31. Eitan's two silly points
Noor , |
Palestine |
|
(11.01.09) |
"1. Question: why single out Jews and demand of them not to reside in city neighborhoods, in villages and in towns which are part of a disputed territory? Isn't singling out Jews in this fashion a form of racism, anti-Jewish racism...?? "
No one said Jews couldn't live in the West Bank, Eitan. The problem is that they are ILLEGALLY residing in occupied territory. No country in the world allows this to happen on their territory publically, so why should the Palestinians accept this? They wont, so if you want to reside here in the West Bank, do so legally. learn to follow the rules.
By the way, the West Bank is not "disputed" rather occupied territory. Those UN resolutions that you had the audacity to mention earlier on, call for Israel to w/draw as it is part of OCCUPIED PALESTINIAN TERRITORY. The ICJ ruled this as well in june or july of 2004.
Furthermore, please dont speak fo racism as israel os the only example of an apartheid state in modern world politics. Do away with your jews-only roads, your no-intermarriage rules, your "Palestinians cant buy land in present day israel," and the Apartheid Wall, and THEN start to point the finger. Apparently, you are not in a position to do so.
"Comment: "Occupation" in Arabic, when used within the context of this Arab Israeli conflict, means the entire landmass from the Jordan River to the Sea, including the UN member state of Israel, all of it. It is time we listen to the Arabs when they speak their language and not the "liberal" and "progressive" language used abroad, away from the conflict itself. "
Well, this argument has already been thrown in the dumpster as the Arabs have commited themselves to 2-states.
|