Print Page | Close Window

Set a date for real Middle East talks!

Printed From: IslamiCity.com
Category: Politics
Forum Name: World Politics
Forum Discription: World Politics
URL: http://www.IslamiCity.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=9367
Printed Date: 24 October 2014 at 1:53pm


Topic: Set a date for real Middle East talks!
Posted By: Judge Dredd
Subject: Set a date for real Middle East talks!
Date Posted: 17 May 2007 at 11:03pm

http://www.avaaz.org/en/real_middle_east_talks/ - http://www.avaaz.org/en/real_middle_east_talks/

Petition to Israeli, Palestinian & international leaders: The Palestinian-Israeli conflict lies at the heart of a global clash threatening to divide us all. People from every corner of the world want a just and lasting peace in the Middle East - and the international community can and must help bring all sides to the table. Start Real Middle East Talks Now, and stay at the negotiating table until we have peace.
 
CLICK ON ABOVE LINK TO SIGN PETITION



Replies:
Posted By: Whisper
Date Posted: 18 May 2007 at 11:04pm

What an absolutely beautiful post!

Short, precise, to the point and packed with the best of British commonsense. My friend, that's the only way out.

Not just that, but I am also willing to be a part of this form of noble jehad.



Posted By: crasss
Date Posted: 19 May 2007 at 8:30am
Originally posted by Judge Dredd

Start Real Middle East Talks Now, and stay at the negotiating table until we have peace.

I don't think a 2-state proposal will solve anything, or a discussion about borders between such states. Such talks will only make things worse.

Before organizing talks, you need to agree on an agenda. What agenda are both sides going to agree on? There is no such agenda...



Posted By: Whisper
Date Posted: 20 May 2007 at 7:19am

I feel, we should leave it to brother Crass he alone knows the situation and its reality! And, any attempts of efforts in this regard should cease, forthwith, till he grants us his verdict.

(I am sure, his reaction and remarks would have been entirely different had this post been from someone with a Muslim sounding name)



-------------
Sasha Khanzadeh


Posted By: crasss
Date Posted: 20 May 2007 at 9:21am
Originally posted by Whisper

I feel, we should leave it to brother Crass he alone knows the situation and its reality! And, any attempts of efforts in this regard should cease, forthwith, till he grants us his verdict.

You know the "problem". It's similar to the one-man-one-vote situation at the time in South Africa.

One of both sides has to "capitulate". For either side, that amounts to "treason". And just like in South Africa, we have to wait until one side has so much enough of it, that they give up.

Since it won't be the Palestinian side, it basically means, waiting until Israel has enough of it, and agrees to drop the idea of a Jewish state in favour of a Jewish+Muslim state to which all refugees can return from the "Bantustan homelands" in Gaza and the Westbank.

That's as good as it could ever get. I doubt that there is realistically anything else in the pipeline.

If they manage to settle on a "Palestinian state" in the "Bantustans", the fighting will simply continue, and both sides know it, and the ones who did the deal will simply be considered "traitors", and there we go again, another Peace Nobel Prize for nothing, and probably shot from behind for "treason".



Posted By: crasss
Date Posted: 20 May 2007 at 11:26am
Originally posted by Whisper

I am sure, his reaction and remarks would have been entirely different had this post been from someone with a Muslim sounding name

There is some truth to what you are saying.

My personal ambition is to keep this nuclear family going, and I need help in stamping out that gigantic fornication fest, because I don't want the kids to get caught up in that.

Who's gonna solve that problem for me? The Muslims, of course.



Posted By: crasss
Date Posted: 20 May 2007 at 11:38am
Originally posted by Whisper

I am sure, his reaction and remarks would have been entirely different had this post been from someone with a Muslim sounding name

So, now you finally get it.

There is no other God than Allah, my friend, and Muhammed is his last Messenger.

And now I am waiting for the club to do something about the "problem".



Posted By: Whisper
Date Posted: 20 May 2007 at 5:58pm

So, now you finally get it.

My friend, for a moment I had genuinely thought that you could understand wht I have said, but, sadly, your pre-occulation with fornication made you fly far past my point.



-------------
Sasha Khanzadeh


Posted By: crasss
Date Posted: 20 May 2007 at 7:53pm
Originally posted by Whisper

So, now you finally get it.

My friend, for a moment I had genuinely thought that you could understand wht I have said, but, sadly, your pre-occulation with fornication made you fly far past my point.


set a date for real Israeli-Arab talks on core issues like 1967 borders

Talking about 1948, 1967, 1973 borders? How can I sign that petition and support a "Bantustan" solution?

It didn't bring peace in South Africa, and it won't bring peace to the Middle East.

The answer is: nay.

Why don't we rather sign a petition to talk about disbanding the UN? What they did in 1948, is simply one insidious thing, in a series of insidious things. The UN has to go.



Posted By: crasss
Date Posted: 20 May 2007 at 8:30pm
Originally posted by Whisper

sadly, your pre-occulation with fornication made you fly far past my point.

Sadly, you don't get it either.

Unless you are a fornicatress or a homosexual from that "democratic" majority, they're going to talk your wife into it, so that they can kick you out of your house, repossess your house, your money, confiscate your kids, and the best part of your income till the end of your life, or put you in jail.

How much more do they need to do, before you also have enough of it?

As I told you, I am now waiting for "the club" to do "something" about it. And I want a "thorough" solution, not something half-baked, if you see what I mean.

And we're not going to "vote" about it. Ok?



Posted By: crasss
Date Posted: 20 May 2007 at 9:04pm
Originally posted by Whisper

My friend, for a moment I had genuinely thought that you could understand wht I have said

You may have to try to genuinely understand what I am saying.

If you remind the guys in Europe what that "democratic" majority is up to, or have done already, it won't be difficult to convince a good proportion of them into supporting an Islamic takeover.

I am personally all for it. I am actually eagerly waiting for it to finally happen. Where can I help out?



Posted By: crasss
Date Posted: 20 May 2007 at 9:28pm
Originally posted by Whisper

...brother Crass...I am sure, his reaction and remarks would have been entirely different had this post been from someone with a Muslim sounding name...

It's double taquilla now. What's the use of that?



Posted By: Duende
Date Posted: 21 May 2007 at 3:54am
Crass lives up to his name again!

(What's a double taquilla?)

Isn't there some kind of 'netiquette' about forum members repeatedly
posting short little response to their own threads? In this way, this
member has quickly enhanced his forum status and become a 'senior
member' in no time.

It's also a shame new members are not required to familiarise themselves
with the long-established members who, like revered elders in any
community, often enjoy a status earned gradually and through
consistently appreciated posts.

It seems to me Crass is attempting to establish himself as some kind of
authority, like a learned elder who dispenses advice to the rest of us. It's
unfortunate his manner is so off putting to Moslems and non-Moslems
alike on this forum. Behaviour such as this, akin to 'trolling' can
eventually drive away long term members who become dissillusioned with
the new tone of 'their' forum.

Rather than decently discussing the subject of the thread, Crass is
demeaning a long standing member who has built a strong following
here, and who (unlike crass) has an exceptional understanding of the
Ummah.


Posted By: crasss
Date Posted: 21 May 2007 at 7:19am
Originally posted by Duende

It seems to me Crass is attempting to establish himself as some kind of authority, like a learned elder who dispenses advice to the rest of us.





Posted By: Whisper
Date Posted: 21 May 2007 at 1:33pm

You may have to try to genuinely understand what I am saying.
God bless, my friend, some of us do delude as if the others "have to try" to understand what they are saying -  in certain phases of their existence.

The day you begin to understand and feel Islam, you will be recover from this phase.



-------------
Sasha Khanzadeh


Posted By: Whisper
Date Posted: 21 May 2007 at 1:42pm

Unless you are a fornicatress or a homosexual from that "democratic" majority, they're going to talk your wife into it, so that they can kick you out of your house, repossess your house, your money, confiscate your kids, and the best part of your income till the end of your life, or put you in jail.
You can share it with us, is this a phobia or some obsession of considerable standing?

I have a dear friend who is looking for script writers, with over the moon sort of styles. I would be delighted to arrange a priority interview, for you with him - in the best interest of this respectable forum.



-------------
Sasha Khanzadeh


Posted By: crasss
Date Posted: 21 May 2007 at 2:05pm
Originally posted by Whisper

You can share it with us, is this a phobia or some obsession of considerable standing?





Posted By: crasss
Date Posted: 21 May 2007 at 2:11pm
Originally posted by Whisper

The day you begin to understand and feel Islam, you will be recover from this phase.

One of the things I understand about Islam is that it is a fantastic way to counter that government apparatus that likes to stick its nose there where it has absolutely no business.

There's the public sphere and there's the private sphere. Islam manages to protect the private sphere and keep the government away from there. They really have no business talking to my wife about me, to figure out if they can re-arrange things behind my back. If they do that with Muslims, they get a hand grenade in their face. I just love that!

Allah Akbar!



Posted By: Duende
Date Posted: 22 May 2007 at 3:20am
"One of the things I understand about Islam is that it is a fantastic way to
counter that government apparatus that likes to stick its nose there where
it has absolutely no business."

You mean, like when the Iranian government decrees how women should
dress? or when the sorely missed Taleban of Afghanistan decreed how
long your beard should be? or maybe you mean in Egypt where they
recently decreed that a male and female work colleague can not be in the
same room together unless he has "suckled from her breast for more
than five months?" Or perhaps you were thinking of the Saudi regime
which forbids women from driving a car?



Posted By: mariyah
Date Posted: 22 May 2007 at 5:56am
Originally posted by Whisper

So, now you finally get it.

My friend, for a moment I had genuinely thought that you could understand wht I have said, but, sadly, your pre-occulation with fornication made you fly far past my point.

Asalaamu alaikum:

 yes, there seems to be a pre-occupation with fornication with this one, is he celibate or something?



-------------
"Every good deed is charity whether you come to your brother's assistance or just greet him with a smile.


Posted By: mariyah
Date Posted: 22 May 2007 at 5:58am
Originally posted by crasss

Originally posted by Whisper

...brother Crass...I am sure, his reaction and remarks would have been entirely different had this post been from someone with a Muslim sounding name...

It's double taquilla now. What's the use of that?

Tequila, now that's haram !

-------------
"Every good deed is charity whether you come to your brother's assistance or just greet him with a smile.


Posted By: Duende
Date Posted: 22 May 2007 at 10:37am
Oh! TEQUILA!

See, he wrote TAQUILLA which over here means "box office".

Anyway, I still don't understand what he was getting at even if he was
referring to alcohol


Posted By: Duende
Date Posted: 05 June 2007 at 3:15am
The mirage of the two-state solution

40th Anniversary of the Six-Day War. Solution on which all agree
impossible to achieve

By George Bisharat
San Francisco Chronicle

06/04/07 "SFC" --- -- Forty years ago this week, Israel conquered the
West Bank and Gaza Strip, re-establishing a political system in which one
sovereign ruled over all of former Palestine. Unnoticed by the world, this
brought about a version of a "single state solution" to the Palestinian-
Israeli conflict -- albeit one in which Palestinians and Jews do not have
equal rights.

Instead, Israel has ruled the West Bank and Gaza Strip through military
governments that control the daily lives of millions of Palestinians in
every aspect, yet in which they have no say. Although Palestinians now
elect representatives to a Palestinian Authority, these officials administer
the tiny Gaza Strip, and less than 20 percent of the West Bank. Their
powers scarcely exceed those of county supervisors.

Meanwhile, international opinion has steadily solidified behind a "two
state solution." In this scenario, independent Jewish and Palestinian states
would divide the land between the Mediterranean coast and the River
Jordan. By the mid-1970s, most states in the U.N. General Assembly
supported Palestinian nationhood. In 1988, the PLO explicitly recognized
Israel within its pre-1967 borders, agreeing to sovereignty over the West
Bank and Gaza Strip, together comprising just 22 percent of former
Palestine.

The United States finally joined the bandwagon in 2002, when President
Bush called for two democratic states living side by side in his "Roadmap
to Peace." Even Israel has signed on, although its conception of what
territory and powers a Palestinian state should possess is more
constrictive than anyone else's.

Ironically, this unanimity, so laboriously assembled over decades, upholds
a solution that is now impossible to achieve. Israel's program of
colonizing the West Bank has become irreversible, and the land base for a
viable Palestinian state has disappeared. Some 450,000 Israeli settlers
now occupy more than 140 settlements in East Jerusalem and the West
Bank. These Jewish settlements, the security swaths around them, the
roads linking them to each other and to Israel, and the "separation wall"
that pens Palestinians into discontiguous islands of land, cover more than
40 percent of the West Bank. Much of this is either private Palestinian
property, seized without compensation, or state lands in which
Palestinians hold traditional use rights that Israel refuses to respect.

Meanwhile, Israel's colonizing juggernaut rolls ahead. Recently, plans to
build 2,500 new homes for Israeli settlers east of Jerusalem were
announced, and orders were given to continue construction of the
"separation wall" in the Jordan Valley. There appears to be no political
force capable of slowing, let alone halting, this movement.

A comforting illusion has been fostered that if Palestinians and Israelis
could only be coaxed back into negotiations, the elusive two-state
solution would somehow materialize. The interests of leaders on all sides
are served by this fiction, although for different reasons. For President
Bush, an appearance of progress toward Palestinian-Israeli peace quells
hostility toward the United States in the Middle East, and eases policy
options elsewhere in the region, including Iraq. The PLO leadership,
personified in the hapless Mahmoud Abbas, staked its entire political
legitimacy in the Oslo accords and the endless "peace process" it
inaugurated. Abandoning negotiations toward a two-state solution would
constitute an admission that it had led the Palestinians into a terrible
dead-end. Israel mollifies the United States by engaging in the
negotiation charade, exploits the continuing indeterminacy to continue
colonizing the West Bank, and advances its strategic objective of
permanent control over most or all of former Palestine. Like the
shimmering waters of a desert mirage, the two-state solution moves just
out of reach with every apparent advancing step.

The tragedy is that temporizing in the face of this inevitable truth
ultimately serves neither Israeli Jews, nor Palestinian Arabs, nor
Americans. Continued conflict in the region hurts the direct parties in
obvious ways, and also deeply undermines the status of the United States
in the Arab and Muslim worlds. Our reflexive support of Israel, even in its
self-destructive policies, is a prime cause of hostility against us.

The number of Israeli Jews and Palestinian Arabs living within the borders
of former Palestine are now roughly equivalent, at just more than 5
million each. The question is: Will political power within this single
political system continue to be exercised in what former ANC member
and current South African Intelligence Minister Ronnie Kasrils and others
have described as an acute form of apartheid? Or will Palestinian Arabs
and Israeli Jews enjoy equal rights and share power fairly in what is
already a joint polity? For those who support peace, justice and respect
for international law, the choice should be obvious.

George Bisharat is a professor of law at Hastings College of the Law, and
writes frequently on law and politics in the Middle East.

This article appeared on page B - 7 of the San Francisco Chronicle

2007 Hearst Communications Inc


Posted By: Cassandra
Date Posted: 06 June 2007 at 1:42pm

Whisper, Crass, Duende,

Stop derailing this thread with non-sequiturs: either sign the ******petition, or come up with a relevant reason why you don't agree. These people at avaaz are trying to do something which I have never seen on this Forum: Make a Difference by engaging public opinion.  They ask you to stand up and be counted: literally.

Is nothing ever going to change here?

Judge Dredd (!) is a Newbie...what must s/he think of your self-serving antics? Thanks to you, this has got lost in obscurity.....

For what it is worth, JD, I remind Forum members of where you started before the Egos took over.

http://www.avaaz.org/en/real_middle_east_talks/ - http://www.avaaz.org/en/real_middle_east_talks/

C



Posted By: crasss
Date Posted: 06 June 2007 at 8:56pm
Originally posted by Cassandra

come up with a relevant reason why you don't agree.

If Israel is willing to talk about one state for both Muslims and Jews, and about the refugees returning home, I will sign up. Otherwise forget it. The talks will lead nowhere.

By the way, Israel clearly indicated that it does not want a http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamas - hudna Unfortunately, all their arguments against a hudna equally well apply to any peace offer.



Posted By: Duende
Date Posted: 07 June 2007 at 1:46am
Cassandra, I thought the point of making a post was to discuss things,
no? It doesn't stop anyone from signing a petition.

Sure the people at Avaaz have got their act together, there's not much
point getting angry at us because of that, or were you hoping to gain
some international standing? Haranguing us for not getting off our
backsides and actually, as you put it, doing something, changes nothing.
What did you expect to change here at Islamicity? Have you noticed any
fundamental changes outside in the world, which would affect the general
tone of things here?

On the one hand, Cindy Sheehan says goodbye to activism, declaring that
her son did in fact, die for nothing, and on the other, a nice shiney new
activist's site promoting yet another petition.

Meanwhile, the forces that be, those who could actually get something to
change, if they had the political will to do so, are meeting behind
reinforced concrete barriers in northern Germany, while activists throw
molotov cocktails and paving stones at police.

The article I posted talks about the problem in a way I had not thought
before: the IMPOSSIBILITY of a two nation solution because of Israel's
actions over the past 40 years. If you feel there's no point discussing that
viewpoint, that's fine.



Posted By: Cassandra
Date Posted: 07 June 2007 at 6:54am

Duende:  Your posting of the article made several valid points. It is discussion, not ad hominem attacks I would like to see. Yes, the world's leaders are just as involved in their own self-serving interests and it takes a woman to persuade them to at least try to listen to the earth (???). Perhaps I should have limited my comments to the male egos here?  You would know far better than I.

e.g.

Whisper: "My friend, for a moment I had genuinely thought that you could understand wht I have said, but, sadly, your pre-occulation (sic) with fornication made you fly far past my point.

 




Print Page | Close Window