About 29.6 per cent of the total area of land in Gaza and the West Bank is classified as cultivable land, and 13.2 per cent of it is irrigated. The agricultural sector is dominated by small-scale and fragmented family-owned farms. Since water is scarce throughout most of these areas, irrigation systems and plentiful water resources are vital to maintaining good productivity rates for many crops. In general productivity levels are below those of Israel but compare well with those of neighbouring countries.

The main agricultural products are olives, citrus, vegetables and beef and dairy products. The Palestinian territories produce a surplus of olives and citrus fruits for export, and are able to meet 90 per cent of domestic requirements of vegetables, white meat, eggs and fruit, and 60 per cent of the area’s milk requirements.

But overall the territories are a net importer of agricultural food, largely from Israel. They are also dependent on external sources for agricultural inputs such as fertilizers and seeds.

http://www.weaponsurvey.com/kbase/egyptandsmuggling.htm

“Gaza [is] intensely agricultural. In fact exporting their produce is a big problem. All stemming from violence on the Gaza side.

And Gaza is bristling with modern weapons. ”

These are absolute lies.

The group of fanatics who seem to swarm around every post about Israel, never engaging in rational dialogue, but always attempting to deflect the discussion and mystify inhumane actions, only strengthens your points.

Israel’s behavior is that of a country at war, which it is. By such standards, Israel’s behavior is extraordinarily tame. And, by European historical standards, Israel has yet even to take the gloves off. Were such behavior occurring in Europe, there would be a million dead Palestinian Arabs instead of 5,000 or so – many of whom died trying to kill Israelis.

Deb-Z, I appreciate your alarm, and you’re asking a good question, “when is the USA going to see the evil that they are allowing and supporting?” But the answer to that must acknowledge the evil that the US is supporting and perpetrating on a global scale, much of it having little connection to the Zionist project. And it must take in the historical record, the millions of innocent civilians slaughtered, diseased, and starved to death by US capitalism’s wars, proxy wars, diplomacy, and economic policies over many decades, and stretching back into the 19th century and beyond, to our founding genocidal wars.

My point is that if a US citizen learns this history, it will be easier for that individual to understand why the US does not see the evil it is allowing and supporting in Palestine. The fact that Zionist penetration of our government has reached an all-time high is symptomatic of the advanced moral rot of our government and system in general. But we should remember that we have brought most of this rot upon ourselves, by our own deeds and false words. We made ourselves vulnerable to their exploits. But we had been breeding our own fanatic mind-set well before they got their hooks into us.

The resonance that people detect between German national socialism and Zionism goes back to early days of political Zionism in Europe (mutual respect for espousing racial purity) and includes the Nazis’ acceptance of the Zionist movement and their mutual (disgusting) negotiations over Jewish emigration.

But in my view the modern resonance between the two began with the arrival of the first Holocaust survivors following WWII. Soon Zionist terror squads were employing techniques they had learned at the hands of the Nazis. If you think about that for awhile, and allow yourself to feel how brutally sad that is, and remember the astounding depravity of the camps, you might think twice about branding Israel with the “Nazi” label. If a nation can be diagnosed with DSM-IV, Israel suffers from PTSD, which it has now inflicted on the Palestinian people. Telling someone with PTSD that they are just like the perpetrator that abused them is a non-starter.

Again: the issue is the authenticity of the statement and its context. Without knowing both, I cannot address what is said. I have seen, by googling the quote, where you obtained it but that does not mean that I accept its authenticity and I certainly do not know the context and you seem to think I can imagine it.

I have also, for what it is worth, examined the issue of how Judaism views non-Jews by examining the Encyclopedia of Judaism – which is an authoritative source of information. Kook’s views appear to be his views, not the view of modern Orthodox Judaism and certainly not the other two dominant branches of Judaism.

The most authoritative thing I can find on the matter appears at http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=142&letter=G&search=gentiles#526 . The article does not remotely support what you write. Yet, the article is authoritative. So, I question the authenticity of the quote or suspect that the quote is out of context.

Like most religions with a very long history, ancient Judaism held some rather noxious views. Such views were mostly cast aside over the ages. The noted article provides a detailed analysis of what the various Jewish sages thought over the ages and shows the evolution in thought. And, thought regarding non-Jews has changed substantially since ancient times, most particularly after the destruction of ancient Israel and Judea but also during the Middle Ages.

The views of Kook are not the views of modern Jews, including modern Orthodox Jews – at least those who believe according to accepted Jewish teachings. There are, of course, always a few people who hold crazy notions. Religious fanatics are more likely to hold nutty views than most. Such, after all, allows people to fly planes into skyscrapers.

As for the rest of what you write, if you are correct and Israelis write about Palestinian Arabs as if they were savages and if Israel and its friends believe as much about Palestinian Arabs, perhaps the cause is that a large number of Palestinian Arabs behave more like savages than human beings while more decent Palestinian Arabs sit by quietly.

After all, walking into a religious cerem0ny, as occurred in Netanya, and intentionally killing a group of elderly people celebrating is the act of a savage, not a human being. Walking into a bar and blowing people up is the act of a savage, not a human being. Walking onto a bus and blowing it up, killing scores of civilians, is the act of a savage, not a human being. These and hundreds of other similar acts are the work of barbarians and those who support such people’s acts are barbarians. Such behavior is cause enough to speak harshly of Palestinian Arabs.

And, to the extent that decent Palestinian Arabs have done nothing to separate themselves from the savages among them, they identify themselves with savages and are reasonably judged harshly. In fact, such is the most reasonable interpretation of things.

DEB-Z, you misunderstood my comment. My point is that such the role of the rabbinate should be eliminated because it is outdated – as in not appropriate for a modern society. But, I doubt such will happen in the near future. Israel has much more serious issues than whether Orthodox control conversion or divorce law for Jews. And, such is a minor matter, in my view.

Your comment regarding Israel does not support your statement, which is based on the proposition that Israel has a single established religion. The fact is that such is not the case.

As for Israel’s policy regarding Jewish conversion and Jewish marriage, such affects Jews and only Jews. In fact, Israel adopted the prior Ottoman and British system in which each of the country’s religious communities has its own court system for matters such as marriage.

In my view, such is outdated and wrong but that does not mean that Israel follows your theory (i.e. “Religious freedom = Religious exclusivity”). Perhaps you do not see the difference. But, it is very different.

Again: your article suffers from confusing propaganda with fact.

You are asking me if I agree with some quote that you claim comes from a certain Rabbi Kook – presumably the Rabbi Kook who died a very long time ago. Well, I do not know enough about the quote to have an opinion, including its authenticity, its context, etc., etc. If you provide the missing information, I can respond. Otherwise, I have no comment.

That said, I think that what can be said is that Jews have shown, over the course of years, to be a very capable people. And, in the 20th Century, the Jewish contribution was extraordinary. I have no idea the reason for it but it is worth noting that there have, over the ages, been a disproportionate number of brilliant Jews.

As for the rest of your comment and as a scholar on the issue, I think you do not have even the remotest idea what you are saying. It is mostly plain old propaganda lies. I might add: I think there is a case for the Palestinian Arab side but it seems to have escaped you.

“…The IDF and the Shin Bet (Israel Security Agency) are vehemently opposed to removing roadblocks in the West Bank as a goodwill gesture to the Palestinians, a high-ranking defense official told The Jerusalem Post on Sunday.

The defense establishment first wants the Palestinians to prove their capabilities in combating terrorism in the West Bank, the official said.

As an example, the official cited Sunday’s capture of a Palestinian boy carrying three explosive devices at a checkpoint outside Nablus. According to the IDF, the boy had planned to transfer the explosives to a suicide bomber, who was to blow himself up in Tel Aviv in the next few days.

“The roadblocks prove themselves effective in saving Israeli lives,” the defense official said. “As long as the roadblocks are doing their job, there is no way they can be removed….”

One needs to note that there are arguments that can be made on behalf of Palestinian Arabs. That does not mean that Mr. Brooks has made one. In fact, what he writes is basically propaganda so that a person with even the most minimal familiarity with the facts would know to be nonsense.

As I mentioned, the most obvious point is that Israel does not have a single established religion, as Brooks would have it. So, what he writes is factually untrue. And, worse than that, it is not an important point. Consider that countries all over Europe have established religions.

And, all over the world, self-defense requires the use of aggression (e.g. the use of arms by Britain, the US and the USSR, et al, against the fascist powers). So, what Brooks is saying that Israel ought not defend itself by the means accepted by the entire world.

My sense of what I’ve seen this poor person post is that she’s not even Jewish, but claims to be so for effect…and of course she also has an irrational hatred of the Jewish religion and Israel.

But this is simply another bizarre symptom of F’s schizoid universe.
Part of it’s entertaining. Part of it’s frightening .

Note that you do not address my points.

I would compare how Islam is allowed to be practiced in Israel with how it is allowed to be practiced in France. There are no restrictions on displays of religious paraphernalia in Israel, as in France. Yet, I would still say that France allows freedom of religion.

Now, my original point was not about how people practice their religion but whether there is an established religion – which was Brooks’ false accusation. Israel does not have a single established religion. It has multiple established religions. Contrast that with Denmark, where Christianity is the officially established national religion.