80% of Gaza Residents Considering Emigrating

Eighty percent of the residents of Gaza find it difficult to cope with the situation there and are considering emigration, a survey by the Gaza-based Institute of Development Studies has found. Gazans are finding it progressively more difficult to deal with the economic situation there, according to the institute, and 44 percent said explicitly that they want to leave Gaza.

Economy 'Significantly Worse'
The findings of a Near East Consulting poll released Tuesday showed that some 94 percent of Gaza residents believe their economic situation under Hamas rule is significantly worse than it was before the terrorist organization took over the region. Hamas ousted the rival Fatah faction in what amounted to a civil war. Now Hamas controls Gaza; Fatah controls the PA areas of Judea and Samaria. In elections before the military coup a majority of the Arabs who live in those areas voted for Hamas.

The survey, which polled 900 Gaza residents, found that 64 percents of respondents live under the poverty line. More than two out of every five, (41 percent) said they would leave Gaza immediately if they could.

www.israelnationalnews.com...


Wait wait wait...They want to leave? I think Isreal plan is starting to work. They created such tension in the region people are dying of poverty.ALL land occupied SINCE 48 should be returned. But if the do leave......where would they go?

[edit on 17-4-2008 by Master_Wii]

Originally posted by Master_Wii In elections before the military coup a majority of the Arabs who live in those areas voted for Hamas.

Has anybody noticed that the locals are entitled to democracy only as long as they vote for the right party?

Never mind...nothing to see here...move along...

And as the Palestinians are only considered as 'tenants' by their Israeli 'landlords' rather than having an internationally recognised state they will no doubt become refugees driven from their own land...the word that spings immediately to mind to describe what's going on is 'Lebensraum'

Eighty percent of the residents of Gaza find it difficult to cope with the situation there and are considering emigration, a survey by the Gaza-based Institute of Development Studies has found. Gazans are finding it progressively more difficult to deal with the economic situation there, according to the institute, and 44 percent said explicitly that they want to leave Gaza.

The Orville Redenbacher Syndrome

Do one thing and do it well!

reply to post by JohnnyCanuck

Has anybody noticed that the locals are entitled to democracy only as long as they vote for the right party?

I call it ETHNIC Cleansing.

Israel has never intended to have a FAIR settlement of the Conflict. It is instead methodically removing Arabs from the Old Palestine Mandate. Israel is not killing enough Arabs for that to amount to genocide, but it is on the same theory. "You're OUT because you're ARAB!"

For a variety or reasons, some of them dumb like the RETURN of JESUS, the US is giving Israel money, war materials, maybe nuclear materials and for sure political COVER in the world community as this process unfolds. It is a tragedy but it is not new to us. Darfur. Bosnia. Armenia. Rwanda. Uganda. And etc. We have a strong stomach when other people are doing the dying.

[edit on 4/16/2008 by donwhite]

reply to post by donwhite


Another factor in Israel wanting to make life as difficult as possible for Gazan Palestinians could be to force the issue of energy-rights to the massive gas field discovered in 2000 just off the coast, and awarded legal ownership to the Palestinian Authority, much to Israel's chagrin

BG Group in talks over Gaza Strip gas deal

Oil and gas firm BG Group said today it remained in talks over a potential deal to supply Palestinian gas to Israel.

According to the Times newspaper in England, BG Group is poised to agree the terms of an historic $4bn (€2.97bn) 15-year contract to supply Israel with gas farmed from off the Gaza strip.

BG, formerly part of British Gas, confirmed it was still in talks regarding a possible deal but warned that any deal depended on agreements being reached between the Israeli and Palestinian governments.

Why It Rains: Hamas holding 'Israeli' gas reserves hostage

An unexpected energy windfall on Israel's doorstep promises to resolve Israel's energy security concerns for years to come. Unfortunately for Israel, it is the Palestinian Authority that controls the licensing of these reserves. So, as Operation Summer Rains washes away the administrative and political structures in the occupied territories, has Israel decided to use Hamas as an excuse to dismantle the PA and seize its energy assets?

After the Iranian Revolution cut-off energy supplies in 1979, and the loss of Sinai's oil in 1982, Israel became dependent on expensive, long-distance energy imports. Towards the end of the 1990s, in an attempt to alleviate concerns over its energy security and reduce its dependency on imported oil, Israel decided to place a greater emphasis on natural gas. The architect of Israel's energy strategy at the time was Netanyahu's Minister of National Infrastructure, Ariel Sharon.

After Netanyahu's election defeat in 1999, Ehud Barak sought to take advantage of improved relations with Egypt to import some of Israel's gas from the Nile Delta [1]. There was, however, political resistance to the deal from within both countries and, when relations with Egypt began to deteriorate with the start of the 2nd Intifada and Sharon's subsequent rise to power, the $3 billion deal was put on the back-burner. However, the possibility of avoiding dependence on such a politically contentious source arose in 2000 when several energy companies, including British Gas (BG), announced the discovery of “significant deposits” of natural gas off the Israeli coast [2].

Estimated at 100 billion cubic meters of proven reserves, these discoveries potentially offer enough gas to meet Israel's goal of supplying 25% of its energy needs for more than 20 years - even without further imports [3]. The discovery has also raised realistic expectations of locating oil deposits beneath the gas fields.

Unfortunately for Israel, 60% of these reserves are in waters controlled by the Palestinian Authority, which has signed a 25-year contract with British Gas for further exploration in the area. Since this discovery, Israel has proceeded with the development of its reserves with the US-Israeli company Yam Tethys, but has been faced with an obvious dilemma over the Palestinian deposits [4]. Keen to secure the gas for its domestic market but unwilling to submit its sensitive energy supplies (and their profits) into the hands of the Palestinians, Israel has for the past 6 years pursued a policy of non-commitment, stalling and obstruction.

[edit on 17-4-2008 by citizen smith]

reply to post by citizen smith

Another factor in Israel wanting to make life as difficult as possible for Gazan Palestinians could be to force the issue of energy-rights to the massive gas field discovered in 2000 just off the coast, and awarded legal ownership to the Palestinian Authority, much to Israel's chagrin.

The last good guy who had the credentials required to make peace - born in Jerusalem, he fought in the 1948-49 War of Independence - was Yitzhak Rabin. I believe he really wanted to achieve a working and liveable reconciliation between the intruding Jewish population and the land’s long time inhabitants, the Arabs. But alas, as we know, he was assassinated in 1995. He joins the getting ever longer list of GOOD guys, JFK, MLKJr, and RFK, who gave their lives for their people. And usually with not much to show for it.

Which brings me to ask about Ariel Sharon - the antithesis of a peacemaker. My curiosity overcomes my politeness. How long they will keep him on the life support machines? He’s obviously in the vegetative state. Looks like he is to be Israel’s Terri Schiavo?

Although I lay 90% of the blame for NO peace on Israel and its staunchest and fumbling ally, the United States, it is true that Yasser Arafat missed a golden opportunity to have a settlement. I’m thinking of the Oslo Accords. But few to none Americans want to recall that Arafat was not the dictator of the Arabs living in Palestine, as most of our other allied “leaders” over there are, but instead was the duly elected Chairman of the Palestinian Liberation Organization. That erstwhile group was made up of 2 or 3 large and 10 or 15 small but independent groups.

We then conjured the Palestinian Authority to be our lackey in the region. I applaud Hamas and Hezbollah for resisting outside (US) domination! Except for Jimmy Carter, almost all to all our efforts to achieve a settlement have heavily favored Israel. No self respecting Arab will ever consent to that. I point to the Jewish occupation of the Temple Mount as the Prime Cause for the tacit support al Qaeda enjoys in the Arab’s mind. Resolve that intrusion amicably and half the impetus for the so-called War on Terror would be gone. But then if we do that our RWRWs lament Jesus will not return! Right Wing Religious Wackos.

First, i am most definitely biased.
Second - Arab citizens of Israel are treated as third class citizens, by establishment and elites. I can see a shift in desired direction, but it is very slow and fragile attempt.
Third - there is a land conflict because of mutual disregard of opponents position.
This said i just would like to ask - what "cleansing" of Arabs is Israel doing? Numbers of Arab citizens of Israel and Arabs in Palestine constantly rising. So all the accusations of genocide and removal are hollow. Prove me wrong, if you can.
Israel was established in 1948 on territory that was not Palestinian. There were very few Arabs who considered them self as a Palestinians then. Large areas were bought from Arab owners. In the armed conflict lot of lands were stolen from Arabs in territories Israel gained/controlled. However in territories lost by Israel (which were bought before establishment of the state) Jews were killed and the land also stolen, by Arab armies. Since Israel gained much more then it lost it took a lot more lands. However it was a mutual thing.
I do not argue with the fact that right now vast majority of Arab population considers them self a Palestinians and thus are entitled to their own country. However the issue is very complex ,carries a lot of emotional/financial/political/resources problem and both sides think that compromise is a dirty word. But the ironic thing is that the only chance for Palestine to become a country is to have Israel as a neighbor, otherwise it will be swallowed by its Arab neighbors, as happened throughout a history. And Israel's only hope to have peace in the region is good connections with independent Palestine. Yet i can see no solution in the near future.
Bonus for the conspirators:
When Oslo negotiations were in the beginning with future pink and shiny, i had a discussion with Palestinian merchant from Hebron. Arafat just arrived , everywhere were talks of bright future and high hopes, on both sides. And then on a contrast he tells me that NOW there will be no peace in future. I was amazed ,to say the least. He then told me that he thinks that Israel does not want peace because instead of making an agreement with locals, elders and respected members ,they (we) are making agreement with lier,thief and killer. I laughed ,but as a time passes by i see that in that discussion he definitely was the smart one,by far.

reply to post by ZeroKnowledge


The two-state solution is the problem, not the answer. So long as there are two "states," there will be conflict.

Ironically, the longer this conflict runs without resolution, the more likely a single-state solution becomes.

reply to post by TheWalkingFox


I do not see how it can be accomplished , in near future or beyond. Might be because i am simply scared of the idea though.
However the fact that it does not solve refugees issue also, and lack of any serious political force on any side pushing the idea are the reasons for my pessimism (or optimism?not sure.)
Not to mention mutual deep (and probably justified) lack of trust.
This "temporal" status of non-deciding might be too comfortable for the sides.

reply to post by ZeroKnowledge

First, I am most definitely biased.
Second - Arab citizens of Israel are treated as third class citizens, by establishment and elites. I can see a shift in desired direction, but it is very slow and fragile attempt.
Third - there is a land conflict because of mutual disregard of opponents position.

1) OK, so am I.
2) I have no reason to dispute that.
3) Right and wrong. Right: There is indeed a conflict. Wrong: The ‘disregard’ however is not MUTUAL.

It is entirely the Jewish people who are doing the ‘disregard.’ It is the Arabs whose call for the ‘Right of Return’ falls on deaf ears. Last visit. Even as Sec State Rice was in a conversation with PM Olmert the Jewish people were constructing NEW settlements on OLD Arab land. That is a break-off-the-talks level of INSULT but poor dumb Condi - I call her the Birmingham Songbird - did not understand that. She just rattled on. Offering her sophomoric advice on democracy to which no one listens. And etc.

This said I just would like to ask - what "cleansing" of Arabs is Israel doing?

What cleansing? Over 400,000 Jewish settlers have squatted on Arab land. By force of arms. If an Arab objects he is ignored or imprisoned. Take off the blinders Mr. ZeroKnowledge lest we take your handle literally!

Israel was established in 1948 on territory that was not Palestinian . . few Arabs who considered them self as a Palestinians . .

Duh? I always thought a Palestinian was an Arab who lived in Palestine? So what’s in a name anyway. In 135 CE, after quashing the Second Jewish Revolt a/k/a Bar Kokhba Revolt, Emperor Hadrian renamed the area stretching from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea Syria-Palaestina. The term 'Palestine' is cognate with the word Philistine.

At the breakup of the Ottoman Empire in 1922, the League of Nations gave Great Britain the area to oversee and tutor under what was called the League of Nations Palestine Mandate. Anyone living there could be called a Palestinian but today’s usage applies that name only to the Arabs who have lived there, as the old English put it, “Till the memory of man runneth not to the contrary.” It is a fact that a few Jewish people lived there too. In numbers variously estimated at between 5% and 15%.

For the most part, Palestinians (Arabs) owned most of the territory the sick-to-the-bone Christians over the Nazi Holocaust “gave” what they did not own to the Jewish survivors in 1948. How’s that for salving your conscience at someone else’s expense? But shucks, who were A-Rabs anyway? Sand eating camel-riders who wear women’s clothes!

However the issue is very complex ,carries a lot of emotional financial political [natural] resources problem and both sides think that compromise is a dirty word.

Complex? What is complicated about giving back property you took from another person without permission? Methinks you are obfuscating the real issue.

I can see no solution in the near future. When Oslo negotiations were beginning I had a discussion with Palestinian from Hebron. Arafat [ad] just arrived [in Oslo]. And then he tells me that NOW there will be no peace. He told me that he thinks Israel does not want peace because instead of making [peace] with locals, elders and respected members, they are making agreement with [Arafat]. [A]s time passes I see that he definitely was the smart one.

If I read you, Mr Z/K, you are laying blame on Israel for negotiating with the PLO and Chairman Arafat, rather than the respected leaders at the local level? The Israelis were West-Euro types and the “respected local leaders” were semi-nomadic Middle Eastern types. It is very hard for Superior White People to sit down on even terms with Inferior Dark Skinned Non-Industrial People. I call it the “Missionary Complex” where Westerner’s have thought it their DIVINE duty to proselytize the heathen around the world WHILE taking all their land, property and women in the process of course.

So we call them heathen and they call us infidels? And here we are, 60 years later and no closer to ending this costly stalemate.

[edit on 4/17/2008 by donwhite]

reply to post by donwhite


Really loved Mr Z/K thing!!!!
I just want to clarify myself on a few points.
For person driven away from his home it is natural to want to return to the land of his ancestors. And as it natural for Jews, it is the same for Palestinians. However what do you suggest as a solution? Because on a land which was taken now lives someone else , maybe even born there. Drive him away too and the vicious cycle will continue, will it not?
Not to mention that no Israeli politician will ever consider this step. So i see that financial compensation might be option. But as i said, i am biased. And a lot of people will probably still prefer to return to their land. I do not know how it will be solved.
As for cleansing - my handle is there for a reason. But i have the impression that settlements that will be on Palestinian lands will be removed, as they were in Gaza.Just as it was government program to build them, it will be their business to remove them. With all the problems, it is not such a heavy issue as refugees are. And i said in my post that there is no cleansing of Arabs. How the new settlement is cleansing Palestinians? Was someone thrown out? I hope that you agree that borders will be needed eventually, so each side grabs the most before the division.

Duh? I always thought a Palestinian was an Arab who lived in Palestine?

Well you probably thought wrong. Are you aware that there was a Jewish newspaper "The Palestine Post"- now Jerusalem post? It ,as you stated, was the name of region. The national identification of Palestinians as a distinct group (from ,say, Syrians) was born as a result of zionism. So in 1948 Palestinian did not necessary meant an Arab who lives in Palestine. It still was a human living in Palestine. When in post-Roman history there was an independent State in Palestine (except crusades)?

Complicated? What’s giving back property that you took from another person without permission so complicated? Methinks you are obfuscating the real issue.

Complicated? Yes. Show me an example of such a "returning" ? Moral or not,it never happened. Australia,US - returned? Because it is not doable. Other generations are born and consider it their own. Emotions involved, finances involved, blood involved.
And i totally think that Israel has a major “Missionary Complex” case. It is very apparent here, in media and politics. Does not help, to say the least.
Respectfully,
Mr Z/K.

reply to post by ZeroKnowledge

Really loved Mr Z/K thing!!!!

Thanks, Mr Z/K. You are not only tolerant of others but you have a good sense of humor. 2 qualities without which civility is hard to maintain.

I just want to clarify myself on a few points. (1) For person driven away from his home it is natural to want to return to the land of his ancestors. And as it natural for Jews, it is the same for Palestinians. However what do you suggest as a solution? (2) Because on a land which was taken now lives someone else , maybe even born there. Drive him away too and the vicious cycle will continue, will it not? Not to mention that no Israeli politician will ever consider this step. So I see that financial compensation might be option.

1) A solution? Not exactly. In the present circumstances - the Israelis are sailing on under the aegis of the United States - the Right of Return is DOA. Dead on arrival. Let's get off that horse as it is going nowhere. It is a NON issue under the current political reality.

2) Compensation? Yes, I agree with you, Mr Z/K. That is the only viable alternative. But I suggest instead of bogging down in a morass of old numbers, compensation of $1 million to each property owner of 1948. Payable without regard as to why he lost it or its current value. Merely show proof of ownership and collect your million dollars. Or payable to the owner's estate should he have died.

As a condition of the transaction, the former owner MUST sign over his rights to the State of Israel which can in its turn do as it pleases with the property. The former owner must PROMISE to give up ALL his claims for the physical return of the land.

As for cleansing - my handle is there for a reason. But I have the impression that settlements that will be on Palestinian lands will be removed, as they were in Gaza. I totally think that Israel has a major “Missionary Complex” case. It is very apparent here, in media and politics. Does not help, to say the least.

Although I’d date this current controversy from 1948, as I mentioned in my prior post, I think the 1967 boundaries are more realistic. Even those borders need a small amount of tweaking to make them easier for Israel - and the New Palestine - to defend and control commerce into and out of their respective countries.

That would be simple to do if the big hurdles were settled. For example, I’d suggest a grade separated 100 meter wide roadway from the new West Bank directly to the old Gaza Strip that would allow the Palestinians constant ingress-egress without the possibility of Israeli interference.

And more. It must be accepted by the Arabs (Palestinians) that a New Palestine must be an unarmed state. Only such weapons as are traditional police weaponry would be allowed.

To enforce this and to give both sides time to accommodate to the new environment the United States should station a peacekeeper division of US Army there, about 15,000-18,000 men and women. Initially this should be on a twenty year treaty basis, but with a review at the half way point, 10 years out. At that time, if both sides agreed, we could either continue, reduce our force strength or withdraw all together.

Isaiah 11:6 “The wolf also shall dwell with the lamb, and the leopard shall lie down with the kid; and the calf and the young lion and the fatling together; and a little child shall lead them.”

By the bye. I see a 300 meter wide border between the two states. Only US soldiers would be allowed inside that zone. The peacekeepers would control everything inside the zone. It would be a “free fire zone” if anyone from either side threatens the life of an American soldier. Just as we suffered NO losses when we did peacekeeping in the Sinai after the 1973 Yom Kippur War, I’d expect no problems this time. You don’t get killed enforcing a fair end to a sad situation. You risk your life when you try to enforce an unfair condition imposed on others.

The Temple Mount including the West Wall, would be placed under a Tripartite Holy Site Control Force made up of 1/4th Israeli, 1/4th Muslim Arabs and ½ Sikh soldiers from India.

Finally, the US could donate $5 b. a year to each side for the first 10 years, then straight line reduce that to zero at the end of Year 20. Adding this to the $50 b. lump sum property settlement we would pay, it's still CHEAP at any price! I say if we settle the Arab Israeli dispute fairly, al Qaeda would be history! Until we do, we will have to face continuing a W o T we cannot sustain in its present excessively costly form. If we had done something like this along with the 1973 Yom Kippur War settlement, there would NOT have been a Nine Eleven Event! That I believe.

[edit on 4/17/2008 by donwhite]

Sorry i could not respond earlier. Your suggestion, in my opinion, is very good. It is no doubt much much better then what is going on now. However i am still pessimistic. It is so easy to derail those well-intended initiatives, and we (Israelis) and Palestinians have very good (you might say - professional ) derailers.... There are powerful people on both sides whose power, status ,income and prestige come from
current mess, and conflict finally being resolved is threatening those.
Once again, i think that your suggestion is very well thought through and balanced. Maybe in the future something similar can really happen?
That is if we all survive 2012 (Too much time on ATS,i know....).
Thank you for investing time and thought for trying to make our swamp better.

reply to post by ZeroKnowledge

Sorry I could not respond earlier.

Glad to hear back from you, Mr Z/K

Your suggestion, in my opinion, is very good. It is no doubt much much better then what is going on now. However I am still pessimistic. It is so easy to derail those well-intended initiatives, and we (Israelis) and Palestinians have very good professional de-railers.

That is what brings me to cynicism, beyond pessimism. It is ONLY the United States that can accomplish a settlement along these lines or similar lines. I hold to the theory that in BIG TIME politics nothing happens by accident. All the more so when the same thing has been going on for decades. I contend everything after the 1982 Lebanon War shows the US is content to have the turmoil in the region that our leaders - US and Israeli - platitudinously publicly deplore! Shedding crocodile tears!

. . .There are powerful people on both sides whose power, status ,income and prestige come from current mess, and conflict finally being resolved is threatening those.

Yes. I’d say Ariel Sharon and Yasser Arafat were TWO who fitted in that category. Arafat died on November 11, 2004. Suffering a massive stroke on January 4, 2006 Sharon fell into a coma; as of April 21, 2008, he is in a persistent vegetative state. See Note 1.

You must keep in mind that it is the US’s diplomatic raison d’etre to prevent the nationalization of the oil reserves of the Middle East. To make a good life possible for 150 million people. The seemingly endless Arab-Jewish Conflict fits into that scheme perfectly. Arab leaders around the region use the highly emotional Conflict to keep their own people off balance.

I’m surprised every day that the Emir Hamad bin Khalifa of Qatar has not been assassinated. He is absolutely alone as a reformer in the Gulf Region. Because Qatar is isolated and has only 1 million people, he poses only a minimal threat to the major oil producing families. Sounds like MAFIA. Families in control of a country. Well, actually OWNING the country to use the Western concept. And we have the ARMED might to impose that concept on those people. OK on that.

That is if we all survive 2012 (Too much time on ATS, I know . . . .) .Thank you for investing time and thought for trying to make our swamp better.

Well, assuming that 2012 is from the Mayan calendar, I’m not much into anyone foretelling the future. December 21, 2012, I believe. Well, considering how LITTLE we really know about the complex life and thought processes of the Mayans, I will not be investing any of my money in that idea.

Aside: The more irrational parts of the Christian world is run amok with prophecies that spell out the End of Time. Yet, it is all a mistake. In Judaism foretelling the future is a capital offense - to be stoned to death. At the city gate. The various so-called books of prophecy of the Hebrew Bible - our Old Testament - are Isaiah in particular, Ezekiel and Daniel also. Those books were written AFTER the events they reported on. The Hebrew word translated prophet is better translated preacher in modern English. What today we call foretelling they called warning or admonishing. But half or more of our Christian religion is based on errors of translation. End.


Note 1. Florida’s Terri Schiavo sustained brain damage in February, 1990, and died March 31, 2005, never having regained consciousness. An earlier case involved another young woman this time from New Jersey. Karen Ann Quinlan. At age 21 she fell into unconsciousness after coming home from a party. 1965. It was conjectured she had consumed - perhaps unknowingly - some illegal drug at the party. After a long court battle, Quinlan was removed from life support in 1976, but to the surprise of everyone, she lived on in a coma for almost a decade until her death from pneumonia in 1985. Our human heart is a wonderful organ! Like the Energizer battery rabbit, it just won’t quit.

[edit on 4/21/2008 by donwhite]

reply to post by donwhite

You must keep in mind that it is the US’s diplomatic reason d’etre to prevent the nationalization of the oil reserves of the Middle East. To make a good life possible for 150 million people. The seemingly endless Arab-Jewish Conflict fits into that scheme perfectly

I have to tell you that to my shame i never really gave much thought about the situation's role in global politics of an area. I mean i understood that Israel is a local big player and it influences other countries and is influenced by them but i never thought of Israel being used as an "irritant" to ease other interests. Another reason for my handle added to the list. I will try to see into it as much as i can, but from what i understood US did not want to create Israel, USSR did. Only when it was clear that the vote might pass in UN, US decided to go along. I definitely might be wrong here, as i said i never really gave much thought to those issues.

And as for 2012 - i also do not take it seriously, having survived already several so called "ends of the world". Just tried to ease the post, which was too depressing.

I see that you used Jimmy Carter's phrase, so i will use it to let out some steam. He visited the area and several politicians canceled meetings with him because he met Hamas leaders. This is unbelievable. I mean, i think that Hamas is a bigger threat to Palestinian Independence then Israel itself, but not meeting an influential politician because he meets Hamas leaders also - this is simply stupid.

posted by ZeroKnowledge
I will try to see into it as much as I can, but from what I understood US did not want to create Israel, USSR did.

Actually it was the other way around. Pres. Truman and his UN General Assembly delegate, Mrs. Eleanor Roosevelt, FDR’s widow, are generally given most of the credit for the United Nations creating the State of Israel out of the defunct League of Nations Palestine Mandate the British had exercised since 1920.

As victors over Nazi Germany, the Allied Powers were filled with remorse that they could not prevent or halt the Holocaust that killed 6+ million Jewish persons and 4-5 million others. Since the 1880s a Zionist movement was getting stronger and finally, after War 2, it was their time! Without consulting the Arabs who lived in old Palestine, the UN “gave” the Jewish persons about ½ of the land. The best half of course. Can you blame them for fighting? When some far off outside authority GIVES away your family home?

The Arabs fought back and in 1948-1949 there was a war the winning Jews called the War of Independence. An armistice was signed in 1949. Then followed the 1956 Suez War. The 1967 Six Days War. The 1973 Yom Kippur War. The 1982 Excursion into Lebanon and a low intensity war called the First and Second Intifada. And here we are still fighting in 2008.

The two state solution. Once a few years ago, after the Six Days War, about half the Israelis wanted peace and would have exchanged territory for peace. Unfortunately, at that time the Arabs were poorly represented and the opportunity fell by the way as internal skirmishes were fought amongst the Arabs. By the time the Arabs reached the same 50/50 divided for peace, internal policies in Israel mitigated against it.

In 2008 about half the Israelis now believe they can ultimately EXPEL all the Arabs from Old Palestine and have it ALL. The primary reason for the internal fighting among the Arabs is this. The Arab people living in Gaza and the Occupied Territories are dependent on foreign aid. Several billion dollars a year. The Arabs are fighting to see who gets to “handle” the money and who gets to distribute the food, medicine and etc.

And as for 2012 - I also do not take it seriously, having survived already several so called "ends of the world". Just tried to ease the post, which was too depressing.

Yes, we must have a sense of humor to get along in this mixed up world.

I mean, I think that Hamas is a bigger threat to Palestinian Independence then Israel itself, but not meeting an influential politician because he meets Hamas leaders also - this is simply stupid.

Don’t forget Hamas won the first open and well observed election in Gaza. They are the chosen representatives of those people. Who else can you talk with if you are sincere about trying to end a 60 year old war?