Well, frankly we should have used the threat of cutting aid to actually take a stand on sorting this out. back about 6 years ago when the whole iraq thing had settled into routine after the gulf war. but we didn't instead, we just reduced it, and burnt our leverage in sorting out the process.
However, this website also mistates their 5 reasons to a significant degree.
1) israel is illegally occupying the settled territory according to UN resolution 242. Sure, except that the UN doesn't make laws. France wants there to be a gloabl UN income tax that would mena if you taxed income less than X% as a government, the UN would get the difference between your governments income tax rate and the global rate X. It's bullshit because the UN is not a governing body. The only thing israel is violating is their meber agreement. And since they are still a member, the UN doesn't have too much of a problem with it. You also need to looka t UN resolution 181. In which palestine and israel's borders are officially recognized by the UN in 1947. Palestine refuses to recognize these boarders. Period. It is a large part of why they are still not a member nation of the UN. THe general upshoot is that although some mebers of the palestinian side, and of the israeli side regard the settled area that was a fallout of the war between israel and egypt in 1967 as being wrongfully taken. There are israelis who think it is rightfully taken, and a LOT of palistinians of the opinion that pretty much the entire israeli state is the disputed territory. Unfortunately, those are the folks in charge on both sides and the ones who go to the negotiating tables. The US stepping in and declaring that the map as drawn in 1947 should be respected by both sides would not be alienating palestine any more than they are.
2)israel violates human rights as established in the 4th geneva convention on human rights. Well, hate to tell you, but the war in 1967 ended. And the human rights violations in the 4th convention are regarding civilian persons in time of war. Sure, people seem to be getting blown up every week, but last I checked, nobody declared it or reconized it as a war. The 4th convention doesn't really apply. You'd either have to go to specific agreements we have or a different convention. I'm guessing none of the geneva conventions address the situation as several factions including the palestininas have attempted, and still are attempting to get it on the agenda for next convention.
3) probably the closest thing to a valid argument. The laws there are messed up and bizzare. Mostly as the product of how the nation itself was formed after WWII. As for travel through the place. Because of the wacky layout chosen in 1947 (see un resolution 181), which was just beyond stupid, to get from part A to part B of palestine, you ahve to go through israel. Most nations tend to have rules regarding passage of foreign nationals through it's boarders. When they blow your shit up on a weekly basis, it tends to make that process more difficult. As for becoming a citizen and voting, that's a different can of worms that also has to do with how the political parties and the governmental process works in israel. It isn't great.
4)US arms export control act makes giving them arms illegal supposedly because of human rights violations. Sorry, but I searched the actual act for mentions of human rights, and they only come up in reference to titles of people's jobs who get reported to in footnotes. and the text the footnotes reference has nothing to do with human rights, but about notions traded with having exclusionary policies regarding americans.
5) is a matter of opinon, the key argument of which assumes that there is some peaceful conclusion to be reached about the size and shape of both palestine and israel if the right parties could jsut sit down. From the israeli side, their system of government makes it likely that the factions interested in ditching the settled areas in trade for some peace will take a while to get there. On the palestinian side, their method of government makes it almsot impossible that the faction of palestinians that are willing to accept the existance of israel peacefully will ever be possible. Then there is the question of weather other muslim factions outside either state would let such a thing happen. Farnkly, before 9-11, the lobbying power of the israei government in the US was at an all time low. The aid going there had been steadily reduced, and the methods and tactics used in the settlements by israel were coming under more and more mainstream criticism in the US. If it were not for 9-11, we might have seen the US put it's foot down, make israel back off, and put the onus on palestine to accept the 1947 map. Radical and fundementalist muslim groups were vehemently against this ever occuring. One of whom was osama bin-laden. Don't take this wrong. I'm not saying that was the sole intent of 9-11, but it was definitely a target of opportunity that got severely damaged in the attack.
Unfortunatley, peace between israel and palestine would require that outside forces on both sides help it along. The US might be convinced to do that, but until you have an arab state willing to keep palestine in line, it's pretty much a lost cause.
holy cow..does this come with a table of contents and a summary? where's the damn back cover when you need it?
I was going to type a rant, but you summed up most of the flaws in their argument. Cheerio.
The Petition Lies
1. The occupation is not illegal, and the UN doesn't make laws anyway. Resolution 242 says the issue of the occupation should be negotiated, and that the Palestinians have to recognize Israels right to exist and Israels security. See also this explanation of the San Remo conference of 1920, and its current applicability.
2. The "Systematic denial of Human Rights" is part of an effort to prevent mass murder of the Jews. Nations at war do not observe the full human rights of their opponents. The Allies bombed Germany and Japan, they did not observe the full human rights of the Germans and the Japanese while the fighting was going on. When a peace treaty is signed between the Palestinians and the Israelis, then a peacetime values should apply. The PA/PLO does not rule democratically either, so it's not as if there is a choice.
And the line about the Geneva convention is totally cynical and dishonest. Neither the PLO nor Hamas nor Islamic Jihad nor the Tanzim have signed the Geneva convention. A set of rules that applies to just one side is neither fair nor just. The war in Israel/Palestine is a very irregular war, and the Geneva convention did not have this sort of situation in mind.
Why would the authors of the petition have to resort to tricks like this if they really thought they were in the right?
3. Israel is no more an Apartheid state than Saudi Arabia is. Israel is a Jewish state at war. The Palestinians do not want what the South African blacks wanted: integration into a united peaceful state. The Palestinian plan is to destroy the Jewish nature of the state and evict the Jews. The Palestinian plan for 50 years has been to annhilate Israel, not join with it.
The petition is a knowing cover for genocide and murder. The Palestinians could have had a state at almost any time since 1967 by recognizing Israels right to exist and signing a peace treaty. After the 1967 war Egypt signed a peace treaty and got back the Sinai peninsula with its oil. The West Bank and Gaza would have been given up in a "Land for Peace" deal if only the Palestinians had wanted peace.
The fundamental problem is that the Palestinians do not accept the Partition of 1947, and petition hides this fact because it has to hide the truth.
4. The US law providing for aid to Israel would have been challanged in the courts if the law were somehow illegal. This is a completely bogus charge to persuade the stupid. The tripe about human rights violations ignores the fact that there is a war on and that civilian-clad soldiers (or terrorists) daily try to kill Israelis for the pure goal of just killing people.
5. Stability would go out the window if US aid to Israel were to be ended. Israel would be militarily insecure and would be forced to eliminate it's major enemies in a pre-emptive fashion to ensure it's national survival. The drive to end the support of Israel is a deliberate drive to destroy stability, not preserve it. The drive to end US support for Israel is a drive deliberately intended to enable a genocidal war to "Ethnically cleanse" the Jews from the mideast.
Don't be fooled by the bloodthirsty pigs who cheered when terrorists took down the World Trade Center, don't sign the petition.
okay you two
you see that soapbox yer standing on?
GET THE FUCK OFF
Man, what gives with jew-haters? Can't we all just get along?
thebaron
#1 Reason why it won't happen: WWII.
I would love to see the ENTIRE Middle East under glass.