Comments on: LectureHop: Columbia Palestine Forum

By: Mark Bernadiner

Mark Bernadiner — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 10:32:15 +0000

Starting in 1948 from very first day of recreation of the State of Israel on the part of Israel territory, Arab countries waged several wars to eliminate Israel from her historic land. Israel won all wars and now Arab countries propose a peace agreement with Israel under conditions, which they intended to dictate. However, only Israel, who won all the wars and defeated Arab countries, has legal rights to formulate and dictate peace agreement terms and conditions, which, in general, shell include the following provisions:

1. Palestinian muslims must compensate Jews for damages caused by Jews massacres (actually, it was Holocaust) conducted in Palestine in 1920s-1930s under British administration supervision, for providing Hitler with idea of Final Solution and for taking active part in implementing the idea in Europe.
2. Arab countries must compensate Israel for damages inflicted on Israel during wars launched by Arab countries.
3. Arab countries must compensate several million Jews expelled from Arab countries between 1948 and 1953, where they lived for centuries, for violation of international law and stilling Jewish properties.
4. Arab countries must recognize â€œArticle 24 of the 1964 PLO charter addressed to UN, which stipulates: Palestinian muslims do not claim Judea and Samaria (West Bank) and Gaza their territoriesâ€ which gives Israel full legal rights to remove muslims from occupied Israel land of Palestine.
5. Arab countries must comply with Geneva Convention, which recognizes Israel rights on Gaza, Judea and Samaria, historic Jewish land liberated by Israel in 1967 war from Jordan and Egypt occupation.
6. Arab countries must recognize Jerusalem as historic Israel capital.
7. Egypt and Jordan are obligated to relocate Palestinian muslims (their former citizens) from Gaza (Egypt), Judea and Samaria (Jordan) inside their territories within 1 (negotiable) year term.
8. Arab countries have no right to develop or acquire WMD or weapon that can be used against Israel.

If any Arab country denies this peace terms and conditions, Israel has full legal rights for preemptive strike against this country using all available military power. All islamofascism organizations operating on Israel territory occupied by Palestinian muslims, such as PLO&Fatah (created after WWII on the principles of Hitlerâ€™s ideology and with close ties to Nazi party), Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Al Agsa Brigade, must be totally, unconditionally and immediately exterminated. All other Palestinian muslims must be expelled from Israel back to the countries of their origin.

By: rapidshare fan

rapidshare fan — Fri, 17 Apr 2009 19:02:19 +0000

In fact, I think it is a sound position supported by both principle and strategic reality. But, in any event, your categorization of Netanyahu is ignorant.

http://loadingvault.com/rapidshare_dsl_speed.html

By: rapidshare

rapidshare — Fri, 17 Apr 2009 19:01:26 +0000

Regardless of how you feel about Israel, this divestment scheme is ultimately a pointless and counterproductive enterprise. The goal of the effort is to end Israel’s “Apartheid” which the activists define as the existence of the Jewish State itself.

dsl speed

By: Ahem...

Ahem... — Fri, 06 Mar 2009 05:28:43 +0000

Barak is not perceived as too left wing because he, as Defense Minister, led a long-overdue and long-avoided response to the anarchy in the densely-populated Gaza Strip, in which a good number of terrorists were killed, and an unfortunate number of civilians killed with them. He is perceived– and properly so– as too left wing because he offered Yasser Arafat 95% of the West Bank, and sovereignty over East Jerusalem– a bargaining position so befitting his perceived strategic brilliance that it invited the Palestinians to demand full sovereignty over the Temple Mount, a right of return to pre-1948 Israel, and other things even more intolerable to any believer in a strong Israeli state. He crossed every “red-line,” reneged upon every promise, and abandoned every principle that had guided scores of governments before him. And the result was an unparalleled increase in violence, and a separation fence that few Israelis would dare dismantle out of fear of renewed attack. Peace!

By: Ha!

Ha! — Fri, 06 Mar 2009 05:07:10 +0000

You obviously don’t know what you’re talking about. What reputable news source? Did you follow the Israeli election campaign? Because it wasn’t covered on any American news channel, just so you know, and I follow them all. So which news source have you been following? Netanyahu spent the first few weeks of his campaign battling a settler leader who pressed for a complete rejection of the two-state, land-for-peace paradigm, and who only commanded, mind you, 20% of the vote in a Likud leadership race. And even though this individual secured the 20th place in the Likud party list by an open democratic vote, Netanyahu lobbied the organizing committees of the party to demote him to an utterly unattainable 40th place– a decision which the individual in question chose not to contest before the judicial courts. That’s how much Netanyahu feared the notion of having an uncompromising right wing politician in his midst. If you have ever followed his career closely– and it is obvious you haven’t– you would know that he has, on many an occasion, committed both formally and informally to negotiations, and has often used cleverly deceptive slogans to avoid categorical opposition to them. This time, he used intentional ambiguity– never once rejecting the diplomatic framework, and even shirking from an opportunity to debate his adversaries, despite his proven proficiency in debate. Now don’t get me wrong. I don’t think there’s anything wrong in being categorically opposed to the peace process, or in being categorically opposed to the manner in which it has been pursued. I don’t think it is at all a position to be ashamed of, and I certainly don’t think it warrants being described as extreme. In fact, I think it is a sound position supported by both principle and strategic reality. But, in any event, your categorization of Netanyahu is ignorant.

By: Few more things

Few more things — Fri, 06 Mar 2009 01:50:41 +0000

1) Yes. I don’t want Columbia investing in Hamas either. But given that the U.S. government would ban us from doing that even if we wanted to, I want to be sure we avoid supporting either set of brutal war criminals.

2) Sadly–yes, it is quite sad, but we must face facts–you are incorrect. This war had overwhelming support in Israel, even as the scale of destruction became clear. Barak’s poll numbers rose dramatically as the war was in progress, then fell when it ended. Israelis like war, no matter how many children they kill. At one point, Israelis wanted peace. After Sabra and Shatila, there were massive antiwar protests. But 25 years of that have desensitized Israelis, so now those protests have maybe 1000 people.

By: Billy

Billy — Fri, 06 Mar 2009 00:48:06 +0000

Wow, Robbins is still whoring his ass out pretending he’s some kind of public intellectual in lieu of demonstrating some competence as an English professor?…some things never change.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 17:09:35 +0000

what in the world do “Sabra, L’Oreal, Motorola, and Max Brenner Chocolate” have to do with anything? is the problem just that they’re israeli companies? what feeble logic. if you don’t want to buy these brands, then don’t, but what’s it got to do with pushing columbia toward some divestment campaign? this just goes to show how supposedly ‘smart’ sometimes aren’t all that smart. i suppose these seem people might protest paying taxes to the u.s. govt since, well, some of their tax dollars do in fact go to israel in the form of support [not to mention gaza as well, thereby indirectly supporting a govt. that refuses to restrain indiscriminate rocket fire on civilians]. these proposals are laughable and will go nowhere.

By: Hypocrisy

Hypocrisy — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 16:52:28 +0000

Just making this point again, any of you divestment people better check the computer you are using to make these posts, because if it uses a Pentium Processor, it’s off limits.

By: oh noes

oh noes — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 16:10:54 +0000

please don’t tell me max brenner is evil. It can’t be true. He’s like willy wonka but real.

By: a few things

a few things — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 14:18:50 +0000

1) is it responsible to set up your rocket-launching gear in dense Gaza City?
2) Barak may have been defense minister, but it was IDF leadership that was planning the war, so your basic argument (Barak plans tactics that kill civillians, Barak is too liberal, therefore everyone in Israel is to the right of Barak and loves to kill civillians) is deeply flawed and sad. Israelis don’t want their children having to hide in bomb shelters during recess because of rocket attacks on land that is unquestionably theirs (i.e. negev towns that were desert 75 years ago). Israelis do want peace. A minority of idiot right-wing religious Israelis totalling, as this recent election proved, somewhere south of 15% of the populace is batshit crazy and racist to boot So think the other 85%, and hopefully any Netaynahu-led government will either fail quickly as a right-wing coalition or include Kadima and work along with Mitchell and Sec. Clinton toward a new round of talks.

By: So wait

So wait — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 12:56:12 +0000

Do you also think that Israeli settlers’ unprovoked attacks on Palestinian civilians justifies suicide bombings? There are plenty of Palestinians who would like to live by the ploughshare, but can not, because the IDF/settlers attack them whenever they go out to harvest:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XHhECvN2kQI

In its last war, Israel carpet-bombed CIVILIANS. The architect of that war, Ehud Barak, suffered a stinging defeat because he was too left-wing. “

By: Peace not divestment

Peace not divestment — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 12:35:55 +0000

I was at the event too and they clearly interpreted apartheid to be the existence of a Jewish state in any part of “historic Palestine”. The first demand of the campaign is “an end tooccupation of all Arab lands.” sounds like calling for the destruction of Israel to me.

By: meh

meh — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 11:55:13 +0000

I am aware of the election results. He is not a representative of the ultra-right, he is center-right. You are probably thinking of Lieberman. Maybe your ‘reputable news source’ is old. Also, Likud only got one less MP seat than Kadima, so it isn’t like Livni was overwhelmingly more popular than he. Either way, as leader of one of the top 2 parties, I would classify that as mainstream.

By: What in the hell?

What in the hell? — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 11:52:04 +0000

This is a case of ‘live by the sword…’ If you launch an unprovoked attack you must be prepared for retaliation including loss of territory.
Did you expect Israel to chuckle and say “hahaha, good one guys! you almost had us!” I hope you realize how silly your opinion is.