NP Rank:
Abbas: We will not recognize Israel as a Jewish state
Abbas just declared that: " that he would not recognize Israel as a Jewish state, Israel Radio reported on Tuesday.
Abbas reportedly said that his position is no different from those Arafat present in previous negotiations, and that his staff is the same as Arafat's.
He also hinted that the PA may fall apart if there is no hope for a solution in the near future. He then repeated that the PA will not recognize Israel as a Jewish state."
This has also been reiterated by the FM of Egypt yesterday. His concern was that once they recognise Israel as a Jewish State then all the Arabs are at risk of being thrown out of the country.
It is a sad state of affairs that countries that are not free and Democratic project their own behavior on to the Jewish State and its respect for all of its citizens as full partners in the rights and obligations of all its citizens.
Since it has been tradition in the Islamic countries that anyone, including Jews , have and had no rights as full citizens and as long as they lived in these countries they were relegated to "dimini" status and most often needed to show that on their apparel. We have not progressed very far.
Most Recommended Comment
Recommendations (10)
-
Piobar
Vancouver, Canada -
Barry ORegan
Burnaby, British Columbia, Canada -
YankeeJim
Arlington, Virginia, United States -
Rory Cripps
New Port Richey, Florida, United States -
Caoimhin1
Dunshaggin, Ireland


-1.jpg)

Most RecentMost Recommended Comments (18)
- Sign In or Join to post comments
“thirty-aught-six” (not verified)at 06:28 on September 7th, 2010
Abbas or any other leader with in the PA will always find an excuse to not accept nor advocate Israel as a Jewish State. The whole premise of their being is founded on the negation of Israel as a State. Jewish or otherwise.
at 06:43 on September 7th, 2010
Abbas's hardline is understable.Although he is a moderate and secular unlike Hamas leadership,which ignores ground realities and wants only a Palestenian state with no Jews.Once Israel has been established,wrongly or rightly,a middle path is to be found.Two independent states or one state,call it Palestine or Israel which can accomodate both as equal partners in governance of the state is need of the hour.Bloodshed won't solve any problem.A secular and socialist Israel is preferable over unending animosity and war of attrition.
at 08:22 on September 7th, 2010
From a UN and USA perspective and my own, I am not in favor of religious states, period.
at 11:33 on September 7th, 2010
Jim, I couldn't agree more. Just because Abbas does not acknowledge Israel as a Jewish State, does not mean that peace talks cannot go ahead. Respond in kind, Israel will not acknowledge that Palestine is to be a Muslim state. Agree that both are states, let them be secular in governance, and accept that those living therein are entitled to believe in God, or gods, or a potted plant, as they see fit.
Semantics over the issue are allowing those who wish the conflict to continue the opportunity to hijack a peace deal that will be beneficial to all involved, and the world as a whole. This is nothing new, indeed it has been a sticking point in past. But with the looming threat of Iran as a Nuclear power, with missiles capable of delivering warheads to the region and killing Muslims, Jews, and Christians alike, and indescriminately, it would seem there are bigger issues facing both parties than the Jewishness of a state that has already been established and recognised by the world.
Moreover, Sunni and Shi'a branches of Islam have been fighting each other for ages, it suits the Iranian government at this time to side with Palestine, but who is to day THAT old conflict would not reignite down the road? Better to make peace with the states that border each other, and agree to mutual defence, rather than continue with the rhetoric and violence, and be left at risk to an outside aggressor while your back is turned. Turkey is a secular state, with a largely Muslim populous. Why should religious denomination enter into the equation? Think of preservation, for both sides will be wiped out, if they cannot accept peace.
- Sign In or Join to post comments
anymoose (not verified)at 09:57 on September 7th, 2010
Israel is not a religious state it is a democracy and should not be confused with the Islamic states surrounding it. Israels laws both criminal and civil are not equatable to Islamic Sharia. A secular and socialist Palestine is preferable over unending animosity and war of attrition.
at 10:17 on September 7th, 2010
Gee. I thought Abbas disbanded after the 1970s disco era. Wow Redneck Swedes, who knew?
- Sign In or Join to post comments
anymoose (not verified)at 10:37 on September 7th, 2010
the swedes have as much right to palestine as do the current so called leadership who come from egypt, jordan, lebanon, syria or iran.
at 11:39 on September 7th, 2010
Lebanon was a Christian state when it was founded, until it was flooded by Palestinian refugees. So most of those "Lebanese" leaders in Palestine are either from Palestine origionally, or their parents were. The same is the case with many those coming from the other states surrounding Palestine and Israel. Their families came from the British protectorate of Palestine, had property, employment, and roots there. They fled, leaving them behind, to escape war, but is a refugee camp really a homeland? The main issue still stands that peace in the Middle East is more desirable than war, and religious differences are being used to prevent that goal from being achieved.
- Sign In or Join to post comments
anymoose (not verified)at 12:33 on September 7th, 2010
nonsense. syria, jordan, egypt, and saudi-arabia pushed hundreds of thousands of tribal outcasts into the area prior to the U.N.'s territorial demarcation more than tripling the population. their tribal identities are still carried in their names. the muslim nations surrounding israel have made a concerted effort since demarcation to obstruct any and all successes of a jewish state. this isn't about religion it is about equality of being. and the muslim states can not and will not abide having the people they have kept in dhimmitude achieve statehood and an equality of being. which is why they use the qu'ran to justify and further their obstructionism. sharia is the justification and spells it out quite clearly for all to read. jews and christians are made subject to a number of humiliating regulations designed to enforce the Qur'an's command that they "feel themselves subdued" (Sura 9:29). This denial of equality of rights and dignity remains part of the Sharia and practiced in varying degrees by all mid-east islamic states.
at 12:48 on September 7th, 2010
THAT is nonsense. Those boundaries were drawn long before there WAS a United Nations. They were drawn by members of the Foreign Offices of the European nations. There was no Israel at the time. There was a British Protectorate known as Palestine. While I agree that the Arab people of those nations did not approve of the divisions set, mainly because, like the British "Zionists" (their chosen name at the time, not mine) they had been made promises that the British did not think they would need to keep. Who knew the Ottoman Empire would collapse? The Arabs were promised a contiguous Arab state, which they never recieved. Both sides were fed a line by a foriegn power. I disagree that this is not about religion, as your comment about Sharia law would seem to show that is exactly what it is about. I agree that it should not be about religion, however. Turkey is a Muslim yet secular state, and its neighbours at the time did not like it being founded either. But here we are. Take the religion out of the equation, and those who continually sabotage the peace efforts will have less ammunition. Let Israel and Palestine both simply be states, Israel has a right to exist and so does Palestine. Neither one of them should have a right to tell the other what to believe, so if Abbas does not accept Israel as a Jewish state, who cares. His mere pressence at the talks shows at least a defacto acceptance of Israel AS a state. That should be enough. It is a starting point, if nothing else.
- Sign In or Join to post comments
anymoose (not verified)at 14:45 on September 7th, 2010
my time line is fact and recorded as such. the population[mixed] living in the british protectorate was not predominately muslim. the first muslim 'migration' came for jobs created by the influx of european jews. mostly these were bedouin arabs. this is prior to 1948 and while still under britain. the second migration was a forced push by the syrians, jordanians, egyptians and saudi-arabians to populate hoping to effect rule by [majority] members. plus it had the added benefit of clearing our their unwanted. [aka fidel castro opening the doors of the prisons so they can migrate to the u.s.] what i said about not being about religion is meant in the context of two religions at odds. it isn't. this is about muslims and islam being used to thwart a jewish state. there is a difference. the arabs got their state as promised. saudi-arabia. but it had nothing to do with the creation of a jewish state or the british in palestine. it was in support of their conflict with the ottoman empire which started before ww1 and the proceeds of that collapse during the time of the british aden protectorate. arabs originating from that area. yemen.
- Sign In or Join to post comments
“thirty-aught-six” (not verified)at 09:18 on September 8th, 2010
Like how a census taken of Hispanic peoples in the U.S. would include the 10-12 million illegals and skew the numbers vis-a-vie actual citizen. So too does the census done by the British in 1922 Palestine relative to the Muslim population. Especially with the Bedouin's who were uncooperative in allowing a count and also being transient and not fixed to any settlement or region. The Hope Simpson report of 1930 mentions the influx of both Jewish and Arab illegals breaching the Mandate borders and names Syria as the culprit. The difference being that the Jews had money, employment opportunities, and brought with them trade craft and professions, while the Arab immigrant was poverty stricken, and dependent on the Jews for employment and services like health care. I found this to be noteworthy of the dichotomy between Arab thinking towards the Jew. The report cited health problems among the Arab population along with Arab complaints of "the enormous influx of Jewish doctors into the country.
at 10:02 on September 8th, 2010
Actually, Anymoose, both Arabs and Jews can trace their ethnic origins back to the same areas, many thousands of years ago. Both are considered Semitic people. And the "influx" you speak of was not during the "British Protectorate." The great era of Arab migration was in the early days of Islam, where they spread from an area in what is now predominately Iraq, across all of the Middle East, and North Africa. They even made it to southern Spain. The Ottoman Empire allowed other religions than Islam be practiced, within limits, as it had since the time of the Crusades, so yes, there were Christians and Jews there. In very small numbers. Though there were other Ethnic groups in what became known as Palestine, the majority were still Muslim, and Arab, Bedouin, or to some extent Turks living there to administer their empire. There were Janiseries living their, abducted from the Balkans as slave warriors, who would have as much right to the land as any other influx of people, as well. The fact of the matter is, none of that is relivent. The influx of Jewish settlers and Immigrants did not take off on a serious level until after the Second World War. The Ottoman Empire, the Muslim Empire that had controlled the middle east since the fall of the Byzantines, were brought in BY the Arabs as mercenaries, centuries before that. To claim one group has more rights to the land than another is futile. It was a cross roads for millenia, the meeting point of Africa and Asia to Europe, and has always had a mix of people. It is time to stop looking back to archaic land claims, and start looking forward, to mutual acceptance and benefit.
at 21:55 on September 7th, 2010
Anymoose(not verified) Could you please quote authentic sources to support your historical facts.Mind it,lies have no legs to stand on.You are an excellent propagandist and Goebbles must be turning in his grave,you have put him to so much shame.
- Sign In or Join to post comments
anymoose (not verified)at 05:32 on September 8th, 2010
my my my. a call for "authentic" sources that are denounced as propaganda and lies before knowing what they might be. and to be likened to goebbles. what genius, what intellectual prowess. i feel honored to be attacked by the king of conspiracies and narrow-minded bigotry mr. t.k. kidwai. i'm going to put this post from you in with my old christmas cards, you're just that special.
at 04:29 on September 9th, 2010
This answer I could expect from a genius like you.I never knew that you have prophetic power.How come,you took it for granted that I would rubbish your authentic source.Liars always resort to more lies to conceal the other lies,be it about men or matter.I challenge that you can not quote a single authentic historical source in support of your contention.You always beguile an answer by uttering pure nonsense.
- Sign In or Join to post comments
talknic (not verified)at 10:40 on September 15th, 2010
No country in the world recognized Israel as the Jewish State.
- Sign In or Join to post comments
jethromayham (not verified)at 03:37 on September 27th, 2010
Ok, hell with them (the West Bank and Gaza). Just treat them as the enemy and suffocate them.end of problem. The next is Syria and Iran. Go snuff them and do it with some expediency.It's time to take off the glove and rake them over the coals a few times.