Jul 14, 2008

Different perspective

Palestinian-Israeli conflict..60 years old..

It started by some Zionists who aimed at collecting Jews in one place, the choice wasn't an empty land but instead a land already having a people who lived for many generations on it, they declared an entity and called it a state, many innocents have been killed and lands have been stolen.

The amazing thing about this conflict is that it's not clear by all its sides until now. However being in the era of Satellite and the Internet facts are kept hidden. That's why I'll try here to focus on another side of this bloody conflict. I don't claim that I have the absolute complete fact, but it's just like an alarm to re look..

Always it's said that Palestinian never had a state before or that they aren't a people .. or that there is nothing at all called Palestinians. If we looked from another perspective i.e if we looked at Palestinians as human-being not as a people or a state I think that our ideas will be different.

Let's imagine that Zionists weren't mistaken at all to declare a state on another land, in fact let's imagine that it's the right of Zionists to establish their state on that land. Then we must ask ourselves a necessary question; IS IT AN ABSOLUTE RIGHT?

"His Majesty's Government view with favour
the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, .... it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may
prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in
, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any
other country."

"Freedom of conscience and the free
exercise of all forms of worship,.., shall be ensured to all, No
discrimination of any kind shall be made between the inhabitants on the ground
of race, religion, language or sex,
.. , No expropriation of
land owned by an Arab in the Jewish State (by a Jew in the Arab State) shall be
except for public purposes."

That's what Balfour declaration and UN partition plan stipulated very clearly. So, it's so obvious that 'the right' of Zionists to declare a state upon this land isn't absolute at all. There is a people already living on this land, this people have rights, right of life, of safety, of freedom, of insured earning, of free transition, etc. In another word; when Zionists decided to establish this state on this land they have to consider the people already living on it, whether this people own this land or just was a temporary inhabitants. This people has the right to .. at least .. live safe on the land where it lived for many generations.

That's what international law texts stipulated. But what Zionists did?!!

Zionists broke all these rules. 1) They killed inhabitants, 2) They terrorized villagers of about 400 villages to force them to leave their homes and farms, they evacuated about 60% of Palestinian people from their homes, 3) About 1.3 Million Palestinian live in refugee camps because of Israelis, 4) Expropriation of lands owned by Arabs is working in a horrible rate that most of Palestinians lands are ruled by Israelis, 5) Government of Israeli entity obviously discriminate between Palestinians and Jews because of race and religion.

So, when Zionists clearly are against international law texts which created their state then should we require Palestinians to keep silent when they see their children are being daily killed, their farms are being burnt, their homes are being destroyed, their lands are being expropriated, etc?!!!!!

If we don't support them in 'land-defence', why don't we support them in -at least- 'self-defence'?

It's an important question which must be settled if we really aim at a solution for this conflict. Rigid minds don't make solutions but instead make the problem more complicated, that's why looking at the problem from more than one perspective is very necessary so as to settle it.


Anonymous said...

You know Mohamed, we have an expression for your argument which originated in rural parts of the United States. The expression is:
"That dog won't hunt."

The implications of the expression are several, among them, that the primary purpose of a dog is to hunt and if the dog won't hunt it is usless.

So too is your argument useless.

I hope they are teaching you other things in that law school you attend, things which are more practical, like how to write a contract.

Much of this blog seems to be a legal argument about why Israel should ot exist. The basic problem with the argument is that Israel does exist which is why your argument won't hunt.

It is like the philospher who stated that an object which moves halway to a destination; and then half the remainder; and then half the remainder; will never reach the destination.

This theory was rudely disproved when a child hearing the philosopher's discourse, threw a rock at the philosopher which struck him the face and broke his nose.

Guess what Mohamend? That rock is Israel and the plight of the Palestinians would certainly have been better if they had stayed to become Israelis as opposed to joining all the Arab states and armies in the 1948 war in which the Arabs got their asses kicked.

You can't rewrite history to suit your views, Mohamed. Why don't you tell us about Egypt for a change.


The Loop Garoo Kid

Mohamed said...


Welcome back.

I believe that the 'past' violation of law don't restrict us from talking about it in the 'present'.

Do you know why this may be useful?

a) This will prevent repeating this violation in the 'future'.
b) It may help knowing who have the right and returning it back to its owner.

You know? If the past violation of law means that we don't need to talk about it in the present, then all courts are useless, judges will find no jobs. But the truth is that who violated law must be judged fairly.

So, when Israeli entity violated law, then we should judge it fairly.

I stated here two important texts which are deeply related to the existence of Israeli entity on Palestinian lands, one is Balfour declaration and the other is the UN partition plan. Israeli entity violated them. Do you know that this partition plan -which Israeli entity is obviousle violating- is the same plan that their Zionistic leaders has agreed in 1947?!!

These continues violation and crimes of Israeli entity against their neighbours gives us the right to resist and fight for our freedom and to get back every inch of our lands, even if they were supported by strong states (England before, America now)

We've learnt that every right has obligations in front of it. So I ask you needing a clear answer; when Israel has the right to exist, what are the obligations in front of this rigth?

We can never stop the one who is being oppressed from defending himself. Can you stop the rains to fall?
You want me to write about Egypt?
Egypt is the greatest country, we have a long history of great civilization, its a country that make you proud to belong, we are the peace dove of the area, we have the Nile and the Pyramids, the spirit of giving and the spirit of greatness.
Egyptian people, the kindest people in the world, you can enjoy his spirit, patient and strong, an Egyptian poor man will guest you and offer every thing he can in his poor home, we enjoy the good spirit of hospitality.
You'll love Egypt and Egyptians.

By the way, I answered your questions that you asked on 'The alert of the explosion' post. I hope that you read them and answer my two questions which I wrote in the ending of my answer.

Thanks in advance,


Anonymous said...


I went back and read your answers which I found to be entirely unsatisfactory and which, again, displayed your refusal to refrain from recognizing history--the facts---and your complete lack of understanding regarding nuclear weapons.

As for the latter, the bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were atomic bombs were much less powerful than the weapons sunsequently developed which, if employed as was feared possible during the Cold War, would result in a condition called nuclear winter that would probably result in the extinction of mankind.

This is why the prinipal nuclear powers, the U.S. and Russia (formerly the USSR) have engaged in a process of destroyng a large portion of their nuclear arsenals.

Have you ever considerd what would occur if Iran shot a missile at Tel Aviv? You support Iran's program for the acquisition of nuclear weapons. What this tells me, Mohamed, is that you are not a rational person. Whereas I recognize there is no use in arguing w/ a madman. I will answer your questions.

Did Israel vilolate the Balfour Declaration? (I assume you mean the 1917 Declaration as opposed to the 1926 one). No, Israel did not. The Declaration was later incorporated into the Sevres Peace Treaty w/ Turkey and into the British Mandate for Palestine.

On November 29, 1947, the U.N. General Assembley approved the Partition Plan for Palestine. On May 15, 1948, Great Britain withdrew the Mandate for Palestine which incorporated the Balfour Declaration. How can you violate a law, as it were, which is no longer in effect.

The Arabs did not accept the partition plan; the Jews did. On May 14, 1948, Israel declared its independence--which violated no accords-- and was immediately attacked by various Arab armies which it defeated.

The estimate is that 80% of the Arab population of Israel fled. "Fled," Mohamed, not "were expelled."

So far as the "right of return" is concerned. It is never going to happen. History may sometimes repeat itself but it does not flow backwards.

Every second you spend in legal discourse on this subject is a waste of time. I am finished discussion the legality of Israel with you as your arguments have as much effect as a dog baying at the moon. The moon does hear the barking. It does not change its course. But the dog is beginning to annoy the hell out of the neighbors.

Meanwhile let me point out one other contradiction. I am happy that your are proud to be an Egyptian. Egypt is indeed is an ancient country. But Egypt was invaded by Muslim Arabs in 639 A.D. and this culture overwhelmed and assimiliated the culture and people that were then in Egypt. My point is, as an Arab and a Muslim, I find it hard for you to "take credit" as it were for the accomplishments of the civilizations that preceeded the Arab conquest.

Again, Mohamed, stop studying the leaglity of Israel and started concentrating on contracts and wills and trusts and Egyptian law if you want to a lawyer.



Tom the Redhunter said...

LOL! Loop, when you're good, you're good!



Yes Tom; when he's 'on point', the "Loop Garoo Kid" is very good.

But when he sides with Uncle George Soros, MoveOnDotOrg, and the Far-out Left-Wing...he's bad, very, very bad!