Indictment coming for Netanyahu

[Derec]

Israel was right to fight back against a blockade.
So what about the blockade Israel has on Palestine?

A blockade is an act of war, but not necessarily an act of aggression. In the case of Gaza, the "siege" (where Israel supplies electricity and hundreds of trucks filled with goods each day) was implemented as a response to acts of aggression by Gaza against Israel that have been ongoing ever since the disengagement.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

So long as Israel keeps Palestinians from having either independence or equal Israeli citizenship, Israel has no claim to any moral high ground.

Israel and Egypt have both released all claims on Gaza. It's currently terra nullius, the Palestinians could declare a state tomorrow based there and declare the West Bank occupied territory.

That's absolutely the last thing they want to do, though. If they were to do it they would be faced with two very bad choices:

1) Claim all of Israel and expose their deception to the world.

2) Don't claim Israel and effectively give up their intent to conquer it.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

So long as Israel keeps Palestinians from having either independence or equal Israeli citizenship, Israel has no claim to any moral high ground.

Israel and Egypt have both released all claims on Gaza. It's currently terra nullius, the Palestinians could declare a state tomorrow based there and declare the West Bank occupied territory.

That's absolutely the last thing they want to do, though. If they were to do it they would be faced with two very bad choices:

1) Claim all of Israel and expose their deception to the world.

2) Don't claim Israel and effectively give up their intent to conquer it.

Why can't Israel push the issue? Free the west bank, stop controlling all palestinian resources, recognize Palestine as an independent nation, and then demand it behave as one. If you want to really push the issue and keep power in Israel's hands, then negotiate with the new nation of Palestine sharply for resources (most of which Israel now provides). Maybe Palestine will end up making deals with the other nations in the area and grow as a nation away from the yoke of Israel, or maybe Israel and Palestine will become friendlier.

But my point is the way you have it now is oppression no matter how you look at it, so long as Israel neither frees nor embraces the palestinians, keeping them in eternal limbo.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

So long as Israel keeps Palestinians from having either independence or equal Israeli citizenship, Israel has no claim to any moral high ground.

Israel and Egypt have both released all claims on Gaza. It's currently terra nullius, the Palestinians could declare a state tomorrow based there and declare the West Bank occupied territory.

That's absolutely the last thing they want to do, though. If they were to do it they would be faced with two very bad choices:

1) Claim all of Israel and expose their deception to the world.

2) Don't claim Israel and effectively give up their intent to conquer it.

Why can't Israel push the issue? Free the west bank, stop controlling all palestinian resources, recognize Palestine as an independent nation, and then demand it behave as one. If you want to really push the issue and keep power in Israel's hands, then negotiate with the new nation of Palestine sharply for resources (most of which Israel now provides). Maybe Palestine will end up making deals with the other nations in the area and grow as a nation away from the yoke of Israel, or maybe Israel and Palestine will become friendlier.

But my point is the way you have it now is oppression no matter how you look at it, so long as Israel neither frees nor embraces the palestinians, keeping them in eternal limbo.

The cost to do this would be well above Israel's annual budget and all it would do is make Israel less safe. The purpose of their control is to keep the weapons out. Do it your way and the West Bank would be bristling with rockets. Next time Hezbollah felt frisky they would be raining down on the major cities and you would pretend to be shocked. And you would be horrified at the civilian casualties when Israel plastered the places they were coming from.

 

[Arctish]

So long as Israel keeps Palestinians from having either independence or equal Israeli citizenship, Israel has no claim to any moral high ground.

Palestinians could have their own state in 1948. They refused because they wanted the whole enchilada falafel.

IOW, they wanted to stay in their homes, retain their property, and participate in their government - a government they intended to protect, serve, and promote their general welfare. I'm pretty sure I know why Loren thinks that's utterly unreasonable but I'm still not sure why you do.

Palestinians could have had their own state between 1948 and 1967 but Egypt and Jordan would not let them.

They wanted to have their own state in the place they lived, not halfway across the frigging desert in a foreign land. Zionists would not let them form a state in their homeland. Zionists would not let them remain in their homes and communities. Zionists wanted them gone and had been brainstorming ways to force them out for decades.

Zionists did not want Muslim, Druze, and Christian Palestinians to be citizens in Israel, and they wanted Israel to encompass all of Palestine. The only Palestinians the Europeans would accept in their brand new colony-turned-nation were the Jewish ones.

Palestinians could have had their own state in 2000 after Camp David negotiations, but Yasser Arafat (the least deserving Nobel Peace Prize recipient ever) decided to start the Second Intifada instead.

Horseshit.

The Palestinians could have had their own state under the Oslo Accords which is why a Zionist killed the Prime Minister who had agreed to them. His successor did not hold with the Accords. He tried to replace them with something else, something that offered far less than a Palestinian State so the crazies on the Israeli right wouldn't be gunning for him too.

Also, Arafat didn't start the Second Intifada. He tried to keep a lid on things while he was drumming up European support for getting the Oslo Accords back on track. But then Baruch Goldstein murdered worshippers at prayer and Israel's response was tepid at best, just like Israel's response to the assassination of a Prime Minister by a Zionist settler. The uprising started well after the Camp David talks failed, and Arafat wasn't calling for one, not that that ever stopped an Israeli apologist from mangling the history.

I once offered to discuss the Oslo Accords and the Camp David talks with Loren. The thread died when he refused to actually read the Accords or consider reliably sourced information regarding Barak's offer and Arafat's response. I'm willing to discuss that period in Israel's history with you but only if you're willing to deal with the facts.

Palestinians got unilateral disengagement from Gaza in 2005, but instead of building on this toward peace, they launched hundreds of rockets instead and elected Hamas (which has destuction of Israel as its raison d'etre).

Yes, we all know the Israelis pulled their settlers out so when they sealed off Gaza they wouldn't have Jews trapped inside the Gaza Ghetto alongside the Palestinians. But have you asked yourself, what gave Israel the right to build those walls on land that isn't Israel? What gave them the right to imprison a civilian population not their own? If you have, what was your answer?

Blaming Israel is ridiculous.

Blaming Israel for things Zionists did before Israel existed is ridiculous. But judging Israel by its policies is pretty normal. We do it all the time when we talk about various nations and international affairs. Israel doesn't get a pass just because it's dear to your heart.

 

[Arctish]

So long as Israel keeps Palestinians from having either independence or equal Israeli citizenship, Israel has no claim to any moral high ground.

Israel and Egypt have both released all claims on Gaza. It's currently terra nullius, the Palestinians could declare a state tomorrow based there and declare the West Bank occupied territory.

That's absolutely the last thing they want to do, though. If they were to do it they would be faced with two very bad choices:

1) Claim all of Israel and expose their deception to the world.

2) Don't claim Israel and effectively give up their intent to conquer it.

Palestinian Declaration of Independence:

"The Palestinian Declaration of Independence is a statement written by the Palestinian poet Mahmoud Darwish and proclaimed by Yasser Arafat on 15 November 1988 (5 Rabi' al-Thani 1409). It had previously[1] been adopted by the Palestinian National Council, the legislative body of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), by a vote of 253 in favour 46 against and 10 abstentions. It was read at the closing session of the 19th Palestinian National Council to a standing ovation.[2] Upon completing the reading of the declaration, Arafat, as Chairman of the Palestine Liberation Organization assumed the title of "President of Palestine."[3] In April 1989, the PLO Central Council elected Yasser Arafat the first President of the State of Palestine."

 

[Derec]

Zionists did not want Muslim, Druze, and Christian Palestinians to be citizens in Israel, and they wanted Israel to encompass all of Palestine. The only Palestinians the Europeans would accept in their brand new colony-turned-nation were the Jewish ones.

Bullshit. There are plenty Israeli Arabs who are citizens of Israel. How many Jews live in Gaza?

Horseshit.

Nope.

The Palestinians could have had their own state under the Oslo Accords which is why a Zionist killed the Prime Minister who had agreed to them. His successor did not hold with the Accords. He tried to replace them with something else, something that offered far less than a Palestinian State so the crazies on the Israeli right wouldn't be gunning for him too.

Rabin was assassinated in 1995. The Camp David Summit, where Ehud Barak offered Arafat a generous peace settlement, was in 2000, 5 years later.

Also, Arafat didn't start the Second Intifada.

The hell he didn't!

Now there is an additional source: Arafat’s widow, Suha. In an interview in December on Dubai TV she said this:
Yasser Arafat had made a decision to launch the Intifada. Immediately after the failure of the Camp David [negotiations], I met him in Paris upon his return, in July 2001 [sic]. Camp David has failed, and he said to me: “You should remain in Paris.” I asked him why, and he said: “Because I am going to start an Intifada. They want me to betray the Palestinian cause. They want me to give up on our principles, and I will not do so. I do not want Zahwa’s friends in the future to say that Yasser Arafat abandoned the Palestinian cause and principles. I might be martyred, but I shall bequeath our historical heritage to Zahwa [Arafat’s daughter] and to the children of Palestine.

Arafat and the Second Intifada

He tried to keep a lid on things while he was drumming up European support for getting the Oslo Accords back on track.

Your history is all over the place. Oslo Accords were in 1993.

But then Baruch Goldstein murdered worshippers at prayer and Israel's response was tepid at best,

That was in 1994, long before the 2nd Intifada. And why do you say the response was "tepid at best"? The guy was already dead, it's not like they could try him. And at least Israel did not pay reward to his family nor are streets and youth centers named after him like the PA does with the much more numerous and deadly Palestinian terrorists. Imagine if Baruch Goldstein was venerated in Israel like for example Dalal Mughrabi, the orchestrator of the Coastal Road Massacre, is venerated in "Palestine".

The uprising started well after the Camp David talks failed, and Arafat wasn't calling for one, not that that ever stopped an Israeli apologist from mangling the history.

A Hamas leader and Arafat's widow are now "Israeli apologists"? Because they both admit that it was Arafat who started the 2nd Intifada.

I once offered to discuss the Oslo Accords and the Camp David talks with Loren. The thread died when he refused to actually read the Accords or consider reliably sourced information regarding Barak's offer and Arafat's response. I'm willing to discuss that period in Israel's history with you but only if you're willing to deal with the facts.

Since you can't even keep the timeline straight, I'll pass. Also because I do not have time to keep up with threads as it is.

Yes, we all know the Israelis pulled their settlers out so when they sealed off Gaza they wouldn't have Jews trapped inside the Gaza Ghetto alongside the Palestinians.

No, we do not know that. The blockade did not start until the Palestinian acts of aggression.

But have you asked yourself, what gave Israel the right to build those walls on land that isn't Israel? What gave them the right to imprison a civilian population not their own? If you have, what was your answer?

What walls? The Gaza border fence? A country has a right to secure their borders. Note that Gaza also has a border with Egypt.

Blaming Israel for things Zionists did before Israel existed is ridiculous. But judging Israel by its policies is pretty normal. We do it all the time when we talk about various nations and international affairs. Israel doesn't get a pass just because it's dear to your heart.

Israel should not be blamed for defending herself when attacked by organizations and people who want her destroyed.

 

[Arctish]

Bullshit. There are plenty Israeli Arabs who are citizens of Israel.

Not bullshit. The work of the Transfer Committee of the Jewish Agency was to figure out ways to remove the Christians and Muslims from the places Zionists wanted to make part of their planned Jewish State. They realized very early on that there was no way they could buy out the Palestinians so they planned for forcible expulsions of Palestinians from key areas. The expulsions continued into the 1950s. In the end the Zionist founders couldn't expel all the non-Jews but it wasn't from lack of trying.

I've posted links to all of this before. If you have any interest in the actual history of the establishment of the State of Israel, and learning how a minority (approx. 30% of the population, 2/3 of which were recent immigrants) managed to seize control of more that 50% of Palestine with the stated intention of creating a State in which the majority of the resident population was not welcome and would not be made citizens, then I can provide them again.

ETA: in the interests of keeping this manageable, I think we should concentrate on the events leading up to the establishment of the State of Israel before moving onto the 1948-1967 period, then onto the period that includes the Oslo Accords and the Camp David negotiations. We should also move this discussion to a separate thread and let this one get back onto the topic of Netanyahu's indictment. Want to give it a go?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

They wanted to have their own state in the place they lived, not halfway across the frigging desert in a foreign land. Zionists would not let them form a state in their homeland. Zionists would not let them remain in their homes and communities. Zionists wanted them gone and had been brainstorming ways to force them out for decades.

Interesting--Egypt and Jordan are Zionist countries??

Also, Arafat didn't start the Second Intifada. He tried to keep a lid on things while he was drumming up European support for getting the Oslo Accords back on track. But then Baruch Goldstein murdered worshippers at prayer and Israel's response was tepid at best, just like Israel's response to the assassination of a Prime Minister by a Zionist settler. The uprising started well after the Camp David talks failed, and Arafat wasn't calling for one, not that that ever stopped an Israeli apologist from mangling the history.

You've fallen for their crap hook, line and sinker.

I once offered to discuss the Oslo Accords and the Camp David talks with Loren. The thread died when he refused to actually read the Accords or consider reliably sourced information regarding Barak's offer and Arafat's response. I'm willing to discuss that period in Israel's history with you but only if you're willing to deal with the facts.

No--I disagreed with your interpretations of what happened.

Yes, we all know the Israelis pulled their settlers out so when they sealed off Gaza they wouldn't have Jews trapped inside the Gaza Ghetto alongside the Palestinians. But have you asked yourself, what gave Israel the right to build those walls on land that isn't Israel? What gave them the right to imprison a civilian population not their own? If you have, what was your answer?

There is a state of war, started by Hamas. Israel is free to do pretty much what it wants there. Legally, they could go far beyond what they actually do.

They built a wall, it was attacked. They declared a buffer zone along with it. Don't like that, don't make it necessary!

Hamas is rather like the kid that runs up to a big guy and punches him and then runs and hides behind mommy's skirts because the big guy reacted. Very much like the kids next door when I was growing up--no matter what wrong they did their parents would always take their side if they didn't see the wrong. They even called the police on me once--the cop that came out had already basically figured out I had done nothing wrong before he even came to talk to us. He just came over to confirm that his read on the situation was right. (Basic situation--I was being attacked with a belt. I snatched it away and threw it where it would take a ladder to retrieve. In the process an expensive buckle went missing. Too bad.) The cop could easily figure out what happened, why couldn't the parents? (Note: Last I knew those kids had spent most of their adult life in the greybar hotel.)

- - - Updated - - -

So long as Israel keeps Palestinians from having either independence or equal Israeli citizenship, Israel has no claim to any moral high ground.

Israel and Egypt have both released all claims on Gaza. It's currently terra nullius, the Palestinians could declare a state tomorrow based there and declare the West Bank occupied territory.

That's absolutely the last thing they want to do, though. If they were to do it they would be faced with two very bad choices:

1) Claim all of Israel and expose their deception to the world.

2) Don't claim Israel and effectively give up their intent to conquer it.

Palestinian Declaration of Independence:

"The Palestinian Declaration of Independence is a statement written by the Palestinian poet Mahmoud Darwish and proclaimed by Yasser Arafat on 15 November 1988 (5 Rabi' al-Thani 1409). It had previously[1] been adopted by the Palestinian National Council, the legislative body of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), by a vote of 253 in favour 46 against and 10 abstentions. It was read at the closing session of the 19th Palestinian National Council to a standing ovation.[2] Upon completing the reading of the declaration, Arafat, as Chairman of the Palestine Liberation Organization assumed the title of "President of Palestine."[3] In April 1989, the PLO Central Council elected Yasser Arafat the first President of the State of Palestine."

You keep providing irrelevancies.

Why haven't they created a state? They have had available some terra nullius for more than a decade.

 

[Sarpedon]

Back on topic, in this thread which is about Prime Minister Netanyahu's corruption cases, and perhaps israeli political corruption in general, if you like, NOT another Israel/Palestine thread, there's been dramatic news: A (former?) close friend of Netanyahu's has agreed to be a state witness against the Prime Minister, in case 4000. To those who are keeping track, case 4000 is a different investigation than the two that the police recommended indictments for.

This is important for several reasons. First, this fellow, Shlomo Filber, was a high placed director in the Communications Ministry, which Netanyahu oversaw himself instead of appointing a minister. More and more, it appears he did this to use the ministry for his own purposes, and Filber could say a lot about this. Second, Filber had previously publicaly asserted he'd never cooperate with the police (Bibi's pals have used the 'fake news' refrain), yet now he is. This means he thinks Bibi can no longer protect him or stop the police. If one of his friends is doing that, more must be thinking about it.

The police investigations and indictments might bring Bibi down slow, but the loss of confidence in him might bring things to a head more quickly. Both sides of the israeli press seems to think he's a goner. They've been wrong about him before, but this seems crippling.