The refugees of Yarmouk deserve better than silence

[oberliner]

Palestinian refugees are being starved, bombed and gunned down like animals. “If you want to feed your children, you need to take your funeral shroud with you,” one told Israeli news website Ynet. “There are snipers on every street, you are not safe anywhere.” This isn’t happening, however, in southern Lebanon, or even Gaza. And these particular Palestinians aren’t being killed or maimed by Israeli bombs and bullets. This is Yarmouk, a refugee camp on the edge of Damascus, just a few miles from the palace of Bashar al-Assad. Since 1 April, the camp has been overrun by Islamic State militants, who have begun a reign of terror: detentions, shootings, beheadings and the rest. Hundreds of refugees are believed to have been killed in what Ban Ki-moon has called the “deepest circle of hell”.

But this isn’t just about the depravity of Isis. The Palestinians of Yarmouk have been bombarded and besieged by Assad’s security forces since 2012. Water and electricity were cut off long ago, and of the 160,000 Palestinian refugees who once lived in the camp only 18,000 now remain. The Syrian regime has, according to Amnesty International, been “committing war crimes by using starvation of civilians as a weapon”, forcing residents to “resort to eating cats and dogs”. Even as the throat-slitters took control, Assad’s pilots were continuing to drop barrel bombs on the refugees. “The sky of Yarmouk has barrel bombs instead of stars,” said Abdallah al-Khateeb, a political activist living inside the camp.

It is difficult to disagree with the verdict of the Palestinian League for Human Rights that the Palestinians of Syria are “the most untold story in the Syrian conflict”. There are 12 official Palestinian refugee camps in Syria, housing more than half a million people. Ninety per cent, estimates the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (Unrwa), are in continuous need of humanitarian aid. In Yarmouk, throughout 2014, residents were forced to live on around 400 calories of food aid a day – fewer than a fifth of the UN’s recommended daily amount of 2,100 calories for civilians in war zones – because UNRWA aid workers had only limited access to the camp. Today, they have zero access.“To know what it is like in Yarmouk,” one of the camp’s residents is quoted as saying on the UNRWA website, “turn off your electricity, water, heating, eat once a day, live in the dark.”

Their plight should matter to us all – regardless of whether their persecutors happen to be Israelis, Syrians, Egyptians or, for that matter, fellow Palestinians (Palestinian Authority security forces, after all, have been shooting and beating unarmed Palestinian protesters for several years now).

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/apr/12/refugees-yarmouk-israel-palestinians-arab-isis

[guillaumeb]

1. so do the dead from Deir Yassin

too bad the Palestinians do not have a "right of return" to return to the homes they were driven from starting in 1946.

I suppose distance from Palestine makes them more deserving of pity?

[oberliner]

3. Amen

One can only hope there will come a day when massacres like this are no longer tolerated.

[shira]

11. How about no deflections & respond to "why the silence"? n/t

[guillaumeb]

30. see my reply to your other post

[Scootaloo]

2. I think I noted before...

With the exception of Russia, the world powers want Syria to fall into carnage and chaos. "The West" prefers Daesh to Assad, to put it bluntly. There will be no meaningful opposition to Daesh, regardless of what they do, so long as they are also trying to topple the Syrian government.

Russia is of course more than a little busy trying to annex Ukraine without looking like it's annexing Ukraine and is doing a poor job of it.

The Arab world is similarly invested in this agenda, as is apparently Pakistan now. The only "local" powers that seem remotely helpful are Iran and Lebanese Hezbollah. And neither of them are proving very helpful at all.

So. Who does this leave?

There is only one nation on earth that can rescind these people's status as refugees. And to hear some peopel tell it, this same state is a shining beacon of humanitarianism, a safe refuge, sacrosanct and beyond question in its benevolence.

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

4. Oh, I have heard of that fabled nation. "A land without a people for a people without a conscience

...or something to that effect.

[Scootaloo]

5. No, that's Utah n/t

[oberliner]

7. ISIS is killing people in numerous Arab countries

Were we living in "a world without Zionism" where Israel did not exist, I doubt the Palestinians would be immune from the brutality of ISIS.

[Scootaloo]

18. Alternate history is a tough genre to write, oberliner.

One claim sometimes seen from racists is the canard, "We did them a favor by nslaving htm! Just look at Africa! They ought to be grateful!" Well, beyond the point that slavery is never beneficial to a slave, there's the historical fact that the triangle trade basically destroyed entire nations in West and Central Africa and destabilized more further in the continent, as trade liens were broken, refugees fled, and raids went further and further afield. THis of course made frican nations easy pickignsfor European nations, and we enter the extractive and abusive practices of the colonial period, which lead to where Africa is today.

We not only did the slaves no favors with slavery, but we also left much of Africa blasted and ruined, setting up the modern crises and troubles that roil around the continent regularly.

Similarly, we can not simply siphon Zionism out of the middle east and assume that Daesh would still be a thing. it likely would not. it's not that Zionism "created" Daesh, any more than slavery "created" the Congolese civil war. it's that it's a big impact on the trajectory of history that leads where we are today.

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

35. Nicely put.

[guillaumeb]

8. excellent update on the original nonsense

wish I had said that. But the original lie WAS necessary to show that the Jews were not really taking something away from anyone. It was just a large parcel of vacant, or at least underused, land. Similar to US historical myth actually.

[shira]

70. The Jews of Israel are this people w/o a conscience? n/t

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

76. "There will never be a Palestinian state..."

- Some corrupted Likrud without a conscience.

[shira]

82. Again, u believe the Jews are this people without a conscience? n/t

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

97. Well, shira, you and others are always conflating Jew with Israel. Right?

Own it. Israel vote for the right and in doing so voted for colonialism, land theft, human rights abuses and apartheid. Own it.

[shira]

102. So is that a yes or no? n/t

[oberliner]

6. "There is only one nation on earth that can rescind these people's status as refugees"

Syria, Lebanon, Jordan.

Any country where Palestinians are living can rescind their status as refugees and make them full citizens if they so choose.

Palestinian Americans are not living in refugee camps.

[guillaumeb]

9. But they cannot return to their homes.

Any Jew living anywhere in the world has a "right of return" to Israel. Even a Spanish Jew whose family has lived in Spain for hundreds of years can "return" to a land that they have never seen.

This attempt at logic is merely an excuse for the Israeli policy and practice of land theft and genocide. It works like this:
1) Israel steals Palestinian land, sometimes killing the Palestinians in the process.
2) The Palestinians flee from the violence.
3) The Palestinians are forced to live in a foreign country.
4) Israel now claims that it is a problem for the country of refuge.

What a bizarre worldview to blame the Palestinians and the countries that offer them temporary refuge for a problem of Israel's creation. A perfect definition of Israeli apology syndrome in action.

[shira]

71. Palestinian refugees can certainly return to Palestine, in the WB or Gaza...

That's part of historic Palestine, isn't it?

[guillaumeb]

109. so the choice is to return,

but only where the Israeli government approves? Sounds like an apartheid state.

Thank you for the clarity.

[shira]

113. Abbas is the one who requested the refugees go to the W.Bank & Gaza.

Unless you think Abbas was pushing for apartheid...

[guillaumeb]

117. Abbas want a Palestinian State.

But he does not speak for all Palestinians. And right of return should apply equally to Israelis and Palestinians.

But Abbas does recognize that Israel is an apartheid type state. As do more and more people, even in the west.

[shira]

118. Israel offered Abbas a Palestinian state & he refused....

And right of return should apply equally to Israelis and Palestinians.

There is no such thing.

But Abbas does recognize that Israel is an apartheid type state. As do more and more people, even in the west.

It's not apartheid. For that, look to Lebanon and their treatment of Palestinians. That's the real thing.

[guillaumeb]

120. Israel offered Abbas a Palestinian state, the parameters and

physical composition to be determined by Israel.

The idea of "right of return" is an Israeli legal construct. That it applies only to Jews typifies the apartheid intent of the law.

[shira]

126. Israel offered both Arafat and Abbas a state based on the '67 borders....

....and which met almost every demand the Palestinians have in attaining their own state in peace alongside Israel.

The idea of "right of return" is an Israeli legal construct. That it applies only to Jews typifies the apartheid intent of the law.

I'm not sure you know what real Apartheid is. Are you in any way knowledgable of and concerned about Lebanese Apartheid vs. Palestinians? That's real Apartheid. It appears you want to avoid this.

And every state sets up its own immigration laws. Here's a WIKI excerpt showing that what Israel does (Law of Return) is not racist or apartheid at all:

Supporters of the Law argue that it is consistent with the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination Article I(3) which allows for preferential treatments of some groups for purpose of immigration, provided there is no discrimination against a specific nationality.[59][60][61]

In addition, proponents of the law point out that in addition to Israel, several other countries provide immigration privileges to individuals with ethnic ties to these countries. Examples include Germany,[62] Serbia, Greece, Japan, Turkey, Ireland, Russia, Italy, Spain, Chile, Poland and Finland[61] (See Right of return and Repatriation laws.) Some supporters noted that the decision by the Venice Commission recognized the relationship between ethnic minorities and their kin-states as legitimate and even desirable, and preference in immigration and naturalization is mentioned as an example of legitimate preference.[61]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racism_in_Israel#Law_of_return_controversy

Let's see if you're consistent. Because you haven't been with respect to the definition for "genocide" or "refugee" when Israel is compared to other entities.

If you are consistent with "apartheid" you must accuse Germany, Serbia, Greece, Japan, Turkey, Ireland, Russia, Italy, Spain, Chile, Poland and Finland of racism and apartheid for doing the very same thing Israel does. You must accuse all these nations of being racist and apartheid.

Well?

[guillaumeb]

130. your response contains its own refutation.

First:
Israel offered both Arafat and Abbas a state based on the '67 borders....
...and which met almost every demand the Palestinians have in attaining their own state in peace alongside Israel.

"almost every demand" means no right of return, no return to the pre 1967 borders, and land swaps. The word almost is key here.

Second, as to the Law of Return, and from your link:
"Supporters of the Law argue that it is consistent with the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination Article I(3) which allows for preferential treatments of some groups for purpose of immigration, provided there is no discrimination against a specific nationality."

"provided there is no discrimination against a specific nationality" means there can be no discrimination against the Palestinians. Your citation makes my point as to the apartheid like nature of the law.

All the countries you cited allow immigration. Unless you can cite specific laws for each country that forbid immigration from specific ethnic or national groups I fail to see the argument.

[shira]

131. "almost..." means no right of return?

There is no such thing as a RoR. We've been over this already. It's a total fantasy engineered by Israel's enemies to destroy Israel. They boast about it all the time.

Israel's offer included land swaps. Abbas and the Arab league's Saudi Peace Plan call for land swaps. Sorry you disagree with them.

===================

As to immigration, you contend that Israel's Law of Return (preference towards Jews) is racist. You stand corrected on that.

As to immigration and refugees, did you know Israel accepted 50-80,000 in shortly after the 1948 war? Israel offered to take in 100,000 at Lausanne 1949 and this fact was part of the negotiations. If Israel was racist/apartheid, they would have never done such a thing.

[guillaumeb]

134. My opinions have no bearing on International Law.

When you write:
"There is no such thing as a RoR. We've been over this already. It's a total fantasy engineered by Israel's enemies to destroy Israel. They boast about it all the time. "

There is a Jewish RoR. It is codified in Israeli law. It is limited to those of Jewish descent, making it a prima facie discriminatory law. The discrimination is nor racist in that both groups have a common Semitic ancestry, but it is discrimination based on ethnicity. It is a foundation of the apartheid like system that is Israeli society. Sorry if the truth is painful but life is like that sometimes.

When you continue:
"Israel's offer included land swaps. Abbas and the Arab league's Saudi Peace Plan call for land swaps. Sorry you disagree with them."

International Law does not permit one country to steal land and claim that land for their own, which is what the Israeli offer is.

Finally, when you claim:
"As to immigration and refugees, did you know Israel accepted 50-80,000 in shortly after the 1948 war? Israel offered to take in 100,000 at Lausanne 1949 and this fact was part of the negotiations. If Israel was racist/apartheid, they would have never done such a thing."

An estimated 80% of Palestinians resident in Palestine prior to 1946 left the country during the violence of the Jewish, later Israeli terror campaign. All of them should have been allowed to return, and return to the many villages that Israel destroyed and depopulated in the ethnic cleansing that went on during that time.

The destruction and depopulation was intended to make of the land "a land without a people" as the saying went, so it could be filled up and resettled by "a people without a land".

[oberliner]

135. "The Jewish terror campaign" of the early 1940s?

Scary that a person can actually believe these things

Given some of the sources previously cited, though, I guess it is understandable.

But to talk about a "Jewish terror campaign" taking place prior to 1946 on this day of all days is really something else.

[guillaumeb]

137. Nakba denialism is apparently an epidemic among some here

There are plenty of links, plus a Google search is easy. If you wish to believe in a fantasy history of the founding of the Israeli State you are fee to do so, but reality does not back you up.

[Scootaloo]

15. False, as has been explained to you a multitude of times

Host nations can offer paths to citizenship in those nations. For the overwhelming most part, nations hosting Palestinian refugees have done so. Lebanon is a glaring exception - and its reasons are identical to Israels, "demographics." Even Kuwait has reinstated its citizenship gateway, after the re-opening of the Palestinian Embassy there.

Those refugees can choose to accept these offers, or not. This cannot be imposed upon them. Their nationality cannot be stripped from them and replaced with another against their will. The only way to end the status of those who do not choose citizenship with another nation, is a return to the land which they fled from. Same as any other refugee. This is the same for Palestinians in Syria as it is for Somalis in Seattle.

Syria cannot end these people's refugee status (at the moment it can't even manage its own refugees, obviously). Lebanon cannot. Iraq cannot. Sweden cannot, Australia cannot. There is one nation on earth, only one, that can bring an end to that status by allowing the refugees to return.

At any rate, Israel is currently the only option to help these people, regardless of the refugee question. So, which do you prefer, Oberliner? Israel stepping up to help these people whose lives are on the line... or doing nothing as they are destroyed?

[shira]

38. Please back that up - where u say host nations have for the most part....

....offered paths to citizenship that the Palestinians have generally turned down.

That's simply untrue according to the 1959 Arab League resolution 1547. Arab states deny citizenship "in order to preserve the Palestinian entity and Palestinian identity." They think they're doing the Palestinians a favor.



That "favor" violates Article 7 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, which calls for countries granting citizenship to children born there. So yeah, nations hosting refugees who have children are violating that convention.

[Scootaloo]

39. Each of these states have methods of becoming citizens of that state

Palestinians may engage these processes the same as any other.

Show me that Palestinians are made an exception to citizenship laws of these nations. Nation-by nation, not just a blanket, lazy "arab states" or what have you. Via official documentation if you please, not via someone from the comments section of israelycool.

[shira]

42. I asked u to back that up. Show where they have methods...

...for Palestinians in camps to become citizens.

[King_David]

43. Yes you have "explained " it many times

And every time it's been nonsense that you invented.

LOL

[shira]

12. So you support the perpetuation of the refugee crisis that continues 7 decades later....

All other refugee populations (and their were 10's of millions of refugees) from the WW2 era were made citizens within a decade of the end of WW2. Their children are citizens and productive members of their respective societies.

No other refugee population from the WW2 era has increased almost 10 fold since the 1940's. They've all decreased to zero, except for Palestinians. Gee, go figure.

As I understand it, all the pro-BDS people here support keeping Palestinians in misery within the camps for the past 7 decades. In fact, they demand such misery as Palestinians are but mere pawns to them in order to "get Israel". If their "friends" in the Int'l community wanted what's best for Palestinian refugees, they would've advocated for ending the refugee situation a long time ago.

Apparently the refugees do not command the same respect or right to a normal life as the 10's of millions of refugees who were resettled shortly after WW2.

I don't think there's any question that pro-BDS'ers hate Palestinians at least 100x more than the worst Kahanists. As nasty as they are, I don't believe many Kahanists would wish misery upon generations of Paletstinian refugees like their pretend pro-Palestinian "friends".

With "friends" like the BDS crew, the Palestinians don't need enemies.

[Scootaloo]

16. I'm not sure how you came to that conclusion

I pointed out how the refugee crisis could be ended. That's really sort of the opposite of what you claim. As with Oberliner, it's been explained to you quite often that host states cannot simply "de-refugee" refugees. Are you so forgetful?

At any rate. The point is this: people west of Damascus are being butchered. Lebanon is blocking its borders against refugees from Syria. The next-closest state to flee towards is Israel. Israel is also the best-equipped nation to handle a bunch of people fleeing certain death - Jordan's all full-up of refugees from the last two and a half years, and could barely manage its resident population before.

Which do you prefer? Israel stepping up to help these people, or watching them get chopped to bits? It's really one or the other right now, I'm afraid.

[shira]

19. Sure you do. The BDS crew wants to help Israel's worst enemies....

...like Hamas, Hezbollah, Iran, etc.. achieve their goal of destroying Israel by facilitating a do-over of the 1947-48 wars against the Jews. Practically every leader in the middle east has crowed since 1948 about their plan of using the refugees as pawns to demographically take over and hopefully destroy the Jewish state, as well as their Jewish inhabitants.

Are you really unaware of this? It seems you are, or that you want to pretend that's not the situation

You're also deflecting from the fact that EVERY other refugee population from the WW2 has diminished to zero, except for Palestinian refugees who have grown exponentially while in horrid conditions.

How's that possible unless the intent to keep them penned up is deliberate?

If you don't support keeping generations of refugees caged for decades in miserable apartheid conditions in order to help Israel's worst enemies achieve their warmongering goals, then why aren't you and yours doing what you can to hold states responsible for not making citizens of AT LEAST Palestinian refugee descendants?

Those states are responsible.

Article 7 of the Convention on the Rights of the child calls for children born in any country to become citizens of that country.

Meanwhile, there is nothing in any convention, law, or UN resolution stating Israel bears responsibility.

[Scootaloo]

20. Deflective gibberish

Save it for your next thread spurred by Nahum Shahaf or Kenneth Meshoe.

The people at Yarmouk are getting killed. They have extremely few options and no helping hands. What should Israel do? Nothing, and let them die?

[shira]

21. Israel isn't the only option. I don't see any other states willing to take them in. n/t

[Scootaloo]

24. You're contradicting yourself.

Other states are not taking them in. That's very true. Lebanon is closing itself off against any Syrian refugees as best as it can. Jordan is more accommodating, but its available resources are very limited - and that limit is pushed by two years' worth of other refugees. iraq and Turkey are not realistic options, as both nations are very far away from Yarmouk, and both routes go through Daesh-controlled territory.

So. They have no options. I'm saying Israel could, and I think should provide one

it's less than a fifty-mile run to Occupied Golan. The route is mostly clear, being mostly held by "Opposition" forces, with occasional Israeli patrols a few miles outside of Golan. Could Israel not step up at least that much, Shira?

Yes, Lebanon SHOULD, but it's not terribly likely to do so. That that crackpot little nation isn't pulling its weight is not a good excuse for Israel to set back and let this carnage happen, too. You say it's the greatest, most wonderful, most humane, most moral nation in the middle east, if not the entire world. It can't stretch a hand out to help refugees being victimized by mass murderers?

[shira]

25. I'm talking about other western nations fully capable of doing so.

You know, western nations that Palestinians generally do not hate, like the Jewish state.

Like, any western nation besides Israel.

[Scootaloo]

26. There's 48 miles between Damascus and Golan. There are 2,777 miles between Damascus and Paris

You know the problem I mentioned for these people fleeing to Iraq or Turkey? It's like that, only increased exponentially.

I find it very bizarre that you're "complaining" about other nation's not stepping up to do something... but you think Peru perhaps (eight thousand and nine miles, and a LOT of swimming) should step up before Israel? Israel's right there Shira.

if something needs to be done - It obviously does - and two of the three immediate neighbors aren't doing anything - and they obviously aren't - then what excuse does the third have? How are you going to support that nation's inaction and condemn the other two's, much less Australia's (8.751 miles)?

[shira]

29. Only those calling for and end to the Jewish state (which they believe is racist) are for....

....Israel taking in what could be thousands of people very hostile to Israel's existence.

Isn't that your motivation for Israel taking them in?

[Scootaloo]

33. No, my motivation is giving them a place where Daesh isn't cutting them to pieces

As it happens, there is a nation within two hours' driving distance (maybe a little more, depending on logistics) of Yarmouk. This nation already has medical facilities set up in Golan, and is itself very prosperous and undoubtedly as able to commit resources to refugees from war in Syria as it is to victims of earthquakes in Haiti.

[shira]

34. If that was your motivation, you'd be calling for their transfer to Jordan....

...and airlift to other nations (within and outside the middle east) to take them in. Jordan has already taken in many refugees.

Hell, you'd demand they all take in Palestinians. Palestinian lives are at stake. Israel isn't the only player in town.

It's cute how you now think the racist, colonialist, apartheid, supremacist, genocidal (did I miss anything?) Jewish state would be the best place for these Palestinians.

Something doesn't add up. Too many holes in your story.

[Scootaloo]

40. Yes, Jordan has already taken in many refugees

Seven hundred and thirty-six thousand of them, from Iraq and Syria. That's an awful lot of people. And Jordan only has so many resources it can apply for them all. it's the second-poorest nation in the middle east. The poorest is Yemen. The nest poorest above Jordan is Syria - both of these states have been sunk into spiralling civil wars for a good while, if that helps get perspective on Jordan's poverty.

Yup, Palestinian lives are at stake, and Israel isn't the only option. But two of their three options have slammed the door shut in their faces. Lebanon won't take them. Jordan can't. And your Flotilla to Tibet fantasies aside, international airlift efforts are pretty impractical - especially given how ready Syria is to use its air force against pretty much anyone in its airspace.

Only 48 miles between Yarmouk and Golan. And you think airlifts to Copenhagen are more practical? The only thing that's not adding up is your front of concern for these people, paired with your apparent willingness to condemn them to die rather than Israel help them.

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

53. You really can't be more bloodthirsty and transparent

about it than that.

Everybody else us responsible for Israel's problems except for Israel, and now there's supposed to be an impractical flytilla of Palestinians to anyplace else except to where they rightfully belong?

[shira]

59. Can't be more bloodthirsty & transparent than the BDS'ers.

Everybody else us responsible for Israel's problems except for Israel, and now there's supposed to be an impractical flytilla of Palestinians to anyplace else except to where they rightfully belong?

It's not Israel's problem.

Let's remember, you couldn't even answer whether it's best for the Palestinians of Syria to....

a) Die in Syria
b) Or renounce a phony right of return in order to live in the W.Bank (part of Palestine 100 years ago).

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

67. Well, shira, since your position us morally indefensible...

who cares what you believe?

Seeing how your hatred for Palestinians is bubbling up again from the pit I wonder how long you will last.

a) Die in Syria

b) Or renounce a phony right of return in order to live in the W.Bank (part of Palestine 100 years ago).

This one
c) Live in their former homeland. Make Aliyah to their Palestine.

[shira]

69. How many people have to die for a make-believe Right of Return? n/t

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

75. How many Palestinians have to die for the

glory of zionist empire?

[shira]

81. Your "solution" guarantees war and death. I'm for a peaceful 2 state solution.

All decent people are for a peaceful 2 state solution.

BDS'ers want war and bloodshed and will fight to the very last Palestinians if they have to.

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

94. "Your "solution" guarantees war and death."

I guess that decaying, colonial, apartheidist zionism might see it that way.

[shira]

99. Yeah, it's what the UN obviously realized in UNGAR's 181 and 194....

....when it clearly stipulated that those refugees willing to live in peace within Israel should be permitted back in.

You demand that Israel allows people committed to Israel's destruction, and committed to massacring Jews into the Jewish state.

You demand that one state should be the objective, with Hamas and Islamic Jihad included.

=========

That's support for a future war.

[shira]

57. Israel offered to move these refugees into the W.Bank but Abbas refused...

He said it's better they die in Syria than renounce some make-believe Right of Return that has no basis whatsoever.

Seems you agree with him, right?

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

36. Like I wrote earlier...a people without a conscience,

but obviously with a lot if excuses.

[shira]

58. Who are these people w/o a conscience? n/t

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

104. They're the ones who have a lot of excuses.

[shira]

105. All Jews in Israel? Yes or No?

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

106. I guess they're the same ones who voted for the Israeli right wing in the last election.

You know: a vote for colonialism, land theft, human rights abuses, apartheid, the status quo and lots of excuses.

[shira]

107. You guess? Practically no Jews in Israel agree with your absurd, immoral demands. n/t

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

108. Excuses, excuses I guess...

[shira]

112. It's immoral to push for war. That's why the UN doesn't push for RoR. n/t

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

115. ...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1134&pid=100262

[guillaumeb]

32. Let us simplify and clarify your argument.

Israel will continue to dispossess the Palestinians, trying to force them to flee from the genocide, or emigrate if you prefer the more innocuous term.

After Israel forcibly expels the Palestinians, it is up to other nations to accommodate Israeli land theft by taking in these Palestinian expatriates.

Do I understand your argument here?

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

52. That's it...

What a complete and morally bankrupt position to have.

[shira]

56. That's absurd. You have a vivid imagination.

Israel will continue to dispossess the Palestinians, trying to force them to flee from the genocide, or emigrate if you prefer the more innocuous term.

None of that is happening, nor is there support in Israel for any of that.

After Israel forcibly expels the Palestinians, it is up to other nations to accommodate Israeli land theft by taking in these Palestinian expatriates.

Are we talking a future scenario or 1948? You're using future tense.

Do I understand your argument here?

Nope.

[guillaumeb]

63. I am unsure of what you are asking.

As to my first contention, the only way one cannot see what Israel is doing regarding dispossession is to ignore reality.

For number 2, substitute the word "when" for "after" because it has been continuing since the very beginning of the state, and even before the formal establishment of the state.

So I suppose that you do not understand my argument. But if we cannot agree on easily provable historical events we cannot really debate issues.

[shira]

66. You said it yourself. We can't agree on the history...

I'm not into the BDS revisionist account of history.

But if we cannot agree on easily provable historical events we cannot really debate issues.

I'm certain you can't prove any revisionist history that you believe in.

[krishnarama]

92. This is very interesting..

As a neutral observer here, I have to say something about this conversation.

Shira, for Pro-Israel arguments, has been saying the history and sometimes links to back her facts up, however, the pro-Palestinians are just dismissing them, and NOT backing up their statements.

I'm finding it very hard to believe, based on the pro-Palestinians are saying, that after close to 70 years of 'exile' - and what appears to be a permanent 'refugee' status, and the host country can't 'absorb' them as a natural citizens of the host country after 70 years?

Israel has offered to take these Palestinians back to West Bank and Gaza, with a VERY reasonable condition - that they give up their RoR, and it is a fair deal. You cannot claim that Israel is refusing to absorb their Palestinians.

[guillaumeb]

110. I will assume for debate purposes that you consider me to be

a "pro-Palestinian". You have a right to your opinion.

As to your first contention that, in your words:

"I'm finding it very hard to believe, based on the pro-Palestinians are saying, that after close to 70 years of 'exile' - and what appears to be a permanent 'refugee' status, and the host country can't 'absorb' them as a natural citizens of the host country after 70 years?"

To clarify, if I decide to evict you from your house because I wish to live there, can I insist that one of your neighbors allow you to move in with them?
Can I further assert that if you do not agree to this process that YOU are the obstacle to peace in the neighborhood?

As to your second contention, again, in your words:

"Israel has offered to take these Palestinians back to West Bank and Gaza, with a VERY reasonable condition - that they give up their RoR, and it is a fair deal. You cannot claim that Israel is refusing to absorb their Palestinians."

Do you feel that Israel had a right to evict/dispossess the Palestinians from their lands both prior to and subsequent to the establishment of the Israeli state? Because that is what happened, and the historical record supports this.

See the link below for a Jewish perspective and acknowledgement of the huge number of Palestinian refugees:
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/refugees.html

My opinion is that hundreds of thousands of Palestinians fled from Jewish, later Israeli violence. These hundreds of thousands of Palestinians who had lived in Palestine became refugees because they were being killed and brutalized in Palestine. Again, there is abundant documentation for this.

For a partial list of Palestinian villages that were depopulated by the Israelis:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_villages_depopulated_during_the_Arab%E2%80%93Israeli_conflict

and also:
https://www.radioislam.org/islam/english/toread/massac2.htm

and also:
https://occupiedpalestine.wordpress.com/2010/10/03/the-deathmasters-israeli-massacres-on-palestinians/

from the last link:
The Nobel Prize of Literature Jose Saramago compares the suffering of the Palestinians under Israeli occupation as the same suffering of the jews in the Nazi boot camps.
“The repression from Israel is the worst form of Apartheid. Nobody has the faintest idea of what is going on here, even the best informed people. Everything is in pieces, the land is destroyed and nothing else may be planted. All this smells like a boot camp, like Auschwitz"

I also ask that you to note that these are Saramago's words, his opinion. But remember too that what the West receives as "information" about Palestine is not everything that goes on. We see what the editors of the media sources report.

[shira]

95. See post #92 for an objective view. Also, let's summarize...

1. You claim that at least all the original Palestinian refugees have a RoR. But there's nothing in any UN resolution stating that. In fact, UNGAR's 181 and 194 stipulate that those willing to live at peace with their neighbors "should" be permitted back. It doesn't require Israel to do anything at all, or else the resolution would state that the refugees "must" be permitted back.

2. You claim that refugee descendants in the millions have this RoR. There's no such language anywhere that would suggest that, in any UN resolution or in any law. In fact, Article 7 on the Convention of the Rights of the Child states that nations shall make citizens of all children born there. So yeah, it's definitely up to the refugees' host nations to make citizens out of the millions of descendants of the original refugees. That's required and it has happened worldwide since WW2. Note, there are no other refugee populations from that time period, and certainly no descendant refugees. You have no leg to stand on.

3. As to your accusation of dispossession, what are we talking about here? Dispossession of state land that Palestinians never had sovereignty over? That's disputed land. Before it was Israel's, it was under British Mandate, and before that under Ottoman rule. You have no basis for this argument that Israel is dispossessing Palestinians of their land. When was it their land? Who was the Palestinian President or King of that particular land prior to 1948? Nobody.

4. Your genocide accusation is even more absurd. According to the very definition you used, Hamas and their fellow enemies against Israel fit the definition far better than Israel. You couldn't even acknowledge that. Meanwhile, Israel doesn't meet any of the criteria related to genocide.

[shira]

22. And, you keep calling for Israel to take them in? Why?

Make a case, using another situation worldwide since the 1940's, demonstrating Israel is responsible for them.

Show me where another nation has been attacked as Israel was, people opposing the attacked state became refugees as a result, but the state attacked was responsible for them and obligated to take them in.

If you can't, then say so.

[oberliner]

23. "What should Israel do? Nothing, and let them die?"

From 2013:

Abbas said he asked U.N. chief Ban Ki-moon last month to seek Israeli permission to bring Palestinians caught in Syria's civil war to the Palestinian territories. The request came after fighting between Syrian troops and rebel fighters in Yarmouk, the largest Palestinian refugee camp in Syria. About half of the camp's 150,000 residents have fled, according to a U.N. aid agency.

Abbas told a group of Egyptian journalists in Cairo late Wednesday that Ban contacted Israel on his behalf.

Abbas said Ban was told Israel "agreed to the return of those refugees to Gaza and the West Bank, but on condition that each refugee ... sign a statement that he doesn't have the right of return (to Israel)."

"So we rejected that and said it's better they die in Syria than give up their right of return," Abbas told the group. Some of his comments were published Thursday by the Palestinian news website Sama.

http://news.yahoo.com/palestinian-leader-rejects-deal-syria-refugees-105551580.html

He got his wish, sadly.

[Scootaloo]

27. And so it's cool for Israel to sit back and watch.

Okay then Oberliner.

Don't you dare complain about other nations' inaction then, if that's what you're going to support.

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

37. "What a crass, disgusting and opportunistic gesture...

but on condition that each refugee ... sign a statement that he doesn't have the right of return (to Israel)."

[shira]

41. But refugee descendants don't have a right of return, and you're defending...

Last edited Tue Apr 14, 2015, 06:55 AM - Edit history (4)

....not only that fantasy but also Abbas' statement they're better off dead.

Now that's disgusting.

So...

1. Are they better off dead in Syria like Abbas said?
2. Or better off within the W.Bank by signing off on a right they never had in the 1st place?

As someone who says he supports Palestinians, this should be a no-brainer for you.

If you're not defending Abbas and his vile statement, prove it.

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

44. As many before me have schooled you

Israel has no right to invite one group of people that have no direct ancestral ties, giving the exclusive citizenship, while denying another group, that they have expelled, the right if return.

And I am no fan of Abbas so your smiley is wasted.

Israel is a crass, opportunistic, vile apartheid state; while its mindless supporters resemble the undemocratic stooges that threaten society everywhere.

[oberliner]

45. "Israel is a crass, opportunistic, vile apartheid state...."

There you have it.

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

47. Truth hurts those who wish to hide it.

[oberliner]

48. You think the state of Israel, the country itself, is vile

Not just the current leadership, not just Likud, not just the RW, but the country itself is vile?

Vile as in morally despicable or abhorrent, right?

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

50. If Israel voted for the continuation of occupation,

illegal colonization and apartheid then yes.

Every settler that squats on land, every Israeli that turns a blind eye, every politician that keeps the suffering of the Palestinians going is responsible.

Deal with it.

[shira]

49. You didn't answer my question. Let's try again.

1. Are they better off dead in Syria like Abbas said?
2. Or better off within the W.Bank by signing off on a right they never had in the 1st place?

I shouldn't have to ask this a 3rd time.

Israel has no right to invite one group of people that have no direct ancestral ties, giving the exclusive citizenship, while denying another group, that they have expelled, the right if return.

Who says? Show me where they are violating some "right" to invite.... Or fold.

Israel is a crass, opportunistic, vile apartheid state; while its mindless supporters resemble the undemocratic stooges that threaten society everywhere.

I'm well aware of how disgusted you are with the Jewish state. You've made yourself clear many times already. How many more times do you need to repeat yourself?

But your solution to "fixing" Israel is that the world should force Israel to become majority Palestinian with totalitarian organizations like the PA and/or Hamas running the government via Sharia Law. Meaning women, gays, children, christians, and jews all treated like dog shit.

How is your solution better than the current situation?

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

51. Your query is irrelevant seeing how Israel created the problem.

It's not up to Israel, or its weak-sauce supporters, to cluck their tongues and demand that somebody else take in the problem that they have made and continues to make. It is up to Israel to own up for its past crimes, but I doubt that will happen when they can whine and play the victim instead.

And as to your questions... since I consider your position to be morally bankrupt WTF do you believe I want to waste my time on your ultimatums?

[shira]

55. You rarely answer direct questions. Too tough, I guess....

If your position was morally defensible, you wouldn't have any trouble answering any questions.

It's not up to Israel, or its weak-sauce supporters, to cluck their tongues and demand that somebody else take in the problem that they have made and continues to make. It is up to Israel to own up for its past crimes, but I doubt that will happen when they can whine and play the victim instead.

Refugee descendants are not Israel's problem. According to Article 7 on the Convention on the rights of the child, refugee descendants are supposed to become citizens of the country they are born in.

I hope you remember that so I don't have to repeat it again as though you never learned it.

The Arab nations hosting these refugee descendants are in gross violation of Palestinian rights, according to UN Humanitarian Law. That's a fact, unlike your accusations against Israel.

But here you are blaming the Jewish state, without a leg to stand on.....demanding they take in millions of Palestinians when no such requirement is mandated. This Right of Return isn't even recognized by the International community, as you've wrongly asserted here.

=======================================

Not even all the refugees are Israel's problem given that UNGAR 181 says Israel should take in those who would want to live in peace within Israel.

Meaning Israel is not obligated to take in those who went to war against the Jews.

UNGAR 181 doesn't make the criminally absurd demand (like BDS) that Israel must take in all refugees so that another war could start.

BDS wants exactly that, another war, which goes to show that BDS is a warmongering movement. As if we didn't know already. It's no wonder they're so popular among rightwing Jew haters and fascists.

========================================

To summarize, you're wrong with just about.....everything.

Not just wrong, but on the wrong side of history.

That's why you don't answer anything that challenges your views.

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

64. Its's like I wrote, shira...

I really don't give a flying fekk what you believe.

Live with it and your morally indefensible positions.

[shira]

68. It's not what I believe. It's fact, and you cannot refute it. n/t

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

74. There are no facts in your dog and phony show.

Just hate, IMHO.

[shira]

80. I rest my case. You're incapable of refuting anything I've written in response to you. n/t

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

93. Okay...AHAHAHAHAHAH....

[shira]

96. See? Still no facts to back your ridiculous accusations. n/t

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

98. Let's restate the obvious...seeing how you have so much trouble understanding morality.

Israel has no right to invite one group of people that have no direct ancestral ties, giving them exclusive citizenship, while denying another group, that they have expelled, the right of return.

Israel is a crass, opportunistic, vile apartheid state; while its mindless supporters resemble the undemocratic stooges that threaten society everywhere.

Own it.

[shira]

101. Israel has every right to abide by its own immigration laws, like all other nations....

It seems you believe Israel is morally committed to allowing Jew haters (those siding with and willing to work alongside Hamas, Islamic Jihad) into Israel.

That's vile and immoral because it invites war and bloodshed.

The UN doesn't call for that b/c they acknowledge it would lead to war.

But you demand exactly that.

=======

And we've already established you don't know what Apartheid is. But you keep repeating the word as if you're being rewarded every time this lie is repeated.

[krishnarama]

121. *DING* Round goes to Shira.

All I see is baseless attacks and nothing to back it up, R. Daneel Olivaw. All you have is attacks and "But, but...." without FACT.

Shira backed her information up with FACTS.

You can't answer Shira's questions, so instead, you attack her character as "fringe" - but this time, Shira won the round.

[azurnoir]

54. That alleged statement has been attributed to Associated Press too by the Algeminer

Fox news who also reced to the publish didn't even bother with that but then again their target audience will believe anything , now we have Black people loot- white people find things yahoo reporting with the insinuation that Sama published the quote but not saying factually in fact on a search it seems Sama is an Arabic only site so exactly what comments were published are impossible to verify

the quote is at best a self serving hearsay type of thing for the outlets that published it

[shira]

72. But Abbas is letting the refugees die in Syria....

Israel agreed to help transfer them to the W.Bank.

Abbas said no due to the stipulation about signing off on a RoR that doesn't exist.

It's obvious he prefers they die in Syria than renounce this make-believe RoR.

There's really no other way of looking at it.

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

77. So Israel is a helpless little kitten/victim that

can't do anything to help the Palestinians?

What sick rubbish.

[shira]

83. Israel offered to help transfer them from Yarmouk to the W.Bank.

I don't see the BDS-holes pressuring Abbas to allow them in.

I think BDS-holes are right there with Abbas and would happily see Palestinians die rather than revoke some fantasy RoR.

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

100. But Israel won't do the moral thing, and is such a helpless little victim otherwise.

And thank you for showing DU your colonial bent: "rather than revoke some fantasy RoR."

For the passing DUer: What shira is having so much trouble with is that Israel refuses to let the Palestinians return from exile...the exile that Israel has imposed upon them. She wrongly believes that it is fantasy.


The world has a differing opinion from the decaying Israeli zionist position, and it will learn this the hard way.

[shira]

103. Israel offered to do the moral thing, but u object to what's moral....

Israel was willing to transfer them into the W.Bank and/or Gaza.

And thank you for showing DU your colonial bent: "rather than revoke some fantasy RoR."

For the passing DUer: What shira is having so much trouble with is that Israel refuses to let the Palestinians return from exile...the exile that Israel has imposed upon them. She wrongly believes that it is fantasy.


The world has a differing opinion from the decaying Israeli zionist position, and it will learn this the hard way.

It is a fantasy.

1. You claim that at least all the original Palestinian refugees have a RoR. But there's nothing in any UN resolution stating that. In fact, UNGAR's 181 and 194 stipulate that those willing to live at peace with their neighbors "should" be permitted back. It doesn't require Israel to do anything at all, or else the resolution would state that the refugees "must" be permitted back.

2. You claim that refugee descendants in the millions have this RoR. There's no such language anywhere that would suggest that, in any UN resolution or in any law. In fact, Article 7 on the Convention of the Rights of the Child states that nations shall make citizens of all children born there. So yeah, it's definitely up to the refugees' host nations to make citizens out of the millions of descendants of the original refugees. That's required and it has happened worldwide since WW2. Note, there are no other refugee populations from that time period, and certainly no descendant refugees.

The reason is obvious. It's because it's immoral to open old wounds that would lead to more war and bloodshed.

You have no leg to stand on, you know that, and it's why you're incapable of supporting your absurd accusations.

[krishnarama]

122. I am a passing DU'er

It's unfortunate that you continue to look silly by continuing to claim "Aliyah" for Palestinians (stop, stop, you're killing me!), using words that you don't really know the definition s to because it's in "vogue" with your love of BDS.

Any observant and rational DU'er would think you're already a nut trying to belittle a pro-Israel poster by yelling and throwing "vogue" words.

Just my observation.....

[azurnoir]

78. Israel put what it knew was an untenable caveat on human itrian rescue

sigm away your rights before we help you

[shira]

84. There is no legal or recognized RoR for millions of Palestinians

It's a complete fantasy.

Looks like you agree with Abbas. I would think those concerned about Palestinian lives would demand Abbas agree to Israel's terms. So where's BDS, FreeGaza, Mondoweiss, Electronic Intifada, the ISM, Palestinian Solidarity Movement, etc.?

Thousands of lives would be saved.

They don't care b/c they want their war. That's why they cling to a make-believe RoR.

[azurnoir]

86. UN Resolution 194 was recognized

[shira]

89. 194 doesn't recognize the BDS version of RoR in any way, shape, or form.

1. It says refugees "should" be permitted to return. It doesn't require it. It doesn't say they "must" be permitted to return.

2. It only refers to those refugees willing to live at peace with their neighbors. So 194 doesn't even say Israel "should" permit all the original refugees back in.

3. No mention of millions of descendants of refugees who, according to Article 7 on the Convention of the Child, are required to be made citizens in the nations to which they were born.

[azurnoir]

87. Israel said it would enter Syria to help transfer Palestinian refugees?

somebodies getting a bit carried away here

shira
72. But Abbas is letting the refugees die in Syria....
View profile
Israel agreed to help transfer them to the W.Bank.

Abbas said no due to the stipulation about signing off on a RoR that doesn't exist.

It's obvious he prefers they die in Syria than renounce this make-believe RoR.

There's really no other way of looking at it.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1134&pid=100176

[shira]

90. Abbas appealed to Ban Ki Moon in order to get Israel to allow 150,000 refugees in. n/t

[azurnoir]

10. couldn't be because the world is hamstrung on the subject of Syria, could it?

at present can anyone outline a desirable outcome, which of the numerous groups engaged in combat should be the victors, which is best for all of the people of Syria. Instead we see this group being armed against that group-never enough support to ensure victory, just enough to ensure the fight keeps going on and on.

Now the question could be asked why are we being asked to ignore the close to 200,000 to 300,000 non-Palestinian deaths in Syria in favor of the estimated 2,725 Palestinian deaths? Curious that isn't it?

Perhaps one only need look at the real title of the article is based on

The Palestinians of Yarmouk and the shameful silence when Israel is not to blame

why was this truncated, there is ample room in the title line for it?

[shira]

13. What's the excuse for Palestinian women, children, & gays oppressed by Hamas?

Where are the Palestinians' friends for all that?

[azurnoir]

60. are we discussing Hamas here? No, so why bring them up?

I'll take it that you can not refute that we're being asked to pay more attention to 2725 Palestinians killed in the Syrian civil war, over the 200,000 to 300,000 that have died in total

[shira]

61. The point is that Israel bashers not only don't care for Palestinians in Syria....

...they don't even care about Palestinians under brutal Hamas rule. Or under brutal PA rule.

Or under apartheid conditions in Lebanon.

It's not some desperate nonsense about the world being hamstrung on Syria. It demonstrates a pattern showing Israel bashers are no friends of the Palestinians at all. They never have been. They're just Israel haters.

[azurnoir]

62. first there is nothing to back up your theory and the world is indeed hamstrung on Syria

there is no acceptable solution at hand, at least for the world powers, it would almost seem there is some benefit to keeping Syria in the condition it is now

[shira]

65. Oh really? I don't see the BDS brigade doing anything about....

....Lebanese apartheid vs. the Palestinians, or Hamas and the PA's terrible treatment of its population.

And then of course there's Syria...

The BDS brigade didn't object to Abbas saying Palestinians in Syria were better off dead than revoking a fake RoR.

Deny it all you wish. You can't refute the facts.

[azurnoir]

79. once again it seems you confuse opinion and hearsay with facts

[shira]

85. I rest my case. You're incapable of refuting anything I've written in response to you. n/t

[azurnoir]

88. how does one refute mere opinion, distortion, and hearsay?

when you have facts get back to me okay?

[shira]

91. If it's just mere opinion, distortion, & hearsay then bring on the facts to refute it.

Show me where BDS-holes, the ISM, Palestinie Solidarity Movement, FreeGaza, Mondoweiss, and Electronic Intifada have...

a) Mobilized people for rallies and protests, or arranged flotillas, flytillas, and trucktillas for Palestinians suffering under apartheid conditions in Lebanon. Where are the Apartheid week protests on campuses worldwide for Palestinians in Lebanon?

b) Mobilized people for......Palestinians oppressed under Hamas or PA rule. Don't they have human rights?

c) Mobilized people for.....Palestinians in Syria. Don't they have the right to live?

d) Petitioned the UN to do something, like pass some resolutions in order to put a spotlight on these situations. The UN has done nothing to advocate for all these Palestinians.

===========

They do all that shit against the Jews of Israel, over and over again.

Where are they when Palestinians outside of Israel need them? I'm betting these Palestinians desperately wish they had their so-called pro-Palestinian "friends" advocating for them in these situations.

Fact is, these "friends" don't give a shit.

Prove me wrong.

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

111. Nobody worth their salt takes you seriously, shira. You know this. So why should we waste our time.

It is far better to let DUers read your obscene loathing for the Palestinians, which has cost you how many time outs(?), than to really care to waste valuable time explaining the truth to you; seeing how you will just ignore it and move your goal posts to another conterfeit argument.

They will know you by your works.

[shira]

114. LoL. You mean no one on the Israel bashing side has answers....

....for any questions challenging their obscene, immoral views. You wouldn't answer these questions if anyone here (besides myself) were to ask you.

We both know that.

I couldn't possibly loathe Palestinians more than Israel bashing BDS-holes who believe it's best for Palestinian refugees to rot in camps, even if it means forever in order for them to cash in on a make-believe, immoral RoR.

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

116. ...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1134&pid=100262

[krishnarama]

123. Problem is, no-one is taking you seriously either...

Come on.. please back your facts up.

Shira does. You evade. That's a huge difference.

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

124. On glee. You've made it to ten this time.

[shira]

128. And still no facts from you, only personal attacks & emotional appeals. n/t

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

132. My statement was factually correct.

[krishnarama]

133. Backed by what evidence?

Right now, it's coming from where the sun doesn't shine - CITATION NEEDED.

You know? Facts? Evidence? Statements to back up what you are saying?

Right now Shira has been providing facts, and you've been doing nothing but belittling her facts with nothing but attacks.

Like my current favorite: " Make Aliyah to their Palestine."

Where did you come up with that fantasy?

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

138. It's good to know that shira can depend on a

departed disruptor to carry her water. It's good to have friends, I guess...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=322397

[azurnoir]

119. ah but only "facts" tailored to your opinion and hearsay

well here's fact protesting for an independent Palestinian state would solve many if not all of the problems you outline but apparently you see that as a threat to "Jews"

[krishnarama]

125. Excuse me? I'm for the creation of the Palestinian state.

Why is it that I'm reading and researching, even with the Mondoweiss and EI and others, stating that Israel has accepted the Clinton Parameters, the Oslo Accords, even unilaterally withdraw from Gaza, handing it over to the PA, and all for what? So Abbas and the Fatahs can continue to "oppress" the Palestinians to line their pockets?

Well, shira is right about a few things here. Most of the refugees from the 1947-48 wars are either gone or assimilated to society. The refugees childrens are already citizens of the host nation as defined by Article 7 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child

Article 7

1. The child shall be registered immediately after birth and shall have the right from birth to a name, the right to acquire a nationality and. as far as possible, the right to know and be cared for by his or her parents.

I have some questions for both of you, and I would like you to answer it, with facts, if you can.

1) Israel has accepted all the parameters to create the Palestinian state for years, and Palestinian leadership hasn't. Why?

2) Abbas has not called for a free and fair elections, and he's in his 10th year of his 4 year term. Is this a democracy?

3) As pointed out clearly - Lebanon is actually practicing apartheid against Palestinian refugees. Why not start action against Lebanon?

4) What would it take for Palestinians to accept the parameters set forth to create a new Palestinian state, and live side by side with Israel, in peace?

5) Israel is currently investigating itself for its role in Operation Protective Edge in 2014. If the ICC is satisfied that Israel is investigating itself adequately - will Palestine accept the findings? Even if it points out that Hamas has committed genocide against its own people?

I'd like these answered, if you guys can.

[azurnoir]

127. Lol answers first you leave part of article 7 the part that shows claims being are not entirely true

here is all of it
krishnarama
125. Excuse me? I'm for the creation of the Palestinian state.

View profile
Why is it that I'm reading and researching, even with the Mondoweiss and EI and others, stating that Israel has accepted the Clinton Parameters, the Oslo Accords, even unilaterally withdraw from Gaza, handing it over to the PA, and all for what? So Abbas and the Fatahs can continue to "oppress" the Palestinians to line their pockets?

Well, shira is right about a few things here. Most of the refugees from the 1947-48 wars are either gone or assimilated to society. The refugees childrens are already citizens of the host nation as defined by Article 7 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child

Article 7

1. The child shall be registered immediately after birth and shall have the right from birth to a name, the right to acquire a nationality and. as far as possible, the right to know and be cared for by his or her parents.

here is article7 in it's entirety

Article 7

1. The child shall be registered immediately after birth and shall have the right from birth to a name, the right to acquire a nationality and. as far as possible, the right to know and be cared for by his or her parents.

2. States Parties shall ensure the implementation of these rights in accordance with their national law and their obligations under the relevant international instruments in this field, in particular where the child would otherwise be stateless.

the parties have treated refugees in accordance with their own law , nothing says that any coutry is obligated to make a child born there a citizen, nor are they citizens of any country



I have some questions for both of you, and I would like you to answer it, with facts, if you can.

1) Israel has accepted all the parameters to create the Palestinian state for years, and Palestinian leadership hasn't. Why?

just who's parameters has Israel accepted? Netanyahu recently stated NO Palestinian state under his watch

2) Abbas has not called for a free and fair elections, and he's in his 10th year of his 4 year term. Is this a democracy?

again untrue elections have been called for Hamas refuses to participate and while 3 states may the dream of some, it not the Palestinians

3) As pointed out clearly - Lebanon is actually practicing apartheid against Palestinian refugees. Why not start action against Lebanon?

I suggest you look up apartheid

4) What would it take for Palestinians to accept the parameters set forth to create a new Palestinian state, and live side by side with Israel, in peace?

ask the Palestinians

5) Israel is currently investigating itself for its role in Operation Protective Edge in 2014. If the ICC is satisfied that Israel is investigating itself adequately - will Palestine accept the findings? Even if it points out that Hamas has committed genocide against its own people?

yes we recently saw the out come of Israel's self investigating shooting and killing an unarmed Palestinian minor in the back is reckless

I'd like these answered, if you guys can.

[shira]

129. Then your take on Article 7 shows you support apartheid vs Palestinians...

....which limits their human rights. There's really no other way of seeing it as no other nations on the planet have national laws rejecting other refugees, in particular children born in their host nations. But this doesn't bother you in the least.

Arab nations don't refuse citizenship to anyone other than Palestinians. That's apartheid and it appears you support it.

More for you...

Article 7: Right to be Registered and Right to a name
Under article 7(1) of the Convention, every child has the right to be registered immediately after birth and the right to have a name and to acquire a nationality. Children who have a registered Palestinian refugee father are registered as refugees by UNRWA and recognized by the Lebanese state. However, children born to non-ID Palestinian fathers (who do not themselves possess recognized identity documents) are not registered with UNRWA and neither receive recognized identity documents from the Lebanese state nor have the ability to acquire a nationality even if they have a Lebanese mother as, under current Lebanese law, nationality can only be passed on by the father (paternalistic application of the principle of jus sanguinis). The non-registration of children of non-ID Palestinian refugees has a detrimental effect on their ability to exercise their human rights, including the right to education (see below).

Amnesty International considers that Lebanon should put in place a system that will ensure that all children within its territory, including the children of non-ID Palestinian refugees, are registered, have an equal right to acquire nationality, and have equal access to human rights. - See more at:

http://unispal.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/0/035D9AA650E839FF85257188005E5FBE#sthash.ZWOnkA0o.dpuf

[oberliner]

136. I'll take a crack at this

1. Israel has not accepted essential parameters. Specifically with regard to Jerusalem.

2. The PA is subject to Israeli occupation and so can not be considered a democracy for that reason.

3. The root of the problem is Israel's refusal to allow Palestinians RoR.

4. Withdrawal to the 1967 lines. East Jerusalem under Palestinian jurisdiction.

5. If so then yes. But previous investigations have been lacking.

[oberliner]

14. The "real title" the article is based on?

The real title was: "The refugees of Yarmouk deserve better than silence" when I posted the article here.

I did not truncate the title - I posted it in full exactly as it was (as I always do).

I think you know me well enough to know that I don't change titles when posting articles here and I resent the implication otherwise.

You will note at the bottom of the article currently:

"The headline of this article was amended on Monday 13 April 2015"

Why The Guardian website decided to change it to the more inflammatory one it has at present is anybody's guess.

[azurnoir]

17. The title was as I noted yesterday when I looked and that was shortly after it was posted

it does not say what the amendment was

[oberliner]

31. Right but Google the initial title

You'll see it was re-posted that way elsewhere as well.

I posted it exactly as it was when I first encountered the article.

And screw The Guardian for changing the title and putting that more inflammatory one on. I know they aren't the only ones who do that sort of thing but it's annoying.

[shaayecanaan]

28. Bewailing the world's unwillingness to accept a nation of refugees

which Israel has itself created strikes me as not very different from the boy who murdered his parents and then begged for the court's mercy, declaring himself an orphan.

Takes a fair amount of chutzpah either way.

[oberliner]

46. How about this analogy?

I get kicked out of my house so I have to move in with a neighbor.

While I am at my neighbor's, someone comes into the house, kills my parents and threatens me with the same.

I ask for someone to help rescue me so that I don't get killed too.

Some folks say we aren't really going to do anything to help because all of this is the fault of the guy who kicked you out of your house in the first place so we need to focus on that.

That's not especially helpful for the person currently fearing for his life.

Incidentally, the piece in the OP was not written by an Israeli. The author is very critical of Israel and its role in all of this.

[shira]

73. Israel is not responsible for the refugees. Not even UNGAR 181 says that....

It only stipulates refugees "should" be allowed back if they're willing to live in peace. "Should" doesn't even mean it's required.

The reason why is obvious. There was just a war waged against the Jews. Avoiding more war and bloodshed trumps any rights refugees have. Israel's neighbors shouldn't have gone to war against the Jews.

There's certainly no way Israel is responsible for millions of descendants either. Their host nations are responsible for them due to Article 7 of the Convention on the rights of the child.

In fact, their host nations are solely responsible, not Israel. They started the war. They encouraged Palestinians to leave. They refuse to grant them citizenship, like every other nation has done with their refugees since the WW2 era.