Noam Chomsky on Israel: An Apartheid State

[aris2chat]

And yet, oddly, you want us to recognize Palestine.

Can you explain this glaring dichotomy? Degree of difficulty: Explain it rationally.

There you go, mis-quoting me again.

I believe my exact words were, "Why should the Palestinian's recognize Israel, when Israel won't recognize them?"

Quid pro quo, mother-fucker!

Only one problem with that there exists a document that is legal and binding were Israel recognises the state of Palestine and its right to exist behind mutually agreed borders. It is lodged in the UN archives, as is the PLO's document recognising Israel as THE JEWISH STATE and its right to exist as such in peace and behind mutually recognised borders.

Guess you are shown up once again as a semi literate foul mouthed JEW HATER. Care to comment.

Why Palestine Must Recognize Israel as a Jewish State | The National Interest

.................Why, the Palestinians ask, should they be required to address the question of Israel's character; it is enough that they recognize its right to exist. No, it is not enough. After sixty-six years of Israeli independence and nearly a century of conflict, the Palestinians must recognize Israel for what it is. They are not being asked to define Israel's character, merely to accept its self-definition.

But, rejoin critics of Israel, there is no symmetry here. Whereas Israel is being asked to recognize the right of the Palestinian nation to a state, the Palestinians are being asked to recognize a religious group's claim.

This is a fundamental misunderstanding of Jewish history, prevalent even among diaspora Jews. The Jews are unique, in that they are both a religious group and a people, a nation, with a right of self-determination. That is why we speak of the "Jewish people”, a Jewish nationhood, but not a Christian people, or a Muslim people. The Jews’ right to a nation-state was recognized by the League of Nations and United Nations. Israel is and always will be the nation-state of the Jewish people. That is its raison d'être, and it is high time that the Palestinians reconcile themselves to this.

The Palestinians argue that the Israeli demand is merely obstructionist; Israel already defines itself as it wishes and Palestinian recognition will have no bearing on its standing. Formally, this is true. Israel does not need Palestinian recognition to define itself.

What it does need is for the Palestinians to truly and irrevocably recognize Israel as it is, not just the Israeli state, which has guaranteed its existence by achieving military superiority, but the legitimacy of its character. Only when the Palestinians can bring themselves to do so, will Israel be confident that they are truly ready for peace, an end to the conflict and the painful concessions that will be required by all.

In recognizing the Israeli demand, the Palestinians charge, they are in effect being asked to forgo the refugees' “right of return” and adversely affect the standing of Israeli Arabs. Absolutely not. Recognition of the Israeli demand does not preclude the Palestinians’ demand for a “right of return”.

Conversely, it is abundantly clear to anyone truly committed to resolving the conflict, that this is a demand which the Palestinians will have to largely forgo. They can retain it for the meantime, as a negotiating card, but just as Israel will be required to make the major concessions on borders, settlements and Jerusalem, the Palestinians will have to do so on the refugees.

Furthermore, the Palestinians do not speak for Israeli Arabs. They already live in an Israel which defines itself as the nation-state of the Jewish people. Palestinian recognition thereof will not affect their standing—unless, of course, they still harbor hopes of changing Israel's character.

Israel, the Palestinians note, did not ask Egypt and Jordan to recognize its Jewish character as part of the peace agreements with them, just its right to exist. This is true, the difference being that, unlike the Palestinians, they did not claim all of Israel as their own, nor did they maintain that in recognizing Israel in its 1967 borders, they were being forced to cede 78 percent of their homeland, nor did they harbor hopes of return of their populations to Israel itself. With Egypt and Jordan, the conflict was ultimately over the occupied territories of 1967. With the Palestinians it is still over 1948..........

And the Nazis wanted to be known as the "Aryan Nation".

What's the difference?

Both are couched in racism.

So is it not also racist to want to be accepted as the American nation, the Chinese nation, the English/British nation or the Roman nation. Or does your definition only apply to the Jews because of your obsessive hatred of all thing Jewish

Jews want to belong to the greater jewish community and the protection of the Israeli community. Beyond that jews are a widely diverse people that sometimes exaggerate their differences rather than be stereotyped as groups like the nazi, islamists and supremacy groups still do. Lies, libels, slanders, bigotry, racial propaganda and rhetoric language that has been around for centuries with no basis in face but that has led to millions of death.
Words like zionist and zionazi as derogatory are not advancing an mutual understanding or willingness to actually listen to either side.
Jews have been returning since the dawn of their history. A lot returned during the spanish inquisition and were encouraged under the Ottoman rule to buy land, start business and recreate their homeland. Ottoman also permitted the jews to pray at the wall, something they have been banned from for centuries.
Islamic history might try but they cannot deny the jews history with Jerusalem. Mohammed even had muslims turn away from Jerusalem, leaving it for the jews and christians. He instead had them face to Mecca. The first caliph invited rabbis to tell where the holy of holies was and to purify the mount with rose water and prayers. The dome was built for pilgrims while al Aqsa was built for muslims to pray on the mount.
Jerusalem was not central to Islam till the end of the 19th, beginning of the 20th C. The mosques and the mount was in decay, part of the poverty of the land in general.
Even under the mandate arab welcomed the return of the jews to their ancestral and religious homeland. The mufti incited the poorer less educated arabs in much the same way as Hitler was doing. At the end of the war Hitler gave the mufti million in gold to carry on the war with the jews.
The jews are part of Jerusalem, part of the land of Israel. They have been present in the area for thousands of years. They have been forced out and returned again and again always to Jerusalem.

It is racist of arab to not be willing to share the land with jews and christians when they came as as conqueror to take land that was part of another empire.
Even today muslims can't share the land with other muslims for tribal and religious conflicts since the dawn of their history.
Time some radical muslims come to accept Israel and work with the Israelis (jews, christians, druze and muslim) to work for more jobs and better economy for all. Time money be devoted to peace not war.

Shame on educated muslims for spreading lies about jews to defame them. It should be 'look what the jews can do to help us and make the region and the world a better place'.

Problem is not the jews, it is the hate being spread about not just jews but any group (muslim or not) that spreads lies and incited violence. Far too long ago both jews and muslims were seekers of truth, even within their own faiths they questioned and analyzed every thing. Now it seems too many don't want to hear the truth except what they erroneously spread as the only truth and point to everyone else as wrong, so wrong they are a danger and should be killed. More blood, more destruction, more extermination, more extremism, more anger, more hate.
Jews are not the problem just the scapegoat of the moment. If there were no jews it would be someone else instead of looking at themselves and understanding that peace don't not mean everyone brainwashed and terrorized to think and say only what is approved by the theocracy or caliphate of the moment.