Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : THE SLIGHTLY MODERATED BOXING RING -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: marcos who wrote (9553)	4/17/2002 9:06:11 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 21057

"Palestine belongs to the Arabs in the same sense that England belongs to the English or France to the French... And part of France used to be part of Germany. Other parts of France long ago used to be controlled by the king of England. That king's ancestors took over England from the people who where living there at the time in 1066. The US conquered lands that where previously used by "native Americans" (really a lousy term I was born here so I'm a native American, but Indians is a lousy term as well because it also refers to other people, and what other choices do I have?). Millions of Pakistanis and Indians (in India) were force to leave when India was partitioned. Should the Pakistanis and Indians have a "right of return"? Should whites blacks and asians leave North America so it can be returned to the decedents of those who arrived thousands of years ago rather then mere hundreds? Maybe Israel's offer wasn't enough but the Ghandi quote or the map of the Jewish settlements have little to do with this. No offer is ever likely to be a lot better then that one in terms of total land area. It might be better in terms of not breaking up the West Bank as much, but your talking about differences at the margin, terrorism is not the answer to trying to an impasse in the negotiations. All this "fighting back" by using suicide bombers against civilians is doing is making it less and less likely that the Palestinians will get their own independent nation any time soon. Tim

To: marcos who wrote (9553)	4/18/2002 8:56:59 AM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 21057

Ghandi is wrong. Not only was there always a Jewish presence in Palestine, but according to Ottoman censuses, most of the Palestinian Arabs had emigrated to the area during the 19th century, just as the Jews were building up their presence, both under established rules. Thus, most Palestinians were not indigenous. Furthermore, the Jews did not rob them of land, but bought or rented what land they owned at independence. When the Jews were emigrating to Palestine, most especially under the British mandate, there was no self- conscious Palestinian people, but Arabs who happened to occupy former Ottoman territory. It was Arab hostility to Israel that created the Palestinians. Finally, although it may be that elements of the Irgun, the more militant paramilitary organization among the Zionists, used the attack on Israel in '48 to despoil some villages, it is generally acknowledged that the main cause of Palestinian flight during that war was the advice of the Arab League to get out of the way while the Arab Powers drove the Jews into the sea. Subsequently, the refugees were regarded as a potential 5th column, and, in any case, could rarely prove title to claimed land........