You know what really bugs me?

Absolutely excellent thread. NZ comments very apposite......but not only his. Maybewe should thsnk the idiot Anelka forbringing this subject to the fore whilst at the same tkme, hoping he gets a huge ban?

 

I can make such a statement, and I did.

The Palestinians are thoroughly disliked by the Jordanians, Syrians and Lebanese. They have arrived in such numbers they are destabilising the local areas, they remain in the refugee camps with little or no integration, are generally abusive of the welcome they initially recieved and present serious problems with the maintenance of law and order.

In respect of the UN mandate (C. 529. M. 314. 1922. VI.) I have no dispute about the content allowing for the creation of a Jewish homeland. It had to be in biblical Israel and not anywhere else (Uganda was suggested at one point). The fact that to extend the mandated territories Jews bought land from local arabs at inflated prices, even though they were willing to pay any price, only now to have the descendants of the vendors demanding the return of these lands; after all would you demand the return of something your grandfather sold because the purchaser had taken the item and improved it?

The middle east is complex and to satisfy all parties is never going to happen. Some Israelis and some Palestinians could find a way forward, but not all.

Anyhow returning to Nicolas Anelka. Why a Frenchman of Martiniquan descent make a gesture in support of Dieudonné M'bana M'bana, a Frenchman of Camerounian/French descent, who incidentally started as an anti-racist comedian and has now morphed into and anti-establishment/anti-Zionist troublemaker, is puzzling. This is especially odd for the gesture to be made in a place where it would go unrecognised, only to be discovered when it was reported back in Anelka's homeland.

 

Just like to begin here by saying that I regard viewing any person primarily with regard to their race, religion, nationality, sex etc. as being basically unacceptable, and obnoxious when it is accompanied by negative stereotypes based on that. For anyone who believes in God, whether Jewish, Islamic Christian or whatever, it should be evident that, when looking at the World and it's incredible diversity of species, races, religions etc., that God loves diversity - and that any person who is religious is compelled to do the same. A great Rabbhi once stated that only when a Christian can hear the word of God from the mouth of a Moslem - only then have they become a Christian. True religion arriving only when we have transcended the divisions which we catagorize as Islamic, Jewish or whatever. Any nation, race or religion which describes itself as being the best, or as `the chosen people`has missed the essential chore of belief. Unfortunately I cannot comment on Anelka because up until reading this thread I had no idea what a `Quirrille`, or whatever, was !

As to the problems in the Middle East we may be forgetting that the area occupied by the present Israel is more than just land, but is regarding as holy land by Jew, Christian and Moslem alike - quite irrespective of the Palestinian problem. Jerusalem is the 3rd most sacred city in Islam, being home to the Al-Aqsa Mosque containing the 3rd most important shrine in Islam - being the place from which Mohammed is supposed to have ascended to heaven. The creation of the state of Israel was a necessity in order to house millions of homeless European Jews after World War 2 but only that Although more just might have been to give them a part of Germany - where they had been for over 800 years. However I am sorry but I cannot buy into the idea of it being exclusively theirs by biblical right - you may as well say that England belongs to the Celts (or Britons) or that Angeln, Jutland or north Saxony belong to the English because they originated there. So if this offends, this is in no way anti semitic, but I feel that a City with such a multi religious background as Jerusalem should be under joint administration.

 

It does - we're just waiting for it to be handed back....

 

As much chance of that as the Yanks handing back the 13 colonies to the UK or, indeed, handing back the whole of their country to the Native Americans.......

 

It's far from certain that much of it ever belonged to the Celts of course.

 

True - I suspect that the Celts actually shared the same view of land 'ownership' as the Australian Aboriginals - basically, they don't own it, they are part of it.

 

I think the Celts were only an earlier wave of invasion anyway - hasn't DNA profiling linked them to the Basque region?

 

You have omitted the essential word - "validly". That is not for you to answer but for others. As Cologne politely implied categorizing whole peoples with negative stereotypes borders on racism. I don't know how you think you can speak for Jordanians, Lebanese and Syrians as a whole. I suspect there will be as many shades of opinion amongst them about Palestinians - or for that matter Jews as there are in any country. Are you aware too of just how many Syrians themselves are currently displaced? Let us not tar races, peoples or nations with a brush of one colour.

Palestine has as much right to exist as any other group of people - whether or not they get on well with their neighbours is another matter - maybe they need to take lessons from Israel ?

 

I am probably descended from the pre-Celts. It make me laugh when they (the Celts) talk about 'their' land, given that they stole it from us. They all come from the east. They are just earlier versions of Poles. Send 'em back home, I say! I f you can't prove that your ancestors lived in the land 40000 years ago you are only a guest.

 

Linked, yes - but both go back to the Urnfield Culture of around 1000 BC, which, somewhat ironically, has its roots in The Balkans. The recent predicted influx of Bulgarians may be nothing more than the second wave...