<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: England should side with the Palestinians: the possibilities for an English foreign policy</title>
	<atom:link href="http://britologywatch.wordpress.com/2009/01/06/england-should-side-with-the-palestinians-the-possibilities-for-an-english-foreign-policy/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://britologywatch.wordpress.com/2009/01/06/england-should-side-with-the-palestinians-the-possibilities-for-an-english-foreign-policy/</link>
	<description>Resisting the efforts to impose a unitary British value system and identity</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 22 Nov 2009 09:44:33 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: M Anderson</title>
		<link>http://britologywatch.wordpress.com/2009/01/06/england-should-side-with-the-palestinians-the-possibilities-for-an-english-foreign-policy/#comment-1610</link>
		<dc:creator>M Anderson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Mar 2009 17:56:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://britologywatch.wordpress.com/?p=273#comment-1610</guid>
		<description>&quot;After all, it was Britain that laid the foundations for the present morass by sanctioning the creation of a state of Israel without a corresponding Palestinian homeland while it was administering the territory in the wake of the Second World War.&quot; 

Arthur Balfour was born at Whittingehame, East Lothian, Scotland. 

&quot;The Balfour Declaration of 1917: A statement of policy by the British government stating that &quot;[the] government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people&quot; with the understanding that &quot;nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine...&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;After all, it was Britain that laid the foundations for the present morass by sanctioning the creation of a state of Israel without a corresponding Palestinian homeland while it was administering the territory in the wake of the Second World War.&#8221; </p>
<p>Arthur Balfour was born at Whittingehame, East Lothian, Scotland. </p>
<p>&#8220;The Balfour Declaration of 1917: A statement of policy by the British government stating that &#8220;[the] government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people&#8221; with the understanding that &#8220;nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine&#8230;&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: David</title>
		<link>http://britologywatch.wordpress.com/2009/01/06/england-should-side-with-the-palestinians-the-possibilities-for-an-english-foreign-policy/#comment-1578</link>
		<dc:creator>David</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 22 Feb 2009 15:16:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://britologywatch.wordpress.com/?p=273#comment-1578</guid>
		<description>Well, Abe, I have to admit that you&#039;re right with respect to my imperfect knowledge of the history. So on that level, I&#039;m not qualified to speak. But I think the only way out of this conflict that can be conceived of in the present is for there to be some sort of two-state or two-nation solution: probably the former, as it&#039;s the only deal currently on the table. What borders those states / nations should be within I&#039;ll leave to the politicians and people on the ground to decide!

I do, however, think that, in this conflict perhaps more than in any other, people of faith need to try to seek the will of God. Easier said than done; but I think God is for peaceful co-existence of all peoples and faiths, not dividing lines keeping them apart; and it&#039;s that vision of reconciliation and peace that should guide the deliberations and actions of those working for a true and lasting settlement. And that also involves reconciliation in some form, which we have to hope that God&#039;s Providence (alone) will bring, between the &lt;strong&gt;three&lt;/strong&gt; great monotheistic religions on earth. I note you said only two, which I assume omits Islam. No peace without getting the Muslims on board!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well, Abe, I have to admit that you&#8217;re right with respect to my imperfect knowledge of the history. So on that level, I&#8217;m not qualified to speak. But I think the only way out of this conflict that can be conceived of in the present is for there to be some sort of two-state or two-nation solution: probably the former, as it&#8217;s the only deal currently on the table. What borders those states / nations should be within I&#8217;ll leave to the politicians and people on the ground to decide!</p>
<p>I do, however, think that, in this conflict perhaps more than in any other, people of faith need to try to seek the will of God. Easier said than done; but I think God is for peaceful co-existence of all peoples and faiths, not dividing lines keeping them apart; and it&#8217;s that vision of reconciliation and peace that should guide the deliberations and actions of those working for a true and lasting settlement. And that also involves reconciliation in some form, which we have to hope that God&#8217;s Providence (alone) will bring, between the <strong>three</strong> great monotheistic religions on earth. I note you said only two, which I assume omits Islam. No peace without getting the Muslims on board!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Abe Bird</title>
		<link>http://britologywatch.wordpress.com/2009/01/06/england-should-side-with-the-palestinians-the-possibilities-for-an-english-foreign-policy/#comment-1577</link>
		<dc:creator>Abe Bird</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 22 Feb 2009 08:35:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://britologywatch.wordpress.com/?p=273#comment-1577</guid>
		<description>As for 1948, and for now, there are 22 Arab nationalists Islamic states. One of these states, called &quot;the Kingdome of Trans Jordan&quot; until 1947 and Jordan since then, located on the big &#039;half&#039; of historical and political Palestine. Most of Jordan soil sits on historical Palestine and most of the Jordanians (about 75% and some say even 85%) see themselves Palestinians Arabs. Most of the pre-1967 Palestinians terror organizations originated out of the &#039;west bank of the Jordan (river)&quot; originally the name given to the all territory west of the river. Same siblings and families live in both places. It is the same people as said always by Fatah and Arabs leaders, including Yasser Arafat (who tried to execute by force his political agenda in Sept.1970 and Jordanian forces battle the PLO terrorist organization, driving its members out of Jordan after the group&#039;s violent activity threatens to destabilize the kingdom. The terrorists flee to Lebanon.), and by King Houssein and his brother Prince Hassan. 
The main obstacle for peace is then, while Israel agrees to withdraw from some parts of the &quot;West Bank&quot; (in its pre-1948 meaning aka Judea and Samaria), most of the Arab Palestinians want the WHOLE west bank, and I mean West Bank in its premier and original interpretation: All the West Bank from the Jordan river to the seashore including the state of Israel itself!!! One can see that if he looks inside the Arab leaders&#039; dialogue on the subject. The main outcome of this dialogue is their call to create &quot;one state for two peoples&quot; or &quot;A state of all its citizens&quot;. That is coverage for their real aim.
 http://www.netreach.net/~zoa/newsLinks/shockers/m96.htm 
http://soccerdad.baltiblogs.com/archives/003939.html

Once Palestine (It’s a Roman and later British name for the land of Israel) had been already divided by the League of Nations in 1923 that handed the Eastern part to Hashemite Kingdom to rule the Arab Palestinians there, they fail to accomplish mission and hand the Western part back to the Jews. They failed their historic mission because of small local politics of the British. Now you say, that Israel should add and give the Jordanian 1948 occupied territories to the same people in order to create their 2nd Palestinian state. So, why then not to create a second Jewish Palestinian state in Judea and Samaria next to the second Arab Palestinian state there?  Just to be even.

I&#039;m quite sarcastic because people in Europe projects their opinions with out digging the facts and lean on them, but fix their mind in reaction to the current Anti Israel motivated misguided and false headlines of what occurs Now. Israel pictured as the big and strong Goliath and small but blood shading Arab Palestinians as the weak and just. That attitude is even not actually meets the facts, less to say morally correct. Israel is the tiny entity that suffers from Islamic/Arab rejection since hers very beginning. Even Egypt and Jordan reflect that true through their official and non-official staff, academics and religion&#039;s clerks.  

As for describing Israel as Jewish state I see a lack of knowledge of those who claim that Israel should be secular. When said a &quot;Jewish state&quot; it refers to the fact that Israel is the national state of the Jewish people and it has nothing to do with religion. When one says that England (not Britain) is Anglican state it doesn&#039;t mean that religion is above all. England is the land of the English and Britain of the Britain. What the Jews can do when &#039;Jewish&#039; is a national and religious under the same umbrella?
Israel is a secular state and ALL religions are tolerated with great concern to religious people of all kinds as needed, because Israel is a democracy and because of the very sensitive fact that Israel Land is the Holy Land, at least in the eyes of the two great religions on earth. But it has nothing to shade upon the ultra free society that exists in Israel.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As for 1948, and for now, there are 22 Arab nationalists Islamic states. One of these states, called &#8220;the Kingdome of Trans Jordan&#8221; until 1947 and Jordan since then, located on the big &#8216;half&#8217; of historical and political Palestine. Most of Jordan soil sits on historical Palestine and most of the Jordanians (about 75% and some say even 85%) see themselves Palestinians Arabs. Most of the pre-1967 Palestinians terror organizations originated out of the &#8216;west bank of the Jordan (river)&#8221; originally the name given to the all territory west of the river. Same siblings and families live in both places. It is the same people as said always by Fatah and Arabs leaders, including Yasser Arafat (who tried to execute by force his political agenda in Sept.1970 and Jordanian forces battle the PLO terrorist organization, driving its members out of Jordan after the group&#8217;s violent activity threatens to destabilize the kingdom. The terrorists flee to Lebanon.), and by King Houssein and his brother Prince Hassan.<br />
The main obstacle for peace is then, while Israel agrees to withdraw from some parts of the &#8220;West Bank&#8221; (in its pre-1948 meaning aka Judea and Samaria), most of the Arab Palestinians want the WHOLE west bank, and I mean West Bank in its premier and original interpretation: All the West Bank from the Jordan river to the seashore including the state of Israel itself!!! One can see that if he looks inside the Arab leaders&#8217; dialogue on the subject. The main outcome of this dialogue is their call to create &#8220;one state for two peoples&#8221; or &#8220;A state of all its citizens&#8221;. That is coverage for their real aim.<br />
 <a href="http://www.netreach.net/~zoa/newsLinks/shockers/m96.htm" rel="nofollow">http://www.netreach.net/~zoa/newsLinks/shockers/m96.htm</a><br />
<a href="http://soccerdad.baltiblogs.com/archives/003939.html" rel="nofollow">http://soccerdad.baltiblogs.com/archives/003939.html</a></p>
<p>Once Palestine (It’s a Roman and later British name for the land of Israel) had been already divided by the League of Nations in 1923 that handed the Eastern part to Hashemite Kingdom to rule the Arab Palestinians there, they fail to accomplish mission and hand the Western part back to the Jews. They failed their historic mission because of small local politics of the British. Now you say, that Israel should add and give the Jordanian 1948 occupied territories to the same people in order to create their 2nd Palestinian state. So, why then not to create a second Jewish Palestinian state in Judea and Samaria next to the second Arab Palestinian state there?  Just to be even.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m quite sarcastic because people in Europe projects their opinions with out digging the facts and lean on them, but fix their mind in reaction to the current Anti Israel motivated misguided and false headlines of what occurs Now. Israel pictured as the big and strong Goliath and small but blood shading Arab Palestinians as the weak and just. That attitude is even not actually meets the facts, less to say morally correct. Israel is the tiny entity that suffers from Islamic/Arab rejection since hers very beginning. Even Egypt and Jordan reflect that true through their official and non-official staff, academics and religion&#8217;s clerks.  </p>
<p>As for describing Israel as Jewish state I see a lack of knowledge of those who claim that Israel should be secular. When said a &#8220;Jewish state&#8221; it refers to the fact that Israel is the national state of the Jewish people and it has nothing to do with religion. When one says that England (not Britain) is Anglican state it doesn&#8217;t mean that religion is above all. England is the land of the English and Britain of the Britain. What the Jews can do when &#8216;Jewish&#8217; is a national and religious under the same umbrella?<br />
Israel is a secular state and ALL religions are tolerated with great concern to religious people of all kinds as needed, because Israel is a democracy and because of the very sensitive fact that Israel Land is the Holy Land, at least in the eyes of the two great religions on earth. But it has nothing to shade upon the ultra free society that exists in Israel.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: David</title>
		<link>http://britologywatch.wordpress.com/2009/01/06/england-should-side-with-the-palestinians-the-possibilities-for-an-english-foreign-policy/#comment-1576</link>
		<dc:creator>David</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 21 Feb 2009 09:51:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://britologywatch.wordpress.com/?p=273#comment-1576</guid>
		<description>For the record, Abe, I&#039;m not opposed to Jews settling in Israel-Palestine, so long as this is within recognised international borders and sustainable limits. I&#039;m not even opposed to Israel defining itself as a Jewish nation or state, which is not how it is presently defined according to one of my commenters (i.e. it&#039;s officially secular). However, I am opposed to proprietary claims over the Holy Land. You refer to Israel as &quot;their [Palestinian Jews&#039;] Holy Land&quot;. Well, is it theirs and theirs alone? That&#039;s the whole point, it seems to me; and that&#039;s what the three great monotheistic religions have been fighting about for the last 1500 years or so. And besides, you and I both know that it&#039;s not just &#039;Palestinian Jews&#039; that have been settling in Israel: Jews from all over the world have the right to do so, which is completely unsustainable.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>For the record, Abe, I&#8217;m not opposed to Jews settling in Israel-Palestine, so long as this is within recognised international borders and sustainable limits. I&#8217;m not even opposed to Israel defining itself as a Jewish nation or state, which is not how it is presently defined according to one of my commenters (i.e. it&#8217;s officially secular). However, I am opposed to proprietary claims over the Holy Land. You refer to Israel as &#8220;their [Palestinian Jews'] Holy Land&#8221;. Well, is it theirs and theirs alone? That&#8217;s the whole point, it seems to me; and that&#8217;s what the three great monotheistic religions have been fighting about for the last 1500 years or so. And besides, you and I both know that it&#8217;s not just &#8216;Palestinian Jews&#8217; that have been settling in Israel: Jews from all over the world have the right to do so, which is completely unsustainable.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Abe Bird</title>
		<link>http://britologywatch.wordpress.com/2009/01/06/england-should-side-with-the-palestinians-the-possibilities-for-an-english-foreign-policy/#comment-1575</link>
		<dc:creator>Abe Bird</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 21 Feb 2009 08:16:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://britologywatch.wordpress.com/?p=273#comment-1575</guid>
		<description>Englans should side aside and let Israel and the Arabs to deal with their problems. The Britons already created much of that problem though their occupation and betrayiong their task to sepetare the Land of Israel between the Jewish people and the Arab Muslims invaders.

Why people think that Palestinian Jews have no permission to settle and live in their Holy Land? Why do you favor the Apartheid policy to cleanse the Land of Israel of Jews?

The Palestinian Arabs have already had their own national home in the East Bank. Just turn Jordan a democracy and the vast majority of Arab Palestinians will rule their state by their own. They need not a second state on the account of The Jewish Palestinians.

There is one solution for the Paletinian problem. And the solution contains ONLY two states in historical Palestine, and NOT 3 or 4 states.

Jordan, aka the eastern part of Palestine, should be the Palestinian Arab state which it&#039;s Capitol is Amman.  You have to remember that 85% of the Jordanians are Arab Palestinians, and the Kings&#039; family and his Beduins are Hashemite Beduin tribes from middle - western Saudi Arabia. 
Israel, the state of the Palestinian Jews, should control and dominant the western part of Palestine, and with its Capitol Jerusalem. The border between both states will be the Jordan River.

Arabs and Jews will live where as they live today and the Arab refugees&#039; problem will be settled within the Arab Palestinian state with the help of other countries, including Arabs&#039; and Israel. 

Arabs in both states will vote to their national Parliament in Amman. Jews in both states (if Jews will move to live in now-Jordan) will vote to their national Knesset in Jerusalem. That will make sure that Israel will stay a Jewish state no matter how many Arabs will live inside the land. If military clashes and terror actions continue, Israel always can evacuate and transfer Arabs from west to east of the Jordan River, with or with out the Jordanian Palestinians approval.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Englans should side aside and let Israel and the Arabs to deal with their problems. The Britons already created much of that problem though their occupation and betrayiong their task to sepetare the Land of Israel between the Jewish people and the Arab Muslims invaders.</p>
<p>Why people think that Palestinian Jews have no permission to settle and live in their Holy Land? Why do you favor the Apartheid policy to cleanse the Land of Israel of Jews?</p>
<p>The Palestinian Arabs have already had their own national home in the East Bank. Just turn Jordan a democracy and the vast majority of Arab Palestinians will rule their state by their own. They need not a second state on the account of The Jewish Palestinians.</p>
<p>There is one solution for the Paletinian problem. And the solution contains ONLY two states in historical Palestine, and NOT 3 or 4 states.</p>
<p>Jordan, aka the eastern part of Palestine, should be the Palestinian Arab state which it&#8217;s Capitol is Amman.  You have to remember that 85% of the Jordanians are Arab Palestinians, and the Kings&#8217; family and his Beduins are Hashemite Beduin tribes from middle &#8211; western Saudi Arabia.<br />
Israel, the state of the Palestinian Jews, should control and dominant the western part of Palestine, and with its Capitol Jerusalem. The border between both states will be the Jordan River.</p>
<p>Arabs and Jews will live where as they live today and the Arab refugees&#8217; problem will be settled within the Arab Palestinian state with the help of other countries, including Arabs&#8217; and Israel. </p>
<p>Arabs in both states will vote to their national Parliament in Amman. Jews in both states (if Jews will move to live in now-Jordan) will vote to their national Knesset in Jerusalem. That will make sure that Israel will stay a Jewish state no matter how many Arabs will live inside the land. If military clashes and terror actions continue, Israel always can evacuate and transfer Arabs from west to east of the Jordan River, with or with out the Jordanian Palestinians approval.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: David B. Wildgoose</title>
		<link>http://britologywatch.wordpress.com/2009/01/06/england-should-side-with-the-palestinians-the-possibilities-for-an-english-foreign-policy/#comment-1529</link>
		<dc:creator>David B. Wildgoose</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Jan 2009 16:05:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://britologywatch.wordpress.com/?p=273#comment-1529</guid>
		<description>It is worth pointing out that Israel is already a secular state, and that one-third of its population are Arabs who have full citizenship - including MPs, at least one member of the Supreme Court, etc.  Furthermore, although Arab Israelis have the option of not serving with the IDF many nonetheless do so.  There will be Israeli Arabs in the armed forces attacking Hamas in Gaza right now.

So in that respect the solution you suggest already exists.

I am also pretty sure that Gaza was historically considered part of Egypt, not Palestine.  And the West Bank was originally Jordan of course.  The &quot;Palestinians&quot; didn&#039;t do themselves any favours when they attempted an armed coup to take over Jordan hence their expulsion.

This isn&#039;t meant to excuse the driving out of non-Jews at the beginning of the Israeli State - nor indeed the equivalent expulsion of Jews from throughout the Middle East leaving them with only Israel to go to.  Two wrongs don&#039;t make a right, but too many years have now passed to do other than accept that it is too late to change this now.

Do you remember the desperate attempts to come up with a deal in the dying days of Bill Clinton&#039;s Presidency?  Israel agreed to all the Palestinian demands save one - &quot;the right of return&quot;, i.e. the right to swamp Israel&#039;s *democratic* state with hostile immigrants.  And so because of this Yasser Arafat refused to deal.

The real tragedy is that no solution that admits the continued existence of an Israeli State will be tolerated by the Islamists who have the hearts and minds of the Palestinian people.  In other words, there is no solution.  Except perhaps one in which Egypt and Jordan take back their territory and start to police the &quot;Palestinian&quot; Arabs within.  And who&#039;d want to grasp that poisoned chalice?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It is worth pointing out that Israel is already a secular state, and that one-third of its population are Arabs who have full citizenship &#8211; including MPs, at least one member of the Supreme Court, etc.  Furthermore, although Arab Israelis have the option of not serving with the IDF many nonetheless do so.  There will be Israeli Arabs in the armed forces attacking Hamas in Gaza right now.</p>
<p>So in that respect the solution you suggest already exists.</p>
<p>I am also pretty sure that Gaza was historically considered part of Egypt, not Palestine.  And the West Bank was originally Jordan of course.  The &#8220;Palestinians&#8221; didn&#8217;t do themselves any favours when they attempted an armed coup to take over Jordan hence their expulsion.</p>
<p>This isn&#8217;t meant to excuse the driving out of non-Jews at the beginning of the Israeli State &#8211; nor indeed the equivalent expulsion of Jews from throughout the Middle East leaving them with only Israel to go to.  Two wrongs don&#8217;t make a right, but too many years have now passed to do other than accept that it is too late to change this now.</p>
<p>Do you remember the desperate attempts to come up with a deal in the dying days of Bill Clinton&#8217;s Presidency?  Israel agreed to all the Palestinian demands save one &#8211; &#8220;the right of return&#8221;, i.e. the right to swamp Israel&#8217;s *democratic* state with hostile immigrants.  And so because of this Yasser Arafat refused to deal.</p>
<p>The real tragedy is that no solution that admits the continued existence of an Israeli State will be tolerated by the Islamists who have the hearts and minds of the Palestinian people.  In other words, there is no solution.  Except perhaps one in which Egypt and Jordan take back their territory and start to police the &#8220;Palestinian&#8221; Arabs within.  And who&#8217;d want to grasp that poisoned chalice?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
