XPost: alt.flame.airlines, alt.politics.immigration, alt.airline   
   XPost: rec.travel.air, alt.travel.uk.air   
   From: malc@gelt.org   
      
   On Sat, 26 Jun 2004 20:13:56 GMT, "Gregory Morrow"   
    wrote:   
      
   [ Snip ]   
      
   >No one was "kick(ed) out".  Look at the original UN partition map.  Both   
   >sides were given a generous "settlement".  The "Palestinians" had a great   
   >thing handed to them and they blew it, pure and simple.  They now can't face   
   >the humiliating fact that the parlous state of their own people is their   
   >*own* fault.   
      
   The problem with this (oft repeated) position is that it is predicated   
   on a false assumption: that in 1948 partitioning was seen as a "fair"   
   thing to do at all!   
      
   Objectively, the UN partition idea was analogous to someone saying "we   
   want the downstairs of this house we think should be ours, but you can   
   have the upstairs".  Any rational person would respond with "Umm,   
   thanks, but we'd rather have the whole house".   
      
   NO-ONE asked the Palestinians (as a whole) whether they wanted the   
   Trans-Jordan or what is now Israel (because the proto-Israelis would   
   never have accepted the Trans-Jordan territory as a base for their new   
   state).   
      
   And I'd note that the other great partition of that era --   
   India/Pakistan/Bangladesh --  didn't solve a whole lot of problems   
   (and created plenty of new ones).   
      
   >And the Israelis did not "steal" any land - they won it fair and square when   
   >their Arab neighbors repeatedly attacked them.   
      
   Nonsense.  There is a difference between occupying a territory to   
   protect your own security, and deliberately establishing settlements   
   in order to change the ethnic make-up of that territory.  These days   
   we call such tactics "ethnic cleansing"...   
      
   Malc.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)