01 May, 2007

GULF NEWS and “Occupied Jerusalem”


An interesting editorial shift appears to have occurred at GULF NEWS – as of approximately April 1, 2007, the UAE’s paper of record appears to have created a new geographic location in the world, to wit:
Occupied Jerusalem: Israel's Lebanon war commission levelled scathing criticism against Prime Minister Ehud Olmert in an interim report on Monday that cast doubt on the unpopular leader's political future.
This piqued my interest so I did a google news search -- and aside from a single byline in the KUWAIT TIMES (as well as two somewhat specious publications named “Journal of Turkish Weekly” and “Arab Monitor”) there is no publication of record that uses “Occupied Jerusalem” as a location. As it occasionally has in the past, GN appears to have messed with the attribution (I’m reasonably sure that the wire “AGENCIES” did not label the story as coming from “Occupied Jerusalem.”)

Now, there are probably many writers in this part of the world that would consider the city to be “occupied” -- but has the GULF NEWS editorial board consciously (or unconsciously, for that matter) stepped over the line that delineates opinion from journalism? Does this indicate a new period where publications in the UAE will be given license to become more politically active, and if so, is that a good thing or a bad thing?

76 comments:

Anonymous said...

Search for

"Occupied Jerusalem" site:arabnews.com

in google and the first result is from 2003, nothing new move along

N. said...

Relevance to UAE?

Please, "Occupied Jerusalem" is used in most Arab-speaking language media. In Arabic it is called "Al Quds Al-Mohtalah".
Just similar in labeling muslims or Arabs as terrorists in US(And) A. If you don't like it, just don't read the newspaper.

No, more Israeli talks please!!!, there is no relations between UAE and Israel (lol).

B.D. said...

An interesting editorial shift appears to have occurred at GULF NEWS – as of approximately April 1, 2007, the UAE’s paper of record appears to have created a new geographic location in the world, to wit:

Occupied Jerusalem


So what?

ibn batatta wa boorthaqal said...

lol b.d. is getting smarter!!!!!

DUBAI JAZZ said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
i, Bobo said...

"Occupied Jerusalem site:arabnews.com... in google and the first result is from 2003, nothing new move along."

Arab News is published out of Saudi Arabia. Gulf News is published in the UAE. Both governments have enormous say in what gets published and how discourse is framed in their respective countries. So once again I ask the question: does Gulf News using this phrase indicate any shift in the UAE government position on the Palestinian issue -- ie, are they taking a more militant stance with regards to support? OR... does this indicate that the government is becoming more tolerant with regard to what editorial positions newspapers can take?

Or is it both for that matter?


Relevance to UAE?

See above.


Please, "Occupied Jerusalem" is used in most Arab-speaking language media. In Arabic it is called "Al Quds Al-Mohtalah".

I don't know about that one -- I mean, we are talking about an English language newspaper primarily aimed at the Expat community. I would hazard to guess that a significant segment of GN's demographic doesn't consider Jerusalem "occupied."


"Just similar in labeling muslims or Arabs as terrorists in US(And) A."

Oh my God -- you mean you're not all terrorists? Because at the secret USA World Domination of the Jews meeting we have every Thursday (Cactus Jack's, table seven) that's what our Mossad masters tell us. I can't believe I fell for it...



"So what?"

So is it occupied or what? Don't go native on me, BD.

B.D. said...

"So what?"

It seems like talking semantics when the whole Palestine/Israel issue is a much bigger deal than semantics. Call it what you will--it is pretty messed up there and a lot of people, mostly Palestinians, are getting a raw deal.

i, Bobo said...

"Call it what you will--it is pretty messed up there and a lot of people, mostly Palestinians, are getting a raw deal."

Then let's have a substantive discussion about it someday. I'd say here and now but the SS or Gestapo or whatever might barge in and say "Hey! You guys are off topic! No going off topic!"

Look, my point and my question remain -- do you think this change in "semantics" indicates some sort of sea change in the way the government of this country views the Palestinian question and/or does it indicate some move toward greater autonomy by the press in the UAE?

Oh, and I personally believe that semantics are significant in the peace process. The agreement that grew from semantics in Oslo would be a good example.

DUBAI JAZZ said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Kiwi Boy said...

It can be spelt both ways - leveled [American spelling, more logical, less letters] or levelled [British spelling, less logical, more letters] :)

Gulf News is run by Israel-hating idiots. They've been publishing news from Israel as being from 'Occupied Jerusalem', always in bold. And this isn't new at all, I've marked this obsession since I started reading the regional news section of Gulf News. I think it's a government order. Maybe not the government, but it certainly is sanctioned by the Committee Against Normalization with the Israeli Enemy. Can we really expect peace when we have such committees existing? Can you imagine the amount of ink they'd have saved by now if they'd have omitted the word 'occupied' before Jerusalem?

i, Bobo said...

"Yeah right, we're riping the delicious fruits of this agreement now after 14 years...just take a peak at Gaza..."

Not the point -- both sides were guilty in the violation of that agreement.

But without it? No PA, no international recognition, and no moves toward eventual statehood. And statehood is what the PA should be moving toward as rapidly as possible -- it affords all kinds of legal status as well -- in the UN, the International Courts, treaty, and trade organizations... it's imperative that the PA move toward statehood as fast as it can.

But that means a stable government, the renunciation of violence, and living up to the Oslo agreed upon recognition of Israel. For their part, the Israelis have to stop building settlements.

But getting back on to topic -- has GN "stepped over the line that delineates opinion from journalism?"

i, Bobo said...

"It can be spelt both ways - leveled [American spelling, more logical, less letters] or levelled [British spelling, less logical, more letters] :)"

I did not know that -- I need to turn off the US dictionary in MS Word and turn on the UK.

You'd think we would have figured out the spelling by now -- what with our "special relationship" and all.

GULF NEWS, I stand corrected. I've removed the offending sentence from the post and bow before you as veritable paragons of the English language.

Anonymous said...

Help Help,

UAE Community Blog has been occupied by Israelis.

A said...

well you'll be interested to know that for journos, it is standard GUIDELINE laid down by the media council here that publications use the term 'occupied jerusalem' instead of Israel...it's a cultural sensibility that we need to respect here..look at what happened with ONE of Lirun's posts..there's no need to assume that Gulf News staff or anyone else is necessarily anti-semitic...it's just that at the end of the day we need to sell to Arabs in this country and in case you noticed there are few Israelis around to offend in the first place...

samuraisam said...

"I'd say here and now but the SS or Gestapo or whatever might barge in and say "Hey! You guys are off topic! No going off topic!"

I like that.

N. said...

Freedom of Speech. GN can do whatever they want.

I don't know about that one -- I mean, we are talking about an English language newspaper primarily aimed at the Expat community. I would hazard to guess that a significant segment of GN's demographic doesn't consider Jerusalem "occupied."

So, those Arabs are idiots and their newspapers suck, while their English media should be the best in the world. Are you completely nuts? Besides, it is up to you.

i, Bobo said...

"UAE Community Blog has been occupied by Israelis."

I'm not an Israeli.

Kiwi, you an Israeli?

BD? SD? Any D?

Now Lirun, he's an Israeli. And people treated him like crap yesterday and today. I felt really quite bad about that because he's a righteous dude and enjoys surfing the tasty waves. But some people drove him off, just because he's Jewish and from Israel.

That was way uncool of us as a community.

i, Bobo said...

"I like that."

Please promise me you'll never run for elected office.


"Freedom of Speech. GN can do whatever they want."

Duh.

Gulf News is a rag.

See -- it goes both ways.


"So, those Arabs are idiots and their newspapers suck, while their English media should be the best in the world.

First off, not English, okay?

Second, you're extrapolating. The post didn't call Arabs idiots, didn't even infer it. I did publish a post saying "Gulf News Sucks" last August, but that was over at my place on my own time.

And um, sorry... but western journalism is better than the journalism in most of the world. Which is why you created places like Media City. The idea is to emulate a successful system.

There's nothing wrong with that -- the Chinese came up with a better mobile phone system so now everybody's emulating it. Do I feel ashamed that American engineers didn't come up with it first? Hell, no. I want my cool new Chinese iPhone!


"Are you completely nuts?"

Completely?

samuraisam said...

"That was way uncool of us as a community."

I think for the most part it was people who usually don't contribute to this site causing a problem about it.

N. said...

My point is nobody really forced you to read GN, I think you have the internet right? Stop whining please.

N. said...

BTW, according to the United Nation Security Council Resolution 242 (1967), Eastern Jerusalem is an occupied city and I am not aware if this status has been changed. It turns out after all that GN description of the city as "occupied" is really accurate. Try to see that in many western media.

Again, no more Israeli talk(lol)

B.D. said...

I'm not against the notion of taking up the Palestine/Israel debate sometimes in this forum, as this issue has relevance/impact anywhere in the Middle East. But it is a complicated issue of which a lot of us, myself included, know little enough about. To be fair, I really do think you have to go back to the 1940's, and look at events since then. That's not to say that all past events are relevant, as I suspect some would say why not go back 2000 years. The 1940's was the watershed point and this issue has remained seriously unresolved with ever growing implications, since. This forum may not be structured well enough to really get into a useful discussion on the topic.

Skeptic Al said...

I noticed the use of the phrase shortly after I moved here, three years ago.

poo said...

i,bobo @ 22:12
[...]the secret USA World Domination of the Jews meeting [...]

ROFLMAO
Damn it I missed it last Thursday, lets get together this weekend and plan our future strategy to spread FUD around the middle east. :)

dxb hack said...

GN has called it Occupied Jerusalem for as long as I can remember. It's a well known Arab thing.

But well done for noticing after several years...

According to the UN, is Palestine...and therefore by extension...parts of Jerusalem, occupied illegally?

Anonymous said...

If you want to play the semantics game. According to several United Nations accords, Israeli dwellers in the West Bank and (formerly Gaza) were officially 'colonists' and not 'settlers'

So why did the Western media almost exclusively term them as 'settlers'? I think only the BBC was ever objective in their description.

localexpat said...

on no !!! not another bitch fighting session over arab israeli issues again. look what happened the last time!
LOOL

a said...

it's strange that everyone ends their 'please let's not talk about the arab-israel talks' with a lol or LOOL (sorry, local expat)...are they all secretly kidding? Do we really want to rake it up again?

Anonymous said...

OK let me enlighten you all . we are all victims of a big world agenda, we can disagree, agree , fight or whatever , we will never make a change , our fate lies in the hands of all the world leaders , even if both the Pali/Israelis citizens want peace , it doesn't matter , because the choice is in the hand of the leaders and the world Agenda , just like today's headline " WASHINGTON - President Bush vetoed legislation to pull U.S. troops out of Iraq Tuesday night in a historic showdown with Congress over whether the unpopular and costly war should end or escalate."
so as you see the world and livelihood of humans lies in the decision of one person , so relax all of you and move on , its a nice day to go to the beach today and drink something cold, cheers!!

i, Bobo said...

"I noticed the use of the phrase shortly after I moved here, three years ago."

Good point -- the Google News Archive lists Gulf News use of the phrase "Occupied Jerusalem" as first occurring on September 8, 2006. That is actually incorrect -- according to the archive over at Gulf News, the phrase began to be used in web articles sometime in mid 2005.

Nonetheless, a shift from "Jerusalem" to "Occupied Jerusalem" occurred. My question remains -- why the change? Look, if I can tell you why it's "Beijing" instead of "Peking," shouldn't someone should be able to tell me how Jerusalem became more occupied in 2005 than it was in 2004?

Kochumanavalan said...

The moment the word "Israel" or "Jew" enters the debate, people instantly forget the original point under discussion. Rather like a bull seeing red.

The question is: what is the city's name? Jerusalem, or Occupied Jerusalem? I think Bobo asked whether a reference to the fact, or view, that the city is under occupation, is required in the dateline of a news report. Arising out of an observed change in the practice of Gulf News in this regard, and what the consequent implications might possibly be.

For example, should journalists filing reports from the Tibetan capital dateline their reports Lhasa, or Occupied Lhasa? I know you're not the Dalai Lama, but you may have an opinion.

Remember, we're speaking of the dateline, not the text of the report itself.

Many thanks.

Kiwi Boy said...

Kiwi, you an Israeli?

Yes, but the stupid government hasn't delivered my army uniform and gun to me yet.
«/sarcasm»

And Bobo, you're so sarcastic! :þ Tone it down a bit, now, will ya.

Brn said...

The labels that the media use for people and places are always interesting, both for what they say and what they don't.

For example, I remember when an American conservative columnist pointed out that the US media always described the West Bank as "the Occupied West Bank" but never described Latvia, Lithuania or Estonia as occupied when reporting from there. (If you don't know, the Soviet Union invaded those Baltic nations in 1940 or 41, prior to the German invasion of June of 41, and annexed them).

rosh said...

i,bobo - I think GN & KT have been using "Occupied Jerusalem" since the stone ages - this is not new.

Perhaps GN didn't pay attention (and erroneously omitted to add occupied) wire agencies reporting from Jerusalem.

What's in a name anyway? I don't think it's going to change peoples mentality? Occupied or otherwise -this holy place has seen much blood, it might as well be called something else and we'd have the same saga.

....sigh!

Anonymous said...

I think it is more likely that GN didn't add the dateline (ie name of the city) on their site stories until 2004/2005

Eg: http://archive.gulfnews.com/articles/03/11/30/104147.html

No mention of Jersualem (occupied or otherwise)

The fact is GN and KT have been doing this in their print edition for as long as I can remember.

Anonymous said...

They could call it Al Quds al Arabiya :-)

MCH said...

Well I.bobo, the era of cut and paste western agencies wire is changing, and awarness is taking over. Whether GN/KT and all the other english newspapers like it or not, this is an opportunity to see the other side of the coin. Sometimes, its hard to swallow the facts !!

Anonymous said...

East Jerusalem is occupied.
That is a fact....
Its been Illegally occupied since 1967....that is according to the UN; hence "occupied Jerusalem".

Anonymous said...

Kiwi Boy said;
” Yes, but the stupid government hasn't delivered my army uniform and gun to me yet.”

Hence the stench that floats around every time you open your mouth to speak. Apparently, you’ve been vampirized by the Haganahs..

/sarcasm/

Salem said...

Its occupied Jerusalem, Occupied Haifa, occupied Hifa and occupied Palestine.

BuJ said...

and your point is?

all arabic countries, most of the world, and countless UN resolutions consider Jerusalem as occupied land.

Did you just wake up today or have I missed something?

il porco said...

Yes, it would seem you missed something. He was not contestng the view that Jerusalem is occupied. He was asking whether, we, the readers felt the shift he noticed in the way GN datelined news stories filed from the place in question reflected any change in policy either by the newspaper or the UAE thought-control authorities.

Anonymous said...

And it was clearly stated by many people that GN and KT have always done this.

Mubarak said...

My Dear Gulf News sensitive, I bobo:

Not only Jerusalem is occupied, but the whole of Palestine is. It is occupied by people from: Russia, Romania, Germany, US, Ethiopia, Yemen, Egypt, Morocco, Iraq, Georgia, Armenia, Hungry, the list goes on and on; people came from all over the world and took the land by force.

The fact they are Jews does not give them the right to drive native people out of their homes!

DUBAI JAZZ said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
DUBAI JAZZ said...

Aha!
We've narrowed down the concerns of i.bobo and partners to one single fact....
why the gulf news has shifted its dateline when reporting news from the Zionist state?

Well i think i.bobo should have been smart enough to realize that his frantic pursuit of the truth can only be quenched by an insider in GN...

In the mean time, Jerusalem will still be occupied (along with whole lots of other Arab territories) until ht international community gets its act together, and get the Zionist state to implement the numerous UN resolution in this regard...

rosh said...

nicely said Mubarak.

Lirun said...

i wouldnt have said anything but i have bit my tongue for so long it is now perferated.. i acknowledge that my comment may not live for long on this trail.. but i write it without the intention to offend.. and acknowledge that some will find it "provocative"..

i am always fascinated by people telling me im an occupier (irrespective of the fact that i hail from israel's continuous jewish community in tiberias and jerusalem).. often people from the every countries that were so thorough at kicking at jews out..

people came from all over the world.. you make it sound like a sale at gallerie lafayette or perhaps a metallica concert.. hahah

"came".. what about fled arabs (amongst others - but keeping it relevant) yielding axes and knives.. slaughtering us like sheep and punishing us for their anger at the very creation of israel.. someone who contacted me by email from tripoli said to me the other day..

but gadafi HAS said that they are all welcome to return now hahahah

you know its funny.. we are the most loved to be hated people on earth.. you cant live with us.. you kick us out.. and then you complain that we left..

after you kick us out and we find a new home that we pay for with donations we mustered because YOU confiscated our old home - you then tell us that WE stole.. i love it..

we continue to get slaughtered.. primarily by arabs at this stage but under keen british supervision.. 1929 and 1936-9 were eventful but hardly isolated massacres BUT you tell us dont you dare hold arms - soon you'll have your own state so we get one and every neighbour we have mobs us..

we somehow manage to survive by dropping soda bottles instead of bombs (the whistle from the sky affect) and using tactics we copied of bible study class and we get called aggressors..

my grandmother's sister's home was looted and burned to a crisp by arabs from yafo in 1948 and she was forced to flee to telaviv.. jews that had lived in places all over the middle east were chased away and under serious threat..

i love the image spread that flower power arabs were accosted by hulky euro-jews who brutalised them unilterally and got their way by force..

u should see what the immigrating jews looked like.. puny geeky whimsical bodied nerds.. a bit like gym junkies saying they were kicked out by programmers..

anyway - sarcasm aside.. the situation now is aweful.. people are suffering all around.. it has avalanched into a cycle of hatred that is truly revolting and inhuman on both sides.. points of refernce in this tiny slice of land are the most surreal i have ever come across..

the palestinian aid that is received is squandered into oblivion.. whether to expand suha's shoe portfolio.. for arms or for other purposes that do not serve the people..

people on both sides are so broken spirited that it is well beyond my comprehension and i live only a stone throw - excuse all puns - away.. israelis and palestinians.. the hungry children measure on both sides is disgusting..

we all desparately and urgently need peace in this region.. and yes there are powerful people who have a lot to lose if our middle east becomes a safe place..

but you.. you here.. as residents of our region.. i urge you to actively care for peace which doesnt happen through proliferation of biassed opinion and random catch phrases.. it happens through seeking dialog..

as someone correctly said earlier.. peace is an issue for all of us.. we share a neighbourhood.. whether the debate is semantic or about journalist professionalism or any other topic.. i urge you with all my heart to seek peace.. we are suffering a breach of trust.. and its people like residents of the UAE who are in a prime position to create commonality.. egypt and jordan are trying but they hardly pursuade either side..

on a lighter note and MUCH more on topic.. i visited the cave wadi yesterday.. a place where you see the oldest continuous slice of history in the world.. or something like that.. showing you modern geology and gradual layers all the way back to a million years ago in a slice that is no thicker than 10 metres.. its amazing.. anyway the nature preservation fund has a sign that explains the finding.. in hebrew it says the caves were inhabited by bla bla bla and in english it says the caves were "occupied" hahahah i immediately thought of this post and laughed.. the semantic debate is omnipresent..

:)

have a great weekend..

Anonymous said...

oh oh noooo, not again please lirun
please, not again
what are you trying to do writing that
...that it is just your own opinion
please not again
write that as an editorial in some western newspapers, but why HERE?????????
it is not a racing about who suffers more..

Lirun said...

exactly..

DUBAI JAZZ said...

that's the most absurd piece of rubbish I've ever read....
apparently, this Israeli guy, who once was trying to sound nice, is now full-swing on the BS business, manipulating history and fiddling with facts..
but apparently you can't improve the smell of a dung by just spraying it with deodorant...
the Jewish community continually living in Palestine since the emergence of Judaism is a very tiny one. 98% of Israelis (except indigenous Arabs) were brought from eastern Europe and other places, to create the populace base that can later create 'Israel' that all happen with the consent of the then British colonization of the area.

while the Arabs were co-operating with the Brits to kick the ottomans out of the Levant, some Balfour chap was concocting the most treacherous document in history, which is called "Balfour Pledge" to accommodate the 'people without land' Jews, in 'land without people' Palestine...

From then on, the immigrants have started to flood Palestine, establishing their kipotiz and getting British help to form arm guards for those colonies which have been confiscated from the Arabs earlier....
These armed guards have later become notoriously known as 'Hagganah' perpetrating several massacres against Arabs. Again, under the eyes and consent of the Brits...

i would like to say what I said earlier on this blog, at one point of history, super powers didn't use contraceptive, hence the illegal child..

The choice of having a dignifying peace is clear and easy... and achievable, and the ball is at the court of 'Israel' , it can either implement the numerous UN resolutions, or continue to antagonize Arabs..

The suffering is immeasurable I agree, but then is talking to Lirun, or to the whole clan of his will solve any issue? the fact is that Politicians make war and peace and we simply follow, people of Jordan as well as Egypt were not asked about their opinion of the respective peace treaties, there was no referendum...

If 'Lirun' wants peace, let'm go speak to his government, and untill he does so, he couldn't have high expecations from us....

Lirun said...

i do speak to my government.. regularly writing letters - contacting MPS - rallying - whatever i can think of.. while also establishing contact with my "other" to further normalise each other to each other..

i am actively trying to modify perspectives so that people on my side dont think everyone on yours is a clone of dubai jazz..

its not easy.. not with people turning on the rhetoric sprinkler 360 degrees.. spreading the misinformation like the flammably toxic cognitive excrement that it is.. so few people assist to clarify the issues.. the topic seems to cause people to purge..

i have no intention of ambushing this post.. but it becomes difficult to stand still for so long while the mud is slung..

you can simplify the matter all you like DJ but it wont make it any simpler.. happy to take it offline with you if you like..

i dont know that the rest of the blog's readers are so hungry for this discussion..

in any event..ive had a gutful of the sermons.. and i dont plan to nod and smile.. i think people deserve to know that there is another side to this conflict..

i have to also add that the illegal child metaphor is quite disgusting.. its in poor taste and is quite ridiculous..

but anyway - i confirm my invitation for you to have your sourly faible views properly challenged.. i have a hunch that my invitation will be declined..

please note that i have purposely avoided a point by point reply to your post..

have a great weekend..

DUBAI JAZZ said...

Most delightfully declined!!!!

Anonymous said...

"i dont know that the rest of the blog's readers are so hungry for this discussion.."

if you care how the readers are...stop posting HERE PLEASE
this it is UAE, a muslim and arab country, with lot of welcomed expats but it is a muslim place where an israeli guy , and you know that it is not...so please send your comments to a american newspaper but please not HERE, please please please

i, Bobo said...

"this it is UAE, a muslim and arab country, with lot of welcomed expats but it is a muslim place where an israeli guy"

Yeah, but it's not exclusively a Muslim and/or Arab blog.

This incident once again raises a rather ugly aspect of society here -- I ask a question about Gulf News editorial policy and some folks go ballistic because just the mere mention of the words "Israel" or "Jew" is supposedly an affront to the sensibility of their culture.

A guy from Israel -- who as far as I can tell is interested in closure, understanding, and a peaceful solution is immediately considered suspect, labeled a zionist instigator, and generally maligned by some people in this community because he just happened to be born into his family.

Are all Jews oppressors of Arabs?

No.

Are all Jews Israelis?

No.

Think about those answers the next time you start bitching about how people in the West stereotype ALL Arabs by defining them as terrorists. Think about the stereotype that you perpetrate when you define ALL people of the Jewish faith -- who are "of the book" and who have the same prophets as you.

There is nothing wrong with being a Jew.

There is nothing wrong with being a Christian.

There is nothing wrong with being a Muslim.

Lirun said...

dubai jazz.. you make me smile..

:D

www.mirvat.blogspot.com the blog of an amazing lebanese girl.. who hated me and all like me a year ago is now a very dear friend.. if she and i can get along i dont believe there is a single person in the world who cannot make peace - where the intention exists..

i reiterate my call.. you the powerful.. successful.. technologically advanced.. iconic arabs of this world.. as people who can tolerate an undefined border with neighbours.. please.. manifest the significance of peace and your values of moderation.. louder and clearer..

i genuinely believe that any call for peace and understanding out of your pocket of the world would be extremely closely listened to and respected..

i am asking you to use your influence not just to live comfortable lifestyles but to enhance the larger community of nations within which you live.. help smsh stereotypes that the world holds against muslims and/or arabs..

anyway.. my week starts tomorrow.. i wish you all a good one..

peace salam shalom

Tim Newman said...

In the mean time, Jerusalem will still be occupied (along with whole lots of other Arab territories) until ht international community gets its act together, and get the Zionist state to implement the numerous UN resolution in this regard...

Which UN resolutions do you think Israel should implement? And can you explain the steps need to be taken for this to happen?

Anonymous said...

Not to mention the fact that Israelis and promiment jews (lets not mention starbucks haha) are often in the UAE...;-)

Nice to see the discussion move on (or rather not move on!)

Anonymous said...

Anonymous @ 16:37 said:

"stop posting HERE PLEASE
this it is UAE, a muslim and arab country, with lot of welcomed expats but it is a muslim place where an israeli guy , and you know that it is not...so please send your comments to a american newspaper but please not HERE, please please please"


Why?

Because we hate Israelis/Jews?

N. said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
N. said...

Where is Secret Dubai in all of this? wasn't he/she the one who invited this guy "Lirun"? Again, nobody really cares about the hell-shit Israel. This is UAE forum not an Israeli, and there is no relationship between UAE and Israel.

DUBAI JAZZ said...

"Which UN resolutions do you think Israel should implement? And can you explain the steps need to be taken for this to happen? "


UN and security coucil resolutions, 242, 338 and 425 (which is not fully complied to yet.)


Check this out for instance:


http://domino.un.org/unispal.nsf/9a798adbf322aff38525617b006d88d7/9c1564a379bc943d0525654f005d71cc!OpenDocument&Highlight=2,S%2F10070

Lirun said...

dubai jazz - that is a fascinating reference. i suggest you read it carefully and lets discuss offline..

there are certainly many fragments in the text that you should find quite sobering..

:)

n.. whats wrong buddy..

Tim Newman said...

UN and security coucil resolutions, 242, 338 and 425 (which is not fully complied to yet.)

Resolution 242 calls for:

"respect for and acknowledgment of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every State in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force."

"Every State in the area" includes Israel, the "sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence" of which is not acknowledged by its neighbours. It is impossible for Israel to unilaterally comply with Resolution 242 because it requires recognised boundaries with its neighbours to do so; as its neighbours refuse to acknowledge Israel's existence, no boundary can be agreed upon. Therefore, your call for international pressure to force Israel to implement Resolution 242 should be extended to include application of equal pressure on Israel's neighbours. Will this be forthcoming?

Resolution 338 calls for all sides to stop fighting the Yom Kippur war, implement Resolution 242. The fighting has stopped, but Resolution 242 has not been implemented for reasons detailed above. Therefore, there is little purpose in trying to get Israel to comply with Resolution 338.

Resolution 425 calls for Israel to withdraw its forces from Southern Lebanon, which it has done so.

I quite deliberately asked you to explain the steps need to be taken for the implementation of the UN resolutions to happen. It's a pity that you didn't, for it would have highlighted the large flaws in your deaire that the international community gets "the Zionist state" to implement the resolutions.

Tim Newman said...

i suggest you read it carefully and lets discuss offline..

Don't hold your breath. Most people who list UN resolutions with regards to Israel have little idea of their content, and almost no idea that they normally require compliance from all parties and not just Israel.

hani said...

All said and done, I guess it's OK for American Jews many of whom have homes, jobs and a livelihood in the US, move to illegal settlements in Palestine? Why create added stress in an already stressed land? there are people whose lives and homes are being taken from them daily and most of them have no option to move elsewhere, they are refugees as is? Yet many Jews who have homes, monies and extended families (especially from the east and west coast and Canada) move in hoards to Palestine and these settlements? Lirun your claim Jews being kicked out from other nations. I am not sure this is entirely true, view for yourself how Jews are treated in the Americas and the clout held. I mean these people pretty much control a lot of key aspects in the Americas and Canada. This is not a negative comment, but please stop being so self serving and sympathetic towards Jewish hurt, history and losses and look at other side too, where many innocents are in harms way and probably living thru a prolonged nightmare similar to your predecessors.

Lirun said...

im not being self sypathetic and also not at all offended.. i am merely explaining how the many people arrived.. in many of the cases it was refugees from countries who now call the same people colonialists..

you should also bare in mind that many muslim immigrants and refugees have achieved enormous success in foreign lands.. im not sure i see the relevance or how that is an argument for them to surrender their sense of origin..

hani said...

" im not sure i see the relevance or how that is an argument for them to surrender their sense of origin.. "

sense of origin as per what or whom? the holy bible? which also states "thou shall not kill" but Israel kills anyway?

with similar logic, i suppose americans, canadians and australia including new zealanders must give up the land to natives of the land? because these are white men who have settled in the land of which they are not the true natives.

the world does not work that way my friend.

it's cruel enough there are plenty of people living under occupation and as refugees. do you need more of your people, many of whom are better off take whatever little from the less fortunate?

DUBAI JAZZ said...

Tim Newman says:
"I quite deliberately asked you to explain the steps need to be taken for the implementation of the UN resolutions to happen. It's a pity that you didn't, for it would have highlighted the large flaws in your deaire that the international community gets "the Zionist state" to implement the resolutions. "

Let me first quote the most critical phrase of the 242 SC resolution:
"Withdrawal of Israeli armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict."

Apparently, the interpretation of this phrase is highly disputable, but let's not be overly pedantic about it, it is clear that a withdrawal - to the borders of June the 4th 67 that is - is a prerequisite to peace and normalization.

The Zionist state claims that those territories are kept as 'buffer zones'; a precautionary measure to spare its inside cities and colonies the brunt of a war should it broke out right on the borders.

I am inclined to believe that the Zionist's state pretenses are pure bull shit. Otherwise why would they build settlement in the newly occupied lands? aren't they going to need another 'buffer zone' to keep it safe?

An outrageous expansionism in disguise.

Why do you think I don't have the desire to get the international community to get the Zionist state to implement the UN resolution? what gave you the impression that I am having the desire or that I am otherwise faking it?

This has nothing to do with the subject at hand.

Please note that I deliberately call it 'Zionist state' as I am not prepared to recognize it. Mind you, most of the people in this side of the fence are 'clones' of me, they don't believe in Israel nor in its right to exist. Call it barbarism, call it anti-Semitism, I really don't care. Things couldn't be worse...

Perhaps Israel can start with dismantling of settlement, then withdrawal from the aforesaid territories, then granting the refugees their right of return, then relinquishing its nuclear arsenal....Maybe after implementing all these things; people may consider living with the Zioinst state side by side...

But come to think of it; will 'Israel' ever do these things? even after loads of guarantees from the arabs?.. I don't think so, this is exactly why I don't believe in peace as a practical solution..

Tim Newman said...

Apparently, the interpretation of this phrase is highly disputable, but let's not be overly pedantic about it, it is clear that a withdrawal - to the borders of June the 4th 67 that is - is a prerequisite to peace and normalization.

So you only want half of Resolution 242 to be implemented, but not the other half, specifically, the part which requires Israel's neighbours to recognise it?

Why do you think I don't have the desire to get the international community to get the Zionist state to implement the UN resolution? what gave you the impression that I am having the desire or that I am otherwise faking it?

Because of this:

Please note that I deliberately call it 'Zionist state' as I am not prepared to recognize it.

Resolution 242 calls on all parties to recognise one another, and if you are not prepared to recognise Israel it is evidence that you do not wish for Resolution 242 to be implemented; you only want Israel to withdraw, which is only part of the resolution.

Perhaps Israel can start with dismantling of settlement, then withdrawal from the aforesaid territories, then granting the refugees their right of return, then relinquishing its nuclear arsenal....Maybe after implementing all these things; people may consider living with the Zioinst state side by side...

So, Israel should disarm itself, allow its enemies to build up an army right on their doorstep (like they did three times before), and flood the country with those Arabs that the neighbouring Arab countries refuse - after 60 years - to live as anything other than refugees. Yeah, this sounds reasonable.

But come to think of it; will 'Israel' ever do these things? even after loads of guarantees from the arabs?.. I don't think so, this is exactly why I don't believe in peace as a practical solution..

Arab guarantees regarding Israel? Which ones are those, exactly? Did they come before or after the Arabs launched 3 wars of extermination against Israel, or after. Sure, you don't believe in peace as a practical solution. A lot of Arabs in the Middle East don't believe in peace with Israel, hence the three wars of extermination and the continued terrorist attacks on Israel.

If Arabs gave a shit about Palestinians they would grant them then right to live and work in their own countries and not keep the descendents of refugees living in squalid refugee camps after six decades. There are few things more pathetic in the world than watching Arabs continually denounce Israel for its treatment of the Palestinians whilst treating Paletsinians like animals themselves.

Lirun said...

"but let's not be overly pedantic about it"

yeah lets ask the people of sderot who have been bombarded not stop since our withdrawal from gaza..

lets ask them what unilateral withdrawal means..

arab assurances? :)

dubai jazz.. seriously.. how naive are you?

in gaza a school was bombed yesterday for having a sports carnival because it was considered unislamic.. the people playing the cards are not exactly chess addicts..

Lirun said...

hani - not sure why you are fragmenting my comments and attacking them from an angle..

DUBAI JAZZ said...

It was my mistake to get caught up in this futile argument from the beginning…
But since the mask has fallen off the face of the self-proclaimed peace-loving 'Israeli' (a.k.a. Lirun) …now he's blabbering about the bombing of ‘Sedort’…
I can’t stifle my excitement about his reference to their ‘withdrawal’ from Gaza.
Of course it was of 'Israel's' interest to withdraw from Gaza, (what's the use of that dreary strip of angry people anyway?) it would make 'Israel' look good before the international community to pull out, actually, it had exploited this event to the max by bringing world media network to broadcast to the world the poor devoutly religious settlers being reluctantly moved out of their synagogue. It was indeed a 'heart wrenching' scene for the uninitiated outside observant.
What happened next?
The 'Israeli' course of action for the post-withdrawal period was clear: put the Gazans under siege. Get a significant number of effective states on the international arena to collaborate with you in implementing this siege. Cut off the financial means of support for the Palestinians (to punish them for their democratic choice). Strangle the hell out of them on the cross points. Force them to take the coastal route between Rafah and Gaza and use your warships to bomb and kill few of them every now and then (to keep the morale high), and don't forget to use your fleet of bulldozers to demolish houses that you think don’t comply with your security plan.

And then sit and whine about fire crackers falling on a ‘colony’ that has been originally built on a stolen land….

A classic ‘Israel’…!


Now Newman ( I am presuming you are a Brit?)
Our ostensible disagreement lies in the answer for the question: which comes first, the egg or the chicken? (i.e. withdrawal versus peace and recognition).
But I think the situation is much more complicated than this, I know you are going to receive this analogy with sarcasm and nullification (since your point of view seems to be fixed and not willing to change under any circumstances ) but I going to give it a try anyway:
Imagine yourself dining in a restaurant with your wife or your girlfriend, and then out of the blue a guy (who happens to be a business rival let’s say) comes to your table and forcibly snatches your mobile phone. In your attempt to stop him from running out of the restaurant, you run after him and you are eventually able to catch him.
What could be the acceptable term for you to let this guy go without calling the police or pressing charges?
If I was in that situation (and I must tell you that I am very lenient person): I wouldn’t let him go before giving me back the stolen mobile, apologizing and promising not to do it again…

You accuse Arabs of not giving a shit about the Palestinian refuges?
Good, at least you are expressing some concerns about the plight of those poor Palestinians.

Do you know that Palestinian refugees in Syria (for instance) have full access to free education, health care and governmental employment? Just like any other Syrian…?

But let’s not circumvent the fact that whatever those refugees have suffered from; was because somebody has kicked them out of their lands in the first place. Are you blindfolding yourself from seeing the simple truth???

One more thing, (which is of a less importance, but worth mentioning anyway)… Arab people are afflicted with totalitarian regimes. Therefore, it is quite likely that over the years the refugees issue was played by some Arab politicians as a powerful card which can be exploited to acquire some benefits. (those incidents are well known, I can cite some if you like?)

Finally Newman, let’s not put more strain on this forum (whose purpose has nothing to do with this discussion), if you are interested in ME affairs, would like to continue this exchange and to meet much more knowledgeable, smart and open-minded Arabs (and none Arabs), please visit:
www.rimeallaf.com/mosaics/index.php
or:
www.syriacomment.com


(This invitation is extended to everyone without exclusions. Tim, you might have noticed that I don't address 'Lirun' directly since our countries are still at a hibernated state of war and breaching the 'cultural boycott' bit might get me in trouble with my government. However, I am sure you are going to notify him about these forums)

:-)

Peace for now.

Lirun said...

dubai jazz - im sorry but that is ridiculous.. firstly you have addressed me directly by email - a copy of which may be presented i proof..

secondly.. it is exactly this one-sided approach that you take that will never fly..

marginalising me - people - or our claims is far from the road to peace..

allow me also to clarify - i dont get paid to blog and stand to gain nothing personally.. i am not an actor and have no interest in staging charades for your entertainment..

i hope that one day you feel proud and secure enough in your beliefs to be able to manifest your kinder side as you did in your email..

i wish that your society not make it unacceptable for you to be who you really have shown me that you are..

peace.. and truth..

DUBAI JAZZ said...

What's is this guy trying to do? threatening me to post a 'please-shut-the-fuck-up' email I wrote to tell him that the issue is not personal and that I am not interested in discussing these things over the Internet?

Listen pal, I have nothing against you as a person....I am an enemy of your state and whatever it symbolizes...
To be more honest, you sound much nicer than so many people I know...
However, I am really not interested in discussing peace on the Internet, it's a futile endeavor. Peace and war in our region are made by politicians..
I have much more important things to worry about, fighting for Human rights in my own country (Syria) for instance...
Let's not dwell on the subject, if we are destined to have a proposal of a dignifying peace treaty and there was a referendum, I will vote YES. I can do nothing more...
let's leave it at that...

Dubai Jazz


Here you go, you don't have to prove anything....

Actually, the only thing you've proved so far is your petulance, spitefulness and vindictiveness...

And given this childish behaviour of yours, I am going to retract what I've said about you being nice...

And for the sake of everything sacred, weren't you leaving this forum anyway?

samuraisam said...

Time for everyone here to learn a new skill!

It's called shutting the fuck up!

It's been 14 days and you have yet to shut up, so I am going to disable commenting.