Iran assails two-state solution for Palestinians

[mawilson 2,133]

Did you cut and paste this from the same site that you got all that juicy stuff about The Jews and how they all share the exact same political views and masterminded the Bolshevik revolution and etc. etc. ?

Why_Me has seen the light and is now pro-Israel.

[The_Dude 1,142]

Why_Me has seen the light and is now pro-Israel.

Or he could just be argumentative.

[scandal 951]

the previous existence of a Jewish community that briefly ruled part of the area some 2000 years ago

[PalestineMyHeart 1,897]

How long have humans been living in the land known as Palestine ?

How long did the Jewish kingdom there last ?

How long was the land of Palestine part of other empires ?

Now you have some context in which to understand what "brief" means.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

You said that before (cut and paste), and it was just as incorrect then as it is now.

All of Israel, West Bank, Gaza Strip, Golan Heights, everything to the Jordan River belong to the Jews. These so called Palestinians are not. They are Arab-muslims from Arabia or Egypt or Turkey. They only started calling themselves Palestinians since May 28, 1964. Before then, it was an insult to a muslim to be called a Palestinian. These Arab-muslims lost all claim to the land in 1918 at the end of WW1. Mulslims fought for Germany and the Axis powers. At the end of WW1, the majority of the population was Jewish not muslim. There are two reasons muslims are in the area, first the muslims conquered the area by force in 636 AD, by bloodshed, brutality, a three siege, a slaughter of 35,000 Jews and Byzantine Christians outside the Citadel gates. The second reason is the Zionist movement got started around 1870 when Jews started buying the land from the Turks. By 1890, the Jews were prosperous and needed workers and invited the Arab muslims in and offered them jobs. The Turks got so alarmed at the success of the Jews they stopped selling land to them around 1900. Read and study history.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

Let's make it easy for them so they don't have to leave the thread to post their propaganda from the pro-Israeli lobby.

Four Basic Talking Points on Israel

David A. Harris, Executive Director, American Jewish Committee

In discussing or debating Israel and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, it may be helpful to emphasize the following points:

Peace

No nation on Earth yearns for peace more than Israel. Since its founding 54 years ago, Israel has not known a single day of peace because it has not been fully accepted by all its neighbors, some of whom still openly call for its annihilation.

It has carried an unimaginable defense burden, buried too many of its sons and daughters, and coped with the realization that its margin of error is almost nil, given the country's tiny size (until the Six-Day War it was no wider than nine miles at its narrowest point).

The notion of peace has always been central to Judaism and the Jewish ethical tradition. It remains so today.

Whenever a credible peace partner emerged, Israel immediately responded. Treaties with Egypt and Jordan, based on territorial compromise, are the proof.

Tragically, no credible Palestinian peace partner has yet emerged. President Bush said so in his landmark speech of June 24, 2002, when he spoke of the endemic terrorism, violence, corruption, and lack of democracy in the current Palestinian leadership.

As far back as 1947 (the UN Partition Plan) and as recently as 2001 (the Clinton-Barak Plan), the Palestinians could have had their own state living side by side with Israel. They refused in both instances. They wanted something altogether different -- Israel's disappearance as a Jewish state.

When a credible Palestinian partner does emerge, no doubt Israel will engage it seriously and in a spirit of compromise that seeks to balance Israel's need for security and recognized borders with the Palestinian quest for self-determination and dignity.

Democracy

Israel is a liberal democracy, the only one in the Middle East.

It shares common values with the United States, including free and fair elections with multiple parties, smooth transfers of power from one leader to another, an independent judiciary, a free press, emancipation of women, and respect for the Christian and Muslim communities in the country.

Is Israel a perfect democracy? No more than any democracy is. But its society and value system reflect a fundamental respect for human dignity and freedom that distinguishes it from the autocratic and totalitarian states that surround it.

Examine the record of any of Israel's neighbors, where leaders stay in power until they die or are ousted in a coup d'etat, and where respect for basic rights is spotty at best, non-existent at worst.

Self-defense

Israel did not initiate the current round of violence that began in September 2000. Indeed, the violence started precisely when Israel, with active American support, was offering the Palestinians the chance for their first state ever, on 96 percent of the West Bank and Gaza, with the bulk of Israeli settlements to be removed, and Jerusalem to be shared.

Israel, like any other nation, has the right and obligation to defend itself against terrorists and suicide bombers. The U.S. acted no differently after September 11. No one would have suggested that Washington sit down and negotiate with Al Qaeda or the Taliban after 9/11.

In any military action, there is unavoidable damage and there are unintended casualties, but this should never blur fundamental distinctions between the two sides.

In Afghanistan, U.S. forces have inadvertently killed innocent civilians and hit Red Cross facilities, and NATO forces fighting strictly from the air in Serbia -- so as to avoid NATO casualties -- had similar experiences, including the bombing of the Chinese Embassy in Belgrade.

Unfortunate as such accidents are, they do not call into question the overriding need for military action in both cases.

So, too, in the case of Israel. The best strategy for fighting terrorism is preemptive, seeking to prevent the terrorists from striking, going after the infrastructure that supports terrorism, and making clear that the nation will not be cowed by the terrrorists.

At the same time, the Israeli military abides by a strict code of conduct that is among the most stringent in the world. In Jenin, for example, which has been a center of Palestinian terrorism, rather than bomb from the air, Israeli troops went house to house to minimize Palestinian civilian casualties. As a result, 23 Israeli soldiers lost their lives in the fierce fighting with well-armed Palestinians.

When lapses occur -- and they do in the Israeli military, as in the armies of all other democratic countries -- they are investigated and, when appropriate, those guilty are punished.

Israeli military actions are complicated by the fact that Palestinian gunmen have absolutely no hesitation operating from civilian zones, utilizing hospitals, ambulances, apartment buildings, churches, and even schools, in order to draw Israeli fire and then portray the Israeli army as inflicting damage on innocent Palestinians and their institutions.

Occupation

Israel never sought occupation. Indeed, in Jewish history the Jewish people never attempted to dominate or subjugate another people.

The occupation came about because, in 1967, Egypt and Syria repeatedly called for Israel's annihilation, mobilized their armies, and took other steps that were clearly intended to wipe Israel off the map. This history is documented.

These days some people are bored by history, but it is vital to understand how we got to this point.

After 1967, even in the absence of successful peace talks with the Palestinians, there was a notable Israeli effort to improve living conditions for the local population, although in recent years, as a result of the 1993 Oslo Accords, the vast majority of Palestinians have come under the daily rule of the Palestinian Authority.

Since 1967, there has been substantial growth in Palestinian per capita income, life expectancy, education, and other socio-economic indices, while infant mortality and illiteracy have fallen dramatically. To cite only one example: Before 1967, there was no Palestinian university; by 1993, there were seven.

This is not to suggest that the Palestinian situation was ideal; it was not. But Israel made good-faith efforts to improve life on the ground, while facing an ongoing challenge of terrorism and violence from these very same areas.

At the end of the day, the solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict must be political. Israel, time and again, has shown its willingness to sit down and resolve the difficult issues of borders, security arrangements, settlements, refugees, water, etc.

It is time for the Palestinians to take responsibility for their own destiny, stop blaming others for their current situation, abandon terrorism, and insist on a leadership committed to peace. They will find a willing partner in Israel.

[The_Dude 1,142]

nvm, not worth it.

Edited October 3, 2011 by The_Dude

[PalestineMyHeart 1,897]

Let's make it easy for them so they don't have to leave the thread to post their propaganda from the pro-Israeli lobby.

They just follow the 4 easy steps:

How to make the case for Israel and win.

To the benefit of the many not-very-bright zionist wannabe apologists who read this blog assiduously, I decided to offer a clear and simple method of arguing the case for Israel. This clear and simple method has been distilled from a life spent listening to and reading Zionist propaganda. It is easy to follow and results are guaranteed or your money back.

So don’t hesitate! Take advantage NOW of this revolutionary rhetorical system that will make YOU a great apologist for Israel in less time than it takes to shoot a Palestinian toddler in the eye.

Ready? 1..2..3..GO!

You need to understand just one principle:

The case for Israel is made of four propositions that should always be presented in the correct escalating order.

1. We rock

2. They suck

3. You suck

4. Everything sucks

That’s it. Now you know everything that it took me a lifetime to learn. The rest is details; filling in the dotted lines.

~~~

1. You begin by saying how great Israel is. Israel wants peace; Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East; the desert blooms; kibbutz; Israelis invented antibiotics, the wheel, the E minor scale; thanks to the occupation Palestinians no longer live in caves; Israel liberates Arab women; Israel has the most moral army in the world, etc.

This will win over 50% of your listeners immediately. Don’t worry about the factual content. This is about brand identity, not writing a PhD. Do you really think BP is ‘beyond petroleum’?

2. Then you go into the second point: They suck. Here you talk about the legal system of Saudi Arabia, gay rights in Iran, slave trade in the Sudan, Mohammad Atta, the burqa, Palestinians dancing after 9/11, Arafat’s facial hair, etc.

There is only one additional principle you need to understand here. It will separate you from the amateurs. You need to know your audience. If you’ve got a crowd already disposed to racist logic, go for it with everything you have. But if you get a liberal crowd, you need to sugar coat the racism a bit. Focus on women rights, human rights, religious tolerance, “clash of civilizations”, terrorism, they teach their children to hate, etc. Deep down your audience WANTS to enjoy racism and feel superior. They just need the proper encouragement so they can keep their sophisticated self-image. Give them what they crave and they’ll adore you! But be careful not to ‘mix n match,’ because it will cost you credibility.

3. When you’re done, there will always be dead-enders insisting that abuse of gays in Iran does not justify ethnic cleansing in Palestine. Take a deep breath, and pull the doomsday weapon: You suck!

You’re a Jew-hater, Arab-lover, anti-Semite, you’re a pinko, a commie, a dreamer, a naive, a self-hater, you have issues, your mother worked for the Nazis, Prince Bandar buys you cookies, you forgot you were responsible for the holocaust, etc. The more the merrier. By the time you end this barrage, only a handful would be left standing. For mopping them up, you use the ultimate postmodern wisdom:

4. Everything sucks. War, genocide, racism, oppression are everywhere. From the Roma in Italy to the Native-Americans in the U.S., the weak are victimized. Why pick on Israel? It’s the way of the world. Look! Right is only in question between equals in power; the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must. Ethics, schmethics. Life is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing. Eat, drink! Carpe diem! The Palestinians would throw us into the sea if they could. Ha ha!

Trust me, that’s as far as words can go. If you followed this method faithfully, you’ve done your work. You should leave the few who are still unconvinced to the forces of order.

Congratulations! You are now ready to apologize for Israel like a pro.

http://jewssansfrontieres.blogspot.com/2008/07/how-to-make-case-for-israel-and-win.html

[Sofiyya 1,687]

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

Did you cut and paste this from the same site that you got all that juicy stuff about The Jews and how they all share the exact same political views and masterminded the Bolshevik revolution and etc. etc. ?

Lets you and I play the history game.

I'm not sure why it bothers you that I stated that Jews played a major part in the Bolshevik revolution. It's pretty common knowledge.

But let's get back to why it bothers you so much that European Jews came back to where their ancestors immigrated from in the first place.

The Romans took Israel from the Jews by force, the Arabs took Israel from the Romans by force, the Brits took Israel from the Arabs by force, and now the Jews have come back home to roost...by force.

So where's the problem? If the Arabs wanted a piece of Israel after WW2, then why didn't they agree to the UN resolution giving them half the action? The Arabs didn't want it then, but after they realized they can't get it by force, they want the UN to step in and give them something they turned down in the first place?

Edited October 3, 2011 by Why_Me

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

Or he could just be argumentative.

Nope. Iv'e always believed Israel is for Israeli's.

My beef with with the US giving tons of money to Israel and Israel not handing over Bolshevik war criminals has nothing to do with my beliefs in regards to the State of Israel.

[Kathryn41 3,205]

Post containing personal attack violating TOS and several posts quoting same have been removed.

[scandal 951]

How long have humans been living in the land known as Palestine ?

How long did the Jewish kingdom there last ?

How long was the land of Palestine part of other empires ?

Now you have some context in which to understand what "brief" means.

Modern humans emerged roughly 200,000 years ago.

Recorded history dates back approximately 5,000 years, i.e from today ~2000CE back to ~3000BCE. All of the cultures and ethnicities and peoples on Earth which historians concern themselves with go back only that far.

The typical span of any civilization, nation-state, empire or regional hegemony in human history varies from a few short years to centuries to perhaps a millennium or two. Some examples of very long lived states are the Roman Republic (~500BC - 44BC), the Western Roman Empire (44BC-476CE), the Eastern Roman Empire (44BC-1453CE). The Kingdom of England/Great Britain is over a thousand years and counting (927CE-present). The American colonial era lasted 180 years from approximately 1600-1776 and has been followed by 235 years and counting of the glorious Republic of the United States of America.

So I think we can grant that a continuous history measured in centuries of a people attached to a land is not "brief".

So let's examine our neck of the woods, shall we?

The earliest documented and uncontroversial dating of the Kingdom of Israel is the Mesha Stele from 840BCE, discussing the powerful Kingdom of Omri. That Kingdom must have already pre-existed the Stele, so we can begin dating the Kingdom to at least 860BCE if not earlier (e.g. the Merneptah Stele, more controversial, would date Israel back to 1200BCE, 350years earlier than Omri).

This kingdom lasted until conquest by Assyria in 722BCE. 860-722: that's 138 years, and was immediately followed by the Kingdom of Judah until Babylonian exile in 586BCE. 722-586= 136years. So up until Nebuchadnezzar we have 138+136= 274 years of documented ancient Israel. A period in which Solomon's temple was built, a priestly class emerged, the Old Testament was written and became the Law of the land, and a culture based on monotheistic worship of Yahweh and sacrificial offerings was established.

Babylonian exile in 586BCE was our first "nakbah" - being ethnically transferred from our land after 276 years of residence on it.

It was followed in 539BCE by a gradual return to the land as the Persian Empire superseded Babylon, at which time Ezra and Nehemia led the Jewish people back and started reconstruction of the Temple. This rebuilding of an autonomous Jewish state within the Persian Empire lasted until the arrival of Alexander the Great and the Hellenists in 332BCE. So we have the "Second Temple Era" lasting 539-332=207years.

This was followed by subjugation of Jews by Hellenist kings, while remaining still in the land, until the creation of the independent Jewish Hasmonean (Maccabee) Kingdom from 165BCE - 37BCE - another 128 years of independent Jewish rule.

This was followed by Herodean/Roman rule of the province of Judea, again with the Jews still in the land, until the Jewish/Roman wars culminating in the Bar Kochva Revolt, the mass killings of Jewish populations in Judea and the expulsion of most of the rest in 135CE, a period of 135CE-37BCE=172 years.

The suppression of the Bar Kochva revolt and resultant exile by the Romans is our Second Nakbah, the one which lasted up until after 2000 years of exile we've come HOME.

Let's add it up. From 860BCE until 135CE is 995 years, almost an exact millennium.

During those 995 years Jews were masters of their own territory for 138 years (860BCE-722BCE) + 136 (722BCE-586BCE) + 207 (539BCE-332BCE) + 128 (165BCE-37BCE) = 609 years.

During those 995 years Jews were living in the land under the jackboots of Hellenists or Romans for 167 years (332BCE-165BCE) + 172 (37BCE-135CE) = 339 years.

And during those 995 years Jews were banished from the land during the Babylonian exile from 586BCE-539BCE= 47years.

Let's check the math:

609 years of self rule + 339 years of subjugation by occupying powers while still residing in the land + 47 years of exile = 995 years. Yup.

A thousand years of history. 6 centuries of self rule. Three and a half centuries of living as an occupied people in our own land. 47 years of outright exile. Compare that to the history of the USA, or Muslim rule of Spain, or the British Empire and I think it stacks up impressively indeed. When you say "Briefly", I respond with .

That thousand years was then followed by two thousand more of yet more expulsion, repression, occupation, denial of rights, culminating in pogroms, Inquisition and Holocaust.

In conclusion, we know how you feel.

We understand expulsion, repression, occupation. We've been there. We've done that.

That doesn't excuse doing it to anyone else, Palestinians or otherwise. If anyone should know better it is we, the Jewish people.

It's time for both Peoples' to understand each others history, each others legitimacy, and live side by side in peace.

[PalestineMyHeart 1,897]

Lets you and I play the history game.

I'm not sure why it bothers you that I stated that Jews played a major part in the Bolshevik revolution. It's pretty common knowledge.

But let's get back to why it bothers you so much that European Jews came back to where their ancestors immigrated from in the first place.

The Romans took Israel from the Jews by force, the Arabs took Israel from the Romans by force, the Brits took Israel from the Arabs by force, and now the Jews have come back home to roost...by force.

So where's the problem? If the Arabs wanted a piece of Israel after WW2, then why didn't they agree to the UN resolution giving them half the action? The Arabs didn't want it then, but after they realized they can't get it by force, they want the UN to step in and give them something they turned down in the first place?

History isn't a game. If you really want to get into the topic, you should start a thread for it and stop trying to derail this one.

Briefly - in answer to your remarks:

First of all, not all of today's Jews are descended from the ancient Hebrews, and many modern Jews' ancestors never set foot in Palestine. Certainly Palestine holds great significance in the history of the Jewish religion, but you could say the same thing about the Christian religion. Christians also once thought they had a "divine" right to the land which was the birthplace of their faith, at the expense of the native inhabitants.

Secondly, the Hebrews were not the original people of Palestine - according to their own Biblical tradition, the Hebrews were originally from Mesopotamia (Ur, in modern-day Iraq.) Egyptian records of the time indicate other origins. At any rate, wherever they came from, by the time the Hebrews arrived in Palestine ("Canaan Land,") it was already populated with Canaanites, who had already founded the city of Jerusalem. The Biblical narrative makes it clear that the Hebrews came from outside Canaan, and it also makes it clear that there were a number of other people already living in the area when the Hebrews first arrived on the scene.

Thirdly, not all Jews were driven out of Palestine. Yes, the Romans cleared out Jerusalem, but some Jewish communities remained in other parts of Palestine. Over time, the majority of these converted to Christianity, and then later to Islam. Today's Palestinian people are descended in part from the ancient Hebrews along with the other groups that lived in the region over the centuries - including the Arabs, who left a lasting cultural influence including language and religion. The indigenous people were not replaced by Arabs; rather, they became Arabized, as they had become Judaized and then Christianized before the arrival of Islam.

So what about the rights of the Palestinians to live in their own ancestral land - one they had never left ?

The Arabs didn't want "a piece of Israel" - it didn't exist until 1948. ("Israel" in the Bible refers to a person and his descendants, not a place.)

By the late 1800s, when the Zionists formulated their plan to create a Jewish nation in Palestine, the area had been predominantly Arab and Muslim for nearly a thousand years. Although different empires had come and gone, the core population remained in the land - an established society with homes, farms, businesses, villages, towns, and cities, and who were well aware that they lived in a place called Palestine.

The plan to partition Palestine and "give" half of it to immigrant European Jews - at grievous expense to the indigenous people living there - was made completely without their consent. Why would anyone accept such a thing ?

As far as the present, the Palestinian Authority has already agreed to accept the State of Israel not just in half of historic Palestine, but in 78% of it. (Hamas has agreed as well.)

[scandal 951]

History isn't a game. If you really want to get into the topic, you should start a thread for it and stop trying to derail this one.

Quite right, it's not a game and it's not something you just get to make up out of whole cloth. Not that you don't try to do just that, right?

Briefly - in answer to your remarks:

First of all, not all of today's Jews are descended from the ancient Hebrews, and many modern Jews' ancestors never set foot in Palestine. Certainly Palestine holds great significance in the history of the Jewish religion, but you could say the same thing about the Christian religion. Christians also once thought they had a "divine" right to the land which was the birthplace of their faith, at the expense of the native inhabitants.

Secondly, the Hebrews were not the original people of Palestine - according to their own Biblical tradition, the Hebrews were originally from Mesopotamia (Ur, in modern-day Iraq.) Egyptian records of the time indicate other origins. At any rate, wherever they came from, by the time the Hebrews arrived in Palestine ("Canaan Land,") it was already populated with Canaanites, who had already founded the city of Jerusalem. The Biblical narrative makes it clear that the Hebrews came from outside Canaan, and it also makes it clear that there were a number of other people already living in the area when the Hebrews first arrived on the scene.

Thirdly, not all Jews were driven out of Palestine. Yes, the Romans cleared out Jerusalem, but some Jewish communities remained in other parts of Palestine. Over time, the majority of these converted to Christianity, and then later to Islam. Today's Palestinian people are descended in part from the ancient Hebrews along with the other groups that lived in the region over the centuries - including the Arabs, who left a lasting cultural influence including language and religion. The indigenous people were not replaced by Arabs; rather, they became Arabized, as they had become Judaized and then Christianized before the arrival of Islam.

So what about the rights of the Palestinians to live in their own ancestral land - one they had never left ?

The Arabs didn't want "a piece of Israel" - it didn't exist until 1948. ("Israel" in the Bible refers to a person and his descendants, not a place.)

By the late 1800s, when the Zionists formulated their plan to create a Jewish nation in Palestine, the area had been predominantly Arab and Muslim for nearly a thousand years. Although different empires had come and gone, the core population remained in the land - an established society with homes, farms, businesses, villages, towns, and cities, and who were well aware that they lived in a place called Palestine.

The plan to partition Palestine and "give" half of it to immigrant European Jews - at grievous expense to the indigenous people living there - was made completely without their consent. Why would anyone accept such a thing ?

In the classic style of the historical revisionist, the above is an artful blend of true statements mixed in with misleading ones and outright falsehoods, all with intent to deceive and obfuscate and still claim some standard of "truth".

An example of truth:

by the time the Hebrews arrived in Palestine ("Canaan Land,") it was already populated with Canaanites,, who had already founded the city of Jerusalem.

This is undisputed and uncontroversial. So what? When the Canaanites (or Jebusites, or Hittites) show up I believe they should be invited to the peace conference along with the Israelis and Palestinians and invited to submit their claim for representation and land. Until such time, those ancient peoples join all the rest who once don't have current standing in the discussion. EVERYONE alive today EVERYWHERE has dispossessed some other people who came before. Ancient Israelites did, just as ancient Persians, Babylonians, and others. For that matter, as do modern Americans in their displacement of the indigenous peoples of the New World. If this is meant to imply a claim for illegitimacy of a Jewish Israel, the logical implications are clear: Move yourself out of San Antonio, you usurper and occupier of someone else's historic land.

An example of outright falsehood:

"Israel" in the Bible refers to a person and his descendants, not a place.

False. In the Bible "Israel" was the name given to Jacob and his descendants (Bnai Israel, the Children of Israel). However it also clearly refers to a place: the Kingdom of Israel united under King David and his heirs as described in the Book of Samuel, of Judges, and latern texts. More importantly, let's leave alone Biblical references and consider the documented history of the Kingdom of Israel as a contiguous territory occupied by a people united by faith, language and custom is amply recorded. See my earlier post in this thread for the timescales of this history. The Mesha Stele clearly refers to Israel as a place, a kingdom and a people.

An insidious example of a deliberately misleading statement:

First of all, not all of today's Jews are descended from the ancient Hebrews, and many modern Jews' ancestors never set foot in Palestine.

Literally - that's true. Some modern Jews did not descend from ancient Hebrews - they were Gentiles who converted into the Jewish faith. I personally know some such converts, they are fine people. "Many modern Jews' ancestors never set foot in the homeland of the Jewish people - also true, for the same reasons of conversion and intermarriage with surrounding peoples. The Jewish people in 2000 years of Diaspora has no doubt mixed and mingled here and there, lost some to assimilation, gained some through new converts and adherents.

The implication of your statement is far more odious. You use the words 'some' and 'many' to convey a sense of 'most' and 'all' in your later text. That we are not the same people, not connected, not a continuous unbroken chain of tradition throughout the centuries. That we, modern Jews, are illegitimate and not entitled to claim our own ancestry. And I say to you: how dare you? Who are you to rewrite my history, and deny it? The continuity of Jewish history in Israel and in the Diaspora is well recorded, as was the ancient history. From the Sanhedrin, the Rabbis of the Talmudic era who essentially recreated our religious practice based on prayer rather than sacrifice following the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem, to the dispersed communities in Spain, North Africa, Yemen, France, and beyond during the medieval era. To the great sages: Rashi, the Rambam, the Ramban, the Baal Shem Tov and more. To the writings: the Mishna, the Gemarah, the Shulchan Aruch, the Pesach Hagaddah and the machzorim for the holidays with the unifying prayers: Kol Nidre, Netane Tokef and more. These are shared traditions, writings, history, leaders of all Jews throughout Ashkenaz and Sefarad that bind us and unite us as a people. Let me ask this: If Ashkenazi Jews are not "real" Jews, truly descendant from our Judean forbears, just who exactly are we? Do you believe in a theory of spontaneous emergence of a community dispersed throughout Europe that shares common language, history, practices? That survives and endures despite the persecutions or oppressions of the majority populations in which it is embedded? Just what kind of masochistic people CHOOSE to create themselves as such a community under such conditions?

It's simply preposterous and without any historical foundation. It's a lie. And it's uttered in order to justify your mythology that Jews have no historic right to the land. Enough. We do. As do Palestinians. Why the need to tear us down, lie about us, insult us, to justify your claim? The Palestinians have legitimate claims and I recognize them. It's not necessary for you to deny my people's history in order to proclaim your own.

There's more nonsense there, but let's part on this gem about Hamas, easy enough to refute:

As far as the present, the Palestinian Authority has already agreed to accept the State of Israel not just in half of historic Palestine, but in 78% of it. (Hamas has agreed as well.)

:rofl: :rofl: Like hell they have. Here's Hamas's Ismail Haniyeh on the subject from a few months ago:

http://www.jpost.com/DiplomacyAndPolitics/Article.aspx?id=218462

Haniyeh urges PLO to annul recognition of Israel

By KHALED ABU TOAMEH

04/29/2011 18:44

Jewish sovereign presence ‘is illegitimate,’ can't be recognized says Hamas PM

Hamas Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh over the weekend called on the PLO to withdraw its recognition of Israel’s right to exist in response to Israel’s opposition to the reconciliation deal between his movement and Fatah.

Haniyeh told reporters in Gaza City that there was no justification for recognizing Israel’s right to exist, in wake of its “denial of the rights and unity of the Palestinian people.”

Israel’s presence “on our land is illegitimate and we can’t recognize it,” he said.