eeeeeeeeergh

1 minute ago, Ilunga said:

 

Like really brother ? 

 

Are you serious ? 

 

You do realise that the people who resided for hundreds of years in what is now known as Palestine/ Israel  were peasants of the Ottoman Empire. 

 

Sigh.

 

tbh im reading EPs posts like hes asking legit questions and hes hearing our points

which makes him 1/1000 people who are openminded enough to have this dialogue and actually listen

notice nobody else who's approaching this from the israeli perspective is coming with an open mind

its cathartic for these words to actually be heard and considered, it gives me hope

I appreciate you for your questions and discussions @Elias Pettersson I apologize if Im getting emotional

Just now, Elias Pettersson said:

I’ve read lots of books. I know the difference. The State of Israel shouldn’t even exist according to you. 
 

But from what I remember in reading books the British gave up their land to Israel. So a state was formed. Are you saying this never happened?  Why do you think the Israelis don’t deserve their own state?  Even the other posters agree that a two state nation is the only solution. You seem to be the only with a different opinion on that. Why is that? 

Palestine wasn't British land. It was a League of Nations mandate. 

Here is the League of Nations definition of what they intended by mandate:

"administrative advice and assistance by a Mandatory until such time as they are able to stand alone"

So given that this was the legal status of the land - do you think that it was within Britain's legal right to allow a foreign population to come in and conquer the land by method of ethnic cleansing from villages and towns?

Just now, Elias Pettersson said:

Can you give me a date on when those 750,000 people actually owned their homes and the land sitting on it?  Like their names were on the title certificate. 

Sorry I dont think legal paperwork had anything to do with this. This was the early 20th century, in a place in the world where there were villages and towns where most people built their homes with their own bare hands and operated communal farms. I dont know this for a fact, but im pretty sure that there was no functional land titles office or registry in greater Palestine at the time.

I know youre looking for a date that these people "owned" the homes, and that date would be up until 1948. 

What we do know for sure is that these villages and towns HAD people who lived in homes that they lived in, and european/north american settlers came in and burned those villages to the ground, forcing them to leave.

If you'd like a list of those villages, here you go:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_towns_and_villages_depopulated_during_the_1947–1949_Palestine_war

Here's one example - Jaffa:

"

On 25 April 1948, the Irgun launched an offensive on Jaffa. This began with a mortar bombardment which went on for three days during which twenty tons of high explosive were fired into the town.^[61][62] On 27 April the British Government, fearing a repetition of the mass exodus from Haifa the week before, ordered the British Army to confront the Irgun and their offensive ended. Simultaneously the Haganah had launched Operation Hametz, which overran the villages east of Jaffa and cut the town off from the interior.^[63]
 

The fall of Haifa a few days earlier, and fear of another massacre similar to Irgun's Deir Yassin massacre, caused panic across the Arabs of Jaffa, leading most of them to flee.^[64] The population of Jaffa on the eve of the attack was between 50,000 and 60,000, with some 20,000 people having already left the town.^[61] By 30 April, there were 15,000–25,000 remaining.^[63][65] In the following days a further 10,000–20,000 people fled by sea. When the Haganah took control of the town on 14 May around 4,000 people were left.^[66] The town and harbour's warehouses were extensively looted.^[67][68]"

1 minute ago, Elias Pettersson said:

If they owned their homes yes. Were they all on title to the property or were they just living there?

What if instead of going through the courts, the invaders simply razed 530 villages to the ground or poisoned the village well water between the years of 1947 and 1949, forcing 750000 people to flee their homes, then in 1950, because these people were "absent", Israels new court system said that those homes were now Israeli property?

Because this is exactly what happened.

4 minutes ago, Guntrix said:

Genuinely gobmsacked some people are siding with Israel. I urge fellow posters to pick up a book and read about what's been happening to the Palestinian people for the past 70 years. If you're going to form an opinion about a conflict as complicated as Palestine-Israel, you can't make up your mind based on what's occurred over the weekend.

 

And no, Israel has no legitimate argument to justify its right to exist. It's stolen Palestinian land. What's crazy is that this is considered an extreme opinion nowadays.

Theres two groups of people who side with Israel:

1. People who believe that evicting people from their homes was justified b/c the torah made them a religious promise

2. People who just woke up and discovered this conflict this past weekend with absolutely zero understanding of why 2 million+ Palestinians are living in exile

5 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

We were referring to this…

 

https://www.hrw.org/news/2023/08/28/west-bank-spike-israeli-killings-palestinian-children

 

In the other cases investigated, the security forces killed boys after they had joined other youths confronting Israeli forces with stones, Molotov cocktails, or fireworks.

If a child is throwing a Molotov cocktail you can’t blame the soldier

but all too often it’s been children throwing stones, or just sitting in their house, or lying in a hospital bed- and the house, or school, or hospital gets vaporized in an Israeli air strike because they claim a Hamas operative was inside.
 

up until 2002, it was officially IDF policy to use Palestinians as human shields (can look this up, Israel doesn’t deny this).
 

Israel puts on the thinnest possible veneer of “care” for civilian lives, just enough to give its Ally countries political cover. But not enough to actually protect civilians from its wrath.
 

Israel uses the same justification for vaporizing a school, mosque, or hospital, as the US did when Napalming villages. “There are some viet cong there living among them”  

2 minutes ago, Darius said:

 

Several posters in here want to zero in on the historical context of this issue - which is fine. But you should also include that this happened all over the Mediterranean (and other parts of the world) during that era.   Take modern day Turkey as an example. The country is basically a product of ethnic cleansing, forced population exchanges, and treaties drawn by third parties which arbitrarily drew boundaries depending on who the victor was in various conflicts. The whole coast (starting from the black sea) was populated by Christian Greek speakers, the eastern third of the country was heavily populated by Armenians and Kurds.  Should all the land be handed back?  These people lived there for centuries and were displaced by populations that were not even in the region till relatively recently.    Not to pick on Turkey , you can look at Greece too.  Large slavic population in the north, muslims in places like Crete, and Today's capital Athens was largely Albanian (or Arvanite).  These populations were forcibly expelled to create relatively homogenous populations.    We can go into the Balkans too - its a quagmire of wars, displaced populations, and nation building.  There were large Jewish populations living everywhere from North Africa to Baghdad that were forcibly displaced - populations that lived in these lands for centuries...kicked out.  Many of them ended up in what is Israel.  Should we look at the Kurds? their land split between multiple countries who dont treat them very nicely.  Yeah, context.

Israel has created the conditions for extremists to flourish - I agree.  They have also violated many Security council resolutions.  So how do we solve the problem going forward because neither population is going anywhere. Its not helpful trying to delegitimize one population by stating they are not original inhabitants -if thats the case then we should reverse multiple international boundaries and or hand a bunch of land back all over the region including land all over the Arab world that was populated by Jews who were forced out. 

 

 

 

 

the Jewish people are hands down the most persecuted group in history, we agree completely. 
 

no group had endured atrocities like they have. 
 

to be extremely clear: I have NO objection to Jewish people having a state. In fact I think it’s a pretty fucking good considering how the world has treated them for the past 2000 years. 
 

what I object to is stealing other peoples homes and then enforcing apartheid on the prisoners and refugees that they created when they conquered other peoples land. 
 

21 minutes ago, Junkyard Dog said:

 

What do you think of this proposal.

 

The PLO (now known as Fatah) would take this in a heartbeat, Netanyahu has made it clear, even when there were no rocket attacks that settlement activity would continue, so Israel’s not going for that deal. 
 

you have to remember too that the current government of Israel got angry at any countries that considered recognizing Palestine as a state, the sheer fucking irony

https://amp.france24.com/en/20160201-israels-netanyahu-slams-france-threat-recognise-palestine

and condemned the UN for recognizing Palestine https://amp.theguardian.com/world/2012/nov/29/united-nations-vote-palestine-state

1 minute ago, Alflives said:

Group of HAMAS attacking a tank. They are all bunched together with some shooting rockets, some throwing grenades, some throw Molotov cocktails, and some throwing rocks. 
Regardless what does this have to do with HAMAS murdering innocent women and children this weekend? 

Hes talking about this, and other events like it:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faris_Odeh

10 minutes ago, RomanPer said:

 

Have you ever been in a tank that gets hit by a Molotov cocktail? I have a friend who had 60% body burns from the Molotov cocktail hitting his tank. It’s a little different from being a keyboard warrior.

Roman theres a difference between a stone and a molotov cocktail

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faris_Odeh

shot in the neck throwing a STONE not a molotov cocktail at a tank

14 years old

5 minutes ago, 24K said:

I am blaming the British. Of course Israel have nothing to do with the original sin. Everything after the six day war, they have a heavy hand in it. 

 

We will have ti see about the rest but it is definitely a very real outcome. 

I mean.. personally I blame the original settlers too. I don't blame their kids who were born in Israel though - they didnt choose where they were born. 

The only reason I even believe in a 2 state solution is because I don't think you can punish the children of the original sinners. It would be wrong to displace the people who were born in Israel since its inception. 

13 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

Where does it say in those writings that the Palestinians should receive more than 38% of the land?  

Great question - 

Letter on July 14, Hussein to Mcmahon:

"England to acknowledge the independence of the Arab countries, bounded on the North by Mersina and Adana up to 37 degrees of latitude, on which degree fall Birijik, Urfa, Mardin, Midiat, Jerizat (Ibn `Umar), Amadia, up to the border of Persia; on the east by the borders of Persia up to the Gulf of Basra; on the South by the Indian Ocean, with the exception of the position of Aden to remain as it is; on the west by the Red Sea, the Mediterranean Sea up to Mersina."

Oct 24, Mcmahon to Hussein:

" As for those regions lying within those frontiers wherein Great Britain is free to act without detriment to the interests of her ally, France... Great Britain is prepared to recognise and support the independence of the Arabs in all the regions within the limits demanded by the Sherif of Mecca."

I would also like the opportunity to explain the chronology here, because I think this is the root of the misunderstanding, and why people think "settler colonialism" is just rhetoric rather than a factual basis for what occured.

First of all - its important to acknowledge that in 1915, there was no state of "Israel" nor or was there a country known as "Palestine".

What there was was multiple towns and cities that made up the geographic region that we now know as Israel and Palestine with the following demographic makeup:

Jewish: 90,000

Non-Jewish (mix of Muslim and Christian): 600,000

Jewish people in the territories known as Israel/Palestine today amounted to around 12-13%. 

1917: Balfour declaration, and the British supports the mass migration of Jewish people in Europe and North America to "Palestine" (at this point this is what the entire territory was called). 

Between 1915 and 1947, over 500,000 Jewish people migrate from Europe and North America to "Palestine". To make room for those Jewish people, the native population was evicted from their homes and chased out of the towns they lived in. Its important to note that in 1936, in the middle of all of this, the native population TRIED to fight back and protest this displacement - they revolted against the British (the migration was sanctioned by Britain and Britain had declared Palestine its mandate), and got crushed. 

In this time period, Jewish terrorist organizations, including Irgun, use violence including bombing arab villages and towns to encourage the still majority Arab population to flee key areas including Jerusalem. See Deir Yassin Massacre as an example. Jewish terrorist organizations also target the British, who at this point are growing concerned about just how many european and north american jewish people are colonizing Palestine, and try to limit the migration numbers. The most notable event here is the bombing of the King David Hotel by Irgun. 

Now after ALL of this - the UN in 1947 recommends a partition plan, an Arab state and a separate Jewish state, meaning that people who were forced to leave their homes would never be able to return. In 1948, the still minority Jewish population declares an Independent jewish state.

Over the span of 30 years, the native Palestinian population was effectively removed from their homes, and conquered by military force. 

Fast forward to today: the 2 million people in Gaza are the children and grandchildren of the people cleansed from their towns to make way for European and North American Jewish migrants. Israel removed its illegal settlements from Gaza, but did put up walls and assumed complete control over the import of goods into Gaza, including food, water, medical supplies, building materials, etc. These people are effectively prisoners, with no ability to leave. 

What these people want - is to go home to the towns they came from. Israel cannot let that happen, because if they do, that means welcoming back so many Arabs that Israel is no longer majority Jewish. 

There is literally no debate - this WAS settler colonialism. Anyone who says otherwise is lying or ignorant. The territory now known as Israel was conquered by European and North American born people between the 1920s and 1930s, exercising their "birthright" to land that was promised to them by God. They needed to remove the local native population which they did.

What we are dealing with today in Gaza and the West Bank IS that native population that was removed.

THAT is where we need to start, if you're truly going to understand why terrorism exists in Palestine. 

19 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

 

I guess they should have gotten it in writing then.  Verbal promises don't really hold up in court...

Here you go, in writing

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/McMahon–Hussein_Correspondence#:~:text=The McMahon–Hussein Correspondence is,Revolt against the Ottoman Empire.

35 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

 

Not sure "cleaning" is the right word there.  If you take land based on winning a war it's not really ethnic cleaning.  I mean did the Europeans "cleanse" North America?  

 

If anything, it is the Muslims who wanted to "cleanse" the Jews from the Middle East considering the only place the Jews have in the entire Middle East is a tiny spot by the sea.  The Jews are surrounded by Muslims all over the Middle East.

 

Also, alot of the Jews that moved to Israel from Europe were holocaust survivors and also Jews that were kicked out of other Arab nations.  They weren't just "settlers" or "colonialists".  

 

Also, the Jews did not steal the Palestinians land.  They conquered it through war like everybody else.  This is a very important distinction that you are not grasping.  The British offered the Palestinians 38% of the land that they owned, they were the Landlords.  They refused and started a war with the Jews to obtain more than 38%.  They lost that war and ultimately got much less than 38%.  They should have taken the original offer...

so cleansing is the perfect word to describe the following:

- mass migrating to a land you have no citizenship or residence in 

- then once you’re there, massacring civilians to force them to flee their homes 

sorry I don’t consider that “war”. 
 

It doesn’t make the slightest bit of moral difference that this series of events was sanctioned by the British. 
 

the children of those people are the ones living in refugee camps in gaza, and who are losing what remaining homes they have left to Israeli settlement building in the West Bank 

if someone chases you out of your village with guns and bombs 

then offers you 38% of it 5 years later

i don’t expect you to be okay with that offer

34 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

 

Because some people have been saying that the Jews never owned the land and the Palestinians did.  The Jews were around long before the Palestinians.  In any event, the Landlord of the property was changed over many times and in 1948 the new Landlord offered the Palestinians a deal and they refused.  They fought to get more land and lost.  Case closed...

The big hole in this argument? The settlers/colonialists who cleansed the land of the now palestinian refugees to make way for the state of Israel are Europeans and North Americans. Sharing religious identity with a completely different group of people who lived in the land 2000 years ago does NOT make it okay to kick people out of their homes and steal their land.

If you accept the logic behind the argument - I, as a Muslim, am entitled to live in Saudi arabia because we share the same religion, even though I nor my parents or grandparents ever lived there. 

1 minute ago, Huggy Bear said:

Could just be grasping desperately to preserve my sanity…

 

 

one way or another i think we do bring in another RD

management prob wanted to see if soucy or cole could slide over, its pretty clear tocchet wants a real RD

and management knows mcward on the 1st pair isnt getting us into the playoffs

5 minutes ago, aGENT said:

 

I largely like Garland and think he can be a decent complementary top 6 guy on the right (not Canucks) roster. One with more size and grit that he would complement.

 

That said, the added "excitement" Garland has to his game kind of reminds me of Ferraro's comment on Yakupov being "chased by bees". The fast cuts and twirls etc look like he's making things happen/working hard...but do they accomplish much...?

Let it be done. 

10 minutes ago, Huggy Bear said:

I see it differently…
 

This could be a sign that other teams are interested, but want to talk to him/his agent first to get more information.

 

Maybe ask his take on what role/line he’s best suited for, and see if he’d buy into their team and system before taking him on for 3 years…

i like it - an optimistic take.

Hope youre right 

25 minutes ago, Rip The Mesh said:

Well one thing; Our average height will go up. I remember his interview before he got to Van. from his home; He said I'm not actually five foot eight, more like five six..

the moment we traded OEL, he became a #1 defenseman

the moment we trade garland, hes going to grow 6 inches

book it

I think this basically rules out the garland-for-peeke hope

1 minute ago, Ilunga said:

 

Respectfully and I agree with much of what you state, it's not as simple as that.

I posted the comments of Ex Isreali PM's, ex head of Mossad, Isreali human rights organisation B'tselem amongst other prominent Isrealis that all state Isreal is practicing arpartheid.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/sep/06/israel-imposing-apartheid-on-palestinians-says-former-mossad-chief

 

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/feb/05/amnesty-israel-apartheid-israeli-politicians-agree

 

This is ignoring the UN and amnesty international amongst others stating the same thing.

 

The state of Israel has a right to exist. 

I am fully aware of the history of this conflict from the moment of the Balfour declaration to the current day.

There are extremists on both sides that are exacerbating this conflict.

There is no way anyone can condone what has happened in the last couple of days.

Hopefully we won't have to say this in a few days time when the Isrealis fully retaliate however I fear for the worst. 

I agree that the state of Israel has a right to exist, I don't dispute that.

I don't condone the massacre of civilians, no matter the context, ever. 

What I'm trying to say is that most people woke up a few days ago, bewildered, never having had any reason or desire to follow the conflict. As a result, they have no clue why the Palestinian people are so angry. They've been sold the notion that this terrorist attack was a random outburst of violence.

I've seen tons of comments like Heffys all over social media (carpet bombing all of Gaza and killing as many civilians as necessary to eradicate Hamas), so I'm trying to show them just how deep and violent the atrocities committed against the Palestinian people have been. My hope is that people will research this and realize that the root cause of this terrorism, as usually is the case of ALL terrorism (see the IRA, Al Shabab, Al Qaeda, etc.) is massive state violence either against its own population or another population. So hopefully they stand up and call for the end of those atrocities, and the resolution of the Palestinians grievances.