab conquests are ancient conquests that have entirely no relevancy to the debate today. What does is the international consensus of the two state solution that Palestine has accepted, but Israel does not, and the fact that Israel continues to build settlements on Palestinian land, in clear violation of international law.
I'll be honest though I dont think the logic adds up. Im American, so that would be calling me and my family hypocrites, who cant make any claims about other conquests because we live on land that was taken by conquest.
It does not make any sense as far as the Israeli situation today. because settlements are being built on what the intentional community has deemed Palestinian land, and we can end this because its happening now.
I am convinced that Israel has rightly reached the conclusion that there will never be peace with the palestinians, never. So, why not take all their land and just drive them away. What's the downside to Israel doing this. What could possibly happen to Isreal that has not been done to Israel already, more then once?
the problem is its against any moral judgement that i think anyone would accept, as well as a gross violation international and I'm sure Israeli law. that would be like asking why not just annihilate or move all the native americans somewhere else because what's the harm to us? in this case there has been an international consensus on how to end the conflict for over 40 years, which calls for Israel to end the occupation, and stop settlements, which it has rejected every time.
It really doesn't matter what it says in their charter, look at what is happening on the ground. Israel still illegally occupies palestine, and puts settlements in its land. the current prime minister Netanyahu barley accepted that there should be a Palestinian state last month. Shimon Peres is quoted as saying a Palestianan state will never happen. words dont really matter in my opinion though, whats happening on the ground matters.
Im saying there is no preferable view as far as rhetoric. Sure it may say that in Hamas's charter that they want to take over all of palestine. but there are numerous statements by Israeli officials saying that they dont recognize a Palestinian state. And I urge you to look at what is happening on the ground. The Palestinians land is being stolen and they are being militarily occupied. i condemn there actions of terrorism, as I condemn Israeli terrorism as well. the occupation needs to end.
You wish to simply discount what the charter of hamas says and what most palestinians want, the total destruction of Israel. There can never be peace with people that are vowed to destroy you, never. The Israelis know this and have given up trying to get this elusive "peace" after 60 years of conflict. Israel is now focusing on expanding its nation and securing its existence. The Palestinians have lost their chance.
I dont discount what it says in their charter, but you also cannot discount what Israeli officials have said, which has been numerous times stating that they do not accept a Palestinian state. Actually Hamas and the PLO preceding it, have accepted the International consensus of the pre 1967 borders, Israel has rejected it every time. if you look at polls of the Palestine and Isreali citizens they both accept a two state solution. Yet the Israeli gov't illegally creates more settlements, andwalls
obviously you dont believe there should be a Palestinian state, and you've already said that you would understand if Israel wanted to finish its ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians, which really makes u no different than the worst "terrorist" who want to wipe out the jews. also you keep referring to the hardships of the Israelis when overwhelmingly, as pointed by Israeli historian Benny Morris, most of the victims of the conflict are the Palestinians.
What I believe matters not. The problem of this "Palestinian State" as defined by the Palestinians calls for the destruction of Israel. Israel does not want to be destroyed. That's the problem. Nothing else matters in this conflict except for the desire of the palestinians to destroy Isreal. Until that desire changes, there will be no peace and Israel knows this and is not waiting anymore. Israel will do what helps insure its survival. The Palestinians have chosen this path.
again ill stress the point that if you look up polls of the Palestinian population they believe in a two state solution, meaning the recognize the state of Israel. Also Hamas and the PLO also have accepted the two state solution the many times that is has been offered, which the entire world accepts, but the Israel and the US veto every time it passes though the U.N. I think you need to do more research to understand the conflict.
Oh, and if you would pay attention, neither Ghada Karmi nor I, nor millions of others of people who advocate peace in the Middle East, say that the Israelis should just pack up an leave. If you would even listen to a single word that Ghada is saying, you'd know that she is saying that both Israelis and Palestinians can stay, and that the conflict can be resolved by incorporating the Palestinians into an already pre-existing state called Israel.
Her suggestion is simply not possible. The Isrealis know, as do those that support such a silly notion, that trying to make one nation would be the end of Isreal as a Jewish state. No one wants to be a minority in a nation where the majority want you dead.
Why is it that Israel is the ONLY nation in the 1st world that is based on ethnic identity? I have yet to hear a good argument that that is not racism by another name.
I hear this notion a lot, that the majority of Palestinians want to kill all the Jews or something like that. I would like to see its source, if you can provide it. Go find me some poll or something factual that can back up your arguments.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Look up the charter of hamas. It is available on the internet. They want Isreal destroyed and the jews killed. They say exactly that in their charter. The palestinians elected hamas hence they support the groups views.
It's quite a stretch to use that as evidence that the majority of Palestinians want to kill the Jews. First of all, the charter only mentions destroying the state of Israel. The most hardline of Islamists would probably accept the Jews as being part of the Ahl al-Kitab (not my cup of tea, by the way). But in recent years, including before Hamas got elected, Hamas has been less and less referring to its charter. There has also been increased discussion of changing the charter.
Also, comments from Hamas officials including Ismail Haniya have shown that they may consider recognizing Israel within its pre-1967 borders, which (incidentally) are the internationally recognized borders.
This is all with the understanding of Israel as a Jewish state. If Israel were to relinquish its preferential treatment towards the Jewish ethnos (i.e. racism) and begin to treat Arabs fairly, then you may find that Palestinian attitudes towards Israel will change dramatically.
This woman is nuts. The arabs don't do democracies. The arabs will elect hamas as their government then they will outlaw judeaism and the slaughter will begin then democracy will be shit canned and radical islamic wackos will take over.
btw 10% of Palestinians are Christian, and almost 40% of Lebanese are Christian, are they somehow less Arab than Muslim Arabs?
And where did you get this idea that a secular Arab democracy would result in a totalitarian Islamic state? That's like saying that the U.S. constitution will result in Fascism; i.e. what you're saying is a pure contradiction in terms.
This idea that the Arabs are undeserving of democracy is not only racist, but it also plays into a patronizing ethno-centric world view that allows for exploitation and repression. It's like in Edward Said's book Orientalism, this idea that "they cannot represent themselves, they must be represented," and that WE should decide what the Arab character is, not Arabs. It's simply ridiculous.
I really do not care what the arabs do, I am just pointing out that historically, arabs don't do democracy. And when they do, they usually elect some terrorist organization like hamas or hissbulla or some other form of violent, wacko, islamic, terror loving lunatics (see iran).
Every example you've given is the result of massive repression. The point of democracy is not to repress people, but as this interviewee herself says, to promote justice, which means that "the dispossessed are no longer dispossessed." Hamas was elected because of failed peace talks and increased Israeli aggressiveness in the Occupied Territories. Hizbullah was created because of Israeli occupation of southern Lebanon.
And Iran became a radicalized Islamic state in 1979 because before that, since the 1953 coup d'état sponsored by the U.S., they had a highly repressive pro-American dictator, the Shah. So yeah, democracy may result in some nasty things when the people are being massively repressed; again, the very point of democracy is so that people no longer be repressed.
To say that "historically, Arabs don't do democracy" is rather a silly comment. I could say that "historically, Europeans don't do democracy" and still be correct, since it took a very long time to get out of the feudal system; there are even small remnants of feudalism still around, such as the British monarchy (it is illegal for a member of British parliament to suggest abolishing the monarchy). But such a statement is simply irrelevant.
Oh, and a couple other things. Iran is not an Arab country, so stop conflating Arabs and Muslims again (didn't I mention Christian Arabs before?). Nor is Iran a democracy, so that doesn't really work into your argument very easily. You might say that the Iranian revolution was a democratic movement that resulted in an un-democratic state, and you might be somewhat correct. But that's not what anybody serious is advocating for Palestine, least of all Ghada Karmi.
The bulk of repression in the arab world comes from the hands of arabs. It's what they do. The Isrealis are not repressing the syrians, syrians are. The Isrealis are not repressing the egyptians, egyptians are. The same is true in almost all arab countries. The arabs never miss an opportunity to do exactly the wrong thing at the wrong time.
First of all, I'm not talking about Egypt or Syria (unless you're talking about the Syrians of the Golan Heights), I'm talking about Palestine. You wouldn't dare to say that Israel doesn't oppress Palestinians, because you'd be dead wrong. I don't care who does the oppression, I fundamentally oppose oppression itself. You, however, are a racist, and you selectively criticize Arabs while either ignoring or being an apologist for Israel's crimes, which are immense.
At some point, the arabs are going to have to look at themselves in the mirror and see that they have caused their lot in life, not the jews. I don't expect that to happen anytime soon but eventually it will happen.
The idea that the Palestinians are responsible for their own suffering is absolutely ridiculous. The Apartheid wall that has stolen their farmland and caged in their cities is an Israeli wall, the checkpoints and roadblocks that prevent them from getting to work and school are Israeli, the cluster bombs that blow off the faces of children are Israeli, the rubber bullets that injure protesters are Israeli, the bulldozers that demolish Arab homes are Israeli. Go spew your bullshit elsewhere!
I would like to bring in a relevant argument from the Classical Liberal tradition. One common argument against the French Revolution was that the French people were not "mature" enough for freedom. But Kant, along with others, argued against this notion. His reply is that "one can not arrive at the maturity for freedom without having already acquired it; one must be free to learn how to make use of one's powers freely and usefully."
So if you want Arabs to be able to participate in a successful democracy, as I and many other do, then you really ought to be active in the fight to give them just that. This may mean either fighting to create a new Palestinian state, or fighting along with Ghada Karmi and Ali Abunimah etc. to try to incorporate the Palestinians into the already existing state called Israel. Anything other than these two options is simply wishful thinking.
Now they want to live together. Where was all this compromise in 1948?
Tasha7845 1 year ago
Yeah democracy like in Lebanon. Or in Gaza/WB. BTW democracy and nation/state are not mutually exclusive concept. If you think jews will agree for one state after this:
/watch?v=O1kglhluz1U
Greywind30 1 year ago
haha a western style democracy with majority of moslem palestinians in charge the problem is this is a oximoran is like fire and water it never works, 2ed she lacks historical insight it was palestinians who rejected partition and attacked the only problem was that they lost and continue to loose. there is a 2 state solution and jordan is palestine
freelebenon 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
We could debate this ad infinitum. The bottom line is isreal will never committ suicide by letting palestinians take over their country by becoming a majority, so a one state solution is out of the question. As long as the palestinians vow to always make war on isreal, a two state solution is out of the question. So either the status quo will contintue or an all out war will occur. Bottom line is I tire of the middle east's complete dysfunctionality. Let them kill each other if they desire.
Maxwedge12000 3 years ago
You tire of it? Oh please, you live in the United States, how could you possibly get tired of it? You're not one who has to live under occupation, nor am I.
If Israel won't commit "suicide" as you put it, then why did White South Africa commit suicide? Similar arguments were made to justify maintaining South Africa's Apartheid regime. On a related note, South African cleric and activist Desmond Tutu has stated that life for the Palestinians is WORSE than it was for Black South Africans.
Irtidad 3 years ago 5
"Let them kill each other if they desire"
Your misanthropy, or perhaps apathy, is a plague far too common these days.
Irtidad 3 years ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Not to worry, it seems you care enough for both of us.
Maxwedge12000 3 years ago
lol
Irtidad 3 years ago
Shed no tears for the palestinians as they are living the lives they have chosen for themselves.
Maxwedge12000 3 years ago
Are you fucking kidding me? Have you heard not a word that this woman, and millions of others, have said? Do you think the Palestinians chose to have their land stolen? Do you think the Palestinians love to be slaughtered by the IDF? Do you really think that the Palestinians enjoy that their home has been turned into a massive prison, a testing ground for Israel's collective punishments?
You are absolutely despicable, a slimy little racist.
Irtidad 3 years ago
You are a master of personal insults and using profanity. Did you get those traits from you mother, father or both? Do some research on the arab conquests. The arabs stole all the land that is not egypt, syria, lebanon, palestine, iraq and northern africa. When they vacate those lands, then and only then, can they or the "millions of others" demand the isrealis leave. Hypocrites, the lot of you!
Maxwedge12000 3 years ago
Yeah, OK, but that happened hundreds of years ago. There is literally nothing anybody can do about that, because there is no longer a dispossessed population of those lands. There is, however, a dispossessed population of Palestine that have been rooted out of their land in RECENT history. You are the hypocrite, for you refuse to apply to your kin the same standards you apply to all others.
Irtidad 3 years ago 2
Again, I am not proposing anyone return from where they originated, in fact very few people do. Either you support returning land to the dispossed of the world or you don't. If the Jews should return land so should every other nation that was founded by conquest of others.
Maxwedge12000 3 years ago
Actually you are incorrect, loads of people propose that people return to where they originated. It's called Zionism. The core Zionist principle is that the Jews should return to their original homeland from 2,000 years ago.
Irtidad 3 years ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
So the jews had their land stolen first?
Maxwedge12000 3 years ago
Do you know no history?
Actually the Canaanites were the first to lose that spot of land. But once again, ancient history is far less valuable than what is going on right now, because there is literally nothing anybody can do about ancient history other than study it. Current events can be changed.
Irtidad 3 years ago 3
To demonstrate your hypocrisy, since we are both Americans, would you advocate that the United States and its population be vacated because this land belonged to the natives? The conquest of America is much more recent in history than the conquest of what are now Arab lands. Surely if you should uphold your standards that is what you would advocate.
Irtidad 3 years ago 2
No hypocrisy here. I am not suggesting that all non native-americans vacate the USA, and unlike the Palestinians, the native americans are not launching rockets at us daily nor sending suicide bombers among us. But it is hypocritical for the arabs to point the finger at the isrealis and call them land stealers when the arabs themselves stole the majority of land they now inhabit.
Maxwedge12000 3 years ago
Well actually one of the biggest excuses used to defend the genocide of the natives was that they were violent, because they did in fact use violence to repel the invaders.
The point is this: there are two events of land stealing we are mentioning. There is the Arab conquest, which happened over a thousand years ago, and there is the Israeli conquest, which is happening now. Precisely zero can be done about the Arabs' conquest anymore, but a lot can be done about Israel's.
Irtidad 3 years ago 2
How can Arabs steal land from the place where they have always existed, idiot?
They are natives of the middle east moron not invaders.
petersz98 2 years ago
The Arabs inhabited the Arabian peninsula and conquered most of the land they live in now. Do a little research on the arab conquests. They should leave Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Egypt, Palestine, Jordan and all of North Africa for they stole those lands from others you Idiot.
Maxwedge12000 2 years ago
Yes I know they conquered large parts of the middle east idiot. But they didn't expel and replace the native population. Most of the people in these areas are descended from populations before the Arab conquest. Idiot!
petersz98 2 years ago
Cool, then you would not object if the US claimed Iraq and Afghanistan as long as we did not replace or expel the native populations?
Maxwedge12000 2 years ago
Bottom line is the arabs occupy lands that are not theirs and until they leave them, the arabs cannot demand the jews leave.
Maxwedge12000 2 years ago
the U.S. conquered all of the land they live on now, do you think it would be reasonable to give it back to Mexico or the Native Americans? or if Mexico expelled the American population in old Mexican lands because they had an historic claim to them it would be justified? Or perhaps Saddam Hussains invasion of Iran was justified because Iran held lands that once were part of Iraq? The old Arab conquests have nothing to do with the current debates, and do not justify further settlement building.
modestryan16 2 years ago
I agree with you. It is silly to expect people to leave the lands they conquered, including the jews. I am just suggesting that it is hypocritical of the arabs to demand the jews leave the lands "they stole" while the arabs remain in the lands "they stole".
Maxwedge12000 2 years ago
by your logic then the US cannot condemn or act on any act of aggression or occupation because that would be "hypocritical." also the Arab conquests are ancient conquests that have entirely no relevancy to the debate today. What does is the international consensus of the two state solution that Palestine has accepted, but Israel does not, and the fact that Israel continues to build settlements on Palestinian land, in clear violation of international law.
modestryan16 2 years ago
"also the Arab conquests are ancient conquests that have entirely no relevancy to the debate today"
We simply do not agree on this point.
Maxwedge12000 2 years ago
I'll be honest though I dont think the logic adds up. Im American, so that would be calling me and my family hypocrites, who cant make any claims about other conquests because we live on land that was taken by conquest.
It does not make any sense as far as the Israeli situation today. because settlements are being built on what the intentional community has deemed Palestinian land, and we can end this because its happening now.
modestryan16 2 years ago
I am convinced that Israel has rightly reached the conclusion that there will never be peace with the palestinians, never. So, why not take all their land and just drive them away. What's the downside to Israel doing this. What could possibly happen to Isreal that has not been done to Israel already, more then once?
Maxwedge12000 2 years ago
the problem is its against any moral judgement that i think anyone would accept, as well as a gross violation international and I'm sure Israeli law. that would be like asking why not just annihilate or move all the native americans somewhere else because what's the harm to us? in this case there has been an international consensus on how to end the conflict for over 40 years, which calls for Israel to end the occupation, and stop settlements, which it has rejected every time.
modestryan16 2 years ago
Before you go blaming Israel for rejecting peace, look up the charter of hamas.
Maxwedge12000 2 years ago
It really doesn't matter what it says in their charter, look at what is happening on the ground. Israel still illegally occupies palestine, and puts settlements in its land. the current prime minister Netanyahu barley accepted that there should be a Palestinian state last month. Shimon Peres is quoted as saying a Palestianan state will never happen. words dont really matter in my opinion though, whats happening on the ground matters.
modestryan16 2 years ago
I now understand why you fail to see the reality of the conflict. You are close minded in regards to information.
Maxwedge12000 2 years ago
Im saying there is no preferable view as far as rhetoric. Sure it may say that in Hamas's charter that they want to take over all of palestine. but there are numerous statements by Israeli officials saying that they dont recognize a Palestinian state. And I urge you to look at what is happening on the ground. The Palestinians land is being stolen and they are being militarily occupied. i condemn there actions of terrorism, as I condemn Israeli terrorism as well. the occupation needs to end.
modestryan16 2 years ago
You wish to simply discount what the charter of hamas says and what most palestinians want, the total destruction of Israel. There can never be peace with people that are vowed to destroy you, never. The Israelis know this and have given up trying to get this elusive "peace" after 60 years of conflict. Israel is now focusing on expanding its nation and securing its existence. The Palestinians have lost their chance.
Maxwedge12000 2 years ago
I dont discount what it says in their charter, but you also cannot discount what Israeli officials have said, which has been numerous times stating that they do not accept a Palestinian state. Actually Hamas and the PLO preceding it, have accepted the International consensus of the pre 1967 borders, Israel has rejected it every time. if you look at polls of the Palestine and Isreali citizens they both accept a two state solution. Yet the Israeli gov't illegally creates more settlements, andwalls
modestryan16 2 years ago
obviously you dont believe there should be a Palestinian state, and you've already said that you would understand if Israel wanted to finish its ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians, which really makes u no different than the worst "terrorist" who want to wipe out the jews. also you keep referring to the hardships of the Israelis when overwhelmingly, as pointed by Israeli historian Benny Morris, most of the victims of the conflict are the Palestinians.
modestryan16 2 years ago
What I believe matters not. The problem of this "Palestinian State" as defined by the Palestinians calls for the destruction of Israel. Israel does not want to be destroyed. That's the problem. Nothing else matters in this conflict except for the desire of the palestinians to destroy Isreal. Until that desire changes, there will be no peace and Israel knows this and is not waiting anymore. Israel will do what helps insure its survival. The Palestinians have chosen this path.
Maxwedge12000 2 years ago
again ill stress the point that if you look up polls of the Palestinian population they believe in a two state solution, meaning the recognize the state of Israel. Also Hamas and the PLO also have accepted the two state solution the many times that is has been offered, which the entire world accepts, but the Israel and the US veto every time it passes though the U.N. I think you need to do more research to understand the conflict.
modestryan16 2 years ago
It seems to me that your position and my position on this issue is as intractable as the positions of the Palestinians and Israelis.
Maxwedge12000 2 years ago
Oh, and if you would pay attention, neither Ghada Karmi nor I, nor millions of others of people who advocate peace in the Middle East, say that the Israelis should just pack up an leave. If you would even listen to a single word that Ghada is saying, you'd know that she is saying that both Israelis and Palestinians can stay, and that the conflict can be resolved by incorporating the Palestinians into an already pre-existing state called Israel.
Irtidad 3 years ago 2
Her suggestion is simply not possible. The Isrealis know, as do those that support such a silly notion, that trying to make one nation would be the end of Isreal as a Jewish state. No one wants to be a minority in a nation where the majority want you dead.
Maxwedge12000 3 years ago
Why is it that Israel is the ONLY nation in the 1st world that is based on ethnic identity? I have yet to hear a good argument that that is not racism by another name.
I hear this notion a lot, that the majority of Palestinians want to kill all the Jews or something like that. I would like to see its source, if you can provide it. Go find me some poll or something factual that can back up your arguments.
Irtidad 3 years ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Look up the charter of hamas. It is available on the internet. They want Isreal destroyed and the jews killed. They say exactly that in their charter. The palestinians elected hamas hence they support the groups views.
Maxwedge12000 3 years ago
It's quite a stretch to use that as evidence that the majority of Palestinians want to kill the Jews. First of all, the charter only mentions destroying the state of Israel. The most hardline of Islamists would probably accept the Jews as being part of the Ahl al-Kitab (not my cup of tea, by the way). But in recent years, including before Hamas got elected, Hamas has been less and less referring to its charter. There has also been increased discussion of changing the charter.
Irtidad 3 years ago 3
Also, comments from Hamas officials including Ismail Haniya have shown that they may consider recognizing Israel within its pre-1967 borders, which (incidentally) are the internationally recognized borders.
This is all with the understanding of Israel as a Jewish state. If Israel were to relinquish its preferential treatment towards the Jewish ethnos (i.e. racism) and begin to treat Arabs fairly, then you may find that Palestinian attitudes towards Israel will change dramatically.
Irtidad 3 years ago 3
This woman is nuts. The arabs don't do democracies. The arabs will elect hamas as their government then they will outlaw judeaism and the slaughter will begin then democracy will be shit canned and radical islamic wackos will take over.
Maxwedge12000 3 years ago
You do know that this woman is Arab, right?
btw 10% of Palestinians are Christian, and almost 40% of Lebanese are Christian, are they somehow less Arab than Muslim Arabs?
And where did you get this idea that a secular Arab democracy would result in a totalitarian Islamic state? That's like saying that the U.S. constitution will result in Fascism; i.e. what you're saying is a pure contradiction in terms.
Irtidad 3 years ago
This idea that the Arabs are undeserving of democracy is not only racist, but it also plays into a patronizing ethno-centric world view that allows for exploitation and repression. It's like in Edward Said's book Orientalism, this idea that "they cannot represent themselves, they must be represented," and that WE should decide what the Arab character is, not Arabs. It's simply ridiculous.
Irtidad 3 years ago
I really do not care what the arabs do, I am just pointing out that historically, arabs don't do democracy. And when they do, they usually elect some terrorist organization like hamas or hissbulla or some other form of violent, wacko, islamic, terror loving lunatics (see iran).
Maxwedge12000 3 years ago
Every example you've given is the result of massive repression. The point of democracy is not to repress people, but as this interviewee herself says, to promote justice, which means that "the dispossessed are no longer dispossessed." Hamas was elected because of failed peace talks and increased Israeli aggressiveness in the Occupied Territories. Hizbullah was created because of Israeli occupation of southern Lebanon.
Irtidad 3 years ago
And Iran became a radicalized Islamic state in 1979 because before that, since the 1953 coup d'état sponsored by the U.S., they had a highly repressive pro-American dictator, the Shah. So yeah, democracy may result in some nasty things when the people are being massively repressed; again, the very point of democracy is so that people no longer be repressed.
Irtidad 3 years ago
To say that "historically, Arabs don't do democracy" is rather a silly comment. I could say that "historically, Europeans don't do democracy" and still be correct, since it took a very long time to get out of the feudal system; there are even small remnants of feudalism still around, such as the British monarchy (it is illegal for a member of British parliament to suggest abolishing the monarchy). But such a statement is simply irrelevant.
Irtidad 3 years ago
Oh, and a couple other things. Iran is not an Arab country, so stop conflating Arabs and Muslims again (didn't I mention Christian Arabs before?). Nor is Iran a democracy, so that doesn't really work into your argument very easily. You might say that the Iranian revolution was a democratic movement that resulted in an un-democratic state, and you might be somewhat correct. But that's not what anybody serious is advocating for Palestine, least of all Ghada Karmi.
Irtidad 3 years ago
The bulk of repression in the arab world comes from the hands of arabs. It's what they do. The Isrealis are not repressing the syrians, syrians are. The Isrealis are not repressing the egyptians, egyptians are. The same is true in almost all arab countries. The arabs never miss an opportunity to do exactly the wrong thing at the wrong time.
Maxwedge12000 3 years ago
First of all, I'm not talking about Egypt or Syria (unless you're talking about the Syrians of the Golan Heights), I'm talking about Palestine. You wouldn't dare to say that Israel doesn't oppress Palestinians, because you'd be dead wrong. I don't care who does the oppression, I fundamentally oppose oppression itself. You, however, are a racist, and you selectively criticize Arabs while either ignoring or being an apologist for Israel's crimes, which are immense.
Irtidad 3 years ago
But, now all of europe does democracy. Get back to me when the arab nations do democracy.
Maxwedge12000 3 years ago
At some point, the arabs are going to have to look at themselves in the mirror and see that they have caused their lot in life, not the jews. I don't expect that to happen anytime soon but eventually it will happen.
Maxwedge12000 3 years ago
The idea that the Palestinians are responsible for their own suffering is absolutely ridiculous. The Apartheid wall that has stolen their farmland and caged in their cities is an Israeli wall, the checkpoints and roadblocks that prevent them from getting to work and school are Israeli, the cluster bombs that blow off the faces of children are Israeli, the rubber bullets that injure protesters are Israeli, the bulldozers that demolish Arab homes are Israeli. Go spew your bullshit elsewhere!
Irtidad 3 years ago
I would like to bring in a relevant argument from the Classical Liberal tradition. One common argument against the French Revolution was that the French people were not "mature" enough for freedom. But Kant, along with others, argued against this notion. His reply is that "one can not arrive at the maturity for freedom without having already acquired it; one must be free to learn how to make use of one's powers freely and usefully."
Irtidad 3 years ago
So if you want Arabs to be able to participate in a successful democracy, as I and many other do, then you really ought to be active in the fight to give them just that. This may mean either fighting to create a new Palestinian state, or fighting along with Ghada Karmi and Ali Abunimah etc. to try to incorporate the Palestinians into the already existing state called Israel. Anything other than these two options is simply wishful thinking.
Irtidad 3 years ago