Letters to the Editor
Xanthro
Published Letters: 522 Editor's Choice: 47
-
Very Serious
[Read the article: Breaking the silence]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]"No one can take seriously the argument that somehow the natives of the area known variously as Palestine or Israel for the better part of the past couple of thousand years are the folks whose claim is weak."
Exactly how long must someone be evicted from an area before they can no longer reclaim it? 40 years, 400 years 4,000 years?
Jews, Christians, and Muslims have lived in the area continously for the past thousand years, but the fact remains, that a displaced people, Jews, have claimed this area as theirs during this entire period. At various times Christians and Muslims were strong enough to enforce their wills and prevent Jewish rule, but it is naive to think that at some point they wouldn't return.
Much of the World lives in history and it greatly affects their everyday outlook. Much of the Western World may discount something that happened 200 years ago but to much of the World in is as relevent as something that happened yesterday. Arab nations are still complaining about the Crusades. This is a reality that has to be dwelt with.
"I can't believe that any serious person would even attempt this argument. You're kidding right? "Because my ancestors might have lived here a couple of thousand years ago you have to move... now!""
What gives any person the right to claim territory other than history and strength? The longer the history the greater the claim.
It's not as if Jews somehow were eliminated for 2,000 years and suddenly sprang back up. They've been there the entire time, making up various percentages of the population determined mostly by how much violence was done against them. Now that they are the majority and have the power to enforce their will, why is their claim any less than a Muslim whose familiy moved their 100 years ago?
"No court anywhere would take such a claim seriously in any age because quite obviously it is far too old to be valid. Israel has some compelling arguments for its existence. "The Bible tells me so" isn't one of them."
Courts don't rule on whether nations can exist or not. There is no statue of limitations on requiring lost land.
-
Which is why
[Read the article: Breaking the silence]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]"Don't you know that now in Israel and the Occupied Territories, it's almost 50/50 Jew/Muslim and Christian Arab?"
Now, the Jewish/Muslim ratio in Israel, Gaza and the West Bank is about 60%/40% Jewish to Muslim but that will certainly switch to a Muslim majority within a few years, which is why Israel wisely left Gaza, so as to not become a minority in territory under their control.
Christian Arab? That's about 5% of the total population.
"And guess who can't go on vacation to get away from it all? The Palestians are well on the path to replace parity with majority. So by your sound logic, they get it all now. Hah! Hah! Hah! "
Why not simply include all of Syria, Jordan, Egypt, Lebanon , Saudia Arabia and Iraq as well an say Jews really are outnumbered and thus do not deserve their own country, because there are more Muslims/Arabs in the World?
"Thus Israel follows the path of apartheid South Africa. Very serious, indeed!"
Favorite false analogy that certain Jew Haters like to use, that Israel is like South Africa and that somehow not annexing the West Bank and Gaza into Israel proper equals apartheid.
Where is your moral outrage at how Saudia Arabia treats its Jewish minority? It's not aparteid, it's capital punishment for simply being Jewish.
-
So only Jewish countries are Modern, Educated and Democratic?
[Read the article: Breaking the silence]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Xanthro states: "The 59th UN Assembly (2004-2005) passed 19 resolutions condemning Israeli treatment of Palestinians and none condemning Sudan. Are we to believe that this is somehow a balanced working view of the World and not a form of Jew Hatred?"
"I suspect the reason for this is that the UN sees Israel as a modern, educated, democratic and powerful state that can regulate itself. Thus, a resolution regarding Israel's behavior is a slap on the wrist to an adult who knows better and can do something about it."
How many resolutions did the UN pass condeming Japan for its official discrimination against Koreans? That would be zero. Familys that have lived in Japan for generations are denied citizenship because they are of Korean descent. Where are the UN Resolutions?
What about Germany, where they have "guest" workers who again are denied citizenship despite the fact they were born there and only speak German? Where are the UN resolutions?
What about Saudia Arabia that executes Jews for being Jewish? Where are the UN resolutions?
Are you saying that Germany, Japan and Saudia Arabia are not modern, educated or powerful?
Besides, since when did being modern, educated, democratic and powerful become criteria for anything in the UN?
The simple fact is that most nations have laws that discriminate in the same manner that Israel does, yet only Israel receives UN condemnation for the same behavior that every other nation practices. The only difference is that Isreal is Jewish, thus the only logical conclusion is the different treatment is because being Jewish.
"A resolution condemning Sudan, a broken place with no government to speak of, guided only by primitive tribal claims and hatreds, would immediately raise the issue: "These people can't respond to a resolution, they can't find their own ass with a map and a mirror." And this, in turn, raises the question of what, exactly, the UN plans to do about it. Emphasis on "do." The UN does not want to DO anything about Sudan, so it doesn't want the question asked. So, back to issuing resolutions about Israel. It's not about Jew Hatred, Xanthro. Just about action-aversion."
No, it's about Jew-Hatred, since as I've pointed out every nation practices the same type of discrimination, but only the Jewish state get singled out.