The Myth of an Undivided Jerusalem and How the Israeli Palestinian Vote Ain't what it looks

The myth of an undivided Jerusalem is collapsing under its own weight
Binyamin Netanyahu is misguided to believe a two-state Israel-Palestine solution is possible while keeping a deeply divided city intact

Wednesday 8 January 2014 16.32 GMT

As John Kerry's Israeli-Palestinian peace initiative moves into a decisive stage, two Jerusalem truths are becoming crystal clear. First, either the two-state solution will also take place within Jerusalem, or there will be no two-state solution at all. Second, any attempt to reach a permanent status agreement regarding Jerusalem that ignores the already existing, deeply rooted urban realities of this bi-national and divided city is doomed to failure.

These truths were on display on 22 October 2013, when Jerusalem held mayoral elections. The incumbent mayor, Nir Barkat, an up-and-coming political star in Israel's ideological right, was re-elected. His victory was convincing: Barkat received 51.9% of the vote, in comparison with the 44.6% received by his closest rival.

Barkat, along with the Israeli prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, is a vocal champion of "Jerusalem-the-eternal-capital-of-Israel-that-will-never-be-divided". Conceding that there have long been major inequities in the level of services between East and West Jerusalem, Barkat proudly claims to have made progress in narrowing the gaps, asserting that his efforts have met with satisfaction from Palestinian residents. Citing this accomplishment, Barkat claims to represent all residents of his city, both Israeli and Palestinian, and has said: "The vast majority of the Arabs in Jerusalem prefer to be on the Israeli side. They don't want the city divided."

At first glance, the 2013 municipal election results appear to support such claims. The number of votes Barkat received from the Palestinian sector in this election was 90% higher than what he received in 2008, winning him 46.9% of votes cast by Palestinians of East Jerusalem. Receiving a percentage of the vote slightly below that which he received from the Israeli sector, Barkat was well ahead of his closest rival, who received only 19.7% of the Palestinian vote.

A more careful look at the numbers, however, tells a very different story. There are approximately 157,382 eligible voters among the Palestinians of East Jerusalem. Of these, a total of 1,101 voted in the 2013 election – meaning a Palestinian voter turnout of only 0.7%. Barkat received 46.9% of these votes – a total of 516 votes, a mere 0.3% of the total vote of all eligible Palestinian voters. In short, Barkat's assertion that he "represents" all residents of Jerusalem is without basis in fact.

Some will argue that Palestinian residents of Jerusalem were intimidated into boycotting the election. This assertion is baseless. All organs of Palestinian authority and political organising in East Jerusalem have been crushed by the government of Israel. There is simply no Palestinian capacity in East Jerusalem to organise a campaign of intimidation, or of anything else of consequence. The Palestinians didn't vote in this election, just as they have refrained from voting in previous municipal elections, because they were making a statement about their own identities: "we are Palestinian, not Israeli".

The results in Israel's national elections for the Knesset, which took place on 22 January last year, are no less illuminating. In those elections, 28.4% of eligible Palestinian voters in East Jerusalem cast a ballot, a seemingly respectable number. A more careful look, once again, tells a different story – in this case a story of formal disenfranchisement.

Out of the approximate 157,382 Palestinian residents of Jerusalem of voting age, only 10,431 actually have the right to vote in Israel's national elections (a number that is artificially high, since it includes thousands of Israeli Arab citizens who moved to Jerusalem from areas in pre-1967 Israel, rather than native Palestinian East Jerusalemites). This means that the number of East Jerusalemite Palestinians entitled to vote in national elections hovers at around 5% of the voting-age Palestinian population of the city. Only 2,965 of the East Jerusalem Palestinians – 1.9% of the Palestinian population – voted in Israel's 2013 national elections, with another 95% denied the right to vote.

This bizarre situation exists because most Palestinians in "undivided Jerusalem" are legally classified as "permanent residents", rather than citizens of Israel. As such, they do not enjoy the right to vote in national elections. An estimated 13,000 Palestinians of all ages, out of a total Palestinian population of 293,000 (37% of Jerusalem's total population), have received Israeli citizenship.

By disenfranchising Palestinians of East Jerusalem from national elections, Israel has declared unequivocally that these residents of Israel's "undivided capital" are not, in fact, part of Israel's body politic. And by overwhelmingly refraining from voting in municipal elections, even when that right exists, Palestinians of East Jerusalem are emphatically agreeing.

The results of these two recent elections reveal the fundamental political truth of contemporary Jerusalem: the only place where Jerusalem is "the undivided capital of Israel" is in the fertile imaginations of ideologues such as Netanyahu and Barkat. Nowhere else in the world is there a prime minister so utterly detached from the daily realities of a city that he claims to be his nation's "exclusive" capital; and nowhere else is there a mayor so utterly disconnected from – and in denial about – the realities of the flesh-and-blood city over which he purports to preside.

Those engaged in the current negotiations can ignore these facts only at great peril. When Netanyahu says he supports the two-state outcome, but opposes anything less than an undivided Jerusalem under sole Israeli sovereignty, he is really saying: "I reject the two-state solution".

The myth of "undivided Jerusalem" is collapsing under the weight of its own fictions. Should the Kerry initiative – the last, best hope for the two-state solution – end in failure, Jerusalem will degenerate into the epicentre of a festering conflict, the arena of recurrent rounds of convulsive violence. But should, against all odds, these talks end in agreement, a new Jerusalem, rooted in its genuine political and urban realities, will emerge: a politically divided, bi-national city, the respective capitals of Israel and Palestine – which is the sine qua non of any permanent status agreement.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jan/08/myth-undivided-jerusalem-israel-palestine-binyamin-netanyahu

Rather gives the lie to Palestinians citizens having the same rights as Israeli citizens.

It does, and I would love to see some polling (independently conducted) in both areas to gauge the popularity of bi-nationality for Jerusalem in the context of a two-state solution. I'm thinking at the end of the day, anything that holds the promise of peace will be very popular. I would love to see Kerry's idea work and put into operation, but I'm afraid that the hardliners will once again prevent that from happening.

It's too bad that Palestinians choose not to participate in the Jerusalem elections, because it appears to be the only one in which they are truly entitled to vote.  

As for Israeli elections, I gather that Palestinians have not gone through something like a naturalization process. which would make them citizens of Israel, entitled to vote in that nation.  Jerusalem is a unique situation because of its political split.  So it is hardly surprising to find Palestinians are voting citizens of one civic entity, but not the other.  

I can think of only one other none too distant city that functions as a divided entity: Buda and Pest, otherwise known as the capital of Hungary, Budapest.  But Buda and Pest do not straddle two nations...they are both within Hungary, on opposite sides of the River Danube.  If Buda and Pest function well, it suggests that it is not the 'divided city' concept that is the problem, but the divided nationalities.

Or, that is to say, this is but another manifestation of Israelis and Palestinians in conflict.  It is what it is.  Just as the Irish and English are not fond mates, neither are the Israelis and Palestinians.

Original Quill wrote:It's too bad that Palestinians choose not to participate in the Jerusalem elections, because it appears to be the only one in which they are truly entitled to vote.  

As for Israeli elections, I gather that Palestinians have not gone through something like a naturalization process. which would make them citizens of Israel, entitled to vote in that nation.  Jerusalem is a unique situation because of its political split.  So it is hardly surprising to find Palestinians are voting citizens of one civic entity, but not the other.  

I can think of only one other none too distant city that functions as a divided entity: Buda and Pest, otherwise known as the capital of Hungary, Budapest.  But Buda and Pest do not straddle two nations...they are both within Hungary, on opposite sides of the River Danube.  If Buda and Pest function well, it suggests that it is not the 'divided city' concept that is the problem, but the divided nationalities.

Or, that is to say, this is but another manifestation of Israelis and Palestinians in conflict.  It is what it is.  Just as the Irish and English are not fond mates, neither are the Israelis and Palestinians.

Then you would gather wrong.   The Palestinians concerned were there before the Israelis and Israel has designed laws to stop them being citizens.   And from your post it is perfectly obvious you don't know the history of Jerusalem. Jerusalem was annexed by Israel illegally in 1967, it is actually part of Palestine. If the Palestinians living there want to be citizens, they have to prove they are not citizens of any other country (and as they are citizens of Palestine and the West Bank that is not only abhorrent but difficult), swear allegiance to Israel (that would be like the French swearing allegiance to Germany during WWII) and learning hebrew. This is the same status granted to foreign citizens who have freely chosen to come to Israel and want to live there. Israel treats Palestinian residents of East Jerusalem as immigrants who live in their homes at the beneficence of the authorities and not by right. The authorities maintain this policy although these Palestinians were born in Jerusalem, lived in the city, and have no other home. Treating these Palestinians as foreigners who entered Israel is astonishing, since it was Israel that entered East Jerusalem in 1967. That by the way, is the view of B'Tselem, the Israeli peace movement.

No, I know little about it except what I gleaned from your article. I think the article makes it clear why Palestinians do not vote in both elections. In one, it is self-choice; in the other it is because they are not citizens. So it's not the same in each case...a false equivalency, which I think the article tries to have us believe.

As far as laws blocking Palestinian citizenship in Israel, well I did say it was a part of the wider picture of the Israeli and Palestinian conflict. That's what I meant.

Taken as a whole, it's because Israel makes it impossible for them to do so, in their own land.

Sassy wrote:Taken as a whole, it's because Israel makes it impossible for them to do so, in their own land.

Nobody owns the land, your belief makes the matter worse, you choose who does!
The Demographics has long ago since changed and Quill showed how the article tries badly to manipulate

The land is Occupied Palestine numbnuts

I rest my case, to me nobody show own Jerusalem, they should make it a free City, as it is such a Holy place for the 3 main religions.

So I think I will stick with something better than a daft view on just one group of people owning it!

Thats why it's called, even by Israel THE OCCUPIED WEST BANK.

Still not able to grasp anything I see, I could care less what it is called, the place should become a Free City, then nobody can lay claim to it because then they would all have claim to it, being open to everyone!

Is that so hard to contemplate?

Why the hell should it become a free city. Tell you what, London is an historic city, lets make that a free city owned by nobody.

Sassy wrote:Taken as a whole, it's because Israel makes it impossible for them to do so, in their own land.

Nail head.

Everything else is just deflection.

Jesus wept, never seen such venom of hate before, the demographics of places change all the time, from Germany losing land after WW2, to new nations being born from within one nation, are you saying Croatia, Serbia etc should never have been created?

Nobody else is laying claim to London and fighting over it so your analogy was daft to say the least

PhilDidge wrote:Jesus wept, never seen such venom of hate before, the demographics of places change all the time, from Germany losing land after WW2, to new nations being born from within one nation, are you saying Croatia, Serbia etc should never have been created?

Nobody else is laying claim to London and fighting over it so your analogy was daft to say the least

Hate is what the Israelis have towards the Palestinians Didge and im shocked you dont see this.

SEXY MAMA wrote:

PhilDidge wrote:Jesus wept, never seen such venom of hate before, the demographics of places change all the time, from Germany losing land after WW2, to new nations being born from within one nation, are you saying Croatia, Serbia etc should never have been created?

Nobody else is laying claim to London and fighting over it so your analogy was daft to say the least

Hate is what the Israelis have towards the Palestinians Didge and im shocked you dont see this.

Hate is what Hamas has for the Jews, so do those in Iran and countless other Muslim countries, of which none of it is right, those views are all wrong. Thankfully some Jews and Palestinians are both sides do not see things that way and want to live in harmony and it is idiots on both sides or people choosing sides that make the situation worse. Peace comes from reconciliation by both sides, not casting blame from one to another

You are comparing Hamas to the Israelis army who by the way are the fourth largest in the WORLD.

SEXY MAMA wrote:You are comparing Hamas to the Israelis army who by the way are the fourth largest in the WORLD.

Hamas are Islamist, who breach human rights just as some of the Israeli army do, both being wrong.

You still don't get it do you Sexy, Jews, Christians and Muslims have been living in this land for centuries, peace will not come with constant hate and blame or who claims to fucking own the land, it will come when they all recognise they have a right to live in these lands, whether Israeli, Palestinian, Arab, Druze, Maronites, Armenians or Kurd.

Lets have some actual facts shall we, instead of the rubbish.

1 - THAT, when the Palestine Problem was created by Britain in 1917, more than 90% of the population of Palestine were Arabs, and that there were at that time no more than 56,000 Jews in Palestine?

2 - THAT, more than half of the Jews living in Palestine at that time were recent immigrants, who had come to Palestine in the preceding decades in order to escape persecution in Europe?... And that less than 5% of the population of Palestine were native Palestinian Jews?

3 - THAT, the Arabs of Palestine at that time owned 97.5% of the land, while Jews (native Palestinians and recent immigrants together) owned only 2.5% of the land?

4 - THAT, during the thirty years of British occupation and rule, the Zionists were able to purchase only 3.5% of the land of Palestine, in spite of the encouragement of the British Government?... And that much of this land was transferred to Zionist bodies by the British Government directly, and was not sold by Arab owners?

5 - THAT, therefore, when British passed the Palestine Problem to the United Nations in 1947, Zionists owned no more than 6% of the total land area of Palestine?

6 - THAT, notwithstanding these facts, the General Assembly of the United Nations recommended that a "Jewish State" be established in Palestine?... And that the Assembly granted that proposed "State" about 54% of the total area of the country?

7 - THAT, Israel immediately occupied (and still occupies) 80.48% of the total land area of Palestine?

8 - THAT, this territorial expansion took place, for the most part, before 15 May 1948: i.e., before the formal end of the British forces from Palestine, before the entry of Arab armies to protect Palestinian Arabs, and before the Arab-Israeli war?

9 - THAT, the 1947 recommendation of the General Assembly in favor of the creation of a "Jewish State" was outside the competence of the Assembly under the Charter of the United Nations?

10 - THAT, all attempts by the Arab States and other Asian countries to have the Assembly submit 3the question of constitutionality" of its recommendation to the International Court of Justice for an "advisory opinion" by the Court were rejected or ignored by the Assembly?

11 - THAT, when the Assembly began to experience "second thoughts" over the matter and convened for its second special session in 1948, it failed to reaffirm the 1947 recommendation for the partition of Palestine-thus destroying whatever dubious legality that recommendation for the establishment of a "Jewish State" had had?

12 - THAT, that original 1947 recommendation to create a "Jewish State" in Palestine was approved, at the first vote, only by European, American and Australian States...for every Asian State, and every African State (with the exception of the Union of South Africa) voted against it?...And that, when the vote was cast in plenary session on 29 November 1947, urgent American pressures (which a member of the Truman cabinet described as "bordering onto scandal") had succeeded in prevailing only upon one African country (Liberia), both of which had special vulnerability to American pressures, to abandon their declared opposition?...And that, in other words, the "Jewish State" was planted at the point-of-intersection of Asia and Africa without the free approval of any Middle Eastern, Asian or African country except that Union of South Africa, itself ruled by an alien minority?

13 - THAT, Israel remained, ever since its inception, a total stranger in the emerging world of Afro-Asia; and that Israel has been refused admission to any inter-state conference of Asian, African, Afro-Asian, or Non-Aligned States ever held?

14 - THAT, since the General Armistice Agreements were signed in 1949, Israel has maintained an aggressive policy of waging military attacks across the Armistice Demarcation Lines, repeatedly invading the territories of the neighboring Arab States...And that Israel has been duly rebuked, censured, or condemned for these military attacks by the Security Council of the General Assembly of the United Nations on eleven occasions-five times by the Security Council and six times by the General Assembly?

15 - THAT, no other country in the world, whether member of the United Nations or non-member, has been so frequently condemned by the United Nations?

16 - THAT, no Arab State has ever been condemned by any organ of the United Nations for military attacks upon Israel?

17 - THAT, besides expelling the bulk of the Arab inhabitants of Palestine, and besides constantly attacking the neighboring Arab States, Israel has also consistently harassed the United Nations observers and other personnel stationed along the Armistice Demarcation Lines: It has assassinated the first United Nations Mediator and his military aide; it has detained some truce observers; it has militarily occupied and illegally searched the Headquarters of United Nations personnel; and it has boycotted meetings of the Mixed Armistice Commissions?...

18 - THAT, Israel has additionally imposed a system of apartheid upon the Arabs who stayed in their homeland? More than 90% of these Arabs live in "security zones;" they alone live under martial law, restricting their freedom to travel from village to village or from town to town; their children are denied equal opportunities for education; and they are denied decent opportunities for work, and the right to receive "equal pay for equal work?"

19 - THAT, notwithstanding the foregoing facts, Israel has always been, and still is, widely portrayed in the Western press as the "bastion of democracy" and the "champion of peace" in the Middle East?

20 - THAT, the Western Powers have persisted in declaring their determination to ensure a so-called "arms balance" in the area, as between Israel, on the one hand, and the one-hundred million inhabitants of the thirteen Arab States, on the other hand?... And this unilateral Western doctrine of so-called "arms balance" is no more reasonable than the suggestion that, in the Cuba-U.S.A conflict, there should be "arms balance" as between Cuba and the United States... or that the whole Continent of Africa should not be allowed to acquire more arms than South Africa... or that Mainland China should not be permitted to have more arms than Taiwan... or that the military allowed to acquire more arms than South Africa... and that only thus can peace be safeguarded in the Western Hemisphere, in Africa, in Asia, or in Europe?...

21 - THAT, Israel allots 85% of the water resources in the occupied territories for Jews and the remaining 15% is divided among all Palestinians in the territories? For example in Hebron, 85% of the water is given to about 500 settlers, while 15% must be divided among Hebron's 120,000 Palestinians?

22 - THAT, The United States awards Israel $3 billion in aid each year, more than to any other country in the world: US aid to Israel exceeds the aid the US grants to the whole sub-Sahara Africa?

23 - THAT, GDP, per capita, and consumption per capita in the Occupied Territories have dropped about 15 percent in the West Bank and Gaza since 1993 - that's even with large foreign assistance pouring in, from Europe, mostly?

24 - THAT, Up until 1993, the U.S. and Israel permitted humanitarian aid to come into the territories. UN humanitarian aid was permitted into the West Bank and Gaza. In 1993, that was restricted?

25 - THAT, Israel is the only country in the Middle East that has nuclear weapons?

26 - THAT, Israel is the only country in the Middle East that refuses to sign the nuclear non-proliferation treaty and bars international inspections from its sites?

27 - THAT, Israel currently occupies territories of two sovereign nations (Lebanon and Syria) in defiance of United Nations Security Council resolutions?

28 - THAT, High-ranking military officers in the Israeli Defense Forces have admitted publicly that unarmed prisoners of war were executed by the IDF?

29 - THAT, Israel refuses to prosecute its soldiers who have acknowledged executing prisoners of war?

30 - THAT, Israel routinely confiscates bank accounts, businesses, and land from Palestinians and refuses to pay compensation to those who suffer the confiscation?

31 - THAT, Israel stands in defiance of 69 United Nations Security Council Resolutions?

32 - THAT, Israel's current prime minister, Ariel Sharon, was found by an Israeli court to be "personally responsible" for the Sabra and Shatilla massacres in Lebanon in which thousands of unarmed Palestinian refugees were slaughtered in 1982?

33 - THAT, Today's Israel sits on the former sites of more than 400 destroyed Palestinian villages, and that the Israelis renamed almost every physical site in the country to cover up the traces?

34 - THAT, Ariel Sharon's coalition government includes a party -- Molodet -- which advocates expelling all [of the over two million] Palestinians from [their homes in] the occupied territories?

35 - THAT, Israel's illegal settlement-building in the Occupied Palestinian territories more than doubled in the eight years since the Oslo agreements?

36 - THAT, Illegal settlement building under Prime Minister Barak doubled compared to settlement building under Prime Minister Netanyahu?

37 - THAT, More illegal settlements in the occupied Palestinian territories were built under Prime Minister Barak than at any other time in the history of Israel's occupation of Palestinian land?

38 - THAT, Despite a ban on torture by Israel's High Court of Justice, torture has continued by Shin Bet interrogators on Palestinian prisoners?

39 - THAT, Palestinian refugees make up the largest refugee population in the world?

40 - THAT, Israeli military checkpoints surround every Palestinian population center in violation of the Oslo Accords?

41 - THAT, The right of self-determination is guaranteed to every human being under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (December, 1948), yet Palestinians were/are expected to negotiate for this right under the Oslo Accords?

42 - THAT, Palestinians have the highest ratio of PhDs per capita in the world?

PhilDidge wrote:

SEXY MAMA wrote:You are comparing Hamas to the Israelis army who by the way are the fourth largest in the WORLD.

Hamas are Islamist, who breach human rights just as some of the Israeli army do, both being wrong.

You still don't get it do you Sexy, Jews, Christians and Muslims have been living in this land for centuries, peace will not come with constant hate and blame or who claims to fucking own the land, it will come when they all recognise they have a right to live in these lands, whether Israeli, Palestinian, Arab, Druze, Maronites, Armenians or Kurd.

Didge its you who is not understanding this whole saga.

The Israelis dont bloody want to live with the Palestinians whose land they HAVE occupied. They want to own it as they believe they are Gods chosen people.

Its really as simple as that.

SEXY MAMA wrote:

PhilDidge wrote:

Hamas are Islamist, who breach human rights just as some of the Israeli army do, both being wrong.

You still don't get it do you Sexy, Jews, Christians and Muslims have been living in this land for centuries, peace will not come with constant hate and blame or who claims to fucking own the land, it will come when they all recognise they have a right to live in these lands, whether Israeli, Palestinian, Arab, Druze, Maronites, Armenians or Kurd.

Didge its you who is not understanding this whole saga.

The Israelis  dont  bloody want to live with the Palestinians whose land they HAVE occupied. They want to own it as they believe they are Gods chosen people.

Its really as simple as that.

They have said so often enough, Didge just chooses to ignore it.

I rest my case only idiots seek to blame and not seek reconciliation, they wish to continue conflict, they are not happy until thousands are dead on all sides just so they ensure one group of people loses and one wins with so much pain and suffering on all sides, that is pointless, when peace should be sought through reconciliation.

Again Sassy you have learnt nothing from the legacy of Mandela after he was released from prison!

SEXY MAMA wrote:

PhilDidge wrote:

Hamas are Islamist, who breach human rights just as some of the Israeli army do, both being wrong.

You still don't get it do you Sexy, Jews, Christians and Muslims have been living in this land for centuries, peace will not come with constant hate and blame or who claims to fucking own the land, it will come when they all recognise they have a right to live in these lands, whether Israeli, Palestinian, Arab, Druze, Maronites, Armenians or Kurd.

Didge its you who is not understanding this whole saga.

The Israelis  dont  bloody want to live with the Palestinians whose land they HAVE occupied. They want to own it as they believe they are Gods chosen people.

Its really as simple as that.

No you are wrong Sexy there is both groups in power on both sides that do not want reconciliation, there are those on both sides that do, so both have people fueling the conflict which serves to help nobody. You and Sassy are blinded by anger and see little of you sharing the same passion to Christians suffering within Muslim lands. When there are in justices you look to help them all not concentrate hate and venom for one people because of the policies of its Government. So no you do not see it simply, you are badly biased with a prejudice view on this!

PhilDidge wrote:I rest my case only idiots seek to blame and not seek reconciliation, they wish to continue conflict, they are not happy until thousands are dead on all sides just so they ensure one group of people loses and one wins with so much pain and suffering on all sides, that is pointless, when peace should be sought through reconciliation.

Again Sassy you have learnt nothing from the legacy of Mandela after he was released from prison!

Idiots, dont think so Didge.

Its not about who wins its about justice. Why should we let one group of people kick another group of people out if their own homes take over there jobs and treat them like 2nd class citizens in their own country and demand they own the land now.

Seem fair? Unless one is an idiot!!!

Oh Didge the great, trying to reconcile.   You can't reconcile with people taking your country, or perhaps you think we should have allowed Germany to occupy us.   Mandela fought people being unjust and carried on fighting people being unjust and inflicting destruction on his people until they had to give way.   Then, and only then, did he forgive them.

SEXY MAMA wrote:

PhilDidge wrote:I rest my case only idiots seek to blame and not seek reconciliation, they wish to continue conflict, they are not happy until thousands are dead on all sides just so they ensure one group of people loses and one wins with so much pain and suffering on all sides, that is pointless, when peace should be sought through reconciliation.

Again Sassy you have learnt nothing from the legacy of Mandela after he was released from prison!

Idiots, dont think so Didge.

Its not about who wins its about justice. Why should we let one group of people kick another group of people out if their own homes take over there jobs and treat them like 2nd class citizens in their own country and demand they own the land now.

Seem fair? Unless one is an idiot!!!

Ever since Mandela died Didge has decided he has taken over the mantle. Never heard him mention Mandela before. The man's a pompous, self serving ass.

Sassy wrote:Oh Didge the great, trying to reconcile.   You can't reconcile with people taking your country, or perhaps you think we should have allowed Germany to occupy us.   Mandela fought people being unjust and carried on fighting people being unjust an inflicting destruction on his people until they had to give way.   Then, and only then, did he forgive them.

Erm we actually went to war because of Poland, of which I agree was right but here this is different with religious groups laying claim to a land, with wrongs being done on both sides. Northern Ireland was not resolved with blame, violence or death, but reconciliation.

Again you make the matter worse as you choose sides, when both sides are in the wrong!

Blah blah blah. The facts say different, but you couldn't give a toss about facts, just want to look like the great peace keeper. Well you can't have peace until the side that has illegally taken all the land from the others GIVES IT BACK and stops persecuting them. Until then, unless you are a bloody idiot, you fight back.

SEXY MAMA wrote:

PhilDidge wrote:I rest my case only idiots seek to blame and not seek reconciliation, they wish to continue conflict, they are not happy until thousands are dead on all sides just so they ensure one group of people loses and one wins with so much pain and suffering on all sides, that is pointless, when peace should be sought through reconciliation.

Again Sassy you have learnt nothing from the legacy of Mandela after he was released from prison!

Idiots, dont think so Didge.

Its not about who wins its about justice. Why should we let one group of people kick another group of people out if their own homes take over there jobs and treat them like 2nd class citizens in their own country and demand they own the land now.

Seem fair? Unless one is an idiot!!!

Yes lets talk about justice, how Palestinians have been displaced from lands, how also 800,000 Jews were also displaced from their homes and lands in Muslim countries around the same time, what justice is there for each?

None, blame never works, you have been listening to comrade sassy for too long sexy, casting blame is not the way, reconciliation is

Sassy wrote:Blah blah blah.   The facts say different, but you couldn't give a toss about facts, just want to look like the great peace keeper.   Well you can't have peace until the side that has illegally taken all the land from the others GIVES IT BACK and stops persecuting them.   Until then, unless you are a bloody idiot, you fight back.

The fact is both sides have been fighting back for near 65 years and what has it accomplished Sassy, untold misery for all, again you have no concept of what is right!

It amazes me that someone can talk so much showing how little he knows and thinks he's an expert.

Sassy wrote:It amazes me that someone can talk so much showing how little he knows and thinks he's an expert.

You don't have to be an expert on peace, its quite simple, you have to stop fighting and blaming each other as both sides do!

Idiots of course choose sides and make the matter worse

In order to bring about peace, you have to have knowledge, and you have to know who is still taking land that doesn't belong to them and have said they are going to take more.

Sassy wrote:In order to bring about peace, you have to have knowledge, and you have to know who is still taking land that doesn't belong to them and have said they are going to take more.

Still not getting it, both sides need to put aside differences and both with claims to the lands, the Muslims have been living there for some time, the Christians longer, the Jews even longer, so what, all have a right to be there and live there without conflict. Peace will come about when both decide to really seek peace and allow each other to exist in peace.

Both dies are wrong, there is no right in any of the arguments from both sides as they also both do many wrongs! You only see through one side, that means you view on this will always be clouded

PhilDidge wrote:

SEXY MAMA wrote:

Idiots, dont think so Didge.

Its not about who wins its about justice. Why should we let one group of people kick another group of people out if their own homes take over there jobs and treat them like 2nd class citizens in their own country and demand they own the land now.

Seem fair? Unless one is an idiot!!!

Yes lets talk about justice, how Palestinians have been displaced from lands, how also 800,000 Jews were also displaced from their homes and lands in Muslim countries, what justice is there for each?

None, blame never works, you have been listening to comrade sassy for too long sexy, casting blame is not the way, reconciliation is  

When were 80,000 Jews displaced?

This is the problem Didge just because Palestinians are Muslims they get the ' well muslims are doing this to others' speech.

You keep talking about reconciliation Didge but that only comes about when ones wants it. The only thing Israelis want is to kill all the Palestinians.

Sassy wrote:

SEXY MAMA wrote:

Idiots, dont think so Didge.

Its not about who wins its about justice. Why should we let one group of people kick another group of people out if their own homes take over there jobs and treat them like 2nd class citizens in their own country and demand they own the land now.

Seem fair? Unless one is an idiot!!!

Ever since Mandela died Didge has decided he has taken over the mantle.   Never heard him mention Mandela before.   The man's a pompous, self serving ass.

Actually debated Mandela loads of times with smelly, you seem to going senile in your old age!

What you have just written in totally inaccurate rubbish. Learn something before you talk tripe in future.

To repeat:

Lets have some actual facts shall we, instead of the rubbish.

1 - THAT, when the Palestine Problem was created by Britain in 1917, more than 90% of the population of Palestine were Arabs, and that there were at that time no more than 56,000 Jews in Palestine?

2 - THAT, more than half of the Jews living in Palestine at that time were recent immigrants, who had come to Palestine in the preceding decades in order to escape persecution in Europe?... And that less than 5% of the population of Palestine were native Palestinian Jews?

3 - THAT, the Arabs of Palestine at that time owned 97.5% of the land, while Jews (native Palestinians and recent immigrants together) owned only 2.5% of the land?

SEXY MAMA wrote:

PhilDidge wrote:


Yes lets talk about justice, how Palestinians have been displaced from lands, how also 800,000 Jews were also displaced from their homes and lands in Muslim countries, what justice is there for each?

None, blame never works, you have been listening to comrade sassy for too long sexy, casting blame is not the way, reconciliation is  

When were 80,000 Jews displaced?

This is the problem Didge just because Palestinians are Muslims they get the ' well muslims are doing this to others' speech.

You keep talking about reconciliation Didge but that only comes about when ones wants it. The only thing Israelis want is to kill all the Palestinians.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_exodus_from_Arab_and_Muslim_countries

Both sides do not want reconciliation, how do you seek reconciliation when some people say they want to wipe Israel off the face of the earth?

The fact is you do ignore Sexy other problems around that area are concerned only because this mainly affects Muslims. Now I stand against discrimination of Muslims, but you here are discriminating against Jews/Israelis' laying claim all of them do not want peace, when some do just as some Palestinians do.

You have this completely wrong as it should be reconciled not fought over for another hundred years

Sassy wrote:What you have just written in totally inaccurate rubbish.   Learn something before you talk tripe in future.

To repeat:

Lets have some actual facts shall we, instead of the rubbish.

1 - THAT, when the Palestine Problem was created by Britain in 1917, more than 90% of the population of Palestine were Arabs, and that there were at that time no more than 56,000 Jews in Palestine?

2 - THAT, more than half of the Jews living in Palestine at that time were recent immigrants, who had come to Palestine in the preceding decades in order to escape persecution in Europe?... And that less than 5% of the population of Palestine were native Palestinian Jews?

3 - THAT, the Arabs of Palestine at that time owned 97.5% of the land, while Jews (native Palestinians and recent immigrants together) owned only 2.5% of the land?

Facts so the problem is all Britain fault then?

It matters not what has happened in the past, in 1500 the vast majority of America was non- European, now its mainly people descended from Europeans, are you going to change that back and start a war up for the indigenous there?

So your points about a 100 years ago have no relevance to the people alive today.

The reality is you both want this conflict to continue because you both seek to blame and continue this by saying who has done wrong when many have done wrong.

Again Northern Ireland was solved not by violence or blame!

Jesus what next, shall we give the land back to the Egyptians because they once live and ruled the land!

Didge why would we want the conflict to continue? What a silly thing to write!

Northern Ireland wasn't solved.   Bombs are still going off.   And it wasn't partially solved until there was a cease fire.   In this case, a cease fire would involve Israel stopping taking land illegally, which they are still doing and have said they have every intention of carrying on.

SEXY MAMA wrote:Didge why would we want the conflict to continue? What a silly thing to write!

Sassy does, read her answer on fighting!

PhilDidge wrote:

SEXY MAMA wrote:Didge why would we want the conflict to continue? What a silly thing to write!

Sassy does, read her answer on fighting!

Don't be so stupid. I want Israel to stop taking land so that fighting can stop. At the moment it can't because they are still occupying more and more land and nobody is going to stand for that unless they are stupid and like being walked over.

Sassy wrote:Northern Ireland wasn't solved.   Bombs are still going off.   And it wasn't partially solved until their was a cease fire.   In this case, a cease fire would involve Israel stopping taking land illegally, which they are still doing and have said they have every intention of carrying on.

Oh for the main it has been solved as many on both sides laid down their arms, there are still some dissidents but not how it one was.

You still don't get it though, that it what is so embarrassing about your replies, that peace is the way forward and you seek to continue conflict by laying claims to lands as both sides do!

What a total ignoramous you are.

Sassy wrote:

PhilDidge wrote:


Sassy does, read her answer on fighting!

Don't be so stupid.   I want Israel to stop taking land so that fighting can stop.  At the moment it can't because they are still occupying more and more land and nobody is going to stand for that unless they are stupid and like being walked over.

Your words:


h Didge the great, trying to reconcile. You can't reconcile with people taking your country, or perhaps you think we should have allowed Germany to occupy us. Mandela fought people being unjust and carried on fighting people being unjust an inflicting destruction on his people until they had to give way.


that is very much advocating violence is the only way and to not reconcile

Sassy wrote:What a total ignoramous you are.

Debate over I guess if that is all you can do now!

The debate never started, because you have no knowledge of the problem and just want to justify the terrible things that Israel is doing. Go and talk to someone who doesn't know or understand what the real situation is, they would probably think you are wonderful, I know how stupid and ignorant the things you are saying are.

I have far more knowledge on history on this topic than you can even begin to imagine Sassy, one thing I am very well versed in hence why I know so many wrongs are done by both sides and why both sides are very much in the wrong. I can go back to when troubles were first erupting in the area with attacks on Jews before Israel got Independence, but that is just seeking blame, which serves no purpose of which you always try to do.

So I actually know far more than you on the history of the area than you will ever hope to know, you only learn from what is also biased, where as I actually study all sides of the arguments, hence why you will never be an expert as you only ever see and read about one side