8. There was never in history an Arab Palestinian state. There is noRead the whole thing.
justification whatsoever for one now (other than perhaps in Jordan).
9. The Palestinians have no legitimate claim to the right to set up their
own state. It is doubtful whether they ever did have such a right, but -
even if they once did - they forfeited it thanks to decades of terrorism,
savagery, mass murders and barbarism.
10. Palestinians are Arabs. The Arabs already rule 22 states. There is no reason why they should be entitled to a 23rd state, and creation of a 23rd Arab state, "Palestine", in the West Bank and Gaza will escalate Middle East violence and world terrorism.
11. The Palestinians are not and never were a "nation". They are not even a tribe. They are a branch of Arabs with only minor and secondary cultural differences that distinguish them from Syrians, Lebanese or Jordanians.
25. There are no visible Palestinian public figures who oppose violence,
terror and Islamist fascism. There are no Palestinian "moderate" leaders,
only a few Palestinian fascists who speak English well and elegantly, like
Hanan Ashrawi.
26. There is not and never has been a Palestinian "peace movement" nor a Syrian "peace movement".
[Hat tip: American Thinker]
Technorati Tag: Israel and Steven Plaut and Palestinians.
In response to 8: Palestinians are still human and their welfare should be of concern to the country in which they reside.
ReplyDeleteIn response to 9: This is false. Refer to the Fourth Geneva Convention.
In response to 10: Palestinians may be Arabs but their 'state' can be secular.
In response to 11: Your attempt to obliterate the personhood of Palestinians is unsuccessful.
Check out my most recent posting and leave your comments. Thanks for keeping up the dialogue.
http://winstoninwonderland.blogspot.com/2007/04/israeli-palestinian-conflict-today-i.html
8. True, their welfare should be of concern to the country in which they reside--the question is whose country it is. For that matter, it can be argued that before the latest Intifada, Palestinian Arabs fared better in Israel than anywhere else--in comparison with Lebanon and Iraq the the argument can still be made.
ReplyDelete9. I understood Plaut as referring to setting up a state next to Israel--where it could continue terrorist attacks on civilians--and not a general right.
10. How is there going to be a secular state when there is no basis for a secular in sight--between Hamas and Fatah.
11. This is not a question of 'personhood', but of being a 'people' with historical and cultural ties to a sovereign country--which in fact never existed. At best, it was part of the Ottoman Empire, but the only time there was a sovereign country there it was called Israel, then and now.
It's late now, but I would like to read your post later.