# Now it's a basic law: The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people



## admonit

70 years after the establishment of a Jewish state was declared, now it became a basic (constitutional) law.

The full text of the law:

*Basic Law: Israel as the Nation State of the Jewish People*

*1 — Basic principles*

A. The land of Israel is the historical homeland of the Jewish people, in which the State of Israel was established.

B. The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people, in which it fulfills its natural, cultural, religious and historical right to self-determination.

C. The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Israel is unique to the Jewish people.

*2 — The symbols of the state*

A. The name of the state is “Israel.”

B. The state flag is white with two blue stripes near the edges and a blue Star of David in the center.

C. The state emblem is a seven-branched menorah with olive leaves on both sides and the word “Israel” beneath it.

D. The state anthem is “Hatikvah.”

E. Details regarding state symbols will be determined by the law.

*3 — The capital of the state*

Jerusalem, complete and united, is the capital of Israel.

*4 — Language*

A. The state’s language is Hebrew.

B. The Arabic language has a special status in the state; Regulating the use of Arabic in state institutions or by them will be set in law.

C. This clause does not harm the status given to the Arabic language before this law came into effect.

*5 — Ingathering of the exiles*

The state will be open for Jewish immigration and the ingathering of exiles

*6 — Connection to the Jewish people*

A. The state will strive to ensure the safety of the members of the Jewish people in trouble or in captivity due to the fact of their Jewishness or their citizenship.

B. The state shall act within the Diaspora to strengthen the affinity between the state and members of the Jewish people.

C. The state shall act to preserve the cultural, historical and religious heritage of the Jewish people among Jews in the Diaspora.

*7 — Jewish settlement*

A. The state views the development of Jewish settlement as a national value and will act to encourage and promote its establishment and consolidation.

*8 — Official calendar*

The Hebrew calendar is the official calendar of the state and alongside it the Gregorian calendar will be used as an official calendar. Use of  the Hebrew calendar and the Gregorian calendar will be determined by law.

*9 — Independence Day and memorial days*

A. Independence Day is the official national holiday of the state.

B. Memorial Day for the Fallen in Israel’s Wars and Holocaust and Heroism Remembrance Day are official memorial days of the State.

*10 — Days of rest and sabbath*

The Sabbath and the festivals of Israel are the established days of rest in the state; Non-Jews have a right to maintain days of rest on their Sabbaths and festivals; Details of this issue will be determined by law.

*11 — Immutability*

This Basic Law shall not be amended, unless by another Basic Law passed by a majority of Knesset members.


----------



## rylah

admonit said:


> 70 years after the establishment of a Jewish state was declared, now it became a basic (constitutional) law.
> 
> The full text of the law:
> 
> *Basic Law: Israel as the Nation State of the Jewish People*
> 
> *1 — Basic principles*
> 
> A. The land of Israel is the historical homeland of the Jewish people, in which the State of Israel was established.
> 
> B. The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people, in which it fulfills its natural, cultural, religious and historical right to self-determination.
> 
> C. The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Israel is unique to the Jewish people.
> 
> *2 — The symbols of the state*
> 
> A. The name of the state is “Israel.”
> 
> B. The state flag is white with two blue stripes near the edges and a blue Star of David in the center.
> 
> C. The state emblem is a seven-branched menorah with olive leaves on both sides and the word “Israel” beneath it.
> 
> D. The state anthem is “Hatikvah.”
> 
> E. Details regarding state symbols will be determined by the law.
> 
> *3 — The capital of the state*
> 
> Jerusalem, complete and united, is the capital of Israel.
> 
> *4 — Language*
> 
> A. The state’s language is Hebrew.
> 
> B. The Arabic language has a special status in the state; Regulating the use of Arabic in state institutions or by them will be set in law.
> 
> C. This clause does not harm the status given to the Arabic language before this law came into effect.
> 
> *5 — Ingathering of the exiles*
> 
> The state will be open for Jewish immigration and the ingathering of exiles
> 
> *6 — Connection to the Jewish people*
> 
> A. The state will strive to ensure the safety of the members of the Jewish people in trouble or in captivity due to the fact of their Jewishness or their citizenship.
> 
> B. The state shall act within the Diaspora to strengthen the affinity between the state and members of the Jewish people.
> 
> C. The state shall act to preserve the cultural, historical and religious heritage of the Jewish people among Jews in the Diaspora.
> 
> *7 — Jewish settlement*
> 
> A. The state views the development of Jewish settlement as a national value and will act to encourage and promote its establishment and consolidation.
> 
> *8 — Official calendar*
> 
> The Hebrew calendar is the official calendar of the state and alongside it the Gregorian calendar will be used as an official calendar. Use of  the Hebrew calendar and the Gregorian calendar will be determined by law.
> 
> *9 — Independence Day and memorial days*
> 
> A. Independence Day is the official national holiday of the state.
> 
> B. Memorial Day for the Fallen in Israel’s Wars and Holocaust and Heroism Remembrance Day are official memorial days of the State.
> 
> *10 — Days of rest and sabbath*
> 
> The Sabbath and the festivals of Israel are the established days of rest in the state; Non-Jews have a right to maintain days of rest on their Sabbaths and festivals; Details of this issue will be determined by law.
> 
> *11 — Immutability*
> 
> This Basic Law shall not be amended, unless by another Basic Law passed by a majority of Knesset members.



Feels like were're in 48, reading the Declaration of Independence for the 1st time.
The law is 70 years late, although better late than never.

If it wasn't the month of Av I'd congratulate You brother.


----------



## cnm

Like the official implementation of apartheid to ensure Boer values were preserved.


----------



## rylah

cnm said:


> Like the official implementation of apartheid to ensure Boer values were preserved.


Unlike the Dutch people, Jews originated in the land of Israel.
Do You see any reference to skin color?


----------



## Penelope

rylah said:


> cnm said:
> 
> 
> 
> Like the official implementation of apartheid to ensure Boer values were preserved.
> 
> 
> 
> Unlike the Dutch people, Jews originated in the land of Israel.
> Do You see any reference to skin color?
Click to expand...


Yes they were once some sects of the Canaanites, and the bible says EKE: Your mother was a Hittite and your father an Amorite.

Lets face it, anyone from Judea was known as  a jew. Good now that that is settled we can take Judeo off of Christian.


----------



## rylah

Penelope said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cnm said:
> 
> 
> 
> Like the official implementation of apartheid to ensure Boer values were preserved.
> 
> 
> 
> Unlike the Dutch people, Jews originated in the land of Israel.
> Do You see any reference to skin color?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes they were once some sects of the Canaanites, and the bible says EKE: Your mother was a Hittite and your father an Amorite.
> 
> Lets face it, anyone from Judea was known as  a jew. Good now that that is settled we can take Judeo off of Christian.
Click to expand...


So many words for so little sense.


----------



## Penelope

rylah said:


> Penelope said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cnm said:
> 
> 
> 
> Like the official implementation of apartheid to ensure Boer values were preserved.
> 
> 
> 
> Unlike the Dutch people, Jews originated in the land of Israel.
> Do You see any reference to skin color?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes they were once some sects of the Canaanites, and the bible says EKE: Your mother was a Hittite and your father an Amorite.
> 
> Lets face it, anyone from Judea was known as  a jew. Good now that that is settled we can take Judeo off of Christian.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So many words for so little sense.
Click to expand...


Jews originated in Israel is not the truth.


----------



## rylah

Penelope said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Penelope said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cnm said:
> 
> 
> 
> Like the official implementation of apartheid to ensure Boer values were preserved.
> 
> 
> 
> Unlike the Dutch people, Jews originated in the land of Israel.
> Do You see any reference to skin color?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes they were once some sects of the Canaanites, and the bible says EKE: Your mother was a Hittite and your father an Amorite.
> 
> Lets face it, anyone from Judea was known as  a jew. Good now that that is settled we can take Judeo off of Christian.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So many words for so little sense.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Jews originated in Israel is not the truth.
Click to expand...


*Q. Why do You think Arabs call it the "Jewish Desert"?*


*Sahara Yahudin -*صحراء يهودا‎ 

The Judaean Desert or Judean Desert (Hebrew:  _Midbar Yehuda_, both _Desert of Judah_or _Judaean Desert_; Arabic: _Sahara Yahudan_) is a desert in Israel and the West Bank that lies east of Jerusalem and descends to the Dead Sea. It stretches from the northeastern Negev to the east of Beit El, and is marked by terraces with escarpments.







"The state views the development of Jewish settlement as a national value and will act to encourage and promote its establishment and consolidation."


----------



## cnm

rylah said:


> Do You see any reference to skin color?


Only to Bantustans.


----------



## cnm

rylah said:


> Unlike the Dutch people, Jews originated in the land of Israel.


Of course YHWH gave South Africa to the Boers. They said so.

_Canaan is the ancient name for the land of Israel. The Torah gave Abraham the land of Canaan, which in some cases stretched from southern Syria to the Eastern Sinai and, in other Torah references, was only a small strip hugging the Mediterranean. Under the leadership of Joshua the Israelites conquered Canaan, which had previously been divided into seven city states. Today, the land of Canaan is known as Palestine, Eretz Yisrael and Israel.
The Canaanites_​


----------



## rylah

cnm said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Unlike the Dutch people, Jews originated in the land of Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> Of course YHWH gave South Africa to the Boers. They said so.
> 
> _Canaan is the ancient name for the land of Israel. The Torah gave Abraham the land of Canaan, which in some cases stretched from southern Syria to the Eastern Sinai and, in other Torah references, was only a small strip hugging the Mediterranean. Under the leadership of Joshua the Israelites conquered Canaan, which had previously been divided into seven city states. Today, the land of Canaan is known as Palestine, Eretz Yisrael and Israel.
> The Canaanites_​
Click to expand...


But Penelope says my mother was a Hittite and my father an Amorite.


----------



## rylah

cnm said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Do You see any reference to skin color?
> 
> 
> 
> Only to Bantustans.
Click to expand...







Yes Israel IS a Bantustan, and anywhere beyond Jews are not allowed.
Although I prefer the term *'Reservation'*.


----------



## Penelope

rylah said:


> Penelope said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Penelope said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cnm said:
> 
> 
> 
> Like the official implementation of apartheid to ensure Boer values were preserved.
> 
> 
> 
> Unlike the Dutch people, Jews originated in the land of Israel.
> Do You see any reference to skin color?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes they were once some sects of the Canaanites, and the bible says EKE: Your mother was a Hittite and your father an Amorite.
> 
> Lets face it, anyone from Judea was known as  a jew. Good now that that is settled we can take Judeo off of Christian.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So many words for so little sense.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Jews originated in Israel is not the truth.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Q. Why do You think Arabs call it the "Jewish Desert"?*
> 
> 
> *Sahara Yahudin -*صحراء يهودا‎
> 
> The Judaean Desert or Judean Desert (Hebrew:  _Midbar Yehuda_, both _Desert of Judah_or _Judaean Desert_; is a desert in Israel and the West Bank that lies east of Jerusalem and descends to the Dead Sea. It stretches from the northeastern Negev to the east of Beit El, and is marked by terraces with escarpments.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "The state views the development of Jewish settlement as a national value and will act to encourage and promote its establishment and consolidation."
Click to expand...


simple, Israel self declared them a state in 1948.  the main language in the first century was Aramaic, tell me why?


----------



## Penelope

rylah said:


> cnm said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Do You see any reference to skin color?
> 
> 
> 
> Only to Bantustans.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes Israel IS a Bantustan, and anywhere beyond Jews are not allowed.
> Although I prefer the term *'Reservation'*.
Click to expand...


You took over others land, and today the Palestinians are the people without a land.


----------



## cnm

rylah said:


> Yes Israel IS a Bantustan,


No, what you show are countries. Bantustans are effectively reservations, nominally states, apartheid powers use for their workers, for which they can deny responsibility while controlling them. Look them up. Or not.


----------



## rylah

Penelope said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Penelope said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Penelope said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Unlike the Dutch people, Jews originated in the land of Israel.
> Do You see any reference to skin color?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes they were once some sects of the Canaanites, and the bible says EKE: Your mother was a Hittite and your father an Amorite.
> 
> Lets face it, anyone from Judea was known as  a jew. Good now that that is settled we can take Judeo off of Christian.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So many words for so little sense.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Jews originated in Israel is not the truth.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Q. Why do You think Arabs call it the "Jewish Desert"?*
> 
> 
> *Sahara Yahudin -*صحراء يهودا‎
> 
> The Judaean Desert or Judean Desert (Hebrew:  _Midbar Yehuda_, both _Desert of Judah_or _Judaean Desert_; is a desert in Israel and the West Bank that lies east of Jerusalem and descends to the Dead Sea. It stretches from the northeastern Negev to the east of Beit El, and is marked by terraces with escarpments.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "The state views the development of Jewish settlement as a national value and will act to encourage and promote its establishment and consolidation."
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> simple, Israel self declared them a state in 1948.  the main language in the first century was Aramaic, tell me why?
Click to expand...


How else can one declare independence but through self declaration?
Aramaic was the main language because it was used by Canaanites as the working language of the greater empires for 6 centuries. Basically Aramaic is Hebrew with slight variation.


----------



## fncceo

B"H


----------



## rylah

cnm said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes Israel IS a Bantustan,
> 
> 
> 
> No, what you show are countries. Bantustans are effectively reservations, nominally states, apartheid powers use for their workers, for which they can deny responsibility while controlling them. Look them up. Or not.
Click to expand...


Yes and compared to them Israel is exactly this tiny Bantustan, the only land in the middle east not under Arab control.

How dare they, right?


----------



## Erinwltr

fncceo said:


> B"H


Did you mean BS?


----------



## fncceo

Erinwltr said:


> fncceo said:
> 
> 
> 
> B"H
> 
> 
> 
> Did you mean BS?
Click to expand...


It's an abbreviation for Baruch Hashem -- Blessed be G-d.


----------



## Erinwltr

fncceo said:


> Erinwltr said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> fncceo said:
> 
> 
> 
> B"H
> 
> 
> 
> Did you mean BS?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's an abbreviation for Baruch Hashem -- Blessed be G-d.
Click to expand...

Thank you.  I had to google that.


----------



## fncceo

Penelope said:


> You took over others land, and today the Palestinians are the people without a land.



In fact, Palestinians are Arabs and there are currently 22 Arab countries.


----------



## Bleipriester

Our German country is too small nowadays.


----------



## fncceo

Bleipriester said:


> Our German country is too small nowadays.



I would say not nearly small enough.


----------



## Bleipriester

fncceo said:


> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> 
> Our German country is too small nowadays.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I would say not nearly small enough.
Click to expand...

MAGA! Rheinische Republik? No, thank you.


----------



## fncceo

Bleipriester said:


> fncceo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> 
> Our German country is too small nowadays.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I would say not nearly small enough.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> MAGA! Rheinische Republik? No, thank you.
Click to expand...


You don't need the French to come back, just let the waters rise like May of 1943.


----------



## Indeependent

cnm said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Unlike the Dutch people, Jews originated in the land of Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> Of course YHWH gave South Africa to the Boers. They said so.
> 
> _Canaan is the ancient name for the land of Israel. The Torah gave Abraham the land of Canaan, which in some cases stretched from southern Syria to the Eastern Sinai and, in other Torah references, was only a small strip hugging the Mediterranean. Under the leadership of Joshua the Israelites conquered Canaan, which had previously been divided into seven city states. Today, the land of Canaan is known as Palestine, Eretz Yisrael and Israel.
> The Canaanites_​
Click to expand...

Genesis chapter 10...
Noah’s son Cham settled in Gaza and Egypt.
Shem settled in what is known today as Israel.


----------



## Bleipriester

fncceo said:


> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> fncceo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> 
> Our German country is too small nowadays.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I would say not nearly small enough.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> MAGA! Rheinische Republik? No, thank you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You don't need the French to come back, just let the waters rise like May of 1943.
Click to expand...

You can´t rely on their phony wars, anyway.
Germany was a good home for Jews for centuries, by the way. This is why most of them have German surnames, wherever they live.


----------



## Penelope

fncceo said:


> Penelope said:
> 
> 
> 
> You took over others land, and today the Palestinians are the people without a land.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In fact, Palestinians are Arabs and there are currently 22 Arab countries.
Click to expand...


And the pop of which is now Israel changed into the opposite as it was 80% Palestinians in 1900.


----------



## fncceo

Bleipriester said:


> Germany was a good home for Jews for centuries,



Except between 1096 and 1349 when wholesale slaughter of Jewish communities by German Crusaders was commonplace, Jews were blamed for spreading the Black Death, and Jews had their property confiscated.

Except for the fact that Jews couldn't be German citizens until 1805.

Except for the rampant Antisemitism that peaked in the Weimar Republic.

Except for the years 1933 to 1945.

Except for the fact that today, attacks on Jews in German are at an all time high since 1945.

Except for all that, it's been a great home for Jews.


----------



## fncceo

Penelope said:


> And the pop of which is now Israel changed into the opposite as it was 80% Palestinians in 1900.



Demographics shift over time in all countries ... it's called change.


----------



## Bleipriester

Update:
An important part of the law was rejected, among the opponents was President Rivlin. 
The law was about to allow municipalities to reject non-Jewish residents.


----------



## fncceo

Bleipriester said:


> Update:
> An important part of the law was rejected, among the opponents was President Rivlin.
> The law was about to allow municipalities to reject non-Jewish residents.



Baby steps.


----------



## Bleipriester

fncceo said:


> Except between 1096 and 1349 when wholesale slaughter of Jewish communities by German Crusaders was commonplace, Jews were blamed for spreading the Black Death, and Jews had their property confiscated.


Pogroms happened everywhere, Germany is not an exception. This is not an excuse, just the fact.




fncceo said:


> Except for the fact that Jews couldn't be German citizens until 1805.


German citizenship did not exist at all.




fncceo said:


> Except for the rampant Antisemitism that peaked in the Weimar Republic.


"The Jews" betrayed their German home and this found its expression in the Balfour declaration.




fncceo said:


> Except for the years 1933 to 1945.


Another result of Balfour and Versailles. It was not inevitable. However, antisemitism was not a reason for Hitler´s success.




fncceo said:


> Except for the fact that today, attacks on Jews in German are at an all time high since 1945.


It is a side effect of the German "multiculturalism" applauded by Zionists.


----------



## Bleipriester

fncceo said:


> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> 
> Update:
> An important part of the law was rejected, among the opponents was President Rivlin.
> The law was about to allow municipalities to reject non-Jewish residents.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Baby steps.
Click to expand...

Sounds not so democratic.


----------



## rylah

Bleipriester said:


> Update:
> An important part of the law was rejected, among the opponents was President Rivlin.
> The law was about to allow municipalities to reject non-Jewish residents.



The clause would _allow for communities, including "of a single religion or a single nationality", to build separate towns._
http://www.iataskforce.org/sites/default/files/resource/resource-1586.pdf

This includes Arab municipalities.


----------



## Bleipriester

rylah said:


> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> 
> Update:
> An important part of the law was rejected, among the opponents was President Rivlin.
> The law was about to allow municipalities to reject non-Jewish residents.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The clause would _allow for communities, including "of a single religion or a single nationality", to build separate towns._
> http://www.iataskforce.org/sites/default/files/resource/resource-1586.pdf
> 
> This includes Arab municipalities.
Click to expand...

So it will be re-considered?


----------



## rylah

Bleipriester said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> 
> Update:
> An important part of the law was rejected, among the opponents was President Rivlin.
> The law was about to allow municipalities to reject non-Jewish residents.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The clause would _allow for communities, including "of a single religion or a single nationality", to build separate towns._
> http://www.iataskforce.org/sites/default/files/resource/resource-1586.pdf
> 
> This includes Arab municipalities.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So it will be re-considered?
Click to expand...


You already answered that. Look at the post I'm responding.


----------



## rylah

Bleipriester said:


> fncceo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> 
> Update:
> An important part of the law was rejected, among the opponents was President Rivlin.
> The law was about to allow municipalities to reject non-Jewish residents.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Baby steps.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sounds not so democratic.
Click to expand...


It sounds middle eastern.


----------



## Bleipriester

rylah said:


> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> 
> Update:
> An important part of the law was rejected, among the opponents was President Rivlin.
> The law was about to allow municipalities to reject non-Jewish residents.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The clause would _allow for communities, including "of a single religion or a single nationality", to build separate towns._
> http://www.iataskforce.org/sites/default/files/resource/resource-1586.pdf
> 
> This includes Arab municipalities.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So it will be re-considered?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You already answered that. Look at the post I'm responding.
Click to expand...

I don´t understand.


----------



## Bleipriester

rylah said:


> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> fncceo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> 
> Update:
> An important part of the law was rejected, among the opponents was President Rivlin.
> The law was about to allow municipalities to reject non-Jewish residents.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Baby steps.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sounds not so democratic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It sounds middle eastern.
Click to expand...

Such is impossible in Syria.


----------



## rylah

Bleipriester said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> fncceo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> 
> Update:
> An important part of the law was rejected, among the opponents was President Rivlin.
> The law was about to allow municipalities to reject non-Jewish residents.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Baby steps.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sounds not so democratic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It sounds middle eastern.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Such is impossible in Syria.
Click to expand...


This is how middle eastern society has lived for millennias. Jewish, Druze and Kurdish villages in different countries. A natural human instinct is to gather around people with similar behavior.
Actually it's the basis of every society/country.

I don't have a problem with either mixed or homogeneous villages and towns.
*It's actually nice to have both.*


----------



## BlackFlag

Israel finally drops any pretense of desiring peace


----------



## rylah

BlackFlag said:


> Israel finally drops any pretense of desiring peace



Because?


----------



## BlackFlag

rylah said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> Israel finally drops any pretense of desiring peace
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Because?
Click to expand...

Lol


----------



## rylah

Bleipriester said:


> Such is impossible in Syria.



Why? There're plenty of examples in Syria, as in other countries with a variety of minorities (virtually every one) that don't suffer from civil war.

Depends on the society, no finger is of the same length, for example Northern Italy are more German in behavior, Souther Italy more Mediterranean.


----------



## BlackFlag

Are non-Jews still allowed to use the same water fountains?


----------



## fncceo

BlackFlag said:


> Are non-Jews still allowed to use the same water fountains?


----------



## rylah

BlackFlag said:


> Are non-Jews still allowed to use the same water fountains?



What water fountains?


----------



## Bleipriester

rylah said:


> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> 
> Such is impossible in Syria.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why? There're plenty of examples in Syria, as in other countries with a variety of minorities (virtually every one) that don't suffer from civil war.
Click to expand...

Diversity is actually a part of Syria´s pride and identity. Whether you are Jew, Muslim, Christian, socialist or right-winger, there is no difference before the law. "Oppressed" Sunnis can even apply Sharia law instead of regular law in a suitcase.

Civil War is also not the correct description. There is no Alawite vs Sunni. It is an attempted Islamist takeover, jihad.


----------



## BlackFlag

rylah said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> Are non-Jews still allowed to use the same water fountains?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What water fountains?
Click to expand...

Really?  I didn’t think the bloodstained Holy Land was _that _backwards


----------



## rylah

BlackFlag said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> Are non-Jews still allowed to use the same water fountains?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What water fountains?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Really?  I didn’t think the bloodstained Holy Land was _that _backwards
Click to expand...


And You come to this conclusion by which part of the law?


----------



## rylah

Bleipriester said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> 
> Such is impossible in Syria.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why? There're plenty of examples in Syria, as in other countries with a variety of minorities (virtually every one) that don't suffer from civil war.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Diversity is actually a part of Syria´s pride and identity. Whether you are Jew, Muslim, Christian, socialist or right-winger, there is no difference before the law. "Oppressed" Sunnis can even apply Sharia law instead of regular law in a suitcase.
> 
> Civil War is also not the correct description. There is no Alawite vs Sunni. It is an attempted Islamist takeover, jihad.
Click to expand...


I don't think it's correct to imply that Kurds are attempting an _'Islamist takeover'.
_


----------



## BlackFlag

rylah said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> Are non-Jews still allowed to use the same water fountains?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What water fountains?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Really?  I didn’t think the bloodstained Holy Land was _that _backwards
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And You come to this conclusion by which part of the law?
Click to expand...

The bloodstain is from the millenia of death and violence cursing the land.  The discrimination part is from Jews declaring that no infidel has a right to self determination.


----------



## rylah

BlackFlag said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> Are non-Jews still allowed to use the same water fountains?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What water fountains?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Really?  I didn’t think the bloodstained Holy Land was _that _backwards
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And You come to this conclusion by which part of the law?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The bloodstain is from the millenia of death and violence cursing the land.  The discrimination part is from Jews declaring that no infidel has a right to self determination.
Click to expand...


Like Germans are banned from self determination in France?

How dare they...


----------



## BlackFlag

rylah said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> Are non-Jews still allowed to use the same water fountains?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What water fountains?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Really?  I didn’t think the bloodstained Holy Land was _that _backwards
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And You come to this conclusion by which part of the law?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The bloodstain is from the millenia of death and violence cursing the land.  The discrimination part is from Jews declaring that no infidel has a right to self determination.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Like Germans are banned from self determination in France?
> 
> How dare they...
Click to expand...

No France doesn’t have any law declaring citizens of German heritage do not have a right to self determination.  That’s probably why the world isn’t coming after them and why they’ve been at peace for so long.


----------



## Sixties Fan

BlackFlag said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> What water fountains?
> 
> 
> 
> Really?  I didn’t think the bloodstained Holy Land was _that _backwards
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And You come to this conclusion by which part of the law?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The bloodstain is from the millenia of death and violence cursing the land.  The discrimination part is from Jews declaring that no infidel has a right to self determination.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Like Germans are banned from self determination in France?
> 
> How dare they...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No France doesn’t have any law declaring citizens of German heritage do not have a right to self determination.  That’s probably why the world isn’t coming after them and why they’ve been at peace for so long.
Click to expand...

Do I have the feeling that you did not understand the France-Germany connection?


----------



## BlackFlag

Sixties Fan said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> Really?  I didn’t think the bloodstained Holy Land was _that _backwards
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And You come to this conclusion by which part of the law?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The bloodstain is from the millenia of death and violence cursing the land.  The discrimination part is from Jews declaring that no infidel has a right to self determination.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Like Germans are banned from self determination in France?
> 
> How dare they...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No France doesn’t have any law declaring citizens of German heritage do not have a right to self determination.  That’s probably why the world isn’t coming after them and why they’ve been at peace for so long.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Do I have the feeling that you did not understand the France-Germany connection?
Click to expand...

I doubt you have any understanding of much at all.  It was irrelevant to the conversation, anyways.  France does not have laws against citizens of German background.


----------



## Sixties Fan

BlackFlag said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> And You come to this conclusion by which part of the law?
> 
> 
> 
> The bloodstain is from the millenia of death and violence cursing the land.  The discrimination part is from Jews declaring that no infidel has a right to self determination.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Like Germans are banned from self determination in France?
> 
> How dare they...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No France doesn’t have any law declaring citizens of German heritage do not have a right to self determination.  That’s probably why the world isn’t coming after them and why they’ve been at peace for so long.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Do I have the feeling that you did not understand the France-Germany connection?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I doubt you have any understanding of much at all.  It was irrelevant to the conversation, anyways.  France does not have laws against citizens of German background.
Click to expand...

Does France have any laws against any other people wanting to declare self-determination on its own soil?


----------



## BlackFlag

Sixties Fan said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> The bloodstain is from the millenia of death and violence cursing the land.  The discrimination part is from Jews declaring that no infidel has a right to self determination.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Like Germans are banned from self determination in France?
> 
> How dare they...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No France doesn’t have any law declaring citizens of German heritage do not have a right to self determination.  That’s probably why the world isn’t coming after them and why they’ve been at peace for so long.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Do I have the feeling that you did not understand the France-Germany connection?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I doubt you have any understanding of much at all.  It was irrelevant to the conversation, anyways.  France does not have laws against citizens of German background.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Does France have any laws against any other people wanting to declare self-determination on its own soil?
Click to expand...

Make your point, because France has no law targeting citizens to make them a secondary class.  Stop pussyfooting around.


----------



## Dogmaphobe

fncceo said:


> Penelope said:
> 
> 
> 
> You took over others land, and today the Palestinians are the people without a land.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In fact, Palestinians are Arabs and there are currently 22 Arab countries.
Click to expand...


and, of course, they never identified as anything but Arab until encouraged to do so for propaganda purposes in the middle part of the 20th century.


 Now, I don't expect the mental midget antisemites in this thread to acknowledge that as facts can't be allowed to get in the way of some good, old ethnic hatred, but a fact it is nevertheless.


----------



## BlackFlag

Dogmaphobe said:


> fncceo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Penelope said:
> 
> 
> 
> You took over others land, and today the Palestinians are the people without a land.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In fact, Palestinians are Arabs and there are currently 22 Arab countries.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> and, of course, they never identified as anything but Arab until encouraged to do so for propaganda purposes in the middle part of the 20th century.
> 
> 
> Now, I don't expect the mental midget antisemites in this thread to acknowledge that as facts can't be allowed to get in the way of some good, old ethnic hatred, but a fact it is nevertheless.
Click to expand...

Doesn’t matter if they call themselves Arabs or Christians or anything else.  They are a secondary class in a theocracy.


----------



## Bleipriester

rylah said:


> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> 
> Such is impossible in Syria.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why? There're plenty of examples in Syria, as in other countries with a variety of minorities (virtually every one) that don't suffer from civil war.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Diversity is actually a part of Syria´s pride and identity. Whether you are Jew, Muslim, Christian, socialist or right-winger, there is no difference before the law. "Oppressed" Sunnis can even apply Sharia law instead of regular law in a suitcase.
> 
> Civil War is also not the correct description. There is no Alawite vs Sunni. It is an attempted Islamist takeover, jihad.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I don't think it's correct to imply that Kurds are attempting an _'Islamist takeover'._
Click to expand...

You are misled by fake news. It was on our TV also again, that the SDF are "rebels" and at war with Damascus. Neither is true. The Kurds (SDF is becoming a pool of former Al-Qaeda and ISIS terrorists in the southeast, so you need to differ), are not attempting a takeover, they do not attempt to oust Assad. They are separatists. Their status with Damascus is neutral.
They also know that the US is attempting to outsource their occupation to Saudi Arabia, which would mean a severe blow to the Kurds. Damascus is their best and only option in the mid and long term.


----------



## Dogmaphobe

BlackFlag said:


> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> fncceo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Penelope said:
> 
> 
> 
> You took over others land, and today the Palestinians are the people without a land.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In fact, Palestinians are Arabs and there are currently 22 Arab countries.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> and, of course, they never identified as anything but Arab until encouraged to do so for propaganda purposes in the middle part of the 20th century.
> 
> 
> Now, I don't expect the mental midget antisemites in this thread to acknowledge that as facts can't be allowed to get in the way of some good, old ethnic hatred, but a fact it is nevertheless.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Doesn’t matter if they call themselves Arabs or Christians or anything else.  They are a secondary class in a theocracy.
Click to expand...

They are not in a theocracy,  mental midget. They are living in a state established as the home for a persecuted ethnic minority.  

It is low functioning creeps like you who prove the need for such.


----------



## BlackFlag

Dogmaphobe said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> fncceo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Penelope said:
> 
> 
> 
> You took over others land, and today the Palestinians are the people without a land.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In fact, Palestinians are Arabs and there are currently 22 Arab countries.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> and, of course, they never identified as anything but Arab until encouraged to do so for propaganda purposes in the middle part of the 20th century.
> 
> 
> Now, I don't expect the mental midget antisemites in this thread to acknowledge that as facts can't be allowed to get in the way of some good, old ethnic hatred, but a fact it is nevertheless.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Doesn’t matter if they call themselves Arabs or Christians or anything else.  They are a secondary class in a theocracy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They are not in a theocracy,  mental midget. They are living in a state established as the home for a persecuted ethnic minority.
> 
> It is low functioning creeps like you who prove the need for such.
Click to expand...

Of course it’s a theocracy.  They deny equal status to non-Jews, and just put out an edict that reaffirms that.


----------



## Sixties Fan

BlackFlag said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Like Germans are banned from self determination in France?
> 
> How dare they...
> 
> 
> 
> No France doesn’t have any law declaring citizens of German heritage do not have a right to self determination.  That’s probably why the world isn’t coming after them and why they’ve been at peace for so long.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Do I have the feeling that you did not understand the France-Germany connection?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I doubt you have any understanding of much at all.  It was irrelevant to the conversation, anyways.  France does not have laws against citizens of German background.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Does France have any laws against any other people wanting to declare self-determination on its own soil?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Make your point, because France has no law targeting citizens to make them a secondary class.  Stop pussyfooting around.
Click to expand...

Muslims conquered the land of Israel, as well as other lands.  They demand self-determantion on any and all lands they have conquered.
They lost some of the land. They want it back, with no respect for the indigenous inhabitants.

Germany conquered France in WWII.
It lost that war, it lost the lands.
We do not see Germany, nor German citizens moving to France, with the idea that they can have France (or any other conquered land) back in their hands and declare self-determination over it.

In today's world, we have the Muslims wanting to take back any land they conquered.

And let us not forget Russia which seems to be showing how upset it got that the USSR got dissolved and all that land taken from under its hands.

Now, the Jews have sovereignty over ONLY less than 20% of their original ancient homeland.  The rest, is being held by invading Arab Muslims (78% of it by the Hashemite Clan which only moved into TranJordan after being booted out around 1915 by the Saud Clan from Arabia)

You and others make no qualms at being upset that Jews are sovereign over any part of their ancient land, much less that they "dare" to call it a (gosh forbid)  A Jewish State.

Europe is full of Christian States.
Asia and North Africa is full of Muslim States.

Accept it.

Israel has always been a Jewish State, by the Jews, for the Jews, with non Jews free to live in it, and have freedom of their religion.

The Jews can accept the Arab Muslims having self determination over 80% of their ancient homeland, the Muslims and Christians need to learn to accept Israel for what it is and always has been .


Israel =  The ancient homeland of the Jews who have the right to self-determination regardless of the endless attempts by Muslims and Christians to try to destroy it.


----------



## Sixties Fan

BlackFlag said:


> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> fncceo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Penelope said:
> 
> 
> 
> You took over others land, and today the Palestinians are the people without a land.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In fact, Palestinians are Arabs and there are currently 22 Arab countries.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> and, of course, they never identified as anything but Arab until encouraged to do so for propaganda purposes in the middle part of the 20th century.
> 
> 
> Now, I don't expect the mental midget antisemites in this thread to acknowledge that as facts can't be allowed to get in the way of some good, old ethnic hatred, but a fact it is nevertheless.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Doesn’t matter if they call themselves Arabs or Christians or anything else.  They are a secondary class in a theocracy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They are not in a theocracy,  mental midget. They are living in a state established as the home for a persecuted ethnic minority.
> 
> It is low functioning creeps like you who prove the need for such.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Of course it’s a theocracy.  They deny equal status to non-Jews, and just put out an edict that reaffirms that.
Click to expand...

Stop reading fiction and you will get to the truth.

Your "Of course" does not hold water anywhere in Israel, with anyone who is non Jewish.

The non Jews in Israel know better about their rights in Israel than you.


----------



## Penelope

Dogmaphobe said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> fncceo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Penelope said:
> 
> 
> 
> You took over others land, and today the Palestinians are the people without a land.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In fact, Palestinians are Arabs and there are currently 22 Arab countries.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> and, of course, they never identified as anything but Arab until encouraged to do so for propaganda purposes in the middle part of the 20th century.
> 
> 
> Now, I don't expect the mental midget antisemites in this thread to acknowledge that as facts can't be allowed to get in the way of some good, old ethnic hatred, but a fact it is nevertheless.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Doesn’t matter if they call themselves Arabs or Christians or anything else.  They are a secondary class in a theocracy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They are not in a theocracy,  mental midget. They are living in a state established as the home for a persecuted ethnic minority.
> 
> It is low functioning creeps like you who prove the need for such.
Click to expand...


Let me see have jews decided yet if a jew is a person who practices Judaism or is it more like a culture??


----------



## Penelope

Sixties Fan said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> No France doesn’t have any law declaring citizens of German heritage do not have a right to self determination.  That’s probably why the world isn’t coming after them and why they’ve been at peace for so long.
> 
> 
> 
> Do I have the feeling that you did not understand the France-Germany connection?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I doubt you have any understanding of much at all.  It was irrelevant to the conversation, anyways.  France does not have laws against citizens of German background.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Does France have any laws against any other people wanting to declare self-determination on its own soil?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Make your point, because France has no law targeting citizens to make them a secondary class.  Stop pussyfooting around.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Muslims conquered the land of Israel, as well as other lands.  They demand self-determantion on any and all lands they have conquered.
> They lost some of the land. They want it back, with no respect for the indigenous inhabitants.
> 
> Germany conquered France in WWII.
> It lost that war, it lost the lands.
> We do not see Germany, nor German citizens moving to France, with the idea that they can have France (or any other conquered land) back in their hands and declare self-determination over it.
> 
> In today's world, we have the Muslims wanting to take back any land they conquered.
> 
> And let us not forget Russia which seems to be showing how upset it got that the USSR got dissolved and all that land taken from under its hands.
> 
> Now, the Jews have sovereignty over ONLY less than 20% of their original ancient homeland.  The rest, is being held by invading Arab Muslims (78% of it by the Hashemite Clan which only moved into TranJordan after being booted out around 1915 by the Saud Clan from Arabia)
> 
> You and others make no qualms at being upset that Jews are sovereign over any part of their ancient land, much less that they "dare" to call it a (gosh forbid)  A Jewish State.
> 
> Europe is full of Christian States.
> Asia and North Africa is full of Muslim States.
> 
> Accept it.
> 
> Israel has always been a Jewish State, by the Jews, for the Jews, with non Jews free to live in it, and have freedom of their religion.
> 
> The Jews can accept the Arab Muslims having self determination over 80% of their ancient homeland, the Muslims and Christians need to learn to accept Israel for what it is and always has been .
> 
> 
> Israel =  The ancient homeland of the Jews who have the right to self-determination regardless of the endless attempts by Muslims and Christians to try to destroy it.
Click to expand...


You need to read some history, ancient history.  Are you going by the bible, I can help you with that as well.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Penelope said:


> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> fncceo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Penelope said:
> 
> 
> 
> You took over others land, and today the Palestinians are the people without a land.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In fact, Palestinians are Arabs and there are currently 22 Arab countries.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> and, of course, they never identified as anything but Arab until encouraged to do so for propaganda purposes in the middle part of the 20th century.
> 
> 
> Now, I don't expect the mental midget antisemites in this thread to acknowledge that as facts can't be allowed to get in the way of some good, old ethnic hatred, but a fact it is nevertheless.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Doesn’t matter if they call themselves Arabs or Christians or anything else.  They are a secondary class in a theocracy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They are not in a theocracy,  mental midget. They are living in a state established as the home for a persecuted ethnic minority.
> 
> It is low functioning creeps like you who prove the need for such.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Let me see have jews decided yet if a jew is a person who practices Judaism or is it more like a culture??
Click to expand...

You need to decide if you are someone with knowledge or just a Jew hater, as you keep showing on every thread where anything about Israel or Jews is discussed.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Penelope said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Do I have the feeling that you did not understand the France-Germany connection?
> 
> 
> 
> I doubt you have any understanding of much at all.  It was irrelevant to the conversation, anyways.  France does not have laws against citizens of German background.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Does France have any laws against any other people wanting to declare self-determination on its own soil?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Make your point, because France has no law targeting citizens to make them a secondary class.  Stop pussyfooting around.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Muslims conquered the land of Israel, as well as other lands.  They demand self-determantion on any and all lands they have conquered.
> They lost some of the land. They want it back, with no respect for the indigenous inhabitants.
> 
> Germany conquered France in WWII.
> It lost that war, it lost the lands.
> We do not see Germany, nor German citizens moving to France, with the idea that they can have France (or any other conquered land) back in their hands and declare self-determination over it.
> 
> In today's world, we have the Muslims wanting to take back any land they conquered.
> 
> And let us not forget Russia which seems to be showing how upset it got that the USSR got dissolved and all that land taken from under its hands.
> 
> Now, the Jews have sovereignty over ONLY less than 20% of their original ancient homeland.  The rest, is being held by invading Arab Muslims (78% of it by the Hashemite Clan which only moved into TranJordan after being booted out around 1915 by the Saud Clan from Arabia)
> 
> You and others make no qualms at being upset that Jews are sovereign over any part of their ancient land, much less that they "dare" to call it a (gosh forbid)  A Jewish State.
> 
> Europe is full of Christian States.
> Asia and North Africa is full of Muslim States.
> 
> Accept it.
> 
> Israel has always been a Jewish State, by the Jews, for the Jews, with non Jews free to live in it, and have freedom of their religion.
> 
> The Jews can accept the Arab Muslims having self determination over 80% of their ancient homeland, the Muslims and Christians need to learn to accept Israel for what it is and always has been .
> 
> 
> Israel =  The ancient homeland of the Jews who have the right to self-determination regardless of the endless attempts by Muslims and Christians to try to destroy it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You need to read some history, ancient history.
Click to expand...

You need to know history.

Ancient Israel is the only history you have no problems distorting because your learned hatred of Jews leads you that way.


----------



## Penelope

Sixties Fan said:


> Penelope said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> fncceo said:
> 
> 
> 
> In fact, Palestinians are Arabs and there are currently 22 Arab countries.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and, of course, they never identified as anything but Arab until encouraged to do so for propaganda purposes in the middle part of the 20th century.
> 
> 
> Now, I don't expect the mental midget antisemites in this thread to acknowledge that as facts can't be allowed to get in the way of some good, old ethnic hatred, but a fact it is nevertheless.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Doesn’t matter if they call themselves Arabs or Christians or anything else.  They are a secondary class in a theocracy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They are not in a theocracy,  mental midget. They are living in a state established as the home for a persecuted ethnic minority.
> 
> It is low functioning creeps like you who prove the need for such.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Let me see have jews decided yet if a jew is a person who practices Judaism or is it more like a culture??
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You need to decide if you are someone with knowledge or just a Jew hater, as you keep showing on every thread where anything about Israel or Jews is discussed.
Click to expand...


Well we have lots of white collar crimes here committed by what one calls Jews so I do have an issue with them?  And don't use anti semite on me, because you a are also an anti semite, see you are an arab if you are a jew.


----------



## Penelope

Sixties Fan said:


> Penelope said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> I doubt you have any understanding of much at all.  It was irrelevant to the conversation, anyways.  France does not have laws against citizens of German background.
> 
> 
> 
> Does France have any laws against any other people wanting to declare self-determination on its own soil?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Make your point, because France has no law targeting citizens to make them a secondary class.  Stop pussyfooting around.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Muslims conquered the land of Israel, as well as other lands.  They demand self-determantion on any and all lands they have conquered.
> They lost some of the land. They want it back, with no respect for the indigenous inhabitants.
> 
> Germany conquered France in WWII.
> It lost that war, it lost the lands.
> We do not see Germany, nor German citizens moving to France, with the idea that they can have France (or any other conquered land) back in their hands and declare self-determination over it.
> 
> In today's world, we have the Muslims wanting to take back any land they conquered.
> 
> And let us not forget Russia which seems to be showing how upset it got that the USSR got dissolved and all that land taken from under its hands.
> 
> Now, the Jews have sovereignty over ONLY less than 20% of their original ancient homeland.  The rest, is being held by invading Arab Muslims (78% of it by the Hashemite Clan which only moved into TranJordan after being booted out around 1915 by the Saud Clan from Arabia)
> 
> You and others make no qualms at being upset that Jews are sovereign over any part of their ancient land, much less that they "dare" to call it a (gosh forbid)  A Jewish State.
> 
> Europe is full of Christian States.
> Asia and North Africa is full of Muslim States.
> 
> Accept it.
> 
> Israel has always been a Jewish State, by the Jews, for the Jews, with non Jews free to live in it, and have freedom of their religion.
> 
> The Jews can accept the Arab Muslims having self determination over 80% of their ancient homeland, the Muslims and Christians need to learn to accept Israel for what it is and always has been .
> 
> 
> Israel =  The ancient homeland of the Jews who have the right to self-determination regardless of the endless attempts by Muslims and Christians to try to destroy it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You need to read some history, ancient history.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You need to know history.
> 
> Ancient Israel is the only history you have no problems distorting because your learned hatred of Jews leads you that way.
Click to expand...


History or Bible??


----------



## BlackFlag

Sixties Fan said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> No France doesn’t have any law declaring citizens of German heritage do not have a right to self determination.  That’s probably why the world isn’t coming after them and why they’ve been at peace for so long.
> 
> 
> 
> Do I have the feeling that you did not understand the France-Germany connection?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I doubt you have any understanding of much at all.  It was irrelevant to the conversation, anyways.  France does not have laws against citizens of German background.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Does France have any laws against any other people wanting to declare self-determination on its own soil?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Make your point, because France has no law targeting citizens to make them a secondary class.  Stop pussyfooting around.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Muslims conquered the land of Israel, as well as other lands.  They demand self-determantion on any and all lands they have conquered.
> They lost some of the land. They want it back, with no respect for the indigenous inhabitants.
> 
> Germany conquered France in WWII.
> It lost that war, it lost the lands.
> We do not see Germany, nor German citizens moving to France, with the idea that they can have France (or any other conquered land) back in their hands and declare self-determination over it.
> 
> In today's world, we have the Muslims wanting to take back any land they conquered.
> 
> And let us not forget Russia which seems to be showing how upset it got that the USSR got dissolved and all that land taken from under its hands.
> 
> Now, the Jews have sovereignty over ONLY less than 20% of their original ancient homeland.  The rest, is being held by invading Arab Muslims (78% of it by the Hashemite Clan which only moved into TranJordan after being booted out around 1915 by the Saud Clan from Arabia)
> 
> You and others make no qualms at being upset that Jews are sovereign over any part of their ancient land, much less that they "dare" to call it a (gosh forbid)  A Jewish State.
> 
> Europe is full of Christian States.
> Asia and North Africa is full of Muslim States.
> 
> Accept it.
> 
> Israel has always been a Jewish State, by the Jews, for the Jews, with non Jews free to live in it, and have freedom of their religion.
> 
> The Jews can accept the Arab Muslims having self determination over 80% of their ancient homeland, the Muslims and Christians need to learn to accept Israel for what it is and always has been .
> 
> 
> Israel =  The ancient homeland of the Jews who have the right to self-determination regardless of the endless attempts by Muslims and Christians to try to destroy it.
Click to expand...

Germans move to France all the time and Jews conquered were in Israel because of conquest.  None of that is relevant.  Israel has passed a policy that proves it has no interest in peace and the U.S. should stop wasting resources in the conflict.


----------



## BlackFlag

Sixties Fan said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> fncceo said:
> 
> 
> 
> In fact, Palestinians are Arabs and there are currently 22 Arab countries.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and, of course, they never identified as anything but Arab until encouraged to do so for propaganda purposes in the middle part of the 20th century.
> 
> 
> Now, I don't expect the mental midget antisemites in this thread to acknowledge that as facts can't be allowed to get in the way of some good, old ethnic hatred, but a fact it is nevertheless.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Doesn’t matter if they call themselves Arabs or Christians or anything else.  They are a secondary class in a theocracy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They are not in a theocracy,  mental midget. They are living in a state established as the home for a persecuted ethnic minority.
> 
> It is low functioning creeps like you who prove the need for such.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Of course it’s a theocracy.  They deny equal status to non-Jews, and just put out an edict that reaffirms that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Stop reading fiction and you will get to the truth.
> 
> Your "Of course" does not hold water anywhere in Israel, with anyone who is non Jewish.
> 
> The non Jews in Israel know better about their rights in Israel than you.
Click to expand...

Israel is a country that denies citizenship to non-Jews, and just classified non-Jews as secondary citizens.  So OF COURSE it is a theocracy.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Penelope said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Penelope said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> 
> and, of course, they never identified as anything but Arab until encouraged to do so for propaganda purposes in the middle part of the 20th century.
> 
> 
> Now, I don't expect the mental midget antisemites in this thread to acknowledge that as facts can't be allowed to get in the way of some good, old ethnic hatred, but a fact it is nevertheless.
> 
> 
> 
> Doesn’t matter if they call themselves Arabs or Christians or anything else.  They are a secondary class in a theocracy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They are not in a theocracy,  mental midget. They are living in a state established as the home for a persecuted ethnic minority.
> 
> It is low functioning creeps like you who prove the need for such.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Let me see have jews decided yet if a jew is a person who practices Judaism or is it more like a culture??
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You need to decide if you are someone with knowledge or just a Jew hater, as you keep showing on every thread where anything about Israel or Jews is discussed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well we have lots of white collar crimes here committed by what one calls Jews so I do have an issue with them?  And don't use anti semite on me, because you a are also an anti semite, see you are an arab if you are a jew.
Click to expand...

White collars are Jews.  Enough said.
You are an Arab if you are a Jew (scratch head)

Anti-Semitism, hostility toward or discrimination against Jews as a religious or racial group. The term _anti-Semitism_ was coined in 1879 by the German agitator Wilhelm Marr to designate the anti-Jewish campaigns under way in central Europe at that time.

anti-Semitism | History, Facts, & Examples


Please, oh Please.....keep showing us the Jew hater you are and will continue to be.

You are amazingly clear in what you say  

Shalom


----------



## Sixties Fan

BlackFlag said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> 
> and, of course, they never identified as anything but Arab until encouraged to do so for propaganda purposes in the middle part of the 20th century.
> 
> 
> Now, I don't expect the mental midget antisemites in this thread to acknowledge that as facts can't be allowed to get in the way of some good, old ethnic hatred, but a fact it is nevertheless.
> 
> 
> 
> Doesn’t matter if they call themselves Arabs or Christians or anything else.  They are a secondary class in a theocracy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They are not in a theocracy,  mental midget. They are living in a state established as the home for a persecuted ethnic minority.
> 
> It is low functioning creeps like you who prove the need for such.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Of course it’s a theocracy.  They deny equal status to non-Jews, and just put out an edict that reaffirms that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Stop reading fiction and you will get to the truth.
> 
> Your "Of course" does not hold water anywhere in Israel, with anyone who is non Jewish.
> 
> The non Jews in Israel know better about their rights in Israel than you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Israel is a country that denies citizenship to non-Jews, and just classified non-Jews as secondary citizens.  So OF COURSE it is a theocracy.
Click to expand...

Oh,  you have really lost your marbles.

Go find them and play with them like a good girl.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Background & Overview of Human Rights in Israel


----------



## BlackFlag

Sixties Fan said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> Doesn’t matter if they call themselves Arabs or Christians or anything else.  They are a secondary class in a theocracy.
> 
> 
> 
> They are not in a theocracy,  mental midget. They are living in a state established as the home for a persecuted ethnic minority.
> 
> It is low functioning creeps like you who prove the need for such.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Of course it’s a theocracy.  They deny equal status to non-Jews, and just put out an edict that reaffirms that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Stop reading fiction and you will get to the truth.
> 
> Your "Of course" does not hold water anywhere in Israel, with anyone who is non Jewish.
> 
> The non Jews in Israel know better about their rights in Israel than you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Israel is a country that denies citizenship to non-Jews, and just classified non-Jews as secondary citizens.  So OF COURSE it is a theocracy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Oh,  you have really lost your marbles.
> 
> Go find them and play with them like a good girl.
Click to expand...

You had nothing.  I didn’t expect you to.  You don’t really need to, as your country has unconditional support from so many yokels here.


----------



## MJB12741

BlackFlag said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> 
> and, of course, they never identified as anything but Arab until encouraged to do so for propaganda purposes in the middle part of the 20th century.
> 
> 
> Now, I don't expect the mental midget antisemites in this thread to acknowledge that as facts can't be allowed to get in the way of some good, old ethnic hatred, but a fact it is nevertheless.
> 
> 
> 
> Doesn’t matter if they call themselves Arabs or Christians or anything else.  They are a secondary class in a theocracy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They are not in a theocracy,  mental midget. They are living in a state established as the home for a persecuted ethnic minority.
> 
> It is low functioning creeps like you who prove the need for such.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Of course it’s a theocracy.  They deny equal status to non-Jews, and just put out an edict that reaffirms that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Stop reading fiction and you will get to the truth.
> 
> Your "Of course" does not hold water anywhere in Israel, with anyone who is non Jewish.
> 
> The non Jews in Israel know better about their rights in Israel than you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Israel is a country that denies citizenship to non-Jews, and just classified non-Jews as secondary citizens.  So OF COURSE it is a theocracy.
Click to expand...


How do ya like that?  And here I actually believed Israel is the only country in all of the Middle East with citizens of several living faiths including Arab Muslims who even have equal voting rights in the Israeli Knesset.  Amazing what we can learn here from America's & Israel's enemies.

Arab citizens of Israel - Wikipedia


----------



## Sixties Fan

BlackFlag said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> 
> and, of course, they never identified as anything but Arab until encouraged to do so for propaganda purposes in the middle part of the 20th century.
> 
> 
> Now, I don't expect the mental midget antisemites in this thread to acknowledge that as facts can't be allowed to get in the way of some good, old ethnic hatred, but a fact it is nevertheless.
> 
> 
> 
> Doesn’t matter if they call themselves Arabs or Christians or anything else.  They are a secondary class in a theocracy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They are not in a theocracy,  mental midget. They are living in a state established as the home for a persecuted ethnic minority.
> 
> It is low functioning creeps like you who prove the need for such.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Of course it’s a theocracy.  They deny equal status to non-Jews, and just put out an edict that reaffirms that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Stop reading fiction and you will get to the truth.
> 
> Your "Of course" does not hold water anywhere in Israel, with anyone who is non Jewish.
> 
> The non Jews in Israel know better about their rights in Israel than you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Israel is a country that denies citizenship to non-Jews, and just classified non-Jews as secondary citizens.  So OF COURSE it is a theocracy.
Click to expand...

"Of Course"


----------



## BlackFlag

MJB12741 said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> Doesn’t matter if they call themselves Arabs or Christians or anything else.  They are a secondary class in a theocracy.
> 
> 
> 
> They are not in a theocracy,  mental midget. They are living in a state established as the home for a persecuted ethnic minority.
> 
> It is low functioning creeps like you who prove the need for such.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Of course it’s a theocracy.  They deny equal status to non-Jews, and just put out an edict that reaffirms that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Stop reading fiction and you will get to the truth.
> 
> Your "Of course" does not hold water anywhere in Israel, with anyone who is non Jewish.
> 
> The non Jews in Israel know better about their rights in Israel than you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Israel is a country that denies citizenship to non-Jews, and just classified non-Jews as secondary citizens.  So OF COURSE it is a theocracy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How do ya like that?  And here I actually believed Israel is the only country in all of the Middle East with citizens of several living faiths including Arab Muslims who even have equal voting rights in the Israeli Knesset.  Amazing what we can learn here from America's & Israel's enemies.
> 
> Arab citizens of Israel - Wikipedia
Click to expand...

They do not have the same rights.  What is the process for a family member of theirs to move to Israel vs. a Jew?  Has the theocratic government declared Jews have no right to self determination?  Don’t feel too embarrassed by the answers.


----------



## Sixties Fan

BlackFlag said:


> MJB12741 said:
> 
> 
> 
> SCORE:
> 
> Sixties Fan ------- 8
> 
> Black Flag ---------0
> 
> 
> 
> ^ Another who’s run out of defenses
Click to expand...

We defend Israel very well.  Militarily and all over the world.

We have Israel, you have hatred of Jews.


----------



## Sixties Fan

BlackFlag said:


> MJB12741 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> 
> They are not in a theocracy,  mental midget. They are living in a state established as the home for a persecuted ethnic minority.
> 
> It is low functioning creeps like you who prove the need for such.
> 
> 
> 
> Of course it’s a theocracy.  They deny equal status to non-Jews, and just put out an edict that reaffirms that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Stop reading fiction and you will get to the truth.
> 
> Your "Of course" does not hold water anywhere in Israel, with anyone who is non Jewish.
> 
> The non Jews in Israel know better about their rights in Israel than you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Israel is a country that denies citizenship to non-Jews, and just classified non-Jews as secondary citizens.  So OF COURSE it is a theocracy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How do ya like that?  And here I actually believed Israel is the only country in all of the Middle East with citizens of several living faiths including Arab Muslims who even have equal voting rights in the Israeli Knesset.  Amazing what we can learn here from America's & Israel's enemies.
> 
> Arab citizens of Israel - Wikipedia
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They do not have the same rights.  What is the process for a family member of theirs to move to Israel vs. a Jew?  Has the theocratic government declared Jews have no right to self determination?  Don’t feel too embarrassed by the answers.
Click to expand...

Why in the world would Israel allow all the Arabs in the world to move into Israel when the Arab world's intent is to destroy Israel from the inside as well as the outside?

What in the world do you think the expulsion of Jews from the Arab conquered lands in 1951 was all about?
Making Jews happy that they could finally go to Israel?
No !
It was about destroying Israel economically.

So, if Israel were to allow all the descendants of Arabs who tried to kill Jews and destroy Israel back in 1948, what would happen to Israel?
What is the Arab intent?

The rights of the Arab refugees, who are not really refugees, or the destruction of Israel by any possible means?


----------



## BlackFlag

Sixties Fan said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MJB12741 said:
> 
> 
> 
> SCORE:
> 
> Sixties Fan ------- 8
> 
> Black Flag ---------0
> 
> 
> 
> ^ Another who’s run out of defenses
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> We defend Israel very well.  Militarily and all over the world.
> 
> We have Israel, you have hatred of Jews.
Click to expand...

I love Jews.  They have done very well for themselves in the U.S.  Israel I just wish I didn’t have to care about, but I might die in a terrorist attack tomorrow because their fairy tale says that bit of desert wasteland belings to them, and they’ll die before sharing it.  So unfortunately, I have to care.


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL

rylah said:


> Penelope said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Penelope said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cnm said:
> 
> 
> 
> Like the official implementation of apartheid to ensure Boer values were preserved.
> 
> 
> 
> Unlike the Dutch people, Jews originated in the land of Israel.
> Do You see any reference to skin color?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes they were once some sects of the Canaanites, and the bible says EKE: Your mother was a Hittite and your father an Amorite.
> 
> Lets face it, anyone from Judea was known as  a jew. Good now that that is settled we can take Judeo off of Christian.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So many words for so little sense.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Jews originated in Israel is not the truth.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Q. Why do You think Arabs call it the "Jewish Desert"?*
> 
> 
> *Sahara Yahudin -*صحراء يهودا‎
> 
> The Judaean Desert or Judean Desert (Hebrew:  _Midbar Yehuda_, both _Desert of Judah_or _Judaean Desert_; Arabic: _Sahara Yahudan_) is a desert in Israel and the West Bank that lies east of Jerusalem and descends to the Dead Sea. It stretches from the northeastern Negev to the east of Beit El, and is marked by terraces with escarpments.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "The state views the development of Jewish settlement as a national value and will act to encourage and promote its establishment and consolidation."
Click to expand...


Ask where they originated and there will be no response. She has the Pro Palestinian Mentality who claims that Israel has no rights to the Western Wall .   What she “ thinks?”


----------



## BlackFlag

Sixties Fan said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MJB12741 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> Of course it’s a theocracy.  They deny equal status to non-Jews, and just put out an edict that reaffirms that.
> 
> 
> 
> Stop reading fiction and you will get to the truth.
> 
> Your "Of course" does not hold water anywhere in Israel, with anyone who is non Jewish.
> 
> The non Jews in Israel know better about their rights in Israel than you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Israel is a country that denies citizenship to non-Jews, and just classified non-Jews as secondary citizens.  So OF COURSE it is a theocracy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How do ya like that?  And here I actually believed Israel is the only country in all of the Middle East with citizens of several living faiths including Arab Muslims who even have equal voting rights in the Israeli Knesset.  Amazing what we can learn here from America's & Israel's enemies.
> 
> Arab citizens of Israel - Wikipedia
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They do not have the same rights.  What is the process for a family member of theirs to move to Israel vs. a Jew?  Has the theocratic government declared Jews have no right to self determination?  Don’t feel too embarrassed by the answers.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why in the world would Israel allow all the Arabs in the world to move into Israel when the Arab world's intent is to destroy Israel from the inside as well as the outside?
> 
> What in the world do you think the expulsion of Jews from the Arab conquered lands in 1951 was all about?
> Making Jews happy that they could finally go to Israel?
> No !
> It was about destroying Israel economically.
> 
> So, if Israel were to allow all the descendants of Arabs who tried to kill Jews and destroy Israel back in 1948, what would happen to Israel?
> What is the Arab intent?
> 
> The rights of the Arab refugees, who are not really refugees, or the destruction of Israel by any possible means?
Click to expand...

Israel does not allow anybody into the country, not just the Arabs they kicked out and are still trying to kick out.


----------



## MJB12741

BlackFlag said:


> MJB12741 said:
> 
> 
> 
> SCORE:
> 
> Sixties Fan ------- 8
> 
> Black Flag ---------0
> 
> 
> 
> ^ Another who’s run out of defenses
Click to expand...


Okay.  Let me dumb it down for you.  Which country/countries has more citizens of numerous living faiths, Israel, or all  the Arab countries combined?


----------



## Indeependent

Bleipriester said:


> fncceo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> fncceo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> 
> Our German country is too small nowadays.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I would say not nearly small enough.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> MAGA! Rheinische Republik? No, thank you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You don't need the French to come back, just let the waters rise like May of 1943.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You can´t rely on their phony wars, anyway.
> Germany was a good home for Jews for centuries, by the way. This is why most of them have German surnames, wherever they live.
Click to expand...

Stalin did that.


----------



## BlackFlag

MJB12741 said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MJB12741 said:
> 
> 
> 
> SCORE:
> 
> Sixties Fan ------- 8
> 
> Black Flag ---------0
> 
> 
> 
> ^ Another who’s run out of defenses
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Okay.  Let me dumb it down for you.  Which country/countries has more citizens of numerous living faiths, Israel, or all  the Arab countries combined?
Click to expand...

I don’t know or care.  The U.S. should stop wasting money and resources on any religious madness _they’re_ involved in as well.


----------



## Sixties Fan

BlackFlag said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MJB12741 said:
> 
> 
> 
> SCORE:
> 
> Sixties Fan ------- 8
> 
> Black Flag ---------0
> 
> 
> 
> ^ Another who’s run out of defenses
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> We defend Israel very well.  Militarily and all over the world.
> 
> We have Israel, you have hatred of Jews.
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I love Jews.  They have done very well for themselves in the U.S.  Israel I just wish I didn’t have to care about, but I might die in a terrorist attack tomorrow because their fairy tale says that bit of desert wasteland belings to them, and they’ll die before sharing it.  So unfortunately, I have to care.
Click to expand...

Wow, so much nonsense based on pure ignorance.

1) You do not love Jews.  Or you would respect all Jews and their right to self-determination

2) You may or not die in a terrorist attack (talk about it with your therapist) not because of a country called Israel, but because the Islamic world has always been about conquest and dominance.

3) Jews living on their ancient homeland for 3800 years and having the right, like any other indigenous people, to that land - never has been a fairy tale, fable or anything else your mind wishes to call it.
It is their indigenous right, like all other indigenous rights by any other indigenous people to their land.

4)  The Muslims turned it into a desert wasteland, the indigenous Jews have been returning it to the glory that it once was.

5)  The Muslim Arabs got 78% of the Jewish homeland as a "gift" from the British in 1925.  The Hashemites do not share any of that land with its indigenous Jewish population.  As a matter of fact, Jews have not been allowed to live in TranJordan since 1925.
The Same goes with Gaza where Jews were first expelled in 1920.


So, now .....explain to us what is it that your mind Full Of Nonsense is really afraid of.


----------



## MJB12741

BlackFlag said:


> MJB12741 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MJB12741 said:
> 
> 
> 
> SCORE:
> 
> Sixties Fan ------- 8
> 
> Black Flag ---------0
> 
> 
> 
> ^ Another who’s run out of defenses
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Okay.  Let me dumb it down for you.  Which country/countries has more citizens of numerous living faiths, Israel, or all  the Arab countries combined?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I don’t know or care.  The U.S. should stop wasting money and resources on any religious madness _they’re_ involved in as well.
Click to expand...


Aha!  So now you have no disagreement with documented facts.  Very good!  How proud of you I am.


----------



## Sixties Fan

BlackFlag said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MJB12741 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Stop reading fiction and you will get to the truth.
> 
> Your "Of course" does not hold water anywhere in Israel, with anyone who is non Jewish.
> 
> The non Jews in Israel know better about their rights in Israel than you.
> 
> 
> 
> Israel is a country that denies citizenship to non-Jews, and just classified non-Jews as secondary citizens.  So OF COURSE it is a theocracy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How do ya like that?  And here I actually believed Israel is the only country in all of the Middle East with citizens of several living faiths including Arab Muslims who even have equal voting rights in the Israeli Knesset.  Amazing what we can learn here from America's & Israel's enemies.
> 
> Arab citizens of Israel - Wikipedia
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They do not have the same rights.  What is the process for a family member of theirs to move to Israel vs. a Jew?  Has the theocratic government declared Jews have no right to self determination?  Don’t feel too embarrassed by the answers.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why in the world would Israel allow all the Arabs in the world to move into Israel when the Arab world's intent is to destroy Israel from the inside as well as the outside?
> 
> What in the world do you think the expulsion of Jews from the Arab conquered lands in 1951 was all about?
> Making Jews happy that they could finally go to Israel?
> No !
> It was about destroying Israel economically.
> 
> So, if Israel were to allow all the descendants of Arabs who tried to kill Jews and destroy Israel back in 1948, what would happen to Israel?
> What is the Arab intent?
> 
> The rights of the Arab refugees, who are not really refugees, or the destruction of Israel by any possible means?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Israel does not allow anybody into the country, not just the Arabs they kicked out and are still trying to kick out.
Click to expand...

Another one of your lies.

Israel will definitely attempt to "kick out" any Arab or Muslim who perpetrates any act of terrorism in Israel.  All countries do it.

You are truly ill informed about Israel and what happens there.  Who comes, who stays, who is allowed to stay.

Think most asylum seekers in Israel are African? Try Ukrainian


More.  Give me more of what you read in your "We hate Israel" sites


----------



## BlackFlag

Sixties Fan said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MJB12741 said:
> 
> 
> 
> SCORE:
> 
> Sixties Fan ------- 8
> 
> Black Flag ---------0
> 
> 
> 
> ^ Another who’s run out of defenses
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> We defend Israel very well.  Militarily and all over the world.
> 
> We have Israel, you have hatred of Jews.
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I love Jews.  They have done very well for themselves in the U.S.  Israel I just wish I didn’t have to care about, but I might die in a terrorist attack tomorrow because their fairy tale says that bit of desert wasteland belings to them, and they’ll die before sharing it.  So unfortunately, I have to care.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Wow, so much nonsense based on pure ignorance.
> 
> 1) You do not love Jews.  Or you would respect all Jews and their right to self-determination
> 
> 2) You may or not die in a terrorist attack (talk about it with your therapist) not because of a country called Israel, but because the Islamic world has always been about conquest and dominance.
> 
> 3) Jews living on their ancient homeland for 3800 years and having the right, like any other indigenous people, to that land - never has been a fairy tale, fable or anything else your mind wishes to call it.
> It is their indigenous right, like all other indigenous rights by any other indigenous people to their land.
> 
> 4)  The Muslims turned it into a desert wasteland, the indigenous Jews have been returning it to the glory that it once was.
> 
> 5)  The Muslim Arabs got 78% of the Jewish homeland as a "gift" from the British in 1925.  The Hashemites do not share any of that land with its indigenous Jewish population.  As a matter of fact, Jews have not been allowed to live in TranJordan since 1925.
> The Same goes with Gaza where Jews were first expelled in 1920.
> 
> 
> So, now .....explain to us what is it that your mind Full Of Nonsense is really afraid of.
Click to expand...

Apartheidists and segregationists have always found arguments to justify their views.  Believe what you will; stop pretending peace is a goal.


----------



## BlackFlag

Sixties Fan said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MJB12741 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> Israel is a country that denies citizenship to non-Jews, and just classified non-Jews as secondary citizens.  So OF COURSE it is a theocracy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How do ya like that?  And here I actually believed Israel is the only country in all of the Middle East with citizens of several living faiths including Arab Muslims who even have equal voting rights in the Israeli Knesset.  Amazing what we can learn here from America's & Israel's enemies.
> 
> Arab citizens of Israel - Wikipedia
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They do not have the same rights.  What is the process for a family member of theirs to move to Israel vs. a Jew?  Has the theocratic government declared Jews have no right to self determination?  Don’t feel too embarrassed by the answers.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why in the world would Israel allow all the Arabs in the world to move into Israel when the Arab world's intent is to destroy Israel from the inside as well as the outside?
> 
> What in the world do you think the expulsion of Jews from the Arab conquered lands in 1951 was all about?
> Making Jews happy that they could finally go to Israel?
> No !
> It was about destroying Israel economically.
> 
> So, if Israel were to allow all the descendants of Arabs who tried to kill Jews and destroy Israel back in 1948, what would happen to Israel?
> What is the Arab intent?
> 
> The rights of the Arab refugees, who are not really refugees, or the destruction of Israel by any possible means?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Israel does not allow anybody into the country, not just the Arabs they kicked out and are still trying to kick out.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Another one of your lies.
> 
> Israel will definitely attempt to "kick out" any Arab or Muslim who perpetrates any act of terrorism in Israel.  All countries do it.
> 
> You are truly ill informed about Israel and what happens there.  Who comes, who stays, who is allowed to stay.
> 
> Think most asylum seekers in Israel are African? Try Ukrainian
> 
> 
> More.  Give me more of what you read in your "We hate Israel" sites
Click to expand...

Again, you abandon the conversation because you have no argument.


----------



## Preacher

Israel Passes Controversial Law Reserving National Self-Determination For Jews

As usual Jewish hypocrisy,force and push invasion and integration on White America but make sure the Jewish people have segregation and closed borders.


----------



## Sixties Fan

BlackFlag said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MJB12741 said:
> 
> 
> 
> How do ya like that?  And here I actually believed Israel is the only country in all of the Middle East with citizens of several living faiths including Arab Muslims who even have equal voting rights in the Israeli Knesset.  Amazing what we can learn here from America's & Israel's enemies.
> 
> Arab citizens of Israel - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> They do not have the same rights.  What is the process for a family member of theirs to move to Israel vs. a Jew?  Has the theocratic government declared Jews have no right to self determination?  Don’t feel too embarrassed by the answers.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why in the world would Israel allow all the Arabs in the world to move into Israel when the Arab world's intent is to destroy Israel from the inside as well as the outside?
> 
> What in the world do you think the expulsion of Jews from the Arab conquered lands in 1951 was all about?
> Making Jews happy that they could finally go to Israel?
> No !
> It was about destroying Israel economically.
> 
> So, if Israel were to allow all the descendants of Arabs who tried to kill Jews and destroy Israel back in 1948, what would happen to Israel?
> What is the Arab intent?
> 
> The rights of the Arab refugees, who are not really refugees, or the destruction of Israel by any possible means?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Israel does not allow anybody into the country, not just the Arabs they kicked out and are still trying to kick out.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Another one of your lies.
> 
> Israel will definitely attempt to "kick out" any Arab or Muslim who perpetrates any act of terrorism in Israel.  All countries do it.
> 
> You are truly ill informed about Israel and what happens there.  Who comes, who stays, who is allowed to stay.
> 
> Think most asylum seekers in Israel are African? Try Ukrainian
> 
> 
> More.  Give me more of what you read in your "We hate Israel" sites
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Again, you abandon the conversation because you have no argument.
Click to expand...

"I" abandoned the conversation !!!!

I will wait for all of your evidence to what you were alleging. I have seen none so far.

Links, please, to all the allegations you insist we are not discussing and have abandoned.

Evidence.


----------



## Bleipriester

Indeependent said:


> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> fncceo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> fncceo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> 
> Our German country is too small nowadays.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I would say not nearly small enough.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> MAGA! Rheinische Republik? No, thank you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You don't need the French to come back, just let the waters rise like May of 1943.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You can´t rely on their phony wars, anyway.
> Germany was a good home for Jews for centuries, by the way. This is why most of them have German surnames, wherever they live.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Stalin did that.
Click to expand...

What did he?


----------



## BlackFlag

Sixties Fan said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> They do not have the same rights.  What is the process for a family member of theirs to move to Israel vs. a Jew?  Has the theocratic government declared Jews have no right to self determination?  Don’t feel too embarrassed by the answers.
> 
> 
> 
> Why in the world would Israel allow all the Arabs in the world to move into Israel when the Arab world's intent is to destroy Israel from the inside as well as the outside?
> 
> What in the world do you think the expulsion of Jews from the Arab conquered lands in 1951 was all about?
> Making Jews happy that they could finally go to Israel?
> No !
> It was about destroying Israel economically.
> 
> So, if Israel were to allow all the descendants of Arabs who tried to kill Jews and destroy Israel back in 1948, what would happen to Israel?
> What is the Arab intent?
> 
> The rights of the Arab refugees, who are not really refugees, or the destruction of Israel by any possible means?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Israel does not allow anybody into the country, not just the Arabs they kicked out and are still trying to kick out.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Another one of your lies.
> 
> Israel will definitely attempt to "kick out" any Arab or Muslim who perpetrates any act of terrorism in Israel.  All countries do it.
> 
> You are truly ill informed about Israel and what happens there.  Who comes, who stays, who is allowed to stay.
> 
> Think most asylum seekers in Israel are African? Try Ukrainian
> 
> 
> More.  Give me more of what you read in your "We hate Israel" sites
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Again, you abandon the conversation because you have no argument.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> "I" abandoned the conversation !!!!
> 
> I will wait for all of your evidence to what you were alleging. I have seen none so far.
> 
> Links, please, to all the allegations you insist we are not discussing and have abandoned.
> 
> Evidence.
Click to expand...

It is an open fact that the process of becoming a citizen in Israel is prohibitive unless you are of the Jewish faith.  You cannot refute that.  Also, the entire topic of this thread is about how the theocratic Israeli government declared that onlish Jewish followers have a right of self determination in Israel.  They have no interest in a peace process with non-Jews, and the U.S. should abandon them to their fate whether it is a good one or a bad one.


----------



## Sixties Fan

BlackFlag said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why in the world would Israel allow all the Arabs in the world to move into Israel when the Arab world's intent is to destroy Israel from the inside as well as the outside?
> 
> What in the world do you think the expulsion of Jews from the Arab conquered lands in 1951 was all about?
> Making Jews happy that they could finally go to Israel?
> No !
> It was about destroying Israel economically.
> 
> So, if Israel were to allow all the descendants of Arabs who tried to kill Jews and destroy Israel back in 1948, what would happen to Israel?
> What is the Arab intent?
> 
> The rights of the Arab refugees, who are not really refugees, or the destruction of Israel by any possible means?
> 
> 
> 
> Israel does not allow anybody into the country, not just the Arabs they kicked out and are still trying to kick out.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Another one of your lies.
> 
> Israel will definitely attempt to "kick out" any Arab or Muslim who perpetrates any act of terrorism in Israel.  All countries do it.
> 
> You are truly ill informed about Israel and what happens there.  Who comes, who stays, who is allowed to stay.
> 
> Think most asylum seekers in Israel are African? Try Ukrainian
> 
> 
> More.  Give me more of what you read in your "We hate Israel" sites
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Again, you abandon the conversation because you have no argument.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> "I" abandoned the conversation !!!!
> 
> I will wait for all of your evidence to what you were alleging. I have seen none so far.
> 
> Links, please, to all the allegations you insist we are not discussing and have abandoned.
> 
> Evidence.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It is an open fact that the process of becoming a citizen in Israel is prohibitive unless you are of the Jewish faith.  You cannot refute that.  Also, the entire topic of this thread is about how the theocratic Israeli government declared that onlish Jewish followers have a right of self determination in Israel.  They have no interest in a peace process with non-Jews, and the U.S. should abandon them to their fate whether it is a good one or a bad one.
Click to expand...

1)  Debunked

Jerusalem Palestinians still seek Israeli citizenship despite Trump declaration

More Palestinians in Jerusalem seek Israeli citizenship

2) Debunked. 

  Herzl was not a religion Jew.  None of the founders was a religious Theocrat.  None of the Presidents or Prime Ministers of Israel have been Theocrats.  Theocrats do not run the State of Israel.

Secularism in Israel - Wikipedia

3)  You are too ignorant to understand the meaning of the expression 
Self-Determination when it comes to the indigenous people of anywhere in the world. And you do it on purpose.  

4)  Debunked
Israel has a Peace Treaty with two of its Arab neighbors.  Egypt and Jordan.  You clearly do not care how those Peace Treaties came about.
You clearly do not know or care what the charters of the PLO, Hamas and Fatah say about negotiating peace with Israel, much less with Jews.

5)  With the US help, or without, Israel would strive, as it is now.
It is not money which matters but what is done with it.

Arabs choose terrorism.

Jews choose progress.


----------



## BlackFlag

Sixties Fan said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> Israel does not allow anybody into the country, not just the Arabs they kicked out and are still trying to kick out.
> 
> 
> 
> Another one of your lies.
> 
> Israel will definitely attempt to "kick out" any Arab or Muslim who perpetrates any act of terrorism in Israel.  All countries do it.
> 
> You are truly ill informed about Israel and what happens there.  Who comes, who stays, who is allowed to stay.
> 
> Think most asylum seekers in Israel are African? Try Ukrainian
> 
> 
> More.  Give me more of what you read in your "We hate Israel" sites
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Again, you abandon the conversation because you have no argument.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> "I" abandoned the conversation !!!!
> 
> I will wait for all of your evidence to what you were alleging. I have seen none so far.
> 
> Links, please, to all the allegations you insist we are not discussing and have abandoned.
> 
> Evidence.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It is an open fact that the process of becoming a citizen in Israel is prohibitive unless you are of the Jewish faith.  You cannot refute that.  Also, the entire topic of this thread is about how the theocratic Israeli government declared that onlish Jewish followers have a right of self determination in Israel.  They have no interest in a peace process with non-Jews, and the U.S. should abandon them to their fate whether it is a good one or a bad one.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 1)  Debunked
> 
> Jerusalem Palestinians still seek Israeli citizenship despite Trump declaration
> 
> More Palestinians in Jerusalem seek Israeli citizenship
> 
> 2) Debunked.
> 
> Herzl was not a religion Jew.  None of the founders was a religious Theocrat.  None of the Presidents or Prime Ministers of Israel have been Theocrats.  Theocrats do not run the State of Israel.
> 
> Secularism in Israel - Wikipedia
> 
> 3)  You are too ignorant to understand the meaning of the expression
> Self-Determination when it comes to the indigenous people of anywhere in the world. And you do it on purpose.
> 
> 4)  Debunked
> Israel has a Peace Treaty with two of its Arab neighbors.  Egypt and Jordan.  You clearly do not care how those Peace Treaties came about.
> You clearly do not know or care what the charters of the PLO, Hamas and Fatah say about negotiating peace with Israel, much less with Jews.
> 
> 5)  With the US help, or without, Israel would strive, as it is now.
> It is not money which matters but what is done with it.
> 
> Arabs choose terrorism.
> 
> Jews choose progress.
Click to expand...

Nothing was debunked in that post.  In fact, you did not address either point I made except to say that indigenous people have a right to self-determination, except that by Israel’s reasoning all people of Abrahamic faith can claim to be indigenous to Israel; of course they passed a law saying that only those of the Jewish faith have any right to self determination.


----------



## Sixties Fan

BlackFlag said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Another one of your lies.
> 
> Israel will definitely attempt to "kick out" any Arab or Muslim who perpetrates any act of terrorism in Israel.  All countries do it.
> 
> You are truly ill informed about Israel and what happens there.  Who comes, who stays, who is allowed to stay.
> 
> Think most asylum seekers in Israel are African? Try Ukrainian
> 
> 
> More.  Give me more of what you read in your "We hate Israel" sites
> 
> 
> 
> Again, you abandon the conversation because you have no argument.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> "I" abandoned the conversation !!!!
> 
> I will wait for all of your evidence to what you were alleging. I have seen none so far.
> 
> Links, please, to all the allegations you insist we are not discussing and have abandoned.
> 
> Evidence.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It is an open fact that the process of becoming a citizen in Israel is prohibitive unless you are of the Jewish faith.  You cannot refute that.  Also, the entire topic of this thread is about how the theocratic Israeli government declared that onlish Jewish followers have a right of self determination in Israel.  They have no interest in a peace process with non-Jews, and the U.S. should abandon them to their fate whether it is a good one or a bad one.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 1)  Debunked
> 
> Jerusalem Palestinians still seek Israeli citizenship despite Trump declaration
> 
> More Palestinians in Jerusalem seek Israeli citizenship
> 
> 2) Debunked.
> 
> Herzl was not a religion Jew.  None of the founders was a religious Theocrat.  None of the Presidents or Prime Ministers of Israel have been Theocrats.  Theocrats do not run the State of Israel.
> 
> Secularism in Israel - Wikipedia
> 
> 3)  You are too ignorant to understand the meaning of the expression
> Self-Determination when it comes to the indigenous people of anywhere in the world. And you do it on purpose.
> 
> 4)  Debunked
> Israel has a Peace Treaty with two of its Arab neighbors.  Egypt and Jordan.  You clearly do not care how those Peace Treaties came about.
> You clearly do not know or care what the charters of the PLO, Hamas and Fatah say about negotiating peace with Israel, much less with Jews.
> 
> 5)  With the US help, or without, Israel would strive, as it is now.
> It is not money which matters but what is done with it.
> 
> Arabs choose terrorism.
> 
> Jews choose progress.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nothing was debunked in that post.  In fact, you did not address either point I made except to say that indigenous people have a right to self-determination, except that by Israel’s reasoning all people of Abrahamic faith can claim to be indigenous to Israel; of course they passed a law saying that only those of the Jewish faith have any right to self determination.
Click to expand...

Tell me that you truly are not serious in supposing/assuming that ALL PEOPLE of the Abrahamic religions can be considered indigenous to the land of Israel and therefore ......"Entitled" to self-determination OVER the Land of Israel.

Please, please tell me that it is not what you meant.

You continue to prove to us:

You do not care about the meaning of the word indigenous
You do not care about the meaning of self-determination

And most of all:

YOU DO NOT CARE to allow the Jewish people to BE WHO THEY ARE:

The indigenous people of the Land of Israel with every right to self-determination over it.

The Indigenous people of the Land of Israel WERE and ARE  Jewish.


----------



## BlackFlag

Sixties Fan said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> Again, you abandon the conversation because you have no argument.
> 
> 
> 
> "I" abandoned the conversation !!!!
> 
> I will wait for all of your evidence to what you were alleging. I have seen none so far.
> 
> Links, please, to all the allegations you insist we are not discussing and have abandoned.
> 
> Evidence.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It is an open fact that the process of becoming a citizen in Israel is prohibitive unless you are of the Jewish faith.  You cannot refute that.  Also, the entire topic of this thread is about how the theocratic Israeli government declared that onlish Jewish followers have a right of self determination in Israel.  They have no interest in a peace process with non-Jews, and the U.S. should abandon them to their fate whether it is a good one or a bad one.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 1)  Debunked
> 
> Jerusalem Palestinians still seek Israeli citizenship despite Trump declaration
> 
> More Palestinians in Jerusalem seek Israeli citizenship
> 
> 2) Debunked.
> 
> Herzl was not a religion Jew.  None of the founders was a religious Theocrat.  None of the Presidents or Prime Ministers of Israel have been Theocrats.  Theocrats do not run the State of Israel.
> 
> Secularism in Israel - Wikipedia
> 
> 3)  You are too ignorant to understand the meaning of the expression
> Self-Determination when it comes to the indigenous people of anywhere in the world. And you do it on purpose.
> 
> 4)  Debunked
> Israel has a Peace Treaty with two of its Arab neighbors.  Egypt and Jordan.  You clearly do not care how those Peace Treaties came about.
> You clearly do not know or care what the charters of the PLO, Hamas and Fatah say about negotiating peace with Israel, much less with Jews.
> 
> 5)  With the US help, or without, Israel would strive, as it is now.
> It is not money which matters but what is done with it.
> 
> Arabs choose terrorism.
> 
> Jews choose progress.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nothing was debunked in that post.  In fact, you did not address either point I made except to say that indigenous people have a right to self-determination, except that by Israel’s reasoning all people of Abrahamic faith can claim to be indigenous to Israel; of course they passed a law saying that only those of the Jewish faith have any right to self determination.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Tell me that you truly are not serious in supposing/assuming that ALL PEOPLE of the Abrahamic religions can be considered indigenous to the land of Israel and therefore ......"Entitled" to self-determination OVER the Land of Israel.
> 
> Please, please tell me that it is not what you meant.
> 
> You continue to prove to us:
> 
> You do not care about the meaning of the word indigenous
> You do not care about the meaning of self-determination
> 
> And most of all:
> 
> YOU DO NOT CARE to allow the Jewish people to BE WHO THEY ARE:
> 
> The indigenous people of the Land of Israel with every right to self-determination over it.
> 
> The Indigenous people of the Land of Israel WERE and ARE  Jewish.
Click to expand...

The Jews there are not indigenous, and this proclamation is a direct rejection by them of any peace process.  Which, again, I would love nothing more than to not have to care about, but those religious nutjobs drive my country's foreign policy for some reason.

All the Abrahamic religions claim origins in Israel, and so all can claim to be indigenous.  That's why they've spent millenia soaking the "holy" land in blood.


----------



## Shusha

Bleipriester said:


> Diversity is actually a part of Syria´s pride and identity. Whether you are Jew, Muslim, Christian, socialist or right-winger, there is no difference before the law.



Hmmmmmmm.  Sounds like Israel.


----------



## Sixties Fan

BlackFlag said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> "I" abandoned the conversation !!!!
> 
> I will wait for all of your evidence to what you were alleging. I have seen none so far.
> 
> Links, please, to all the allegations you insist we are not discussing and have abandoned.
> 
> Evidence.
> 
> 
> 
> It is an open fact that the process of becoming a citizen in Israel is prohibitive unless you are of the Jewish faith.  You cannot refute that.  Also, the entire topic of this thread is about how the theocratic Israeli government declared that onlish Jewish followers have a right of self determination in Israel.  They have no interest in a peace process with non-Jews, and the U.S. should abandon them to their fate whether it is a good one or a bad one.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 1)  Debunked
> 
> Jerusalem Palestinians still seek Israeli citizenship despite Trump declaration
> 
> More Palestinians in Jerusalem seek Israeli citizenship
> 
> 2) Debunked.
> 
> Herzl was not a religion Jew.  None of the founders was a religious Theocrat.  None of the Presidents or Prime Ministers of Israel have been Theocrats.  Theocrats do not run the State of Israel.
> 
> Secularism in Israel - Wikipedia
> 
> 3)  You are too ignorant to understand the meaning of the expression
> Self-Determination when it comes to the indigenous people of anywhere in the world. And you do it on purpose.
> 
> 4)  Debunked
> Israel has a Peace Treaty with two of its Arab neighbors.  Egypt and Jordan.  You clearly do not care how those Peace Treaties came about.
> You clearly do not know or care what the charters of the PLO, Hamas and Fatah say about negotiating peace with Israel, much less with Jews.
> 
> 5)  With the US help, or without, Israel would strive, as it is now.
> It is not money which matters but what is done with it.
> 
> Arabs choose terrorism.
> 
> Jews choose progress.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nothing was debunked in that post.  In fact, you did not address either point I made except to say that indigenous people have a right to self-determination, except that by Israel’s reasoning all people of Abrahamic faith can claim to be indigenous to Israel; of course they passed a law saying that only those of the Jewish faith have any right to self determination.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Tell me that you truly are not serious in supposing/assuming that ALL PEOPLE of the Abrahamic religions can be considered indigenous to the land of Israel and therefore ......"Entitled" to self-determination OVER the Land of Israel.
> 
> Please, please tell me that it is not what you meant.
> 
> You continue to prove to us:
> 
> You do not care about the meaning of the word indigenous
> You do not care about the meaning of self-determination
> 
> And most of all:
> 
> YOU DO NOT CARE to allow the Jewish people to BE WHO THEY ARE:
> 
> The indigenous people of the Land of Israel with every right to self-determination over it.
> 
> The Indigenous people of the Land of Israel WERE and ARE  Jewish.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Jews there are not indigenous, and this proclamation is a direct rejection by them of any peace process.  Which, again, I would love nothing more than to not have to care about, but those religious nutjobs drive my country's foreign policy for some reason.
Click to expand...

How do I tell you this?

You are a nutcase who believes the things you do, and only for the reasons you know about.

None of your endless delegitimization of the Jewish people, who are YES, the indigenous people of the land, is going to ever matter to them, because they have become used to all of the nonsense of the past 2000 years with endless attacks by Christianity and Islam as to who and what they are supposed to be and why.

You are 1000% a Jew hater, and you do not care to know it.
You have bought into every one of the conspiracy theories about Jews, because you want to.

There only exist conspiracy theories of this kind against one people on the planet:  The Jewish People, who were and continue to be, the indigenous people of the Land of Israel NO MATTER what nutcases of any kind say or do.

The policies of the US are currently being run by Republican nutcases, who do not care that the Russians are about to run the show.
That, you do not care about.

It is the Jews, only the Jews, always the Jews.


How could that EVER make you a Jew hater?


----------



## Shusha

BlackFlag said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> Are non-Jews still allowed to use the same water fountains?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What water fountains?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Really?  I didn’t think the bloodstained Holy Land was _that _backwards
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And You come to this conclusion by which part of the law?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The bloodstain is from the millenia of death and violence cursing the land.  The discrimination part is from Jews declaring that no infidel has a right to self determination.
Click to expand...


The bloodstain is from the millennia of conquest and invasion of land which is the homeland of the Jewish people and the usurption of Jewish history as their own.  If people would STOP trying to take the land and the history of the Jewish people there would be no more bloodshed. 

The Jewish people have NOT declared that others have no right to self-determination.  They declared that the right of self-determination in the Jewish homeland, where the Jewish people have their history and the origins of their ethnicity and nationality belongs only to the Jewish people.  Others are welcome to live in the land and they are also welcome to have self-determination in their own lands.  That includes the Arab Palestinian people.  But that land is not in Israel.  It may be right next door if they can get their shit together and stop the bloodstain.


----------



## BlackFlag

Sixties Fan said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> It is an open fact that the process of becoming a citizen in Israel is prohibitive unless you are of the Jewish faith.  You cannot refute that.  Also, the entire topic of this thread is about how the theocratic Israeli government declared that onlish Jewish followers have a right of self determination in Israel.  They have no interest in a peace process with non-Jews, and the U.S. should abandon them to their fate whether it is a good one or a bad one.
> 
> 
> 
> 1)  Debunked
> 
> Jerusalem Palestinians still seek Israeli citizenship despite Trump declaration
> 
> More Palestinians in Jerusalem seek Israeli citizenship
> 
> 2) Debunked.
> 
> Herzl was not a religion Jew.  None of the founders was a religious Theocrat.  None of the Presidents or Prime Ministers of Israel have been Theocrats.  Theocrats do not run the State of Israel.
> 
> Secularism in Israel - Wikipedia
> 
> 3)  You are too ignorant to understand the meaning of the expression
> Self-Determination when it comes to the indigenous people of anywhere in the world. And you do it on purpose.
> 
> 4)  Debunked
> Israel has a Peace Treaty with two of its Arab neighbors.  Egypt and Jordan.  You clearly do not care how those Peace Treaties came about.
> You clearly do not know or care what the charters of the PLO, Hamas and Fatah say about negotiating peace with Israel, much less with Jews.
> 
> 5)  With the US help, or without, Israel would strive, as it is now.
> It is not money which matters but what is done with it.
> 
> Arabs choose terrorism.
> 
> Jews choose progress.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nothing was debunked in that post.  In fact, you did not address either point I made except to say that indigenous people have a right to self-determination, except that by Israel’s reasoning all people of Abrahamic faith can claim to be indigenous to Israel; of course they passed a law saying that only those of the Jewish faith have any right to self determination.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Tell me that you truly are not serious in supposing/assuming that ALL PEOPLE of the Abrahamic religions can be considered indigenous to the land of Israel and therefore ......"Entitled" to self-determination OVER the Land of Israel.
> 
> Please, please tell me that it is not what you meant.
> 
> You continue to prove to us:
> 
> You do not care about the meaning of the word indigenous
> You do not care about the meaning of self-determination
> 
> And most of all:
> 
> YOU DO NOT CARE to allow the Jewish people to BE WHO THEY ARE:
> 
> The indigenous people of the Land of Israel with every right to self-determination over it.
> 
> The Indigenous people of the Land of Israel WERE and ARE  Jewish.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Jews there are not indigenous, and this proclamation is a direct rejection by them of any peace process.  Which, again, I would love nothing more than to not have to care about, but those religious nutjobs drive my country's foreign policy for some reason.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> How do I tell you this?
> 
> You are a nutcase who believes the things you do, and only for the reasons you know about.
> 
> None of your endless delegitimization of the Jewish people, who are YES, the indigenous people of the land, is going to ever matter to them, because they have become used to all of the nonsense of the past 2000 years with endless attacks by Christianity and Islam as to who and what they are supposed to be and why.
> 
> You are 1000% a Jew hater, and you do not care to know it.
> You have bought into every one of the conspiracy theories about Jews, because you want to.
> 
> There only exist conspiracy theories of this kind against one people on the planet:  The Jewish People, who were and continue to be, the indigenous people of the Land of Israel NO MATTER what nutcases of any kind say or do.
> 
> The policies of the US are currently being run by Republican nutcases, who do not care that the Russians are about to run the show.
> That, you do not care about.
> 
> It is the Jews, only the Jews, always the Jews.
> 
> 
> How could that EVER make you a Jew hater?
Click to expand...

You have become unhinged and no longer capable of conversation.  The actions of Israel's government stand on their own, and are not the actions of all Jews.  Opposing one is not opposing the other.  You, sir, are retarded.


----------



## Bleipriester

Shusha said:


> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> 
> Diversity is actually a part of Syria´s pride and identity. Whether you are Jew, Muslim, Christian, socialist or right-winger, there is no difference before the law.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hmmmmmmm.  Sounds like Israel.
Click to expand...

No. Rapists when in IDF geht a house arrest and a 30 days Internet ban.


----------



## BlackFlag

Shusha said:


> The bloodstain is from the millennia of conquest and invasion of land which is the homeland of the Jewish people and the usurption of Jewish history as their own.


The other 2 Abrahamic religions claimed the same argument in favor of their own beliefs when it was their turn to spill blood in that cursed land.


----------



## Sixties Fan

BlackFlag said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 1)  Debunked
> 
> Jerusalem Palestinians still seek Israeli citizenship despite Trump declaration
> 
> More Palestinians in Jerusalem seek Israeli citizenship
> 
> 2) Debunked.
> 
> Herzl was not a religion Jew.  None of the founders was a religious Theocrat.  None of the Presidents or Prime Ministers of Israel have been Theocrats.  Theocrats do not run the State of Israel.
> 
> Secularism in Israel - Wikipedia
> 
> 3)  You are too ignorant to understand the meaning of the expression
> Self-Determination when it comes to the indigenous people of anywhere in the world. And you do it on purpose.
> 
> 4)  Debunked
> Israel has a Peace Treaty with two of its Arab neighbors.  Egypt and Jordan.  You clearly do not care how those Peace Treaties came about.
> You clearly do not know or care what the charters of the PLO, Hamas and Fatah say about negotiating peace with Israel, much less with Jews.
> 
> 5)  With the US help, or without, Israel would strive, as it is now.
> It is not money which matters but what is done with it.
> 
> Arabs choose terrorism.
> 
> Jews choose progress.
> 
> 
> 
> Nothing was debunked in that post.  In fact, you did not address either point I made except to say that indigenous people have a right to self-determination, except that by Israel’s reasoning all people of Abrahamic faith can claim to be indigenous to Israel; of course they passed a law saying that only those of the Jewish faith have any right to self determination.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Tell me that you truly are not serious in supposing/assuming that ALL PEOPLE of the Abrahamic religions can be considered indigenous to the land of Israel and therefore ......"Entitled" to self-determination OVER the Land of Israel.
> 
> Please, please tell me that it is not what you meant.
> 
> You continue to prove to us:
> 
> You do not care about the meaning of the word indigenous
> You do not care about the meaning of self-determination
> 
> And most of all:
> 
> YOU DO NOT CARE to allow the Jewish people to BE WHO THEY ARE:
> 
> The indigenous people of the Land of Israel with every right to self-determination over it.
> 
> The Indigenous people of the Land of Israel WERE and ARE  Jewish.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Jews there are not indigenous, and this proclamation is a direct rejection by them of any peace process.  Which, again, I would love nothing more than to not have to care about, but those religious nutjobs drive my country's foreign policy for some reason.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> How do I tell you this?
> 
> You are a nutcase who believes the things you do, and only for the reasons you know about.
> 
> None of your endless delegitimization of the Jewish people, who are YES, the indigenous people of the land, is going to ever matter to them, because they have become used to all of the nonsense of the past 2000 years with endless attacks by Christianity and Islam as to who and what they are supposed to be and why.
> 
> You are 1000% a Jew hater, and you do not care to know it.
> You have bought into every one of the conspiracy theories about Jews, because you want to.
> 
> There only exist conspiracy theories of this kind against one people on the planet:  The Jewish People, who were and continue to be, the indigenous people of the Land of Israel NO MATTER what nutcases of any kind say or do.
> 
> The policies of the US are currently being run by Republican nutcases, who do not care that the Russians are about to run the show.
> That, you do not care about.
> 
> It is the Jews, only the Jews, always the Jews.
> 
> 
> How could that EVER make you a Jew hater?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You have become unhinged and no longer capable of conversation.  The actions of Israel's government stand on their own, and are not the actions of all Jews.  Opposing one is not opposing the other.  You, sir, are retarded.
Click to expand...

That is your argument?  Again without evidence, making generalized accusations. 
Clearly, any attempts from Israel to defend any and all of its population and territory is not the same as any and all other countries defending their populations and territories.

I am Jewish.  And Proud Of It.

Am Israel Chai.
The People of Israel Live

(Despite all attempts to make all Jews disappear )


----------



## Shusha

BlackFlag said:


> Israel has passed a policy that proves it has no interest in peace



No interest in peace?  Isn't the foundation of a peace plan in the conflict the self-determination of BOTH peoples in two sovereign nations?  This basic law supports the peace plan by insisting that Arab Palestinians give up the idea that Israel can not exist and must not have self-determination.  Its a wake-up call.


----------



## Shusha

BlackFlag said:


> Israel is a country that denies citizenship to non-Jews, and just classified non-Jews as secondary citizens.  So OF COURSE it is a theocracy.



The Basic Law does no such thing.  You are spreading blatantly false information.


----------



## Humanity

Indeependent said:


> cnm said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Unlike the Dutch people, Jews originated in the land of Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> Of course YHWH gave South Africa to the Boers. They said so.
> 
> _Canaan is the ancient name for the land of Israel. The Torah gave Abraham the land of Canaan, which in some cases stretched from southern Syria to the Eastern Sinai and, in other Torah references, was only a small strip hugging the Mediterranean. Under the leadership of Joshua the Israelites conquered Canaan, which had previously been divided into seven city states. Today, the land of Canaan is known as Palestine, Eretz Yisrael and Israel.
> The Canaanites_​
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Genesis chapter 10...
> Noah’s son Cham settled in Gaza and Egypt.
> Shem settled in what is known today as Israel.
Click to expand...


You can't beat a 'quotation' from a book of fiction!


----------



## BlackFlag

Sixties Fan said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nothing was debunked in that post.  In fact, you did not address either point I made except to say that indigenous people have a right to self-determination, except that by Israel’s reasoning all people of Abrahamic faith can claim to be indigenous to Israel; of course they passed a law saying that only those of the Jewish faith have any right to self determination.
> 
> 
> 
> Tell me that you truly are not serious in supposing/assuming that ALL PEOPLE of the Abrahamic religions can be considered indigenous to the land of Israel and therefore ......"Entitled" to self-determination OVER the Land of Israel.
> 
> Please, please tell me that it is not what you meant.
> 
> You continue to prove to us:
> 
> You do not care about the meaning of the word indigenous
> You do not care about the meaning of self-determination
> 
> And most of all:
> 
> YOU DO NOT CARE to allow the Jewish people to BE WHO THEY ARE:
> 
> The indigenous people of the Land of Israel with every right to self-determination over it.
> 
> The Indigenous people of the Land of Israel WERE and ARE  Jewish.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Jews there are not indigenous, and this proclamation is a direct rejection by them of any peace process.  Which, again, I would love nothing more than to not have to care about, but those religious nutjobs drive my country's foreign policy for some reason.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> How do I tell you this?
> 
> You are a nutcase who believes the things you do, and only for the reasons you know about.
> 
> None of your endless delegitimization of the Jewish people, who are YES, the indigenous people of the land, is going to ever matter to them, because they have become used to all of the nonsense of the past 2000 years with endless attacks by Christianity and Islam as to who and what they are supposed to be and why.
> 
> You are 1000% a Jew hater, and you do not care to know it.
> You have bought into every one of the conspiracy theories about Jews, because you want to.
> 
> There only exist conspiracy theories of this kind against one people on the planet:  The Jewish People, who were and continue to be, the indigenous people of the Land of Israel NO MATTER what nutcases of any kind say or do.
> 
> The policies of the US are currently being run by Republican nutcases, who do not care that the Russians are about to run the show.
> That, you do not care about.
> 
> It is the Jews, only the Jews, always the Jews.
> 
> 
> How could that EVER make you a Jew hater?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You have become unhinged and no longer capable of conversation.  The actions of Israel's government stand on their own, and are not the actions of all Jews.  Opposing one is not opposing the other.  You, sir, are retarded.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That is your argument?  Again without evidence, making generalized accusations.
> Clearly, any attempts from Israel to defend any and all of its population and territory is not the same as any and all other countries defending their populations and territories.
> 
> I am Jewish.  And Proud Of It.
> 
> Am Israel Chai.
> The People of Israel Live
> 
> (Despite all attempts to make all Jews disappear )
Click to expand...

Congrats.  Please stop roping my country into your religious insanity.  K thnx bye


----------



## BlackFlag

Shusha said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> Israel is a country that denies citizenship to non-Jews, and just classified non-Jews as secondary citizens.  So OF COURSE it is a theocracy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Basic Law does no such thing.  You are spreading blatantly false information.
Click to expand...

How does this happen, when the law says no such thing? A Holocaust survivor's daughter faces Israeli deportation over claims her father became Christian


----------



## Sixties Fan

BlackFlag said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> The bloodstain is from the millennia of conquest and invasion of land which is the homeland of the Jewish people and the usurption of Jewish history as their own.
> 
> 
> 
> The other 2 Abrahamic religions claimed the same argument in favor of their own beliefs when it was their turn to spill blood in that cursed land.
Click to expand...

Susha was talking exactly about the Christian and Muslim religions taking, by blood, any and all lands they could conquer Including the Land of Israel which was always respected by them as being Land belonging to the Jewish People.

ONLY with the Jews achieving sovereignty, the Christian and Muslim nutcases decided that "Jews are not Jews" and the land was never Jewish to begin with.

We know very well who and what we are dealing with.

None of it is going to ever take what remains for us, 20% of all of our ancient homeland.

The last I looked, land all over the world has spilled blood for territory .

But you, and a few others, look only at Israel and what the Jews have and demand that they give it up, especially as that would mean their death sentence.

You have not learned one thing from pogroms and the Inquisition and the Holocaust being committed against one people and one people only.


----------



## Shusha

BlackFlag said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> The bloodstain is from the millennia of conquest and invasion of land which is the homeland of the Jewish people and the usurption of Jewish history as their own.
> 
> 
> 
> The other 2 Abrahamic religions claimed the same argument in favor of their own beliefs when it was their turn to spill blood in that cursed land.
Click to expand...


No.  It is not the same argument.  The ethnicity, culture and nationality of the Jewish people (the very things that MAKE someone indigenous) all had their origin in that land.  It is the definition of indigeneity.  That Christianity and Islam stole parts of the Jewish history and religion does not give them license to indigenous title to Jewish land.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Humanity said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cnm said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Unlike the Dutch people, Jews originated in the land of Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> Of course YHWH gave South Africa to the Boers. They said so.
> 
> _Canaan is the ancient name for the land of Israel. The Torah gave Abraham the land of Canaan, which in some cases stretched from southern Syria to the Eastern Sinai and, in other Torah references, was only a small strip hugging the Mediterranean. Under the leadership of Joshua the Israelites conquered Canaan, which had previously been divided into seven city states. Today, the land of Canaan is known as Palestine, Eretz Yisrael and Israel.
> The Canaanites_​
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Genesis chapter 10...
> Noah’s son Cham settled in Gaza and Egypt.
> Shem settled in what is known today as Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You can't beat a 'quotation' from a book of fiction!
Click to expand...

In other words, in your world, no indigenous people have the right to their ancient homeland because their claims are based on oral or written myths.

By the way, ALL people started their histories with myths passed on from generation to generation.

The Arab people are still to deny that their history/myths started in the Arabian Peninsula, and that land continues to be the indigenous ancient homeland of all Arabs, including those who now call themselves Palestinians, Egyptians, Syrians, Iranians, etc, etc, etc


----------



## BlackFlag

Sixties Fan said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> The bloodstain is from the millennia of conquest and invasion of land which is the homeland of the Jewish people and the usurption of Jewish history as their own.
> 
> 
> 
> The other 2 Abrahamic religions claimed the same argument in favor of their own beliefs when it was their turn to spill blood in that cursed land.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Susha was talking exactly about the Christian and Muslim religions taking, by blood, any and all lands they could conquer Including the Land of Israel which was always respected by them as being Land belonging to the Jewish People.
> 
> ONLY with the Jews achieving sovereignty, the Christian and Muslim nutcases decided that "Jews are not Jews" and the land was never Jewish to begin with.
> 
> We know very well who and what we are dealing with.
> 
> None of it is going to ever take what remains for us, 20% of all of our ancient homeland.
> 
> The last I looked, land all over the world has spilled blood for territory .
> 
> But you, and a few others, look only at Israel and what the Jews have and demand that they give it up, especially as that would mean their death sentence.
> 
> You have not learned one thing from pogroms and the Inquisition and the Holocaust being committed against one people and one people only.
Click to expand...

Jews conquered the indigenous residents of Israel long ago.  I wonder if their descendants claim ownership of the land.  I don't care what Israel does, I care that my country faces consequences over what they do.  The worst mistake of the 20th century was the 1st world determining that the land that is now Israel should be taken and given to foreigners, and to expel the indigenous people there.  Now the middle east has become the major pain in the modern world's ass, with religious insanity everywhere you look.


----------



## BlackFlag

Shusha said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> The bloodstain is from the millennia of conquest and invasion of land which is the homeland of the Jewish people and the usurption of Jewish history as their own.
> 
> 
> 
> The other 2 Abrahamic religions claimed the same argument in favor of their own beliefs when it was their turn to spill blood in that cursed land.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No.  It is not the same argument.  The ethnicity, culture and nationality of the Jewish people (the very things that MAKE someone indigenous) all had their origin in that land.  It is the definition of indigeneity.  That Christianity and Islam stole parts of the Jewish history and religion does not give them license to indigenous title to Jewish land.
Click to expand...

Careful not to insult Christians, or the voodoo you've worked on the U.S., the ONLY country of any significance that defends your provocations, might wear off.


----------



## Shusha

BlackFlag said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> Israel is a country that denies citizenship to non-Jews, and just classified non-Jews as secondary citizens.  So OF COURSE it is a theocracy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Basic Law does no such thing.  You are spreading blatantly false information.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> How does this happen, when the law says no such thing? A Holocaust survivor's daughter faces Israeli deportation over claims her father became Christian
Click to expand...


The law in discussion on this thread does NOT deny citizenship to non-Jews. Nor does it classify non-Jews are secondary citizens.  That is blatantly false.  

The Law of Return is not one of denial -- but one of preference.  The topic you've brought up is nevertheless an interesting and difficult one.  I'd be willing to discuss it on its own thread.


----------



## Sixties Fan

BlackFlag said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> The bloodstain is from the millennia of conquest and invasion of land which is the homeland of the Jewish people and the usurption of Jewish history as their own.
> 
> 
> 
> The other 2 Abrahamic religions claimed the same argument in favor of their own beliefs when it was their turn to spill blood in that cursed land.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Susha was talking exactly about the Christian and Muslim religions taking, by blood, any and all lands they could conquer Including the Land of Israel which was always respected by them as being Land belonging to the Jewish People.
> 
> ONLY with the Jews achieving sovereignty, the Christian and Muslim nutcases decided that "Jews are not Jews" and the land was never Jewish to begin with.
> 
> We know very well who and what we are dealing with.
> 
> None of it is going to ever take what remains for us, 20% of all of our ancient homeland.
> 
> The last I looked, land all over the world has spilled blood for territory .
> 
> But you, and a few others, look only at Israel and what the Jews have and demand that they give it up, especially as that would mean their death sentence.
> 
> You have not learned one thing from pogroms and the Inquisition and the Holocaust being committed against one people and one people only.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Jews conquered the indigenous residents of Israel long ago.  I wonder if their descendants claim ownership of the land.  I don't care what Israel does, I care that my country faces consequences over what they do.  The worst mistake of the 20th century was the 1st world determining that the land that is now Israel should be taken and given to foreigners, and to expel the indigenous people there.  Now the middle east has become the major pain in the modern world's ass, with religious insanity everywhere you look.
Click to expand...

Please, stop.

The Indigenous people of ancient Canaan became the Nation of Israel about 3000 years ago.  They have not complained about it, but defended, protected and continued to live ON THEIR land, as the Jewish People.

Are you telling all of us that all 6 Million Plus Jews who lived in Europe by 1945, where 6 Million of them were murdered FOR BEING JEWISH, are now (according to the sites you have been reading) not Jewish.  That the Holocaust was not the murder of Jews, but non Jews?

Are you telling me that the Nazis bothered to kill non real Jews, en masse?  For what reason?

Are you also trying to tell me that the Muslims were living with non Jews, and expelled nearly a Million non Jews from their conquered lands in 1950?

When Arabs do ever become indigenous of both Arabia and the Land of Israel, that will be a trick successful only by one people, and one people only.  How do the Arabs do it?

Muslim conquered land in Asia has become a pain because Muslims are conquerors who DO NOT LIKE being conquered by NON MUSLIMS.

The Ottoman Turkish Muslims conquered the Middle East for 700 years, and not one other Muslim population cried AT ALL at being conquered by another Muslim.


You are helping the Muslims and you do not see and you do not care.

Go ahead, help the Muslims conquer America.

It is always better than having the Jews "conquer" America, is it not?

I cannot wait until this country totally gives in to Islam.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Shusha said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> Israel is a country that denies citizenship to non-Jews, and just classified non-Jews as secondary citizens.  So OF COURSE it is a theocracy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Basic Law does no such thing.  You are spreading blatantly false information.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> How does this happen, when the law says no such thing? A Holocaust survivor's daughter faces Israeli deportation over claims her father became Christian
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The law in discussion on this thread does NOT deny citizenship to non-Jews. Nor does it classify non-Jews are secondary citizens.  That is blatantly false.
> 
> The Law of Return is not one of denial -- but one of preference.  The topic you've brought up is nevertheless an interesting and difficult one.  I'd be willing to discuss it on its own thread.
Click to expand...

Well ,who is going to start one?


----------



## Shusha

BlackFlag said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> The bloodstain is from the millennia of conquest and invasion of land which is the homeland of the Jewish people and the usurption of Jewish history as their own.
> 
> 
> 
> The other 2 Abrahamic religions claimed the same argument in favor of their own beliefs when it was their turn to spill blood in that cursed land.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No.  It is not the same argument.  The ethnicity, culture and nationality of the Jewish people (the very things that MAKE someone indigenous) all had their origin in that land.  It is the definition of indigeneity.  That Christianity and Islam stole parts of the Jewish history and religion does not give them license to indigenous title to Jewish land.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Careful not to insult Christians, or the voodoo you've worked on the U.S., the ONLY country of any significance that defends your provocations, might wear off.
Click to expand...


Provocation?  Its a provocation to claim the Jewish people are victims of conquest, invasion, the usurption and corruption of Jewish history and religious doctrine?


----------



## Indeependent

Humanity said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cnm said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Unlike the Dutch people, Jews originated in the land of Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> Of course YHWH gave South Africa to the Boers. They said so.
> 
> _Canaan is the ancient name for the land of Israel. The Torah gave Abraham the land of Canaan, which in some cases stretched from southern Syria to the Eastern Sinai and, in other Torah references, was only a small strip hugging the Mediterranean. Under the leadership of Joshua the Israelites conquered Canaan, which had previously been divided into seven city states. Today, the land of Canaan is known as Palestine, Eretz Yisrael and Israel.
> The Canaanites_​
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Genesis chapter 10...
> Noah’s son Cham settled in Gaza and Egypt.
> Shem settled in what is known today as Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You can't beat a 'quotation' from a book of fiction!
Click to expand...

You’ll find out in less than 120 years when you expire.


----------



## Indeependent

BlackFlag said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> The bloodstain is from the millennia of conquest and invasion of land which is the homeland of the Jewish people and the usurption of Jewish history as their own.
> 
> 
> 
> The other 2 Abrahamic religions claimed the same argument in favor of their own beliefs when it was their turn to spill blood in that cursed land.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Susha was talking exactly about the Christian and Muslim religions taking, by blood, any and all lands they could conquer Including the Land of Israel which was always respected by them as being Land belonging to the Jewish People.
> 
> ONLY with the Jews achieving sovereignty, the Christian and Muslim nutcases decided that "Jews are not Jews" and the land was never Jewish to begin with.
> 
> We know very well who and what we are dealing with.
> 
> None of it is going to ever take what remains for us, 20% of all of our ancient homeland.
> 
> The last I looked, land all over the world has spilled blood for territory .
> 
> But you, and a few others, look only at Israel and what the Jews have and demand that they give it up, especially as that would mean their death sentence.
> 
> You have not learned one thing from pogroms and the Inquisition and the Holocaust being committed against one people and one people only.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Jews conquered the indigenous residents of Israel long ago.  I wonder if their descendants claim ownership of the land.  I don't care what Israel does, I care that my country faces consequences over what they do.  The worst mistake of the 20th century was the 1st world determining that the land that is now Israel should be taken and given to foreigners, and to expel the indigenous people there.  Now the middle east has become the major pain in the modern world's ass, with religious insanity everywhere you look.
Click to expand...

Provide details in regards to the first sentence.


----------



## Circe

Good for the Israelis. How I wish we would do something like that here.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Circe said:


> Good for the Israelis. How I wish we would do something like that here.


Meaning what exactly?


----------



## Shusha

BlackFlag said:


> Jews conquered the indigenous residents of Israel long ago.  I wonder if their descendants claim ownership of the land.


You would be very, very hard pressed to find a culture in that territory which is distinct from and pre-existing the Jewish culture.  All archaeological findings seem to indicate that the Jewish culture developed from within preceding cultures.  That said, if you find me some descendants of some ancient culture still practicing that culture, they have every right to claim indigenous status on that land. 



> The worst mistake of the 20th century was the 1st world determining that the land that is now Israel should be taken and given to foreigners, and to expel the indigenous people there.


But you've reversed which were the foreigners and which are the indigenous peoples.


----------



## BlackFlag

Indeependent said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> The bloodstain is from the millennia of conquest and invasion of land which is the homeland of the Jewish people and the usurption of Jewish history as their own.
> 
> 
> 
> The other 2 Abrahamic religions claimed the same argument in favor of their own beliefs when it was their turn to spill blood in that cursed land.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Susha was talking exactly about the Christian and Muslim religions taking, by blood, any and all lands they could conquer Including the Land of Israel which was always respected by them as being Land belonging to the Jewish People.
> 
> ONLY with the Jews achieving sovereignty, the Christian and Muslim nutcases decided that "Jews are not Jews" and the land was never Jewish to begin with.
> 
> We know very well who and what we are dealing with.
> 
> None of it is going to ever take what remains for us, 20% of all of our ancient homeland.
> 
> The last I looked, land all over the world has spilled blood for territory .
> 
> But you, and a few others, look only at Israel and what the Jews have and demand that they give it up, especially as that would mean their death sentence.
> 
> You have not learned one thing from pogroms and the Inquisition and the Holocaust being committed against one people and one people only.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Jews conquered the indigenous residents of Israel long ago.  I wonder if their descendants claim ownership of the land.  I don't care what Israel does, I care that my country faces consequences over what they do.  The worst mistake of the 20th century was the 1st world determining that the land that is now Israel should be taken and given to foreigners, and to expel the indigenous people there.  Now the middle east has become the major pain in the modern world's ass, with religious insanity everywhere you look.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Provide details in regards to the first sentence.
Click to expand...

Read the holy books of any of the 3 religions claiming indigenous status in Israel.


----------



## BlackFlag

Shusha said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> Jews conquered the indigenous residents of Israel long ago.  I wonder if their descendants claim ownership of the land.
> 
> 
> 
> You would be very, very hard pressed to find a culture in that territory which is distinct from and pre-existing the Jewish culture.  All archaeological findings seem to indicate that the Jewish culture developed from within preceding cultures.  That said, if you find me some descendants of some ancient culture still practicing that culture, they have every right to claim indigenous status on that land.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The worst mistake of the 20th century was the 1st world determining that the land that is now Israel should be taken and given to foreigners, and to expel the indigenous people there.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> But you've reversed which were the foreigners and which are the indigenous peoples.
Click to expand...

Christian culture developed from Jewish culture.  You have now argued that Christians are indigenous to Israel.  What did Islamic culture grow out of?  Uh oh...


----------



## Indeependent

BlackFlag said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> The bloodstain is from the millennia of conquest and invasion of land which is the homeland of the Jewish people and the usurption of Jewish history as their own.
> 
> 
> 
> The other 2 Abrahamic religions claimed the same argument in favor of their own beliefs when it was their turn to spill blood in that cursed land.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Susha was talking exactly about the Christian and Muslim religions taking, by blood, any and all lands they could conquer Including the Land of Israel which was always respected by them as being Land belonging to the Jewish People.
> 
> ONLY with the Jews achieving sovereignty, the Christian and Muslim nutcases decided that "Jews are not Jews" and the land was never Jewish to begin with.
> 
> We know very well who and what we are dealing with.
> 
> None of it is going to ever take what remains for us, 20% of all of our ancient homeland.
> 
> The last I looked, land all over the world has spilled blood for territory .
> 
> But you, and a few others, look only at Israel and what the Jews have and demand that they give it up, especially as that would mean their death sentence.
> 
> You have not learned one thing from pogroms and the Inquisition and the Holocaust being committed against one people and one people only.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Jews conquered the indigenous residents of Israel long ago.  I wonder if their descendants claim ownership of the land.  I don't care what Israel does, I care that my country faces consequences over what they do.  The worst mistake of the 20th century was the 1st world determining that the land that is now Israel should be taken and given to foreigners, and to expel the indigenous people there.  Now the middle east has become the major pain in the modern world's ass, with religious insanity everywhere you look.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Provide details in regards to the first sentence.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Read the holy books of any of the 3 religions claiming indigenous status in Israel.
Click to expand...

Jews were first, the others were copycats.
Second, you didn’t read Genesis 10.
Shem was in Canaan and was conquered by Cham.
Shem (Israel) came back and took back the land.


----------



## Sixties Fan

BlackFlag said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> The bloodstain is from the millennia of conquest and invasion of land which is the homeland of the Jewish people and the usurption of Jewish history as their own.
> 
> 
> 
> The other 2 Abrahamic religions claimed the same argument in favor of their own beliefs when it was their turn to spill blood in that cursed land.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Susha was talking exactly about the Christian and Muslim religions taking, by blood, any and all lands they could conquer Including the Land of Israel which was always respected by them as being Land belonging to the Jewish People.
> 
> ONLY with the Jews achieving sovereignty, the Christian and Muslim nutcases decided that "Jews are not Jews" and the land was never Jewish to begin with.
> 
> We know very well who and what we are dealing with.
> 
> None of it is going to ever take what remains for us, 20% of all of our ancient homeland.
> 
> The last I looked, land all over the world has spilled blood for territory .
> 
> But you, and a few others, look only at Israel and what the Jews have and demand that they give it up, especially as that would mean their death sentence.
> 
> You have not learned one thing from pogroms and the Inquisition and the Holocaust being committed against one people and one people only.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Jews conquered the indigenous residents of Israel long ago.  I wonder if their descendants claim ownership of the land.  I don't care what Israel does, I care that my country faces consequences over what they do.  The worst mistake of the 20th century was the 1st world determining that the land that is now Israel should be taken and given to foreigners, and to expel the indigenous people there.  Now the middle east has become the major pain in the modern world's ass, with religious insanity everywhere you look.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Provide details in regards to the first sentence.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Read the holy books of any of the 3 religions claiming indigenous status in Israel.
Click to expand...

Only ONE of them claims indigenous rights to their ancestral homeland, Israel.
The other two borrowed and stole everything, including possible or impossible ancestry (as the Muslims do when they say the Ishmael is their forefather.  Where were they for the previous 2400 years, with any of these claims? )

Christianity has never claimed Indigenous rights to the land of Israel.
That is NOWHERE in the Gospels.
To say that Jesus was born in Bethlehem is not the same as saying that ALL Christians come from the land of Israel.


----------



## Sixties Fan

BlackFlag said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> Jews conquered the indigenous residents of Israel long ago.  I wonder if their descendants claim ownership of the land.
> 
> 
> 
> You would be very, very hard pressed to find a culture in that territory which is distinct from and pre-existing the Jewish culture.  All archaeological findings seem to indicate that the Jewish culture developed from within preceding cultures.  That said, if you find me some descendants of some ancient culture still practicing that culture, they have every right to claim indigenous status on that land.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The worst mistake of the 20th century was the 1st world determining that the land that is now Israel should be taken and given to foreigners, and to expel the indigenous people there.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> But you've reversed which were the foreigners and which are the indigenous peoples.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Christian culture developed from Jewish culture.  You have now argued that Christians are indigenous to Israel.  What did Islamic culture grow out of?  Uh oh...
Click to expand...

Culture is not the same as being Indigenous.

Gosh, have patience  !!!!


----------



## Shusha

BlackFlag said:


> Christian culture developed from Jewish culture.  You have now argued that Christians are indigenous to Israel.  What did Islamic culture grow out of?  Uh oh...



You clearly do not understand the meaning of "culture" and how it relates to indigeneity.  Stealing another culture's religious stories does not give one a culture nor make one indigenous.


----------



## BlackFlag

Indeependent said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> The other 2 Abrahamic religions claimed the same argument in favor of their own beliefs when it was their turn to spill blood in that cursed land.
> 
> 
> 
> Susha was talking exactly about the Christian and Muslim religions taking, by blood, any and all lands they could conquer Including the Land of Israel which was always respected by them as being Land belonging to the Jewish People.
> 
> ONLY with the Jews achieving sovereignty, the Christian and Muslim nutcases decided that "Jews are not Jews" and the land was never Jewish to begin with.
> 
> We know very well who and what we are dealing with.
> 
> None of it is going to ever take what remains for us, 20% of all of our ancient homeland.
> 
> The last I looked, land all over the world has spilled blood for territory .
> 
> But you, and a few others, look only at Israel and what the Jews have and demand that they give it up, especially as that would mean their death sentence.
> 
> You have not learned one thing from pogroms and the Inquisition and the Holocaust being committed against one people and one people only.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Jews conquered the indigenous residents of Israel long ago.  I wonder if their descendants claim ownership of the land.  I don't care what Israel does, I care that my country faces consequences over what they do.  The worst mistake of the 20th century was the 1st world determining that the land that is now Israel should be taken and given to foreigners, and to expel the indigenous people there.  Now the middle east has become the major pain in the modern world's ass, with religious insanity everywhere you look.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Provide details in regards to the first sentence.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Read the holy books of any of the 3 religions claiming indigenous status in Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Jews were first, the others were copycats.
> Second, you didn’t read Genesis 10.
> Shem was in Canaan and was conquered by Cham.
> Shem (Israel) came back and took back the land.
Click to expand...

Genesis is a total fabrication.  Other monotheistic religions existed before Judaism, they are just copying them.


----------



## BlackFlag

Sixties Fan said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> Jews conquered the indigenous residents of Israel long ago.  I wonder if their descendants claim ownership of the land.
> 
> 
> 
> You would be very, very hard pressed to find a culture in that territory which is distinct from and pre-existing the Jewish culture.  All archaeological findings seem to indicate that the Jewish culture developed from within preceding cultures.  That said, if you find me some descendants of some ancient culture still practicing that culture, they have every right to claim indigenous status on that land.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The worst mistake of the 20th century was the 1st world determining that the land that is now Israel should be taken and given to foreigners, and to expel the indigenous people there.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> But you've reversed which were the foreigners and which are the indigenous peoples.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Christian culture developed from Jewish culture.  You have now argued that Christians are indigenous to Israel.  What did Islamic culture grow out of?  Uh oh...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Culture is not the same as being Indigenous.
> 
> Gosh, have patience  !!!!
Click to expand...

Shusha argued otherwise.  Take it up with them.


----------



## BlackFlag

Shusha said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> Christian culture developed from Jewish culture.  You have now argued that Christians are indigenous to Israel.  What did Islamic culture grow out of?  Uh oh...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You clearly do not understand the meaning of "culture" and how it relates to indigeneity.  Stealing another culture's religious stories does not give one a culture nor make one indigenous.
Click to expand...

One culture evolved out of another, and one evolved from that one, but my arbitrary rules say only the one I like can claim indigeneity.


----------



## Shusha

Let me help you out.  

Christian religious doctrine (not culture -- religious doctrine) developed by usurping and then corrupting specific religious elements of another culture's religious faith and well-developed religious culture, deliberately replacing those elements with their own.  Islam then did the same.  

The theft of these elements of religious doctrine does not create a culture -- which encapsulates numerous elements including language, a system of laws, myths and histories, religious ritual, holidays and celebrations, rituals for life events, significant foods and dietary systems, clothing, and a specific connection to a land based on long residence in that place, etc, etc, etc.  

Thus, while a specific religious doctrine may have originated in a place (and I'd argue against the development of either Christianity or Islam IN Israel) this does not create the reality of indigeneity.


----------



## Sixties Fan

BlackFlag said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Susha was talking exactly about the Christian and Muslim religions taking, by blood, any and all lands they could conquer Including the Land of Israel which was always respected by them as being Land belonging to the Jewish People.
> 
> ONLY with the Jews achieving sovereignty, the Christian and Muslim nutcases decided that "Jews are not Jews" and the land was never Jewish to begin with.
> 
> We know very well who and what we are dealing with.
> 
> None of it is going to ever take what remains for us, 20% of all of our ancient homeland.
> 
> The last I looked, land all over the world has spilled blood for territory .
> 
> But you, and a few others, look only at Israel and what the Jews have and demand that they give it up, especially as that would mean their death sentence.
> 
> You have not learned one thing from pogroms and the Inquisition and the Holocaust being committed against one people and one people only.
> 
> 
> 
> Jews conquered the indigenous residents of Israel long ago.  I wonder if their descendants claim ownership of the land.  I don't care what Israel does, I care that my country faces consequences over what they do.  The worst mistake of the 20th century was the 1st world determining that the land that is now Israel should be taken and given to foreigners, and to expel the indigenous people there.  Now the middle east has become the major pain in the modern world's ass, with religious insanity everywhere you look.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Provide details in regards to the first sentence.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Read the holy books of any of the 3 religions claiming indigenous status in Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Jews were first, the others were copycats.
> Second, you didn’t read Genesis 10.
> Shem was in Canaan and was conquered by Cham.
> Shem (Israel) came back and took back the land.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Genesis is a total fabrication.  Other monotheistic religions existed before Judaism, they are just copying them.
Click to expand...

The myths of ALL tribes/Nations on the planet are filled with historical truths and myths.

ONLY the Jewish Nation is attacked and there are endless allegations as to its "impossible " history, how the Jewish people, religion, culture, etc came to be.

Do it to ALL, and not just to the Jewish People.


----------



## Shusha

BlackFlag said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> Christian culture developed from Jewish culture.  You have now argued that Christians are indigenous to Israel.  What did Islamic culture grow out of?  Uh oh...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You clearly do not understand the meaning of "culture" and how it relates to indigeneity.  Stealing another culture's religious stories does not give one a culture nor make one indigenous.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> One culture evolved out of another, and one evolved from that one, but my arbitrary rules say only the one I like can claim indigeneity.
Click to expand...


Not so.  Christianity and Islam did not evolve out of Judaism.  They developed as counter-arguments and replacement arguments to Jewish religious beliefs, in opposition to them and in other parts of the world.


----------



## BlackFlag

Sixties Fan said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> Jews conquered the indigenous residents of Israel long ago.  I wonder if their descendants claim ownership of the land.  I don't care what Israel does, I care that my country faces consequences over what they do.  The worst mistake of the 20th century was the 1st world determining that the land that is now Israel should be taken and given to foreigners, and to expel the indigenous people there.  Now the middle east has become the major pain in the modern world's ass, with religious insanity everywhere you look.
> 
> 
> 
> Provide details in regards to the first sentence.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Read the holy books of any of the 3 religions claiming indigenous status in Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Jews were first, the others were copycats.
> Second, you didn’t read Genesis 10.
> Shem was in Canaan and was conquered by Cham.
> Shem (Israel) came back and took back the land.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Genesis is a total fabrication.  Other monotheistic religions existed before Judaism, they are just copying them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The myths of ALL tribes/Nations on the planet are filled with historical truths and myths.
> 
> ONLY the Jewish Nation is attacked and there are endless allegations as to its "impossible " history, how the Jewish people, religion, culture, etc came to be.
> 
> Do it to ALL, and not just to the Jewish People.
Click to expand...

Lots of nations are attacked.  What a colossally stupid thing of you to say.


----------



## BlackFlag

Shusha said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> Christian culture developed from Jewish culture.  You have now argued that Christians are indigenous to Israel.  What did Islamic culture grow out of?  Uh oh...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You clearly do not understand the meaning of "culture" and how it relates to indigeneity.  Stealing another culture's religious stories does not give one a culture nor make one indigenous.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> One culture evolved out of another, and one evolved from that one, but my arbitrary rules say only the one I like can claim indigeneity.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Not so.  Christianity and Islam did not evolve out of Judaism.  They developed as counter-arguments and replacement arguments to Jewish religious beliefs, in opposition to them and in other parts of the world.
Click to expand...

What country is Christianity indigenous to?


----------



## Shusha

BlackFlag said:


> One culture evolved out of another, and one evolved from that one, but my arbitrary rules say only the one I like can claim indigeneity.



And religion is part of an indigenous people's culture, but having a religion does not give a people a culture.


----------



## Sixties Fan

BlackFlag said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Provide details in regards to the first sentence.
> 
> 
> 
> Read the holy books of any of the 3 religions claiming indigenous status in Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Jews were first, the others were copycats.
> Second, you didn’t read Genesis 10.
> Shem was in Canaan and was conquered by Cham.
> Shem (Israel) came back and took back the land.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Genesis is a total fabrication.  Other monotheistic religions existed before Judaism, they are just copying them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The myths of ALL tribes/Nations on the planet are filled with historical truths and myths.
> 
> ONLY the Jewish Nation is attacked and there are endless allegations as to its "impossible " history, how the Jewish people, religion, culture, etc came to be.
> 
> Do it to ALL, and not just to the Jewish People.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Lots of nations are attacked.  What a colossally stupid thing of you to say.
Click to expand...

Name the current countries which are being attacked as to their validity to exist.

Or to the rights of its indigenous people being sovereign of any part of their ancient homeland.


----------



## Shusha

BlackFlag said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> Christian culture developed from Jewish culture.  You have now argued that Christians are indigenous to Israel.  What did Islamic culture grow out of?  Uh oh...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You clearly do not understand the meaning of "culture" and how it relates to indigeneity.  Stealing another culture's religious stories does not give one a culture nor make one indigenous.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> One culture evolved out of another, and one evolved from that one, but my arbitrary rules say only the one I like can claim indigeneity.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Not so.  Christianity and Islam did not evolve out of Judaism.  They developed as counter-arguments and replacement arguments to Jewish religious beliefs, in opposition to them and in other parts of the world.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What country is Christianity indigenous to?
Click to expand...


Christianity is not a culture so it has no indigeneity to any place.  The correct question would be where the doctrine of Christianity developed.


----------



## Shusha

BlackFlag said:


> Lots of nations are attacked.  What a colossally stupid thing of you to say.



Really?  Link me to some articles denying the right of existing States to exist and calling for their destruction.  Or to some articles claiming that indigenous peoples aren't really indigenous.


----------



## BlackFlag

Sixties Fan said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> Read the holy books of any of the 3 religions claiming indigenous status in Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> Jews were first, the others were copycats.
> Second, you didn’t read Genesis 10.
> Shem was in Canaan and was conquered by Cham.
> Shem (Israel) came back and took back the land.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Genesis is a total fabrication.  Other monotheistic religions existed before Judaism, they are just copying them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The myths of ALL tribes/Nations on the planet are filled with historical truths and myths.
> 
> ONLY the Jewish Nation is attacked and there are endless allegations as to its "impossible " history, how the Jewish people, religion, culture, etc came to be.
> 
> Do it to ALL, and not just to the Jewish People.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Lots of nations are attacked.  What a colossally stupid thing of you to say.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Name the current countries which are being attacked as to their validity to exist.
> 
> Or to the rights of its indigenous people being sovereign of any part of their ancient homeland.
Click to expand...

Off the top of my head, Catalonia and Tibet.  There are many others but I’m not sure how to look it up.  As for countries that were attacked in the last hundred years alone, too many to name.  

Oh... and Palestine.


----------



## Sixties Fan

BlackFlag said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> Christian culture developed from Jewish culture.  You have now argued that Christians are indigenous to Israel.  What did Islamic culture grow out of?  Uh oh...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You clearly do not understand the meaning of "culture" and how it relates to indigeneity.  Stealing another culture's religious stories does not give one a culture nor make one indigenous.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> One culture evolved out of another, and one evolved from that one, but my arbitrary rules say only the one I like can claim indigeneity.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Not so.  Christianity and Islam did not evolve out of Judaism.  They developed as counter-arguments and replacement arguments to Jewish religious beliefs, in opposition to them and in other parts of the world.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What country is Christianity indigenous to?
Click to expand...

The question should be:
Where did Christianity originated?

Which is different from saying the word Indigenous.

Paul of Tarsus, who founded Christianity, was definitely NOT indigenous from the Land of Israel/Judea.

Many who followed him, as he went all around the Roman world, were also not Indigenous to the Land of Israel/Judea.

The number of Jews following in Paul's teachings of Jesus, was not a great one.  Most remained Jewish and continued to follow Judaism.

That included Jesus and his followers themselves.  They remained Jewish.


----------



## BlackFlag

Shusha said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> Christian culture developed from Jewish culture.  You have now argued that Christians are indigenous to Israel.  What did Islamic culture grow out of?  Uh oh...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You clearly do not understand the meaning of "culture" and how it relates to indigeneity.  Stealing another culture's religious stories does not give one a culture nor make one indigenous.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> One culture evolved out of another, and one evolved from that one, but my arbitrary rules say only the one I like can claim indigeneity.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Not so.  Christianity and Islam did not evolve out of Judaism.  They developed as counter-arguments and replacement arguments to Jewish religious beliefs, in opposition to them and in other parts of the world.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What country is Christianity indigenous to?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Christianity is not a culture so it has no indigeneity to any place.  The correct question would be where the doctrine of Christianity developed.
Click to expand...

Christians would unanimously beg to differ.  You really shouldn’t bite the hand that feeds.


----------



## BlackFlag

Sixties Fan said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> Christian culture developed from Jewish culture.  You have now argued that Christians are indigenous to Israel.  What did Islamic culture grow out of?  Uh oh...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You clearly do not understand the meaning of "culture" and how it relates to indigeneity.  Stealing another culture's religious stories does not give one a culture nor make one indigenous.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> One culture evolved out of another, and one evolved from that one, but my arbitrary rules say only the one I like can claim indigeneity.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Not so.  Christianity and Islam did not evolve out of Judaism.  They developed as counter-arguments and replacement arguments to Jewish religious beliefs, in opposition to them and in other parts of the world.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What country is Christianity indigenous to?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The question should be:
> Where did Christianity originated?
> 
> Which is different from saying the word Indigenous.
> 
> Paul of Tarsus, who founded Christianity, was definitely NOT indigenous from the Land of Israel/Judea.
> 
> Many who followed him, as he went all around the Roman world, were also not Indigenous to the Land of Israel/Judea.
> 
> The number of Jews following in Paul's teachings of Jesus, was not a great one.  Most remained Jewish and continued to follow Judaism.
> 
> That included Jesus and his followers themselves.  They remained Jewish.
Click to expand...

Christianity originated in Israel.    That is not a question.


----------



## Sixties Fan

BlackFlag said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> Jews were first, the others were copycats.
> Second, you didn’t read Genesis 10.
> Shem was in Canaan and was conquered by Cham.
> Shem (Israel) came back and took back the land.
> 
> 
> 
> Genesis is a total fabrication.  Other monotheistic religions existed before Judaism, they are just copying them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The myths of ALL tribes/Nations on the planet are filled with historical truths and myths.
> 
> ONLY the Jewish Nation is attacked and there are endless allegations as to its "impossible " history, how the Jewish people, religion, culture, etc came to be.
> 
> Do it to ALL, and not just to the Jewish People.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Lots of nations are attacked.  What a colossally stupid thing of you to say.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Name the current countries which are being attacked as to their validity to exist.
> 
> Or to the rights of its indigenous people being sovereign of any part of their ancient homeland.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Off the top of my head, Catalonia and Tibet.  There are many others but I’m not sure how to look it up.  As for countries that were attacked in the last hundred years alone, too many to name.
> 
> Oh... and Palestine.
Click to expand...

Palestine was never a country.  A Nation, or anything else but the name of a region, given by the Romans after they defeated the JEWS
in 135 CE.

Catalonia was never a country.  It wants Independence from Spain, which is different.

Tibet is a country conquered by the Chinese.  But the Tibetans are not being denied their sovereign or indigenous rights to Tibet.


----------



## Sixties Fan

BlackFlag said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> You clearly do not understand the meaning of "culture" and how it relates to indigeneity.  Stealing another culture's religious stories does not give one a culture nor make one indigenous.
> 
> 
> 
> One culture evolved out of another, and one evolved from that one, but my arbitrary rules say only the one I like can claim indigeneity.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Not so.  Christianity and Islam did not evolve out of Judaism.  They developed as counter-arguments and replacement arguments to Jewish religious beliefs, in opposition to them and in other parts of the world.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What country is Christianity indigenous to?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Christianity is not a culture so it has no indigeneity to any place.  The correct question would be where the doctrine of Christianity developed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Christians would unanimously beg to differ.  You really shouldn’t bite the hand that feeds.
Click to expand...

Christianity is a religion.

The many Nations which have formed Christianity have always had their distinct cultures, formed even before Christianity came to be.
Christianity may have molded some of that culture, as in music, art, etc, but they are ALL different.

Germans, French, Irish, Dutch, each and every one of them has their own identity and culture.


----------



## BlackFlag

Sixties Fan said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> Genesis is a total fabrication.  Other monotheistic religions existed before Judaism, they are just copying them.
> 
> 
> 
> The myths of ALL tribes/Nations on the planet are filled with historical truths and myths.
> 
> ONLY the Jewish Nation is attacked and there are endless allegations as to its "impossible " history, how the Jewish people, religion, culture, etc came to be.
> 
> Do it to ALL, and not just to the Jewish People.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Lots of nations are attacked.  What a colossally stupid thing of you to say.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Name the current countries which are being attacked as to their validity to exist.
> 
> Or to the rights of its indigenous people being sovereign of any part of their ancient homeland.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Off the top of my head, Catalonia and Tibet.  There are many others but I’m not sure how to look it up.  As for countries that were attacked in the last hundred years alone, too many to name.
> 
> Oh... and Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Palestine was never a country.  A Nation, or anything else but the name of a region, given by the Romans after they defeated the JEWS
> in 135 CE.
> 
> Catalonia was never a country.  It wants Independence from Spain, which is different.
> 
> Tibet is a country conquered by the Chinese.  But the Tibetans are not being denied their sovereign or indigenous rights to Tibet.
Click to expand...

All 3 of those countries are being denied their perceived indigenous rights to self-determination in their country.  And they’re not even arguing that minorities they don’t like should have lesser rights than they do.


----------



## BlackFlag

Sixties Fan said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> One culture evolved out of another, and one evolved from that one, but my arbitrary rules say only the one I like can claim indigeneity.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not so.  Christianity and Islam did not evolve out of Judaism.  They developed as counter-arguments and replacement arguments to Jewish religious beliefs, in opposition to them and in other parts of the world.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What country is Christianity indigenous to?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Christianity is not a culture so it has no indigeneity to any place.  The correct question would be where the doctrine of Christianity developed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Christians would unanimously beg to differ.  You really shouldn’t bite the hand that feeds.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Christianity is a religion.
> 
> The many Nations which have formed Christianity have always had their distinct cultures, formed even before Christianity came to be.
> Christianity may have molded some of that culture, as in music, art, etc, but they are ALL different.
> 
> Germans, French, Irish, Dutch, each and every one of them has their own identity and culture.
Click to expand...

All those cultures were shaped by Christianity, as Canaanite culture was shaped by Judaism. If Christianity cannot be part of a culture, then neither can Judaism.


----------



## Shusha

BlackFlag said:


> Christians would unanimously beg to differ.  You really shouldn’t bite the hand that feeds.



Christianity is not a culture.  Christianity is part of other cultures.


----------



## BlackFlag

Shusha said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> Christians would unanimously beg to differ.  You really shouldn’t bite the hand that feeds.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Christianity is not a culture.  Christianity is part of other cultures.
Click to expand...

So is Judaism.


----------



## Shusha

BlackFlag said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> Christians would unanimously beg to differ.  You really shouldn’t bite the hand that feeds.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Christianity is not a culture.  Christianity is part of other cultures.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So is Judaism.
Click to expand...


Judaism is the religious aspect of the Jewish culture.  Jewish culture is much more than just the religious faith.


----------



## Sixties Fan

BlackFlag said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> The myths of ALL tribes/Nations on the planet are filled with historical truths and myths.
> 
> ONLY the Jewish Nation is attacked and there are endless allegations as to its "impossible " history, how the Jewish people, religion, culture, etc came to be.
> 
> Do it to ALL, and not just to the Jewish People.
> 
> 
> 
> Lots of nations are attacked.  What a colossally stupid thing of you to say.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Name the current countries which are being attacked as to their validity to exist.
> 
> Or to the rights of its indigenous people being sovereign of any part of their ancient homeland.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Off the top of my head, Catalonia and Tibet.  There are many others but I’m not sure how to look it up.  As for countries that were attacked in the last hundred years alone, too many to name.
> 
> Oh... and Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Palestine was never a country.  A Nation, or anything else but the name of a region, given by the Romans after they defeated the JEWS
> in 135 CE.
> 
> Catalonia was never a country.  It wants Independence from Spain, which is different.
> 
> Tibet is a country conquered by the Chinese.  But the Tibetans are not being denied their sovereign or indigenous rights to Tibet.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> All 3 of those countries are being denied their perceived indigenous rights to self-determination in their country.  And they’re not even arguing that minorities they don’t like should have lesser rights than they do.
Click to expand...

All 500 First Nations of the USA are being denied self-determination to their ancient lands.  But they are not being denied their identity as Sioux, Navajo, etc.

That goes to the Aborigines, Hawaiians, Maori, Berbers, Copts, Kurds, Yazidis, etc.   
Not one of them is being denied of their indigenous identity or their rights to self-determination over their land, if they are ever successful at it.


The Jewish Nation is being denied, even by you, of their Jewish identity, indigenous status and self-determination over their ancient homeland.


----------



## BlackFlag

Shusha said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> Christians would unanimously beg to differ.  You really shouldn’t bite the hand that feeds.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Christianity is not a culture.  Christianity is part of other cultures.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So is Judaism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Judaism is the religious aspect of the Jewish culture.  Jewish culture is much more than just the religious faith.
Click to expand...

Same with Christianity.  You are changing your definition of culture to suit your steaming heap of horseshit.


----------



## BlackFlag

Sixties Fan said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> Lots of nations are attacked.  What a colossally stupid thing of you to say.
> 
> 
> 
> Name the current countries which are being attacked as to their validity to exist.
> 
> Or to the rights of its indigenous people being sovereign of any part of their ancient homeland.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Off the top of my head, Catalonia and Tibet.  There are many others but I’m not sure how to look it up.  As for countries that were attacked in the last hundred years alone, too many to name.
> 
> Oh... and Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Palestine was never a country.  A Nation, or anything else but the name of a region, given by the Romans after they defeated the JEWS
> in 135 CE.
> 
> Catalonia was never a country.  It wants Independence from Spain, which is different.
> 
> Tibet is a country conquered by the Chinese.  But the Tibetans are not being denied their sovereign or indigenous rights to Tibet.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> All 3 of those countries are being denied their perceived indigenous rights to self-determination in their country.  And they’re not even arguing that minorities they don’t like should have lesser rights than they do.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> All 500 First Nations of the USA are being denied self-determination to their ancient lands.  But they are not being denied their identity as Sioux, Navajo, etc.
> 
> That goes to the Aborigines, Hawaiians, Maori, Berbers, Copts, Kurds, Yazidis, etc.
> Not one of them is being denied of their indigenous identity or their rights to self-determination over their land, if they are ever successful at it.
> 
> 
> The Jewish Nation is being denied, even by you, of their Jewish identity, indigenous status and self-determination over their ancient homeland.
Click to expand...

Plenty of Jews lived in the land that is now Israel, self-determining themselves, before the UN decided to deny the Arabs living there of their right to self-determination over their ancient homeland.


----------



## Shusha

BlackFlag said:


> All 3 of those countries are being denied their perceived indigenous rights to self-determination in their country.



Really?  Who is arguing against the Catalans being indigenous to Catalonia (now part of Spain)?  Who is calling Catalans "foreigners"? 

We agree that Catalans, Tibetans and Palestinians should have self-determination.  The question is why you are on a thread arguing against that very same thing for the Jewish people.


----------



## Shusha

BlackFlag said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> Christians would unanimously beg to differ.  You really shouldn’t bite the hand that feeds.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Christianity is not a culture.  Christianity is part of other cultures.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So is Judaism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Judaism is the religious aspect of the Jewish culture.  Jewish culture is much more than just the religious faith.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Same with Christianity.  You are changing your definition of culture to suit your steaming heap of horseshit.
Click to expand...


It is you who has an inconsistent argument.  Christianity is a religion.  Judaism is a religion.  Islam is a religion.  None of these religions form a culture of themselves.  But they are part of what defines a culture.  Christianity is part of Roman (Italian) culture.  Christianity is part of Latin American culture.  Christianity is part of Greek culture.  Islam is part of Arab culture.  Judaism is part of Jewish culture. 

Do you need a Venn diagram?


----------



## Sixties Fan

BlackFlag said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> The myths of ALL tribes/Nations on the planet are filled with historical truths and myths.
> 
> ONLY the Jewish Nation is attacked and there are endless allegations as to its "impossible " history, how the Jewish people, religion, culture, etc came to be.
> 
> Do it to ALL, and not just to the Jewish People.
> 
> 
> 
> Lots of nations are attacked.  What a colossally stupid thing of you to say.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Name the current countries which are being attacked as to their validity to exist.
> 
> Or to the rights of its indigenous people being sovereign of any part of their ancient homeland.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Off the top of my head, Catalonia and Tibet.  There are many others but I’m not sure how to look it up.  As for countries that were attacked in the last hundred years alone, too many to name.
> 
> Oh... and Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Palestine was never a country.  A Nation, or anything else but the name of a region, given by the Romans after they defeated the JEWS
> in 135 CE.
> 
> Catalonia was never a country.  It wants Independence from Spain, which is different.
> 
> Tibet is a country conquered by the Chinese.  But the Tibetans are not being denied their sovereign or indigenous rights to Tibet.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> All 3 of those countries are being denied their perceived indigenous rights to self-determination in their country.  And they’re not even arguing that minorities they don’t like should have lesser rights than they do.
Click to expand...

You do not care that what you quote is nothing but a lie.
But the Arabs, citizens and loyal to Israel do








So, who do you believe?

The lying sites you read or watch, or the above Arabs and other minorities who have the same rights and are proud of being Israelis?


----------



## BlackFlag

Shusha said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> All 3 of those countries are being denied their perceived indigenous rights to self-determination in their country.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really?  Who is arguing against the Catalans being indigenous to Catalonia (now part of Spain)?  Who is calling Catalans "foreigners"?
> 
> We agree that Catalans, Tibetans and Palestinians should have self-determination.  The question is why you are on a thread arguing against that very same thing for the Jewish people.
Click to expand...

I have said many times in this thread that I’d love nothing more than to not care what Israel does, but my country feels beholden to you because a bunch of Christians, who you look down on, have decided Israel is our responsibility, and you take full advantage of it.  If we were wrapped up in a bunch of religious madness in Catalonia, and Catalonians kept exacerbating the problems and acting against peace, I’d say the same thing about them.


----------



## BlackFlag

Shusha said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> Christians would unanimously beg to differ.  You really shouldn’t bite the hand that feeds.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Christianity is not a culture.  Christianity is part of other cultures.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So is Judaism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Judaism is the religious aspect of the Jewish culture.  Jewish culture is much more than just the religious faith.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Same with Christianity.  You are changing your definition of culture to suit your steaming heap of horseshit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It is you who has an inconsistent argument.  Christianity is a religion.  Judaism is a religion.  Islam is a religion.  None of these religions form a culture of themselves.  But they are part of what defines a culture.  Christianity is part of Roman (Italian) culture.  Christianity is part of Latin American culture.  Christianity is part of Greek culture.  Islam is part of Arab culture.  Judaism is part of Jewish culture.
> 
> Do you need a Venn diagram?
Click to expand...

Jewish culture in New York is different from Jewish culture in Bethelhem.  But they share the same rituals and beliefs, thus linking their cultures.  You have a different definition of culture for Judaism than for other religions.  You are not unique.  Your perceptions about your religion are not unique.  Christians and Muslims and Taoists and Hindu’s will all tell you that their religions are part of their cultures.


----------



## BlackFlag

Sixties Fan said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> Lots of nations are attacked.  What a colossally stupid thing of you to say.
> 
> 
> 
> Name the current countries which are being attacked as to their validity to exist.
> 
> Or to the rights of its indigenous people being sovereign of any part of their ancient homeland.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Off the top of my head, Catalonia and Tibet.  There are many others but I’m not sure how to look it up.  As for countries that were attacked in the last hundred years alone, too many to name.
> 
> Oh... and Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Palestine was never a country.  A Nation, or anything else but the name of a region, given by the Romans after they defeated the JEWS
> in 135 CE.
> 
> Catalonia was never a country.  It wants Independence from Spain, which is different.
> 
> Tibet is a country conquered by the Chinese.  But the Tibetans are not being denied their sovereign or indigenous rights to Tibet.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> All 3 of those countries are being denied their perceived indigenous rights to self-determination in their country.  And they’re not even arguing that minorities they don’t like should have lesser rights than they do.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You do not care that what you quote is nothing but a lie.
> But the Arabs, citizens and loyal to Israel do
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So, who do you believe?
> 
> The lying sites you read or watch, or the above Arabs and other minorities who have the same rights and are proud of being Israelis?
Click to expand...

I believe the majority over your cherry picking.  I remember Bibi rallying Jews to go vote because he claimed hated Arabs were being bused to the polls.  Is his wife in jail yet?


----------



## Sixties Fan

BlackFlag said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> All 3 of those countries are being denied their perceived indigenous rights to self-determination in their country.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really?  Who is arguing against the Catalans being indigenous to Catalonia (now part of Spain)?  Who is calling Catalans "foreigners"?
> 
> We agree that Catalans, Tibetans and Palestinians should have self-determination.  The question is why you are on a thread arguing against that very same thing for the Jewish people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I have said many times in this thread that I’d love nothing more than to not care what Israel does, but my country feels beholden to you because a bunch of Christians, who you look down on, have decided Israel is our responsibility, and you take full advantage of it.  If we were wrapped up in a bunch of religious madness in Catalonia, and Catalonians kept exacerbating the problems and acting against peace, I’d say the same thing about them.
Click to expand...

Which shows the depth of your ignorance as to why the USA is an ally of Israel and not of Russia, Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia, North Korea and others.

America has never felt "beholden" to Israel.  It could not care less about Jews most of the time, and did not care to help save the Jews under Nazi concentration camps.

If the Christians you speak of are the ones who would like to see Israel destroyed and all Jews dead, then yes, we are all looking down at them, including all the Christians and Muslims who have had enough of the Jews being persecuted.

No, America DOES NOT think that Israel is its responsibility.

Israel has always defended itself, by itself, with NOT ONE foreign soldier being amongst the combatants, not one foreign soldier dying during ANY ONE of the wars since 1948.


----------



## Sixties Fan

BlackFlag said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Name the current countries which are being attacked as to their validity to exist.
> 
> Or to the rights of its indigenous people being sovereign of any part of their ancient homeland.
> 
> 
> 
> Off the top of my head, Catalonia and Tibet.  There are many others but I’m not sure how to look it up.  As for countries that were attacked in the last hundred years alone, too many to name.
> 
> Oh... and Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Palestine was never a country.  A Nation, or anything else but the name of a region, given by the Romans after they defeated the JEWS
> in 135 CE.
> 
> Catalonia was never a country.  It wants Independence from Spain, which is different.
> 
> Tibet is a country conquered by the Chinese.  But the Tibetans are not being denied their sovereign or indigenous rights to Tibet.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> All 3 of those countries are being denied their perceived indigenous rights to self-determination in their country.  And they’re not even arguing that minorities they don’t like should have lesser rights than they do.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You do not care that what you quote is nothing but a lie.
> But the Arabs, citizens and loyal to Israel do
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So, who do you believe?
> 
> The lying sites you read or watch, or the above Arabs and other minorities who have the same rights and are proud of being Israelis?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I believe the majority over your cherry picking.  I remember Bibi rallying Jews to go vote because he claimed hated Arabs were being bused to the polls.  Is his wife in jail yet?
Click to expand...

And I wonder why in the world Arabs were being bused to the voting poles, and by whom?  Do you have that information, or would you like to obliterate it.

No, Mrs. Netanyahu is not in jail, and nor will she be.

One is innocent until PROVEN  guilty.


----------



## Sixties Fan

BlackFlag said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Name the current countries which are being attacked as to their validity to exist.
> 
> Or to the rights of its indigenous people being sovereign of any part of their ancient homeland.
> 
> 
> 
> Off the top of my head, Catalonia and Tibet.  There are many others but I’m not sure how to look it up.  As for countries that were attacked in the last hundred years alone, too many to name.
> 
> Oh... and Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Palestine was never a country.  A Nation, or anything else but the name of a region, given by the Romans after they defeated the JEWS
> in 135 CE.
> 
> Catalonia was never a country.  It wants Independence from Spain, which is different.
> 
> Tibet is a country conquered by the Chinese.  But the Tibetans are not being denied their sovereign or indigenous rights to Tibet.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> All 3 of those countries are being denied their perceived indigenous rights to self-determination in their country.  And they’re not even arguing that minorities they don’t like should have lesser rights than they do.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You do not care that what you quote is nothing but a lie.
> But the Arabs, citizens and loyal to Israel do
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So, who do you believe?
> 
> The lying sites you read or watch, or the above Arabs and other minorities who have the same rights and are proud of being Israelis?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I believe the majority over your cherry picking.  I remember Bibi rallying Jews to go vote because he claimed hated Arabs were being bused to the polls.  Is his wife in jail yet?
Click to expand...

Oh, by the way......

The majority of what?


----------



## BlackFlag

Sixties Fan said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> All 3 of those countries are being denied their perceived indigenous rights to self-determination in their country.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really?  Who is arguing against the Catalans being indigenous to Catalonia (now part of Spain)?  Who is calling Catalans "foreigners"?
> 
> We agree that Catalans, Tibetans and Palestinians should have self-determination.  The question is why you are on a thread arguing against that very same thing for the Jewish people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I have said many times in this thread that I’d love nothing more than to not care what Israel does, but my country feels beholden to you because a bunch of Christians, who you look down on, have decided Israel is our responsibility, and you take full advantage of it.  If we were wrapped up in a bunch of religious madness in Catalonia, and Catalonians kept exacerbating the problems and acting against peace, I’d say the same thing about them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Which shows the depth of your ignorance as to why the USA is an ally of Israel and not of Russia, Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia, North Korea and others.
> 
> America has never felt "beholden" to Israel.  It could not care less about Jews most of the time, and did not care to help save the Jews under Nazi concentration camps.
> 
> If the Christians you speak of are the ones who would like to see Israel destroyed and all Jews dead, then yes, we are all looking down at them, including all the Christians and Muslims who have had enough of the Jews being persecuted.
> 
> No, America DOES NOT think that Israel is its responsibility.
> 
> Israel has always defended itself, by itself, with NOT ONE foreign soldier being amongst the combatants, not one foreign soldier dying during ANY ONE of the wars since 1948.
Click to expand...

Most soldiers who died in service to Israel to Israel were foreigners, as they did not grow up in Israel and many had just barely moved there.


----------



## Sixties Fan

BlackFlag said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Christianity is not a culture.  Christianity is part of other cultures.
> 
> 
> 
> So is Judaism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Judaism is the religious aspect of the Jewish culture.  Jewish culture is much more than just the religious faith.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Same with Christianity.  You are changing your definition of culture to suit your steaming heap of horseshit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It is you who has an inconsistent argument.  Christianity is a religion.  Judaism is a religion.  Islam is a religion.  None of these religions form a culture of themselves.  But they are part of what defines a culture.  Christianity is part of Roman (Italian) culture.  Christianity is part of Latin American culture.  Christianity is part of Greek culture.  Islam is part of Arab culture.  Judaism is part of Jewish culture.
> 
> Do you need a Venn diagram?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Jewish culture in New York is different from Jewish culture in Bethelhem.  But they share the same rituals and beliefs, thus linking their cultures.  You have a different definition of culture for Judaism than for other religions.  You are not unique.  Your perceptions about your religion are not unique.  Christians and Muslims and Taoists and Hindu’s will all tell you that their religions are part of their cultures.
Click to expand...

They share a religion, which is followed because they read the same Torah. 
Which is different from culturally American, or Israeli.

By the way, there are no Jews living in Bethlehem.  Not anymore, not for a long time since last century.

Just ask the Christian Arabs who have been reduced from 85 to 15% of the population in Bethlehem since 1993.

Do you know what happened in 1993 for that to happen?


----------



## Shusha

BlackFlag said:


> I have said many times in this thread that I’d love nothing more than to not care what Israel does, but my country feels beholden to you because a bunch of Christians, who you look down on, have decided Israel is our responsibility, and you take full advantage of it.  If we were wrapped up in a bunch of religious madness in Catalonia, and Catalonians kept exacerbating the problems and acting against peace, I’d say the same thing about them.



A person with any sense of fair-minded social justice and morality should be supporting and celebrating the self-determination of ALL peoples.  So why are you on this thread if not to support the self-determination of the Jewish people as outlined in the law which just passed?

The underlying cause of the conflict is the rejection of Jewish self-determination.  The conflict will not end until people universally support it.  Start here and now.  On this thread.  

(And yes, I noticed the little nod to antisemitic tropes there with your "look down on Christians" and "take advantage of it".  Be clear.  Jews do not "look down" on Christians.  Many are uncomfortable with the usurption and corruption of Jewish Holy Scripture.  Many are very uncomfortable with the replacement and conversion theology which developed with that and see it as a threat to Jews.  Many find Christianity nothing past being irrelevant.  And many find Christianity to be a lovely and thoughtful religious faith.)


----------



## Sixties Fan

BlackFlag said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> All 3 of those countries are being denied their perceived indigenous rights to self-determination in their country.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really?  Who is arguing against the Catalans being indigenous to Catalonia (now part of Spain)?  Who is calling Catalans "foreigners"?
> 
> We agree that Catalans, Tibetans and Palestinians should have self-determination.  The question is why you are on a thread arguing against that very same thing for the Jewish people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I have said many times in this thread that I’d love nothing more than to not care what Israel does, but my country feels beholden to you because a bunch of Christians, who you look down on, have decided Israel is our responsibility, and you take full advantage of it.  If we were wrapped up in a bunch of religious madness in Catalonia, and Catalonians kept exacerbating the problems and acting against peace, I’d say the same thing about them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Which shows the depth of your ignorance as to why the USA is an ally of Israel and not of Russia, Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia, North Korea and others.
> 
> America has never felt "beholden" to Israel.  It could not care less about Jews most of the time, and did not care to help save the Jews under Nazi concentration camps.
> 
> If the Christians you speak of are the ones who would like to see Israel destroyed and all Jews dead, then yes, we are all looking down at them, including all the Christians and Muslims who have had enough of the Jews being persecuted.
> 
> No, America DOES NOT think that Israel is its responsibility.
> 
> Israel has always defended itself, by itself, with NOT ONE foreign soldier being amongst the combatants, not one foreign soldier dying during ANY ONE of the wars since 1948.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Most soldiers who died in service to Israel to Israel were foreigners, as they did not grow up in Israel and many had just barely moved there.
Click to expand...

They were Jewish.  JEWISH.  They were all defending their ancestral homeland, as any Maori anywhere in the world would return to defend what is now known as New Zealand, if it came to that.

And the Christians and Muslims who volunteered to defend Israel, and the Jewish People in any of those wars, did so voluntarily because they thought it was a just cause against what too many Christians and Muslims were trying to do.

Destroy Israel.  Return the Jews to the only state those two religions could accept.  No sovereignty, no rights, no country.


----------



## Shusha

BlackFlag said:


> Jewish culture in New York is different from Jewish culture in Bethelhem.  But they share the same rituals and beliefs, thus linking their cultures.  You have a different definition of culture for Judaism than for other religions.  You are not unique.  Your perceptions about your religion are not unique.  Christians and Muslims and Taoists and Hindu’s will all tell you that their religions are part of their cultures.



Judaism is part of Jewish culture.  That is entirely my point.  It is the exact same definition I hold for other religions.  The religion is part of the culture.  It is YOU who are denying that religion is only a small part of the Jewish culture.  Jewish culture also encompasses all the other aspects I have already mentioned.  That is what makes Jewish culture indigenous to that particular place.  Not the religion.  The broader culture.


----------



## BlackFlag

Shusha said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have said many times in this thread that I’d love nothing more than to not care what Israel does, but my country feels beholden to you because a bunch of Christians, who you look down on, have decided Israel is our responsibility, and you take full advantage of it.  If we were wrapped up in a bunch of religious madness in Catalonia, and Catalonians kept exacerbating the problems and acting against peace, I’d say the same thing about them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A person with any sense of fair-minded social justice and morality should be supporting and celebrating the self-determination of ALL peoples.  So why are you on this thread if not to support the self-determination of the Jewish people as outlined in the law which just passed?
> 
> The underlying cause of the conflict is the rejection of Jewish self-determination.  The conflict will not end until people universally support it.  Start here and now.  On this thread.
> 
> (And yes, I noticed the little nod to antisemitic tropes there with your "look down on Christians" and "take advantage of it".  Be clear.  Jews do not "look down" on Christians.  Many are uncomfortable with the usurption and corruption of Jewish Holy Scripture.  Many are very uncomfortable with the replacement and conversion theology which developed with that and see it as a threat to Jews.  Many find Christianity nothing past being irrelevant.  And many find Christianity to be a lovely and thoughtful religious faith.)
Click to expand...

My country pays a price for your country’s actions.  That’s why I’m in this thread.  Your argument about conflict rising from Jewish self-determination can easily be thrown back in your face as rising from Palestinian self-determination.  And until both of your groups stop behaving like children, arguing about fairy tales, I will condemn my government for involving itself in the madness, and you all for causing it.


----------



## Shusha

Sixties Fan said:


> They were Jewish.  JEWISH.  They were all defending their ancestral homeland, as any Maori anywhere in the world would return to defend what is now known as New Zealand, if it came to that.



This.


----------



## Sixties Fan

BlackFlag said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have said many times in this thread that I’d love nothing more than to not care what Israel does, but my country feels beholden to you because a bunch of Christians, who you look down on, have decided Israel is our responsibility, and you take full advantage of it.  If we were wrapped up in a bunch of religious madness in Catalonia, and Catalonians kept exacerbating the problems and acting against peace, I’d say the same thing about them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A person with any sense of fair-minded social justice and morality should be supporting and celebrating the self-determination of ALL peoples.  So why are you on this thread if not to support the self-determination of the Jewish people as outlined in the law which just passed?
> 
> The underlying cause of the conflict is the rejection of Jewish self-determination.  The conflict will not end until people universally support it.  Start here and now.  On this thread.
> 
> (And yes, I noticed the little nod to antisemitic tropes there with your "look down on Christians" and "take advantage of it".  Be clear.  Jews do not "look down" on Christians.  Many are uncomfortable with the usurption and corruption of Jewish Holy Scripture.  Many are very uncomfortable with the replacement and conversion theology which developed with that and see it as a threat to Jews.  Many find Christianity nothing past being irrelevant.  And many find Christianity to be a lovely and thoughtful religious faith.)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> My country pays a price for your country’s actions.  That’s why I’m in this thread.  Your argument about conflict rising from Jewish self-determination can easily be thrown back in your face as rising from Palestinian self-determination.  And until both of your groups stop behaving like children, arguing about fairy tales, I will condemn my government for involving itself in the madness, and you all for causing it.
Click to expand...

One groups has agreed to peace since 1920.

One group has declared war since 1920.


Figure out which is which between the Jews and the Muslims.


----------



## BlackFlag

Shusha said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> Jewish culture in New York is different from Jewish culture in Bethelhem.  But they share the same rituals and beliefs, thus linking their cultures.  You have a different definition of culture for Judaism than for other religions.  You are not unique.  Your perceptions about your religion are not unique.  Christians and Muslims and Taoists and Hindu’s will all tell you that their religions are part of their cultures.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Judaism is part of Jewish culture.  That is entirely my point.  It is the exact same definition I hold for other religions.  The religion is part of the culture.  It is YOU who are denying that religion is only a small part of the Jewish culture.  Jewish culture also encompasses all the other aspects I have already mentioned.  That is what makes Jewish culture indigenous to that particular place.  Not the religion.  The broader culture.
Click to expand...

Jewish rituals are no more special than other religions’ rituals.  I consider that a profoundly stupid argument.  So move on.


----------



## BlackFlag

Sixties Fan said:


> They were Jewish.  JEWISH.


But not Israeli.  And those Muslims and Christians that fought with them are now relegated to second-class status.


----------



## Shusha

BlackFlag said:


> Your argument about conflict rising from Jewish self-determination can easily be thrown back in your face as rising from Palestinian self-determination.



So, to be clear, you support the Jewish people's self-determination as a nation, yes?


----------



## BlackFlag

Shusha said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your argument about conflict rising from Jewish self-determination can easily be thrown back in your face as rising from Palestinian self-determination.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So, to be clear, you support the Jewish people's self-determination as a nation, yes?
Click to expand...

Not as long as my country has to suffer for it.    So get your shit together.


----------



## Sixties Fan

BlackFlag said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your argument about conflict rising from Jewish self-determination can easily be thrown back in your face as rising from Palestinian self-determination.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So, to be clear, you support the Jewish people's self-determination as a nation, yes?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not as long as my country has to suffer for it.    So get your shit together.
Click to expand...

Exactly HOW is America suffering for it?

And exactly how is America going to stop suffering if it caves in to the Muslim demand of "No Israel".  No sovereignty, no self-determination to the Jewish People?


----------



## Shusha

BlackFlag said:


> Jewish rituals are no more special than other religions’ rituals.  I consider that a profoundly stupid argument.  So move on.



You find it a stupid argument because you are reducing the entirety of Jewish culture to Judaism and rituals.  It has nothing to do with being special.  Just the opposite.  It is demanding the same level playing field as Catalonia.  Catalan is a culture encapsulating many aspects, including, but not limited to, religion.  So is the Jewish culture.


----------



## Shusha

BlackFlag said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your argument about conflict rising from Jewish self-determination can easily be thrown back in your face as rising from Palestinian self-determination.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So, to be clear, you support the Jewish people's self-determination as a nation, yes?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not as long as my country has to suffer for it.    So get your shit together.
Click to expand...


Do you or do you not believe fundamentally, objectively in the right of peoples to self-determination, including the Jewish people?


----------



## Shusha

Do you believe that the Arab Palestinian people have a fundamental right to self-determination?  And that they should be supported in obtaining it?


----------



## Shusha

Sixties Fan said:


> Exactly HOW is America suffering for it?
> 
> And exactly how is America going to stop suffering if it caves in to the Muslim demand of "No Israel".  No sovereignty, no self-determination to the Jewish People?



I second these questions.


----------



## BlackFlag

Sixties Fan said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your argument about conflict rising from Jewish self-determination can easily be thrown back in your face as rising from Palestinian self-determination.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So, to be clear, you support the Jewish people's self-determination as a nation, yes?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not as long as my country has to suffer for it.    So get your shit together.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Exactly HOW is America suffering for it?
> 
> And exactly how is America going to stop suffering if it caves in to the Muslim demand of "No Israel".  No sovereignty, no self-determination to the Jewish People?
Click to expand...

We give away free money to a country with no interest in peace, we enact policies for Israel’s protection that really shouldn’t concern us, we are attacked, at times fatally, for choosing sides in religious madness, we have to stand alone against a world that condemns your government’s actions, we base our foreign policy around your preferences... I could go on and on


----------



## BlackFlag

Shusha said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your argument about conflict rising from Jewish self-determination can easily be thrown back in your face as rising from Palestinian self-determination.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So, to be clear, you support the Jewish people's self-determination as a nation, yes?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not as long as my country has to suffer for it.    So get your shit together.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Do you or do you not believe fundamentally, objectively in the right of peoples to self-determination, including the Jewish people?
Click to expand...

Nobody has ever had an objective right to self determination.  The people doing the self determining are the ones who eliminated the others in the vicinity who were trying to self determine.  So your people happened to be in or around Israel thousands of years ago the day enough of them became convinced to believe in a bunch of magic.  That is not special.


----------



## BlackFlag

Shusha said:


> Do you believe that the Arab Palestinian people have a fundamental right to self-determination?  And that they should be supported in obtaining it?


No, but I wouldn’t care if they felt that way if it didn’t affect me.


----------



## Sixties Fan

BlackFlag said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your argument about conflict rising from Jewish self-determination can easily be thrown back in your face as rising from Palestinian self-determination.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So, to be clear, you support the Jewish people's self-determination as a nation, yes?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not as long as my country has to suffer for it.    So get your shit together.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Exactly HOW is America suffering for it?
> 
> And exactly how is America going to stop suffering if it caves in to the Muslim demand of "No Israel".  No sovereignty, no self-determination to the Jewish People?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> We give away free money to a country with no interest in peace, we enact policies for Israel’s protection that really shouldn’t concern us, we are attacked, at times fatally, for choosing sides in religious madness, we have to stand alone against a world that condemns your government’s actions, we base our foreign policy around your preferences... I could go on and on
Click to expand...

How much aid does the US give Palestinians, and what’s it for?


Please, tell the American congress to not only stop helping Israel but stop giving money to the Palestinians who have been committing terrorist actions against Jews in Israel and all over the world  since 
1972 when 11 Israeli athletes were murdered in Munich.

Please, tell the EU and all others to also stop donating, as so many Arab countries have, to the Palestinians who have declared - more than clearly - that they will never negotiate any peace with Israel, because it is the Nation of the Jews.

I won't go into your endless nonsense on how "Israel and the Jews control America".

Enjoy your delusions.


----------



## Shusha

BlackFlag

The reason I ask about your stand on self-determination, is that your entrance into this thread was to claim that the declaration of self-determination is an obstacle to peace.  And I reject that idea.  On the contrary, the acceptance of self-determination for BOTH peoples is essential to peace.  It is the core of peace.

Now it seems from your last two posts that you reject the idea of rights to self-determination by either side. And presumably that right for all other peoples as well. 

Your point on this thread, then, is to remove the US (at least, I assume you are American) from the Arab/Israeli conflict because that conflict hurts you and the US?


----------



## Sixties Fan

BlackFlag said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your argument about conflict rising from Jewish self-determination can easily be thrown back in your face as rising from Palestinian self-determination.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So, to be clear, you support the Jewish people's self-determination as a nation, yes?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not as long as my country has to suffer for it.    So get your shit together.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Do you or do you not believe fundamentally, objectively in the right of peoples to self-determination, including the Jewish people?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nobody has ever had an objective right to self determination.  The people doing the self determining are the ones who eliminated the others in the vicinity who were trying to self determine.  So your people happened to be in or around Israel thousands of years ago the day enough of them became convinced to believe in a bunch of magic.  That is not special.
Click to expand...

That is total and utter nonsense.
And you apply it only to the Jewish people's rights to their ancient homeland, regardless of whether you understand it or not.


----------



## TNHarley

cnm said:


> Like the official implementation of apartheid to ensure Boer values were preserved.


Hmm that sounds really close to the response from the terrorist org in Palestine


----------



## Shusha

BlackFlag said:


> Nobody has ever had an objective right to self determination.  The people doing the self determining are the ones who eliminated the others in the vicinity who were trying to self determine.  So your people happened to be in or around Israel thousands of years ago the day enough of them became convinced to believe in a bunch of magic.  That is not special.



You keep bringing up the word "special".  You realize that the Jewish people are not asking for "special", right?  The Jewish people want the same rights to self-determination as indigenous peoples everywhere have, or should have.


----------



## Sixties Fan

BlackFlag said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Do you believe that the Arab Palestinian people have a fundamental right to self-determination?  And that they should be supported in obtaining it?
> 
> 
> 
> No, but I wouldn’t care if they felt that way if it didn’t affect me.
Click to expand...

How does it affect you?

YOU are choosing to live in fear.

YOU are choosing in seeing both sides as the ones who started and will not end that conflict.

YOU are choosing to see Jews and Israel as being the "Masters" of America

YOU are the one who wants America to stop helping Israel and ONLY Israel.
Let America keep giving aid to the Palestinians, Saudi, Jordanians, Syrians, Russians, etc.

But Israel........Thanks, but no thanks.

So, where exactly is your level handed dealings for both sides?

Do you want the USA to stop aid to ALL others but to Americans?
Why?  Why should it?  When has the USA not been involved in helping others as it wants others to help this country, when necessary?


----------



## BlackFlag

Sixties Fan said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your argument about conflict rising from Jewish self-determination can easily be thrown back in your face as rising from Palestinian self-determination.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So, to be clear, you support the Jewish people's self-determination as a nation, yes?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not as long as my country has to suffer for it.    So get your shit together.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Exactly HOW is America suffering for it?
> 
> And exactly how is America going to stop suffering if it caves in to the Muslim demand of "No Israel".  No sovereignty, no self-determination to the Jewish People?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> We give away free money to a country with no interest in peace, we enact policies for Israel’s protection that really shouldn’t concern us, we are attacked, at times fatally, for choosing sides in religious madness, we have to stand alone against a world that condemns your government’s actions, we base our foreign policy around your preferences... I could go on and on
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> How much aid does the US give Palestinians, and what’s it for?
> 
> 
> Please, tell the American congress to not only stop helping Israel but stop giving money to the Palestinians who have been committing terrorist actions against Jews in Israel and all over the world  since
> 1972 when 11 Israeli athletes were murdered in Munich.
> 
> Please, tell the EU and all others to also stop donating, as so many Arab countries have, to the Palestinians who have declared - more than clearly - that they will never negotiate any peace with Israel, because it is the Nation of the Jews.
> 
> I won't go into your endless nonsense on how "Israel and the Jews control America".
> 
> Enjoy your delusions.
Click to expand...

Hey jackass, when have I voiced any support for palestinians?  You going to call me an anti-semite again?  Fucking hack.


----------



## BlackFlag

Shusha said:


> BlackFlag
> 
> The reason I ask about your stand on self-determination, is that your entrance into this thread was to claim that the declaration of self-determination is an obstacle to peace.  And I reject that idea.  On the contrary, the acceptance of self-determination for BOTH peoples is essential to peace.  It is the core of peace.
> 
> Now it seems from your last two posts that you reject the idea of rights to self-determination by either side. And presumably that right for all other peoples as well.
> 
> Your point on this thread, then, is to remove the US (at least, I assume you are American) from the Arab/Israeli conflict because that conflict hurts you and the US?


You have 2 sides that believe they have a right to self-determination.  The heart of the peace process is reconciling those 2 beliefs.  The government that is in power and holds the cards just said that 1 of those groups now officially has no right to self-determination in the country.  That is akin to the United States, instead of passing the civil rights act in the 60’s, had declared that black people will not have equal rights.


----------



## Sixties Fan

BlackFlag said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> So, to be clear, you support the Jewish people's self-determination as a nation, yes?
> 
> 
> 
> Not as long as my country has to suffer for it.    So get your shit together.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Exactly HOW is America suffering for it?
> 
> And exactly how is America going to stop suffering if it caves in to the Muslim demand of "No Israel".  No sovereignty, no self-determination to the Jewish People?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> We give away free money to a country with no interest in peace, we enact policies for Israel’s protection that really shouldn’t concern us, we are attacked, at times fatally, for choosing sides in religious madness, we have to stand alone against a world that condemns your government’s actions, we base our foreign policy around your preferences... I could go on and on
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> How much aid does the US give Palestinians, and what’s it for?
> 
> 
> Please, tell the American congress to not only stop helping Israel but stop giving money to the Palestinians who have been committing terrorist actions against Jews in Israel and all over the world  since
> 1972 when 11 Israeli athletes were murdered in Munich.
> 
> Please, tell the EU and all others to also stop donating, as so many Arab countries have, to the Palestinians who have declared - more than clearly - that they will never negotiate any peace with Israel, because it is the Nation of the Jews.
> 
> I won't go into your endless nonsense on how "Israel and the Jews control America".
> 
> Enjoy your delusions.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Hey jackass, when have I voiced any support for palestinians?  You going to call me an anti-semite again?  Fucking hack.
Click to expand...

Oh, so you do not support anybody.
All you do is "cry" about how it affects your life, without telling us how it has actually affected, if ever, your life.

You do not support the Palestinians, but you are not crying about all the aid which goes to them which is very high:

How much aid does the US give Palestinians, and what’s it for?

You also do not say that America in a puppet to Muslims from anywhere, much less the Palestinians.

Well, if you do not say it and demand that only aid to Israel be stopped......

Yes, me stupid Jackass and Hack who does not understand at all what you write.

Poor me


----------



## BlackFlag

Sixties Fan said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Do you believe that the Arab Palestinian people have a fundamental right to self-determination?  And that they should be supported in obtaining it?
> 
> 
> 
> No, but I wouldn’t care if they felt that way if it didn’t affect me.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> How does it affect you?
> 
> YOU are choosing to live in fear.
> 
> YOU are choosing in seeing both sides as the ones who started and will not end that conflict.
> 
> YOU are choosing to see Jews and Israel as being the "Masters" of America
> 
> YOU are the one who wants America to stop helping Israel and ONLY Israel.
> Let America keep giving aid to the Palestinians, Saudi, Jordanians, Syrians, Russians, etc.
> 
> But Israel........Thanks, but no thanks.
> 
> So, where exactly is your level handed dealings for both sides?
> 
> Do you want the USA to stop aid to ALL others but to Americans?
> Why?  Why should it?  When has the USA not been involved in helping others as it wants others to help this country, when necessary?
Click to expand...

I would absolutely love for the U.S. to stop giving aid to all of those countries.  Except maybe Jordan.  Are they currently fueling any slaughters or conflicts?  Does it help poverty there? 

You have been completely unhinged and inventing failing strawmen for most of this thread.  I won’t be responding to you again.


----------



## Shusha

BlackFlag said:


> You have 2 sides that believe they have a right to self-determination.  The heart of the peace process is reconciling those 2 beliefs.



It is not a zero-sum game.  They can both have those rights.  That is the simplest, easiest, most fair and reasonable solution to the conflict.  It has been the solution for every other territory which had this type of conflict between ethnic groups.  The former USSR, former Yugoslavia, former Czechoslovakia, former Sudan, former Korea, former Ottoman Empire. Hell, it even happened to PALESTINE. There are literally dozens and dozens of examples in the past 100 years.  It is the norm in international politics. 

So what is the hold up?


----------



## Sixties Fan

BlackFlag said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag
> 
> The reason I ask about your stand on self-determination, is that your entrance into this thread was to claim that the declaration of self-determination is an obstacle to peace.  And I reject that idea.  On the contrary, the acceptance of self-determination for BOTH peoples is essential to peace.  It is the core of peace.
> 
> Now it seems from your last two posts that you reject the idea of rights to self-determination by either side. And presumably that right for all other peoples as well.
> 
> Your point on this thread, then, is to remove the US (at least, I assume you are American) from the Arab/Israeli conflict because that conflict hurts you and the US?
> 
> 
> 
> You have 2 sides that believe they have a right to self-determination.  The heart of the peace process is reconciling those 2 beliefs.  The government that is in power and holds the cards just said that 1 of those groups now officially has no right to self-determination in the country.  That is akin to the United States, instead of passing the civil rights act in the 60’s, had declared that black people will not have equal rights.
Click to expand...

The Palestinians have a right to self-determination in Gaza.
And they will have a right to self determination in the areas A and B of Judea and Samaria, as per the Oslo Accords and any negotiations the Arabs finally agree to sit for.  Which they refuse to do.

The Arabs, or Bedouins, or Druze, etc  have absolutely NO RIGHTS to self-determination in Israel because they ARE NOT the indigenous people of the land.  
They have the right to live in Israel, as they do, and have all the rights that Israel grants them.

The opposite is not true.

There are no Jews in ancient Jewish homeland of TranJordan or Gaza.
No Jews allowed to live in Areas A and B of the PA.  They never will be allowed to.
And Abbas has clearly declared that no Jews will be allowed to live in Judea and Samaria once the State of Palestine comes to be.

Sure, equate it to America and the Civil rights with no understanding at all of what the conflict is about and what self-determination actually means.

Arabs and other non Jews DO have the same rights in Israel.  Those rights have not been taken away because Israel has always been and will continue to be the Ancient homeland of the Jewish People, with the Jewish People having self-determination.


Try not to change the reality of what Israel is and the rights it has always granted all who live there.

The opposite is true of Jews who still live in Muslim countries.


----------



## rylah

BlackFlag said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> What water fountains?
> 
> 
> 
> Really?  I didn’t think the bloodstained Holy Land was _that _backwards
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And You come to this conclusion by which part of the law?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The bloodstain is from the millenia of death and violence cursing the land.  The discrimination part is from Jews declaring that no infidel has a right to self determination.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Like Germans are banned from self determination in France?
> 
> How dare they...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No France doesn’t have any law declaring citizens of German heritage do not have a right to self determination.  That’s probably why the world isn’t coming after them and why they’ve been at peace for so long.
Click to expand...


The law we discuss doesn't say that either.
Israel's independence is a fact that allows a unique opportunity for the Jewish nation, on it's historic homeland, that it lacks in any other place or state - is a mere statement of reality and logic.

 Seems like common sense.


----------



## Sixties Fan

BlackFlag said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Do you believe that the Arab Palestinian people have a fundamental right to self-determination?  And that they should be supported in obtaining it?
> 
> 
> 
> No, but I wouldn’t care if they felt that way if it didn’t affect me.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> How does it affect you?
> 
> YOU are choosing to live in fear.
> 
> YOU are choosing in seeing both sides as the ones who started and will not end that conflict.
> 
> YOU are choosing to see Jews and Israel as being the "Masters" of America
> 
> YOU are the one who wants America to stop helping Israel and ONLY Israel.
> Let America keep giving aid to the Palestinians, Saudi, Jordanians, Syrians, Russians, etc.
> 
> But Israel........Thanks, but no thanks.
> 
> So, where exactly is your level handed dealings for both sides?
> 
> Do you want the USA to stop aid to ALL others but to Americans?
> Why?  Why should it?  When has the USA not been involved in helping others as it wants others to help this country, when necessary?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I would absolutely love for the U.S. to stop giving aid to all of those countries.  Except maybe Jordan.  Are they currently fueling any slaughters or conflicts?  Does it help poverty there?
> 
> You have been completely unhinged and inventing failing strawmen for most of this thread.  I won’t be responding to you again.
Click to expand...

LOL
Jordan is one of the worst about equal rights.
Just ask the Arabs who are being called Palestinians what rights they have been getting and being allowed to keep by the Jordan Monarchy.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Jordanian citizens of Palestinian origin in the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan ... have the full rights of citizenship and all its obligations, the same as any other citizen irrespective of his origin. -King Hussein, Amman, July 31, 1988

We are Jordanians if the government needs us, but Palestinians if we want something from the government.-Dr. Walid, Amman, January 29, 2009

(full article online)

Stateless Again | Palestinian-Origin Jordanians Deprived of their Nationality


----------



## Shusha

BlackFlag said:


> That is akin to the United States, instead of passing the civil rights act in the 60’s, had declared that black people will not have equal rights.



Wait?!  Are you saying that POC as a defined cultural group in the US should have the right to self-determination and sovereignty in the US?  If so -- I agree wholeheartedly.


----------



## BlackFlag

Shusha said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> You have 2 sides that believe they have a right to self-determination.  The heart of the peace process is reconciling those 2 beliefs.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is not a zero-sum game.  They can both have those rights.  That is the simplest, easiest, most fair and reasonable solution to the conflict.  It has been the solution for every other territory which had this type of conflict between ethnic groups.  The former USSR, former Yugoslavia, former Czechoslovakia, former Sudan, former Korea, former Ottoman Empire. Hell, it even happened to PALESTINE. There are literally dozens and dozens of examples in the past 100 years.  It is the norm in international politics.
> 
> So what is the hold up?
Click to expand...

Lots of hold ups, and little significant action or concessions.  Which has led me to believe there is no serious movement for peace on either side; just movements for victory.  I don’t really care which happens, but I don’t have any say.  So when I see something like this declaration, which was a totally unnecessary provocation, I will comment on it.  I will also maintain that the U.S. has nothing to gain from inserting itself.


----------



## BlackFlag

Shusha said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> That is akin to the United States, instead of passing the civil rights act in the 60’s, had declared that black people will not have equal rights.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wait?!  Are you saying that POC as a defined cultural group in the US should have the right to self-determination and sovereignty in the US?  If so -- I agree wholeheartedly.
Click to expand...

You have been arguing the opposite for this entire thread.


----------



## Shusha

BlackFlag said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> That is akin to the United States, instead of passing the civil rights act in the 60’s, had declared that black people will not have equal rights.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wait?!  Are you saying that POC as a defined cultural group in the US should have the right to self-determination and sovereignty in the US?  If so -- I agree wholeheartedly.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You have been arguing the opposite for this entire thread.
Click to expand...


WTF?  No, I have not.  I have consistently been arguing for the rights to self-determination by ALL peoples.


----------



## BlackFlag

Shusha said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> That is akin to the United States, instead of passing the civil rights act in the 60’s, had declared that black people will not have equal rights.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wait?!  Are you saying that POC as a defined cultural group in the US should have the right to self-determination and sovereignty in the US?  If so -- I agree wholeheartedly.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You have been arguing the opposite for this entire thread.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> WTF?  No, I have not.  I have consistently been arguing for the rights to self-determination by ALL peoples.
Click to expand...

Not for gentile citizens of Israel or others who claim it as homeland.


----------



## Shusha

BlackFlag said:


> Lots of hold ups, and little significant action or concessions.  Which has led me to believe there is no serious movement for peace on either side; just movements for victory.  I don’t really care which happens, but I don’t have any say.  So when I see something like this declaration, which was a totally unnecessary provocation, I will comment on it.  I will also maintain that the U.S. has nothing to gain from inserting itself.



How is a declaration of self-determination a "provocation"?  Contrasted with violent attempts to cross the border and murder Israelis?


----------



## rylah

Bleipriester said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> 
> Update:
> An important part of the law was rejected, among the opponents was President Rivlin.
> The law was about to allow municipalities to reject non-Jewish residents.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The clause would _allow for communities, including "of a single religion or a single nationality", to build separate towns._
> http://www.iataskforce.org/sites/default/files/resource/resource-1586.pdf
> 
> This includes Arab municipalities.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So it will be re-considered?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You already answered that. Look at the post I'm responding.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I don´t understand.
Click to expand...


You already confirmed that the clause was rejected.
The law was passed with a pragraph of immutability.


----------



## Olde Europe

The Jews in Europe suffered the shoa, and sought a homeland of their own, understandably enough.  They invaded, by the hundreds of thousands, Palestine.  Their founding act arguably was what is known as nakba, the murder, rape, expropriation and expulsion of at least two thirds of the indigenous population.

That, to this day, is the ugly, original sin baked right into the foundation of the State of Israel, which has to remain unmentioned.  That is what necessitates all the lying and the hypocrisy about self-determination, all the bad conscience that poisons any and all debates about the matter.

Now, Israel is seemingly to complete the genocide of 1948, officially declaring itself an apartheid state, and Arabs not equal before the law, which, of course, it was right from the start.  Israel has been getting away with its murderous apartheid brutality for so long, so the current leadership apparently has decided it's time to close the 70-years old deal they've made with the devil, calculating they could get away with that, too.

Among the many saddening developments of recent years, this one still stands out.


----------



## BlackFlag

Shusha said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> Lots of hold ups, and little significant action or concessions.  Which has led me to believe there is no serious movement for peace on either side; just movements for victory.  I don’t really care which happens, but I don’t have any say.  So when I see something like this declaration, which was a totally unnecessary provocation, I will comment on it.  I will also maintain that the U.S. has nothing to gain from inserting itself.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How is a declaration of self-determination a "provocation"?  Contrasted with violent attempts to cross the border and murder Israelis?
Click to expand...

In my country, minority groups are not rising up in revolution and risking their lives to fight a perceived oppressor.  That is a problem for you to solve, and for me to convince my country to leave it alone.


----------



## rylah

BlackFlag said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Like Germans are banned from self determination in France?
> 
> How dare they...
> 
> 
> 
> No France doesn’t have any law declaring citizens of German heritage do not have a right to self determination.  That’s probably why the world isn’t coming after them and why they’ve been at peace for so long.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Do I have the feeling that you did not understand the France-Germany connection?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I doubt you have any understanding of much at all.  It was irrelevant to the conversation, anyways.  France does not have laws against citizens of German background.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Does France have any laws against any other people wanting to declare self-determination on its own soil?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Make your point, because France has no law targeting citizens to make them a secondary class.  Stop pussyfooting around.
Click to expand...


Neither does the law.
It only addresses the unique status of an indigenous nation in its' homeland.
It would be a nice gesture for the US to declare the unique status of the indigenous nations, and call it their homeland - just to be at least a bit polite .


----------



## Shusha

Olde Europe said:


> The Jews in Europe suffered the shoa, and sought a homeland of their own, understandably enough.  They invaded, by the hundreds of thousands, Palestine.  Their founding act arguably was what is known as nakba, the murder, rape, expropriation and expulsion of at least two thirds of the indigenous population.
> 
> That, to this day, is the ugly, original sin baked right into the foundation of the State of Israel, which has to remain unmentioned.  That is what necessitates all the lying and the hypocrisy about self-determination, all the bad conscience that poisons any and all debates about the matter.
> 
> Now, Israel is seemingly to complete the genocide of 1948, officially declaring itself an apartheid state, and Arabs not equal before the law, which, of course, it was right from the start.  Israel has been getting away with its murderous apartheid brutality for so long, so the current leadership apparently has decided it's time to close the 70-years old deal they've made with the devil, calculating they could get away with that, too.
> 
> Among the many saddening developments of recent years, this one still stands out.



You can't invade your own homeland.  That is called return.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Olde Europe said:


> The Jews in Europe suffered the shoa, and sought a homeland of their own, understandably enough.  They invaded, by the hundreds of thousands, Palestine.  Their founding act arguably was what is known as nakba, the murder, rape, expropriation and expulsion of at least two thirds of the indigenous population.
> 
> That, to this day, is the ugly, original sin baked right into the foundation of the State of Israel, which has to remain unmentioned.  That is what necessitates all the lying and the hypocrisy about self-determination, all the bad conscience that poisons any and all debates about the matter.
> 
> Now, Israel is seemingly to complete the genocide of 1948, officially declaring itself an apartheid state, and Arabs not equal before the law, which, of course, it was right from the start.  Israel has been getting away with its murderous apartheid brutality for so long, so the current leadership apparently has decided it's time to close the 70-years old deal they've made with the devil, calculating they could get away with that, too.
> 
> Among the many saddening developments of recent years, this one still stands out.


Sure, and the homeland the Jewish people sought had nothing to do with their ancestral homeland, where they have become sovereign over ONLY 20% of it, and having to defend that 20% from the invading Arabs who want the whole area to belong to Muslims and Muslims only.

Just as it did when the Ottoman Turkish Muslims had the area for 700 years.

Thank you for you History lesson.  NOT.

And thank you for being ignorant as to what self-determination means, and what rights non-Jews always had, and continue to have in Israel.

The G-D of Abraham is the devil?

Such a extreme view, would you not say?


----------



## Shusha

BlackFlag said:


> In my country, minority groups are not rising up in revolution and risking their lives to fight a perceived oppressor.



Um.  So you are NOT American?

But you dodged my question.  Why is a declaration of self-determination (independence) a provocation?


----------



## fncceo

BlackFlag said:


> but I might die in a terrorist attack tomorrow


----------



## BlackFlag

Shusha said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> In my country, minority groups are not rising up in revolution and risking their lives to fight a perceived oppressor.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Um.  So you are NOT American?
> 
> But you dodged my question.  Why is a declaration of self-determination (independence) a provocation?
Click to expand...

Yes, I am American.  Your declaration is a provocation because its purpose is to communicate to minority groups that they cannot be equal.


----------



## rylah

BlackFlag said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> Lots of hold ups, and little significant action or concessions.  Which has led me to believe there is no serious movement for peace on either side; just movements for victory.  I don’t really care which happens, but I don’t have any say.  So when I see something like this declaration, which was a totally unnecessary provocation, I will comment on it.  I will also maintain that the U.S. has nothing to gain from inserting itself.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How is a declaration of self-determination a "provocation"?  Contrasted with violent attempts to cross the border and murder Israelis?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In my country, minority groups are not rising up in revolution and risking their lives to fight a perceived oppressor.  That is a problem for you to solve, and for me to convince my country to leave it alone.
Click to expand...


Are there countries where minorities don't rise for revolution?


----------



## BlackFlag

rylah said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> Lots of hold ups, and little significant action or concessions.  Which has led me to believe there is no serious movement for peace on either side; just movements for victory.  I don’t really care which happens, but I don’t have any say.  So when I see something like this declaration, which was a totally unnecessary provocation, I will comment on it.  I will also maintain that the U.S. has nothing to gain from inserting itself.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How is a declaration of self-determination a "provocation"?  Contrasted with violent attempts to cross the border and murder Israelis?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In my country, minority groups are not rising up in revolution and risking their lives to fight a perceived oppressor.  That is a problem for you to solve, and for me to convince my country to leave it alone.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Are there countries where minorities don't rise for revolution?
Click to expand...

Yes.  The umbrella term for them is the “first world” countries.


----------



## Shusha

BlackFlag said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> In my country, minority groups are not rising up in revolution and risking their lives to fight a perceived oppressor.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Um.  So you are NOT American?
> 
> But you dodged my question.  Why is a declaration of self-determination (independence) a provocation?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes, I am American.  Your declaration is a provocation because its purpose is to communicate to minority groups that they cannot be equal.
Click to expand...


No.  There is nothing in the declaration about people not being equal.  

You and I ordered a pizza and we are going to share it.  If I declare this half of the pizza is mine -- that is no provocation.


----------



## rylah

BlackFlag said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> In my country, minority groups are not rising up in revolution and risking their lives to fight a perceived oppressor.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Um.  So you are NOT American?
> 
> But you dodged my question.  Why is a declaration of self-determination (independence) a provocation?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes, I am American.  Your declaration is a provocation because its purpose is to communicate to minority groups that they cannot be equal.
Click to expand...


It's the right of every minority group to raise their issues in a democratic manner.


----------



## rylah

BlackFlag said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> 
> and, of course, they never identified as anything but Arab until encouraged to do so for propaganda purposes in the middle part of the 20th century.
> 
> 
> Now, I don't expect the mental midget antisemites in this thread to acknowledge that as facts can't be allowed to get in the way of some good, old ethnic hatred, but a fact it is nevertheless.
> 
> 
> 
> Doesn’t matter if they call themselves Arabs or Christians or anything else.  They are a secondary class in a theocracy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They are not in a theocracy,  mental midget. They are living in a state established as the home for a persecuted ethnic minority.
> 
> It is low functioning creeps like you who prove the need for such.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Of course it’s a theocracy.  They deny equal status to non-Jews, and just put out an edict that reaffirms that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Stop reading fiction and you will get to the truth.
> 
> Your "Of course" does not hold water anywhere in Israel, with anyone who is non Jewish.
> 
> The non Jews in Israel know better about their rights in Israel than you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Israel is a country that denies citizenship to non-Jews, and just classified non-Jews as secondary citizens.  So OF COURSE it is a theocracy.
Click to expand...


False, Israeli law is specifically clear on the procedure of naturalization for anyone. it's called "Adults" in legal term. And at least 20% of Israeli citizens are not Jews.


----------



## Bleipriester

rylah said:


> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> 
> Update:
> An important part of the law was rejected, among the opponents was President Rivlin.
> The law was about to allow municipalities to reject non-Jewish residents.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The clause would _allow for communities, including "of a single religion or a single nationality", to build separate towns._
> http://www.iataskforce.org/sites/default/files/resource/resource-1586.pdf
> 
> This includes Arab municipalities.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So it will be re-considered?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You already answered that. Look at the post I'm responding.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I don´t understand.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You already confirmed that the clause was rejected.
> The law was passed with a pragraph of immutability.
Click to expand...

Your PDF reads:

"The bill does include a clause allowing communities, including "of a single religion or a single
nationality", to build separate towns, but the explanation notes to the bill state that this clause
will be reexamined when the bill is prepared for second and third reading." 

So I asked if it will be re-considered later.


----------



## Bleipriester

Shusha said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> In my country, minority groups are not rising up in revolution and risking their lives to fight a perceived oppressor.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Um.  So you are NOT American?
> 
> But you dodged my question.  Why is a declaration of self-determination (independence) a provocation?
Click to expand...

I don´t see a problem either. If Israel can´t be the Jewish home, what then?


----------



## Shusha

Bleipriester said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> The clause would _allow for communities, including "of a single religion or a single nationality", to build separate towns._
> http://www.iataskforce.org/sites/default/files/resource/resource-1586.pdf
> 
> This includes Arab municipalities.
> 
> 
> 
> So it will be re-considered?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You already answered that. Look at the post I'm responding.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I don´t understand.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You already confirmed that the clause was rejected.
> The law was passed with a pragraph of immutability.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Your PDF reads:
> 
> "The bill does include a clause allowing communities, including "of a single religion or a single
> nationality", to build separate towns, but the explanation notes to the bill state that this clause
> will be reexamined when the bill is prepared for second and third reading."
> 
> So I asked if it will be re-considered later.
Click to expand...



It was removed.


----------



## Shusha

Bleipriester said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> In my country, minority groups are not rising up in revolution and risking their lives to fight a perceived oppressor.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Um.  So you are NOT American?
> 
> But you dodged my question.  Why is a declaration of self-determination (independence) a provocation?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I don´t see a problem either. If Israel can´t be the Jewish home, what then?
Click to expand...


Israel IS the Jewish home.  The only way it "can't" be the Jewish home is if people deny history, reality and basic facts.


----------



## Bleipriester

Shusha said:


> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> 
> So it will be re-considered?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You already answered that. Look at the post I'm responding.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I don´t understand.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You already confirmed that the clause was rejected.
> The law was passed with a pragraph of immutability.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Your PDF reads:
> 
> "The bill does include a clause allowing communities, including "of a single religion or a single
> nationality", to build separate towns, but the explanation notes to the bill state that this clause
> will be reexamined when the bill is prepared for second and third reading."
> 
> So I asked if it will be re-considered later.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> It was removed.
Click to expand...

Yes, I know. So you mean that this third reading is already done?


----------



## rylah

BlackFlag said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MJB12741 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Stop reading fiction and you will get to the truth.
> 
> Your "Of course" does not hold water anywhere in Israel, with anyone who is non Jewish.
> 
> The non Jews in Israel know better about their rights in Israel than you.
> 
> 
> 
> Israel is a country that denies citizenship to non-Jews, and just classified non-Jews as secondary citizens.  So OF COURSE it is a theocracy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How do ya like that?  And here I actually believed Israel is the only country in all of the Middle East with citizens of several living faiths including Arab Muslims who even have equal voting rights in the Israeli Knesset.  Amazing what we can learn here from America's & Israel's enemies.
> 
> Arab citizens of Israel - Wikipedia
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They do not have the same rights.  What is the process for a family member of theirs to move to Israel vs. a Jew?  Has the theocratic government declared Jews have no right to self determination?  Don’t feel too embarrassed by the answers.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why in the world would Israel allow all the Arabs in the world to move into Israel when the Arab world's intent is to destroy Israel from the inside as well as the outside?
> 
> What in the world do you think the expulsion of Jews from the Arab conquered lands in 1951 was all about?
> Making Jews happy that they could finally go to Israel?
> No !
> It was about destroying Israel economically.
> 
> So, if Israel were to allow all the descendants of Arabs who tried to kill Jews and destroy Israel back in 1948, what would happen to Israel?
> What is the Arab intent?
> 
> The rights of the Arab refugees, who are not really refugees, or the destruction of Israel by any possible means?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Israel does not allow anybody into the country, not just the Arabs they kicked out and are still trying to kick out.
Click to expand...


No country allows "anybody" in their country.
Israeli law states clearly that Jews who are potentially dangerous to society cannot become citizens.


----------



## BlackFlag

Shusha said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> In my country, minority groups are not rising up in revolution and risking their lives to fight a perceived oppressor.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Um.  So you are NOT American?
> 
> But you dodged my question.  Why is a declaration of self-determination (independence) a provocation?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes, I am American.  Your declaration is a provocation because its purpose is to communicate to minority groups that they cannot be equal.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No.  There is nothing in the declaration about people not being equal.
> 
> You and I ordered a pizza and we are going to share it.  If I declare this half of the pizza is mine -- that is no provocation.
Click to expand...

You and I ordered a pizza, and you declared I can’t pick any of the toppings now or ever, and pizza’s from other places are not allowed.  You gave me half the pizza to try to shut me up, but keep taking bites and knock me unconscious whenever I swat your hand away.  Also, as much as you do, I believe the pizza belongs to me.  How fun.


----------



## rylah

BlackFlag said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why in the world would Israel allow all the Arabs in the world to move into Israel when the Arab world's intent is to destroy Israel from the inside as well as the outside?
> 
> What in the world do you think the expulsion of Jews from the Arab conquered lands in 1951 was all about?
> Making Jews happy that they could finally go to Israel?
> No !
> It was about destroying Israel economically.
> 
> So, if Israel were to allow all the descendants of Arabs who tried to kill Jews and destroy Israel back in 1948, what would happen to Israel?
> What is the Arab intent?
> 
> The rights of the Arab refugees, who are not really refugees, or the destruction of Israel by any possible means?
> 
> 
> 
> Israel does not allow anybody into the country, not just the Arabs they kicked out and are still trying to kick out.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Another one of your lies.
> 
> Israel will definitely attempt to "kick out" any Arab or Muslim who perpetrates any act of terrorism in Israel.  All countries do it.
> 
> You are truly ill informed about Israel and what happens there.  Who comes, who stays, who is allowed to stay.
> 
> Think most asylum seekers in Israel are African? Try Ukrainian
> 
> 
> More.  Give me more of what you read in your "We hate Israel" sites
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Again, you abandon the conversation because you have no argument.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> "I" abandoned the conversation !!!!
> 
> I will wait for all of your evidence to what you were alleging. I have seen none so far.
> 
> Links, please, to all the allegations you insist we are not discussing and have abandoned.
> 
> Evidence.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It is an open fact that the process of becoming a citizen in Israel is prohibitive unless you are of the Jewish faith.  You cannot refute that.  Also, the entire topic of this thread is about how the theocratic Israeli government declared that onlish Jewish followers have a right of self determination in Israel.  They have no interest in a peace process with non-Jews, and the U.S. should abandon them to their fate whether it is a good one or a bad one.
Click to expand...


----------



## RoccoR

RE:  Now it's a basic law: The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people
※→ Shusha, BlackFlag, et al,

The pro-Israeli element here, including our friend "Shusha," has consistently stated the concepts that all peoples, have the right to self-determination; just not at the expense of the Jewish People. 

And I believe that the general consensus is that it would apply as well to those under colonial, foreign and alien powers administering effective control.



Shusha said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> That is akin to the United States, instead of passing the civil rights act in the 60’s, had declared that black people will not have equal rights.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wait?!  Are you saying that POC as a defined cultural group in the US should have the right to self-determination and sovereignty in the US?  If so -- I agree wholeheartedly.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You have been arguing the opposite for this entire thread.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> WTF?  No, I have not.  I have consistently been arguing for the rights to self-determination by ALL peoples.
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

The basis argument which throws a wrench in the gears is that Israel is allowed to defend their right to self-determination, as a minority people surrounded by the military and political influences of the majority of the Arab Regional Representation which is trying so desperately to twist the international consensus to believe that they are the victims.  

It is also important to understand that Israel _(less than 9 million people)_ has the right to self-determination and the right to determine their own fate, even as they defend themselves in the face of Hostile Arab military and political intervention, aggression, and attempt at exploitation by four border states comprised of 124 million people (plus)_(not including the other 18 Arab League nations)_.

One final point.  Each time that Hostile Arab Component attempts to coerce or threaten Israel through acts of military intimidation or actual of aggression, the Arab Palestinian must be prepared to accept the consequences; including loss of territorial control. 


Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Shusha

BlackFlag said:


> You and I ordered a pizza, and you declared I can’t pick any of the toppings now or ever, and pizza’s from other places are not allowed.  You gave me half the pizza to try to shut me up, but keep taking bites and knock me unconscious whenever I swat your hand away.  Also, as much as you do, I believe the pizza belongs to me.  How fun.



The Basic Law we are discussing does not say anything about toppings.  At all.  But the principles of self-determination say that you get to pick your toppings and I get to pick my toppings.  

My declaration that this is my half (with my toppings) is only a provocation if you think you should get the whole pizza.  Otherwise, reasonable people would say that sharing the pie is the normal way of it.  Just like all those other countries that split the pizza into pieces.


----------



## Bleipriester

Shusha said:


> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> In my country, minority groups are not rising up in revolution and risking their lives to fight a perceived oppressor.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Um.  So you are NOT American?
> 
> But you dodged my question.  Why is a declaration of self-determination (independence) a provocation?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I don´t see a problem either. If Israel can´t be the Jewish home, what then?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Israel IS the Jewish home.  The only way it "can't" be the Jewish home is if people deny history, reality and basic facts.
Click to expand...

It´s only because those people would use any argument against Israel, no matter how silly it is. And when you have criticism, you will be in their corner.


----------



## rylah

BlackFlag said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Another one of your lies.
> 
> Israel will definitely attempt to "kick out" any Arab or Muslim who perpetrates any act of terrorism in Israel.  All countries do it.
> 
> You are truly ill informed about Israel and what happens there.  Who comes, who stays, who is allowed to stay.
> 
> Think most asylum seekers in Israel are African? Try Ukrainian
> 
> 
> More.  Give me more of what you read in your "We hate Israel" sites
> 
> 
> 
> Again, you abandon the conversation because you have no argument.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> "I" abandoned the conversation !!!!
> 
> I will wait for all of your evidence to what you were alleging. I have seen none so far.
> 
> Links, please, to all the allegations you insist we are not discussing and have abandoned.
> 
> Evidence.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It is an open fact that the process of becoming a citizen in Israel is prohibitive unless you are of the Jewish faith.  You cannot refute that.  Also, the entire topic of this thread is about how the theocratic Israeli government declared that onlish Jewish followers have a right of self determination in Israel.  They have no interest in a peace process with non-Jews, and the U.S. should abandon them to their fate whether it is a good one or a bad one.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 1)  Debunked
> 
> Jerusalem Palestinians still seek Israeli citizenship despite Trump declaration
> 
> More Palestinians in Jerusalem seek Israeli citizenship
> 
> 2) Debunked.
> 
> Herzl was not a religion Jew.  None of the founders was a religious Theocrat.  None of the Presidents or Prime Ministers of Israel have been Theocrats.  Theocrats do not run the State of Israel.
> 
> Secularism in Israel - Wikipedia
> 
> 3)  You are too ignorant to understand the meaning of the expression
> Self-Determination when it comes to the indigenous people of anywhere in the world. And you do it on purpose.
> 
> 4)  Debunked
> Israel has a Peace Treaty with two of its Arab neighbors.  Egypt and Jordan.  You clearly do not care how those Peace Treaties came about.
> You clearly do not know or care what the charters of the PLO, Hamas and Fatah say about negotiating peace with Israel, much less with Jews.
> 
> 5)  With the US help, or without, Israel would strive, as it is now.
> It is not money which matters but what is done with it.
> 
> Arabs choose terrorism.
> 
> Jews choose progress.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nothing was debunked in that post.  In fact, you did not address either point I made except to say that indigenous people have a right to self-determination, except that by Israel’s reasoning all people of Abrahamic faith can claim to be indigenous to Israel; of course they passed a law saying that only those of the Jewish faith have any right to self determination.
Click to expand...


Secular Jews and their house, including Jewish family members of other faiths or non-Jews are eligible to Israeli citizenship, how do You explain that?


----------



## rylah

BlackFlag said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> The bloodstain is from the millennia of conquest and invasion of land which is the homeland of the Jewish people and the usurption of Jewish history as their own.
> 
> 
> 
> The other 2 Abrahamic religions claimed the same argument in favor of their own beliefs when it was their turn to spill blood in that cursed land.
Click to expand...


Did they claim there was a Christian ethnicity or Muslim one?
They claimed the whole world. That's exactly the opposite of the Jewish claim for their national homeland


----------



## Indeependent

Sixties Fan said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> Genesis is a total fabrication.  Other monotheistic religions existed before Judaism, they are just copying them.
> 
> 
> 
> The myths of ALL tribes/Nations on the planet are filled with historical truths and myths.
> 
> ONLY the Jewish Nation is attacked and there are endless allegations as to its "impossible " history, how the Jewish people, religion, culture, etc came to be.
> 
> Do it to ALL, and not just to the Jewish People.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Lots of nations are attacked.  What a colossally stupid thing of you to say.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Name the current countries which are being attacked as to their validity to exist.
> 
> Or to the rights of its indigenous people being sovereign of any part of their ancient homeland.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Off the top of my head, Catalonia and Tibet.  There are many others but I’m not sure how to look it up.  As for countries that were attacked in the last hundred years alone, too many to name.
> 
> Oh... and Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Palestine was never a country.  A Nation, or anything else but the name of a region, given by the Romans after they defeated the JEWS
> in 135 CE.
> 
> Catalonia was never a country.  It wants Independence from Spain, which is different.
> 
> Tibet is a country conquered by the Chinese.  But the Tibetans are not being denied their sovereign or indigenous rights to Tibet.
Click to expand...

China is taking over the Eastern hemisphere and these idiots are worried sick over Israel and Russia.


----------



## rylah

BlackFlag said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> Israel is a country that denies citizenship to non-Jews, and just classified non-Jews as secondary citizens.  So OF COURSE it is a theocracy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Basic Law does no such thing.  You are spreading blatantly false information.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> How does this happen, when the law says no such thing? A Holocaust survivor's daughter faces Israeli deportation over claims her father became Christian
Click to expand...


An organized case of political provocation.
Tourist visa is not a way to citizenship, it sets many alarms due to common attempt like in any country. In such cases straightforwardness plays a crucial part in the analysis of the application.
Messianic Jews immigrate as non-Jewish relatives of Jews.
Straightforward Christians do too.


----------



## rylah

Circe said:


> Good for the Israelis. How I wish we would do something like that here.



May I ask where are You from?


----------



## rylah

BlackFlag said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> Jews conquered the indigenous residents of Israel long ago.  I wonder if their descendants claim ownership of the land.
> 
> 
> 
> You would be very, very hard pressed to find a culture in that territory which is distinct from and pre-existing the Jewish culture.  All archaeological findings seem to indicate that the Jewish culture developed from within preceding cultures.  That said, if you find me some descendants of some ancient culture still practicing that culture, they have every right to claim indigenous status on that land.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The worst mistake of the 20th century was the 1st world determining that the land that is now Israel should be taken and given to foreigners, and to expel the indigenous people there.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> But you've reversed which were the foreigners and which are the indigenous peoples.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Christian culture developed from Jewish culture.  You have now argued that Christians are indigenous to Israel.  What did Islamic culture grow out of?  Uh oh...
Click to expand...


There is no such thing as Christian ethnicity or nation.
Their claim to indigenous rights goes through Jews.

And You're back to square one.


----------



## rylah

BlackFlag said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> Christian culture developed from Jewish culture.  You have now argued that Christians are indigenous to Israel.  What did Islamic culture grow out of?  Uh oh...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You clearly do not understand the meaning of "culture" and how it relates to indigeneity.  Stealing another culture's religious stories does not give one a culture nor make one indigenous.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> One culture evolved out of another, and one evolved from that one, but my arbitrary rules say only the one I like can claim indigeneity.
Click to expand...


Indigenous culture is fundamentally distinct from preceding cultures in scope and originality.
It's when the connection between a people and land become common heritage of most nations, as is the case with the Jewish nation indigenous to Israel.


----------



## rylah

BlackFlag said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> You clearly do not understand the meaning of "culture" and how it relates to indigeneity.  Stealing another culture's religious stories does not give one a culture nor make one indigenous.
> 
> 
> 
> One culture evolved out of another, and one evolved from that one, but my arbitrary rules say only the one I like can claim indigeneity.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Not so.  Christianity and Islam did not evolve out of Judaism.  They developed as counter-arguments and replacement arguments to Jewish religious beliefs, in opposition to them and in other parts of the world.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What country is Christianity indigenous to?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The question should be:
> Where did Christianity originated?
> 
> Which is different from saying the word Indigenous.
> 
> Paul of Tarsus, who founded Christianity, was definitely NOT indigenous from the Land of Israel/Judea.
> 
> Many who followed him, as he went all around the Roman world, were also not Indigenous to the Land of Israel/Judea.
> 
> The number of Jews following in Paul's teachings of Jesus, was not a great one.  Most remained Jewish and continued to follow Judaism.
> 
> That included Jesus and his followers themselves.  They remained Jewish.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Christianity originated in Israel.    That is not a question.
Click to expand...


Original christians were a Jewish sect, they circumcised and kept the Jewish law.
It ceased to have all connection to the Jewish tribe when Rome took it over and made it into the exact opposite of Jewish heritage.


----------



## rylah

BlackFlag said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> Christians would unanimously beg to differ.  You really shouldn’t bite the hand that feeds.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Christianity is not a culture.  Christianity is part of other cultures.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So is Judaism.
Click to expand...

Half the world are Christians...
Judaism is a small family with a distinct identity.


----------



## rylah

BlackFlag said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Christianity is not a culture.  Christianity is part of other cultures.
> 
> 
> 
> So is Judaism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Judaism is the religious aspect of the Jewish culture.  Jewish culture is much more than just the religious faith.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Same with Christianity.  You are changing your definition of culture to suit your steaming heap of horseshit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It is you who has an inconsistent argument.  Christianity is a religion.  Judaism is a religion.  Islam is a religion.  None of these religions form a culture of themselves.  But they are part of what defines a culture.  Christianity is part of Roman (Italian) culture.  Christianity is part of Latin American culture.  Christianity is part of Greek culture.  Islam is part of Arab culture.  Judaism is part of Jewish culture.
> 
> Do you need a Venn diagram?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Jewish culture in New York is different from Jewish culture in Bethelhem.  But they share the same rituals and beliefs, thus linking their cultures.  You have a different definition of culture for Judaism than for other religions.  You are not unique.  Your perceptions about your religion are not unique.  Christians and Muslims and Taoists and Hindu’s will all tell you that their religions are part of their cultures.
Click to expand...


Jew are an ethno-religious group.
There're secular Jews, Taoist Jews...although the Taoist would argue he was merely a cat in the flow until the question of his existence arose.


----------



## rylah

BlackFlag said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> Jewish culture in New York is different from Jewish culture in Bethelhem.  But they share the same rituals and beliefs, thus linking their cultures.  You have a different definition of culture for Judaism than for other religions.  You are not unique.  Your perceptions about your religion are not unique.  Christians and Muslims and Taoists and Hindu’s will all tell you that their religions are part of their cultures.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Judaism is part of Jewish culture.  That is entirely my point.  It is the exact same definition I hold for other religions.  The religion is part of the culture.  It is YOU who are denying that religion is only a small part of the Jewish culture.  Jewish culture also encompasses all the other aspects I have already mentioned.  That is what makes Jewish culture indigenous to that particular place.  Not the religion.  The broader culture.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Jewish rituals are no more special than other religions’ rituals.  I consider that a profoundly stupid argument.  So move on.
Click to expand...


'Distinct' is the word You're looking for, and yes they are.
Hebrew for example is the only Canaanite language that preserved.


----------



## rylah

BlackFlag said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your argument about conflict rising from Jewish self-determination can easily be thrown back in your face as rising from Palestinian self-determination.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So, to be clear, you support the Jewish people's self-determination as a nation, yes?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not as long as my country has to suffer for it.    So get your shit together.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Do you or do you not believe fundamentally, objectively in the right of peoples to self-determination, including the Jewish people?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nobody has ever had an objective right to self determination.  The people doing the self determining are the ones who eliminated the others in the vicinity who were trying to self determine.  So your people happened to be in or around Israel thousands of years ago the day enough of them became convinced to believe in a bunch of magic.  That is not special.
Click to expand...

Small correction there,
Not thousands of years *ago*, but *for *thousands of years.


----------



## rylah

BlackFlag said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag
> 
> The reason I ask about your stand on self-determination, is that your entrance into this thread was to claim that the declaration of self-determination is an obstacle to peace.  And I reject that idea.  On the contrary, the acceptance of self-determination for BOTH peoples is essential to peace.  It is the core of peace.
> 
> Now it seems from your last two posts that you reject the idea of rights to self-determination by either side. And presumably that right for all other peoples as well.
> 
> Your point on this thread, then, is to remove the US (at least, I assume you are American) from the Arab/Israeli conflict because that conflict hurts you and the US?
> 
> 
> 
> You have 2 sides that believe they have a right to self-determination.  The heart of the peace process is reconciling those 2 beliefs.  The government that is in power and holds the cards just said that 1 of those groups now officially has no right to self-determination in the country.  That is akin to the United States, instead of passing the civil rights act in the 60’s, had declared that black people will not have equal rights.
Click to expand...


No, a relative comparison would be a declaration by the Arab empire that Israel/Judea is the homeland of the Jewish people.


----------



## rylah

BlackFlag said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> Lots of hold ups, and little significant action or concessions.  Which has led me to believe there is no serious movement for peace on either side; just movements for victory.  I don’t really care which happens, but I don’t have any say.  So when I see something like this declaration, which was a totally unnecessary provocation, I will comment on it.  I will also maintain that the U.S. has nothing to gain from inserting itself.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How is a declaration of self-determination a "provocation"?  Contrasted with violent attempts to cross the border and murder Israelis?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In my country, minority groups are not rising up in revolution and risking their lives to fight a perceived oppressor.  That is a problem for you to solve, and for me to convince my country to leave it alone.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Are there countries where minorities don't rise for revolution?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes.  The umbrella term for them is the “first world” countries.
Click to expand...


Should we call the US a 3rd world country then?
Minorities do call for an Intifada and Jihad against the WH.


----------



## rylah

Bleipriester said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> The clause would _allow for communities, including "of a single religion or a single nationality", to build separate towns._
> http://www.iataskforce.org/sites/default/files/resource/resource-1586.pdf
> 
> This includes Arab municipalities.
> 
> 
> 
> So it will be re-considered?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You already answered that. Look at the post I'm responding.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I don´t understand.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You already confirmed that the clause was rejected.
> The law was passed with a pragraph of immutability.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Your PDF reads:
> 
> "The bill does include a clause allowing communities, including "of a single religion or a single
> nationality", to build separate towns, but the explanation notes to the bill state that this clause
> will be reexamined when the bill is prepared for second and third reading."
> 
> So I asked if it will be re-considered later.
Click to expand...


Bleipriester 
The clause said it would be reexamined,
It already passed the 2nd and 3rd readings and wasn't included.


----------



## montelatici

Should the U.S. declare itself the Christian state, or maybe the EU should declare itself Christian too and reserve self-determination to Christians only.  Would U.S. or European Jews be offended?


----------



## Preacher

montelatici said:


> Should the U.S. declare itself the Christian state, or maybe the EU should declare itself Christian too and reserve self-determination to Christians only.  Would U.S. or European Jews be offended?


Oh you know Jews would be offended as would the world...Jews just have to whine about anti semitism to shut people up and it works usually.


----------



## montelatici

*"Presbyterian Church calls Israel ‘apartheid state’"*

*Scots and Scot-Irish Protestants have taken a big step. *

*US Presbyterian Church calls Israel 'apartheid state'*


----------



## waltky

Granny says, "Dat's right - dat's the land God gave the Jews."

*‘This is our country. This is our language’: Controversial law deems Israel homeland of the Jewish people*
_Jul 19, 2018 - A controversial new law enacted overnight by Israel's parliament has again stirred deep emotions about the identity of the nation. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu praised the new law for enshrining the basic principle of Israel's existence -- that it is the national state of the Jewish people. But critics called it cruel, fearing what it means for the Arab minority._

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/t...-israel-homeland-of-the-jewish-people


----------



## Coyote

Interesting and disturbing.  I guess this doesn’t bode well for the Arab Israeli citizens down the road.  I wonder if they will allowed into the Jewish settlements being promoted?

_According to the Haaretz, "The [nation-state] law also includes clauses stating that a 'united Jerusalem' is the capital of Israel and that Hebrew is the country's official language. Another says that 'the state *sees the development of Jewish settlement as a national value and will act to encourage and promote its establishment and consolidation.*'"

The law further *rescinds Arabic as an official language,* downgrading it to a "special status."

Reuters notes, "Early drafts of the legislation went further in what critics at home and abroad saw as discrimination toward Israel's Arabs, who have long said they are treated as second-class citizens."

The news agency says, "Clauses that were dropped in last-minute political wrangling - and after objections by Israel's president and attorney-general - *would have enshrined in law the establishment of Jewish-only communities, and instructed courts to rule according to Jewish ritual law when there were no relevant legal precedents*."_​


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL

Odium said:


> Israel Passes Controversial Law Reserving National Self-Determination For Jews
> 
> As usual Jewish hypocrisy,force and push invasion and integration on White America but make sure the Jewish people have segregation and closed borders.



Tell us please how the Jewish people are pushing “ invasion” ( I suppose you mean illegal immigration) and integration on White America


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL

montelatici said:


> Should the U.S. declare itself the Christian state, or maybe the EU should declare itself Christian too and reserve self-determination to Christians only.  Would U.S. or European Jews be offended?



Another Hypocrite. Tell us why there are recognized Arab or Muslim States. Better yet, tell us why Abbas has stated No Israelis allowed in “ Palestine” Thete will not be a response; there never is


----------



## Preacher

ILOVEISRAEL said:


> Odium said:
> 
> 
> 
> Israel Passes Controversial Law Reserving National Self-Determination For Jews
> 
> As usual Jewish hypocrisy,force and push invasion and integration on White America but make sure the Jewish people have segregation and closed borders.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tell us please how the Jewish people are pushing “ invasion” ( I suppose you mean illegal immigration) and integration on White America
Click to expand...

Like you care. I won't bother. I have gone over it before...the short answer is the 1965 immigration act go look who was BEHIND it not who was the face of it. Jewish senators,Congressman and Jewish groups ALL pushed it and lied about it. You don't care so I don't care if you don't like the truth.


----------



## Coyote

Odium said:


> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Odium said:
> 
> 
> 
> Israel Passes Controversial Law Reserving National Self-Determination For Jews
> 
> As usual Jewish hypocrisy,force and push invasion and integration on White America but make sure the Jewish people have segregation and closed borders.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tell us please how the Jewish people are pushing “ invasion” ( I suppose you mean illegal immigration) and integration on White America
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Like you care. I won't bother. I have gone over it before...the short answer is the 1965 immigration act go look who was BEHIND it not who was the face of it. Jewish senators,Congressman and Jewish groups ALL pushed it and lied about it. You don't care so I don't care if you don't like the truth.
Click to expand...

 That is just nuts.


----------



## Preacher

Coyote said:


> Odium said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Odium said:
> 
> 
> 
> Israel Passes Controversial Law Reserving National Self-Determination For Jews
> 
> As usual Jewish hypocrisy,force and push invasion and integration on White America but make sure the Jewish people have segregation and closed borders.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tell us please how the Jewish people are pushing “ invasion” ( I suppose you mean illegal immigration) and integration on White America
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Like you care. I won't bother. I have gone over it before...the short answer is the 1965 immigration act go look who was BEHIND it not who was the face of it. Jewish senators,Congressman and Jewish groups ALL pushed it and lied about it. You don't care so I don't care if you don't like the truth.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That is just nuts.
Click to expand...

Did you go look? I just don't feel like sharing the information again...I have done it SEVERAL times here..its easy to find.
Just like they do in Europe


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL

Odium said:


> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Odium said:
> 
> 
> 
> Israel Passes Controversial Law Reserving National Self-Determination For Jews
> 
> As usual Jewish hypocrisy,force and push invasion and integration on White America but make sure the Jewish people have segregation and closed borders.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tell us please how the Jewish people are pushing “ invasion” ( I suppose you mean illegal immigration) and integration on White America
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Like you care. I won't bother. I have gone over it before...the short answer is the 1965 immigration act go look who was BEHIND it not who was the face of it. Jewish senators,Congressman and Jewish groups ALL pushed it and lied about it. You don't care so I don't care if you don't like the truth.
Click to expand...


You’re the one who doesn’t like the truth. The majority of the Senators and Congressmen were not Jewish. One small example is Ted Kennedy


----------



## Preacher

ILOVEISRAEL said:


> Odium said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Odium said:
> 
> 
> 
> Israel Passes Controversial Law Reserving National Self-Determination For Jews
> 
> As usual Jewish hypocrisy,force and push invasion and integration on White America but make sure the Jewish people have segregation and closed borders.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tell us please how the Jewish people are pushing “ invasion” ( I suppose you mean illegal immigration) and integration on White America
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Like you care. I won't bother. I have gone over it before...the short answer is the 1965 immigration act go look who was BEHIND it not who was the face of it. Jewish senators,Congressman and Jewish groups ALL pushed it and lied about it. You don't care so I don't care if you don't like the truth.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You’re the one who doesn’t like the truth. The majority of the Senators and Congressmen were not Jewish. One small example is Ted Kennedy
Click to expand...

I said BEHIND the scenes NOT the face of it who yes was Kennedy...BEHIND the scenes as I said were Jews.

The Jewish Conspiracy Behind The 1965 Open Immigration Law! | Real Jew News
Jewish Organizations Had a Role in 1965 Act

Even Wall Street Journal admits it

Ted Kennedy was not responsible for the Immigration Act of 1965 – The Occidental Observer


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL

Odium said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Odium said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Odium said:
> 
> 
> 
> Israel Passes Controversial Law Reserving National Self-Determination For Jews
> 
> As usual Jewish hypocrisy,force and push invasion and integration on White America but make sure the Jewish people have segregation and closed borders.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tell us please how the Jewish people are pushing “ invasion” ( I suppose you mean illegal immigration) and integration on White America
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Like you care. I won't bother. I have gone over it before...the short answer is the 1965 immigration act go look who was BEHIND it not who was the face of it. Jewish senators,Congressman and Jewish groups ALL pushed it and lied about it. You don't care so I don't care if you don't like the truth.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That is just nuts.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Did you go look? I just don't feel like sharing the information again...I have done it SEVERAL times here..its easy to find.
> Just like they do in Europe
> View attachment 206016
Click to expand...


What does your “ info” have to do with the U.S?


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL

Odium said:


> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Odium said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Odium said:
> 
> 
> 
> Israel Passes Controversial Law Reserving National Self-Determination For Jews
> 
> As usual Jewish hypocrisy,force and push invasion and integration on White America but make sure the Jewish people have segregation and closed borders.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tell us please how the Jewish people are pushing “ invasion” ( I suppose you mean illegal immigration) and integration on White America
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Like you care. I won't bother. I have gone over it before...the short answer is the 1965 immigration act go look who was BEHIND it not who was the face of it. Jewish senators,Congressman and Jewish groups ALL pushed it and lied about it. You don't care so I don't care if you don't like the truth.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You’re the one who doesn’t like the truth. The majority of the Senators and Congressmen were not Jewish. One small example is Ted Kennedy
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I said BEHIND the scenes NOT the face of it who yes was Kennedy...BEHIND the scenes as I said were Jews.
> 
> The Jewish Conspiracy Behind The 1965 Open Immigration Law! | Real Jew News
> Jewish Organizations Had a Role in 1965 Act
> 
> Even Wall Street Journal admits it
> 
> Ted Kennedy was not responsible for the Immigration Act of 1965 – The Occidental Observer
Click to expand...


Your link expresses nothing but hate and racism , calling the Jewish people “ Christ Killers”.   Consider the source


----------



## Preacher

ILOVEISRAEL said:


> Odium said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Odium said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Odium said:
> 
> 
> 
> Israel Passes Controversial Law Reserving National Self-Determination For Jews
> 
> As usual Jewish hypocrisy,force and push invasion and integration on White America but make sure the Jewish people have segregation and closed borders.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tell us please how the Jewish people are pushing “ invasion” ( I suppose you mean illegal immigration) and integration on White America
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Like you care. I won't bother. I have gone over it before...the short answer is the 1965 immigration act go look who was BEHIND it not who was the face of it. Jewish senators,Congressman and Jewish groups ALL pushed it and lied about it. You don't care so I don't care if you don't like the truth.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That is just nuts.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Did you go look? I just don't feel like sharing the information again...I have done it SEVERAL times here..its easy to find.
> Just like they do in Europe
> View attachment 206016
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What does your “ info” have to do with the U.S?
Click to expand...

I said they do the same thing in Europe.


----------



## Preacher

T


ILOVEISRAEL said:


> Odium said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Odium said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Odium said:
> 
> 
> 
> Israel Passes Controversial Law Reserving National Self-Determination For Jews
> 
> As usual Jewish hypocrisy,force and push invasion and integration on White America but make sure the Jewish people have segregation and closed borders.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tell us please how the Jewish people are pushing “ invasion” ( I suppose you mean illegal immigration) and integration on White America
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Like you care. I won't bother. I have gone over it before...the short answer is the 1965 immigration act go look who was BEHIND it not who was the face of it. Jewish senators,Congressman and Jewish groups ALL pushed it and lied about it. You don't care so I don't care if you don't like the truth.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You’re the one who doesn’t like the truth. The majority of the Senators and Congressmen were not Jewish. One small example is Ted Kennedy
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I said BEHIND the scenes NOT the face of it who yes was Kennedy...BEHIND the scenes as I said were Jews.
> 
> The Jewish Conspiracy Behind The 1965 Open Immigration Law! | Real Jew News
> Jewish Organizations Had a Role in 1965 Act
> 
> Even Wall Street Journal admits it
> 
> Ted Kennedy was not responsible for the Immigration Act of 1965 – The Occidental Observer
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Your link expresses nothing but hate and racism , calling the Jewish people “ Christ Killers”.   Consider the source
Click to expand...

There are 3 sources. Try again.


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL

Odium said:


> T
> 
> 
> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Odium said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Odium said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> Tell us please how the Jewish people are pushing “ invasion” ( I suppose you mean illegal immigration) and integration on White America
> 
> 
> 
> Like you care. I won't bother. I have gone over it before...the short answer is the 1965 immigration act go look who was BEHIND it not who was the face of it. Jewish senators,Congressman and Jewish groups ALL pushed it and lied about it. You don't care so I don't care if you don't like the truth.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You’re the one who doesn’t like the truth. The majority of the Senators and Congressmen were not Jewish. One small example is Ted Kennedy
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I said BEHIND the scenes NOT the face of it who yes was Kennedy...BEHIND the scenes as I said were Jews.
> 
> The Jewish Conspiracy Behind The 1965 Open Immigration Law! | Real Jew News
> Jewish Organizations Had a Role in 1965 Act
> 
> Even Wall Street Journal admits it
> 
> Ted Kennedy was not responsible for the Immigration Act of 1965 – The Occidental Observer
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Your link expresses nothing but hate and racism , calling the Jewish people “ Christ Killers”.   Consider the source
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There are 3 sources. Try again.
Click to expand...


I did.


Odium said:


> T
> 
> 
> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Odium said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Odium said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> Tell us please how the Jewish people are pushing “ invasion” ( I suppose you mean illegal immigration) and integration on White America
> 
> 
> 
> Like you care. I won't bother. I have gone over it before...the short answer is the 1965 immigration act go look who was BEHIND it not who was the face of it. Jewish senators,Congressman and Jewish groups ALL pushed it and lied about it. You don't care so I don't care if you don't like the truth.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You’re the one who doesn’t like the truth. The majority of the Senators and Congressmen were not Jewish. One small example is Ted Kennedy
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I said BEHIND the scenes NOT the face of it who yes was Kennedy...BEHIND the scenes as I said were Jews.
> 
> The Jewish Conspiracy Behind The 1965 Open Immigration Law! | Real Jew News
> Jewish Organizations Had a Role in 1965 Act
> 
> Even Wall Street Journal admits it
> 
> Ted Kennedy was not responsible for the Immigration Act of 1965 – The Occidental Observer
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Your link expresses nothing but hate and racism , calling the Jewish people “ Christ Killers”.   Consider the source
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There are 3 sources. Try again.
Click to expand...


I did. The sentence that tell it all is; “ The enemy of our lord; The Jews”


----------



## Preacher

ILOVEISRAEL said:


> Odium said:
> 
> 
> 
> T
> 
> 
> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Odium said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Odium said:
> 
> 
> 
> Like you care. I won't bother. I have gone over it before...the short answer is the 1965 immigration act go look who was BEHIND it not who was the face of it. Jewish senators,Congressman and Jewish groups ALL pushed it and lied about it. You don't care so I don't care if you don't like the truth.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You’re the one who doesn’t like the truth. The majority of the Senators and Congressmen were not Jewish. One small example is Ted Kennedy
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I said BEHIND the scenes NOT the face of it who yes was Kennedy...BEHIND the scenes as I said were Jews.
> 
> The Jewish Conspiracy Behind The 1965 Open Immigration Law! | Real Jew News
> Jewish Organizations Had a Role in 1965 Act
> 
> Even Wall Street Journal admits it
> 
> Ted Kennedy was not responsible for the Immigration Act of 1965 – The Occidental Observer
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Your link expresses nothing but hate and racism , calling the Jewish people “ Christ Killers”.   Consider the source
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There are 3 sources. Try again.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I did.
> 
> 
> Odium said:
> 
> 
> 
> T
> 
> 
> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Odium said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Odium said:
> 
> 
> 
> Like you care. I won't bother. I have gone over it before...the short answer is the 1965 immigration act go look who was BEHIND it not who was the face of it. Jewish senators,Congressman and Jewish groups ALL pushed it and lied about it. You don't care so I don't care if you don't like the truth.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You’re the one who doesn’t like the truth. The majority of the Senators and Congressmen were not Jewish. One small example is Ted Kennedy
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I said BEHIND the scenes NOT the face of it who yes was Kennedy...BEHIND the scenes as I said were Jews.
> 
> The Jewish Conspiracy Behind The 1965 Open Immigration Law! | Real Jew News
> Jewish Organizations Had a Role in 1965 Act
> 
> Even Wall Street Journal admits it
> 
> Ted Kennedy was not responsible for the Immigration Act of 1965 – The Occidental Observer
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Your link expresses nothing but hate and racism , calling the Jewish people “ Christ Killers”.   Consider the source
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There are 3 sources. Try again.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I did. The sentence that tell it all is; “ The enemy of our lord; The Jews”
Click to expand...

All 3 links eh? You like ALL Jews are a liar.


----------



## waltky

When in Israel...

... do as the Israelis do.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> Interesting and disturbing.  I guess this doesn’t bode well for the Arab Israeli citizens down the road.



What is disturbing about it?  Before you answer, have you read the declarations of independence and constitutions of other States?  Which ones?  Because there is nothing disturbing in this law. It's as typical as dozens of other States.


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL

Odium said:


> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Odium said:
> 
> 
> 
> T
> 
> 
> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Odium said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> You’re the one who doesn’t like the truth. The majority of the Senators and Congressmen were not Jewish. One small example is Ted Kennedy
> 
> 
> 
> I said BEHIND the scenes NOT the face of it who yes was Kennedy...BEHIND the scenes as I said were Jews.
> 
> The Jewish Conspiracy Behind The 1965 Open Immigration Law! | Real Jew News
> Jewish Organizations Had a Role in 1965 Act
> 
> Even Wall Street Journal admits it
> 
> Ted Kennedy was not responsible for the Immigration Act of 1965 – The Occidental Observer
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Your link expresses nothing but hate and racism , calling the Jewish people “ Christ Killers”.   Consider the source
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There are 3 sources. Try again.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I did.
> 
> 
> Odium said:
> 
> 
> 
> T
> 
> 
> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Odium said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> You’re the one who doesn’t like the truth. The majority of the Senators and Congressmen were not Jewish. One small example is Ted Kennedy
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I said BEHIND the scenes NOT the face of it who yes was Kennedy...BEHIND the scenes as I said were Jews.
> 
> The Jewish Conspiracy Behind The 1965 Open Immigration Law! | Real Jew News
> Jewish Organizations Had a Role in 1965 Act
> 
> Even Wall Street Journal admits it
> 
> Ted Kennedy was not responsible for the Immigration Act of 1965 – The Occidental Observer
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Your link expresses nothing but hate and racism , calling the Jewish people “ Christ Killers”.   Consider the source
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There are 3 sources. Try again.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I did. The sentence that tell it all is; “ The enemy of our lord; The Jews”
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> All 3 links eh? You like ALL Jews are a liar.
Click to expand...


Didn’t say all three links you.  Just referring to the Anti Semetic Mentality. I take great pleasure in knowing the Jewish People have so much power .


----------



## Sixties Fan

The world always knew Jews formed a nation and were a people, beyond a religion.

And if the Jewish people require a home, where would it be?

The illustration at the start of one of these books shows it clearly:




"Palestine to Illustrate the History of the Jews."

The land that was called Palestine by most of the world was also recognized as the homeland of the Jewish people by most of the world before Zionism.

(full article online)

Yes, there is a Jewish nation and a Jewish people ~ Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News


----------



## Shusha

_In reality, Israel’s Basic Law would not be out of place among the liberal democratic constitutions of Europe—which include similar provisions that have not aroused controversy. The law does not infringe on the individual rights of any Israeli citizen, including Arabs; nor does it create individual privileges. The illiberalism here lies with the law’s critics, who would deny the Jewish state the freedom to legislate like a normal country._
_
...

The Latvian Constitution opens by invoking the “unwavering will of the Latvian nation to have its own State and its inalienable right of self-determination in order to guarantee the existence and development of the Latvian nation, its language and culture throughout the centuries.” Latvia’s population is about 25% Russian.
_
Get Over It -- Israel is the Jewish State


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting and disturbing.  I guess this doesn’t bode well for the Arab Israeli citizens down the road.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What is disturbing about it?  Before you answer, have you read the declarations of independence and constitutions of other States?  Which ones?  Because there is nothing disturbing in this law. It's as typical as dozens of other States.
Click to expand...

Because Arab was the language there for centuries.  It seems it is aime at furthet marginslizing the Arab population.  Canada has two, foe example.  I think an Arab Israeli citizen would have a hard time feeling a fully equal citizen.  The part about Jewish settlements....can Arab Israeli's live in them or expand their own with equak access to land and rezources under this?   What is really disturbing are the portions that wete eventually rejected.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting and disturbing.  I guess this doesn’t bode well for the Arab Israeli citizens down the road.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What is disturbing about it?  Before you answer, have you read the declarations of independence and constitutions of other States?  Which ones?  Because there is nothing disturbing in this law. It's as typical as dozens of other States.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Because Arab was the language there for centuries.  It seems it is aime at furthet marginslizing the Arab population.  Canada has two, foe example.  I think an Arab Israeli citizen would have a hard time feeling a fully equal citizen.  The part about Jewish settlements....can Arab Israeli's live in them or expand their own with equak access to land and rezources under this?   What is really disturbing are the portions that wete eventually rejected.
Click to expand...



There are dozens of nations which have one official language and minority populations.  Spain, for example, requires all citizens to speak Castilian even if their mother tongue is Catalan or Basque.

And current law in Israel permits Arabs to have Arab-only settlements while forbidding Jews to do the same.  Much like Jews are not permitted to worship, pray or equally access the Temple Mount. 

It is hypocrisy to demand something of Israel that is not demanded of other nations.  Have you read the constitutions of other nations?  For that matter have you read the Palestinian one?


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting and disturbing.  I guess this doesn’t bode well for the Arab Israeli citizens down the road.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What is disturbing about it?  Before you answer, have you read the declarations of independence and constitutions of other States?  Which ones?  Because there is nothing disturbing in this law. It's as typical as dozens of other States.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Because Arab was the language there for centuries.  It seems it is aime at furthet marginslizing the Arab population.  Canada has two, foe example.  I think an Arab Israeli citizen would have a hard time feeling a fully equal citizen.  The part about Jewish settlements....can Arab Israeli's live in them or expand their own with equak access to land and rezources under this?   What is really disturbing are the portions that wete eventually rejected.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> There are dozens of nations which have one official language and minority populations.  Spain, for example, requires all citizens to speak Castilian even if their mother tongue is Catalan or Basque.
> 
> And current law in Israel permits Arabs to have Arab-only settlements while forbidding Jews to do the same.  Much like Jews are not permitted to worship, pray or equally access the Temple Mount.
> 
> It is hypocrisy to demand something of Israel that is not demanded of other nations.  Have you read the constitutions of other nations?  For that matter have you read the Palestinian one?
Click to expand...

What law forbids Jews from living in Arab settlements?


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting and disturbing.  I guess this doesn’t bode well for the Arab Israeli citizens down the road.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What is disturbing about it?  Before you answer, have you read the declarations of independence and constitutions of other States?  Which ones?  Because there is nothing disturbing in this law. It's as typical as dozens of other States.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Because Arab was the language there for centuries.  It seems it is aime at furthet marginslizing the Arab population.  Canada has two, foe example.  I think an Arab Israeli citizen would have a hard time feeling a fully equal citizen.  The part about Jewish settlements....can Arab Israeli's live in them or expand their own with equak access to land and rezources under this?   What is really disturbing are the portions that wete eventually rejected.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> There are dozens of nations which have one official language and minority populations.  Spain, for example, requires all citizens to speak Castilian even if their mother tongue is Catalan or Basque.
> 
> And current law in Israel permits Arabs to have Arab-only settlements while forbidding Jews to do the same.  Much like Jews are not permitted to worship, pray or equally access the Temple Mount.
> 
> It is hypocrisy to demand something of Israel that is not demanded of other nations.  Have you read the constitutions of other nations?  For that matter have you read the Palestinian one?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What law forbids Jews from living in Arab settlements?
Click to expand...


I'd have to look it up.  Read it in Eugene Kontorovitch's article this morning.


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting and disturbing.  I guess this doesn’t bode well for the Arab Israeli citizens down the road.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What is disturbing about it?  Before you answer, have you read the declarations of independence and constitutions of other States?  Which ones?  Because there is nothing disturbing in this law. It's as typical as dozens of other States.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Because Arab was the language there for centuries.  It seems it is aime at furthet marginslizing the Arab population.  Canada has two, foe example.  I think an Arab Israeli citizen would have a hard time feeling a fully equal citizen.  The part about Jewish settlements....can Arab Israeli's live in them or expand their own with equak access to land and rezources under this?   What is really disturbing are the portions that wete eventually rejected.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> There are dozens of nations which have one official language and minority populations.  Spain, for example, requires all citizens to speak Castilian even if their mother tongue is Catalan or Basque.
> 
> And current law in Israel permits Arabs to have Arab-only settlements while forbidding Jews to do the same.  Much like Jews are not permitted to worship, pray or equally access the Temple Mount.
> 
> It is hypocrisy to demand something of Israel that is not demanded of other nations.  Have you read the constitutions of other nations?  For that matter have you read the Palestinian one?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What law forbids Jews from living in Arab settlements?
Click to expand...


Tell us that Jews who choose to live in Arab Settlements wouldn’t have to fear for their lives.


----------



## Coyote

ILOVEISRAEL said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting and disturbing.  I guess this doesn’t bode well for the Arab Israeli citizens down the road.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What is disturbing about it?  Before you answer, have you read the declarations of independence and constitutions of other States?  Which ones?  Because there is nothing disturbing in this law. It's as typical as dozens of other States.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Because Arab was the language there for centuries.  It seems it is aime at furthet marginslizing the Arab population.  Canada has two, foe example.  I think an Arab Israeli citizen would have a hard time feeling a fully equal citizen.  The part about Jewish settlements....can Arab Israeli's live in them or expand their own with equak access to land and rezources under this?   What is really disturbing are the portions that wete eventually rejected.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> There are dozens of nations which have one official language and minority populations.  Spain, for example, requires all citizens to speak Castilian even if their mother tongue is Catalan or Basque.
> 
> And current law in Israel permits Arabs to have Arab-only settlements while forbidding Jews to do the same.  Much like Jews are not permitted to worship, pray or equally access the Temple Mount.
> 
> It is hypocrisy to demand something of Israel that is not demanded of other nations.  Have you read the constitutions of other nations?  For that matter have you read the Palestinian one?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What law forbids Jews from living in Arab settlements?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Tell us that Jews who choose to live in Arab Settlements wouldn’t have to fear for their lives.
Click to expand...

I suspect Arabs in Jewish settlements might have the same concerns.  But tbat is neither hete nor thete.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> What law forbids Jews from living in Arab settlements?



Still looking....found this:

_However, that same Supreme Court in the Avitan case (HCJ 528/88) decided that there was a public interest in assisting Beduin to settle permanently in urban communities, thus justifying a policy of preferential treatment to Arabs, allowing Arab-only towns._

Source


----------



## Shusha

Still, there is nothing "controversial" in the Basic Law that just passed.  At least its not at all controversial in other countries.  Only in the Jewish State.  Makes you go "hmmmmmm", doesn't it?


----------



## Sixties Fan




----------



## admonit

Shusha said:


> And current law in Israel permits Arabs to have Arab-only settlements while forbidding Jews to do the same.


Formally it's incorrect, but practically it's the case.


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL

Coyote said:


> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> What is disturbing about it?  Before you answer, have you read the declarations of independence and constitutions of other States?  Which ones?  Because there is nothing disturbing in this law. It's as typical as dozens of other States.
> 
> 
> 
> Because Arab was the language there for centuries.  It seems it is aime at furthet marginslizing the Arab population.  Canada has two, foe example.  I think an Arab Israeli citizen would have a hard time feeling a fully equal citizen.  The part about Jewish settlements....can Arab Israeli's live in them or expand their own with equak access to land and rezources under this?   What is really disturbing are the portions that wete eventually rejected.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> There are dozens of nations which have one official language and minority populations.  Spain, for example, requires all citizens to speak Castilian even if their mother tongue is Catalan or Basque.
> 
> And current law in Israel permits Arabs to have Arab-only settlements while forbidding Jews to do the same.  Much like Jews are not permitted to worship, pray or equally access the Temple Mount.
> 
> It is hypocrisy to demand something of Israel that is not demanded of other nations.  Have you read the constitutions of other nations?  For that matter have you read the Palestinian one?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What law forbids Jews from living in Arab settlements?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Tell us that Jews who choose to live in Arab Settlements wouldn’t have to fear for their lives.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I suspect Arabs in Jewish settlements might have the same concerns.  But tbat is neither hete nor thete.
Click to expand...


The difference is; Arabs do live in Israel


----------



## Shusha

ILOVEISRAEL said:


> The difference is; Arabs do live in Israel



Somehow a "no Jews allowed" policy in Palestine and Gaza isn't the slightest bit controversial.


----------



## Shusha

admonit said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> And current law in Israel permits Arabs to have Arab-only settlements while forbidding Jews to do the same.
> 
> 
> 
> Formally it's incorrect, but practically it's the case.
Click to expand...


A Supreme Court decision labels it as permissible as affirmative action for the Bedouin.  It is an older decision from what I can determine, so maybe its changed again.


----------



## admonit

Shusha said:


> admonit said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> And current law in Israel permits Arabs to have Arab-only settlements while forbidding Jews to do the same.
> 
> 
> 
> Formally it's incorrect, but practically it's the case.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> A Supreme Court decision labels it as permissible as affirmative action for the Bedouin.  It is an older decision from what I can determine, so maybe its changed again.
Click to expand...

The Supreme Court decision, which you posted, was based rather on "a public interest" than on the law.


----------



## Shusha

admonit said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> admonit said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> And current law in Israel permits Arabs to have Arab-only settlements while forbidding Jews to do the same.
> 
> 
> 
> Formally it's incorrect, but practically it's the case.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> A Supreme Court decision labels it as permissible as affirmative action for the Bedouin.  It is an older decision from what I can determine, so maybe its changed again.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Supreme Court decision, which you posted, was based rather on "a public interest" than on the law.
Click to expand...


Ah.  I understand now what you are saying.  Its a setting aside of the law in the interests of assisting the Bedouin community.  We agree, then.


----------



## admonit

Shusha said:


> admonit said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> admonit said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> And current law in Israel permits Arabs to have Arab-only settlements while forbidding Jews to do the same.
> 
> 
> 
> Formally it's incorrect, but practically it's the case.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> A Supreme Court decision labels it as permissible as affirmative action for the Bedouin.  It is an older decision from what I can determine, so maybe its changed again.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Supreme Court decision, which you posted, was based rather on "a public interest" than on the law.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Ah.  I understand now what you are saying.  Its a setting aside of the law in the interests of assisting the Bedouin community.  We agree, then.
Click to expand...

Yes. And it's a big problem in Israel. There is no discriminatory laws, but there is a discriminatory court practice, based on domination of the left in the legal system. If they were not the Bedouins, but the Jews, the court would most likely have taken a different decision.


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL

Shusha said:


> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> The difference is; Arabs do live in Israel
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Somehow a "no Jews allowed" policy in Palestine and Gaza isn't the slightest bit controversial.
Click to expand...


In addition the Palestinians state that the Israelis have no right to the Western Wall. Somehow that isn’t racist


----------



## Shusha

admonit said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> admonit said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> admonit said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> And current law in Israel permits Arabs to have Arab-only settlements while forbidding Jews to do the same.
> 
> 
> 
> Formally it's incorrect, but practically it's the case.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> A Supreme Court decision labels it as permissible as affirmative action for the Bedouin.  It is an older decision from what I can determine, so maybe its changed again.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Supreme Court decision, which you posted, was based rather on "a public interest" than on the law.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Ah.  I understand now what you are saying.  Its a setting aside of the law in the interests of assisting the Bedouin community.  We agree, then.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes. And it's a big problem in Israel. There is no discriminatory laws, but there is a discriminatory court practice, based on domination of the left in the legal system. If they were not the Bedouins, but the Jews, the court would most likely have taken a different decision.
Click to expand...


The court did.  In another decision. There is a strange irony in the fact that Israeli courts try just SO HARD to be "fair" that they discriminate mostly against Jews, and yet still they are vilified for being an "apartheid state".


----------



## Shusha

ILOVEISRAEL said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> The difference is; Arabs do live in Israel
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Somehow a "no Jews allowed" policy in Palestine and Gaza isn't the slightest bit controversial.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> In addition the Palestinians state that the Israelis have no right to the Western Wall. Somehow that isn’t racist
Click to expand...


Oh no.  Not at all.  Even supported by the UN so it must be "right". /sarcasm


----------



## admonit

Shusha said:


> admonit said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> admonit said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> admonit said:
> 
> 
> 
> Formally it's incorrect, but practically it's the case.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A Supreme Court decision labels it as permissible as affirmative action for the Bedouin.  It is an older decision from what I can determine, so maybe its changed again.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Supreme Court decision, which you posted, was based rather on "a public interest" than on the law.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Ah.  I understand now what you are saying.  Its a setting aside of the law in the interests of assisting the Bedouin community.  We agree, then.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes. And it's a big problem in Israel. There is no discriminatory laws, but there is a discriminatory court practice, based on domination of the left in the legal system. If they were not the Bedouins, but the Jews, the court would most likely have taken a different decision.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The court did.  In another decision. There is a strange irony in the fact that Israeli courts try just SO HARD to be "fair" that they discriminate mostly against Jews, and yet still they are vilified for being an "apartheid state".
Click to expand...

Jews and their country are vilified by definition, not for their actions...


----------



## barryqwalsh

The controversial law states only Jewish people have the right to self-determination in the State of Israel, denying the right to 1.8 million Palestians who hold Israeli citizenship. 

Israel’s Parliament, the Knesset, approved the controversial nationality bill Thursday declaring Israel a nation-state for the Jewish people and downgrading the status of Arabic from official language to “special status.” Arabs make up 21 percent of Israel’s population.


The basic law, approved with 62 votes in favor and 55 against, recognizes the Jewish people in Israel “have an exclusive right to national self-determination." It also includes the declaration of a “united Jerusalem” as the capital of Israel, despite the fact that East Jerusalem is internationally recognized as being under Israeli occupation.

Furthermore, the law affirms "the state sees the development of Jewish settlement as a national value and will act to encourage and promote its establishment and consolidation."

"One-hundred-and-twenty-two years after Herzl (father of Zionism) published his vision, we've enshrined into the law the basic principle of our existence," prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu said, prising the law.

Legislator Avi Dichter of the ruling Likud party, who also sponsored the bill, explained “we are enshrining this important bill into a law today to prevent even the slightest thought, let alone attempt, to transform Israel to a country of all its citizens."


Zionist Union leader Tzipi Livni argued the bill sought to strengthen Netanyahu. “Netanyahu wants the bill in order to fight. Otherwise how will people know he is more of a nationalist than you’” she said.

Arab lawmakers protested the bill’s approval arguing it is a codification of apartheid and ripping papers in a symbolic gesture, which prompted Knesset Speaker Yuli Edelstein to remove them from the plenum.

Legislators Ahmad Tibi and Ayeda Touma-Souliman yelled at Netanyahu: "You passed an apartheid law, a racist law."

"I announce with shock and sorrow the death of democracy," Ahmed Tibi told reporters.

Lawmaker Ayman Odeh, chairman of the Joint List, released a statement saying that Israel "passed a law of Jewish supremacy and told us that we will always be second-class citizens." Around 1.8 million Arabs live in Israel, they are the descendents of the Palestinians who remained in what is today Israel after the 1948 “War of Independence.”

Jewish Israeli peace activists also protested the bill by unfurling a large black flag in the Knesset.


----------



## Sixties Fan

barryqwalsh said:


> The controversial law states only Jewish people have the right to self-determination in the State of Israel, denying the right to 1.8 million Palestians who hold Israeli citizenship.
> 
> Israel’s Parliament, the Knesset, approved the controversial nationality bill Thursday declaring Israel a nation-state for the Jewish people and downgrading the status of Arabic from official language to “special status.” Arabs make up 21 percent of Israel’s population.
> 
> 
> The basic law, approved with 62 votes in favor and 55 against, recognizes the Jewish people in Israel “have an exclusive right to national self-determination." It also includes the declaration of a “united Jerusalem” as the capital of Israel, despite the fact that East Jerusalem is internationally recognized as being under Israeli occupation.
> 
> Furthermore, the law affirms "the state sees the development of Jewish settlement as a national value and will act to encourage and promote its establishment and consolidation."
> 
> "One-hundred-and-twenty-two years after Herzl (father of Zionism) published his vision, we've enshrined into the law the basic principle of our existence," prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu said, prising the law.
> 
> Legislator Avi Dichter of the ruling Likud party, who also sponsored the bill, explained “we are enshrining this important bill into a law today to prevent even the slightest thought, let alone attempt, to transform Israel to a country of all its citizens."
> 
> 
> Zionist Union leader Tzipi Livni argued the bill sought to strengthen Netanyahu. “Netanyahu wants the bill in order to fight. Otherwise how will people know he is more of a nationalist than you’” she said.
> 
> Arab lawmakers protested the bill’s approval arguing it is a codification of apartheid and ripping papers in a symbolic gesture, which prompted Knesset Speaker Yuli Edelstein to remove them from the plenum.
> 
> Legislators Ahmad Tibi and Ayeda Touma-Souliman yelled at Netanyahu: "You passed an apartheid law, a racist law."
> 
> "I announce with shock and sorrow the death of democracy," Ahmed Tibi told reporters.
> 
> Lawmaker Ayman Odeh, chairman of the Joint List, released a statement saying that Israel "passed a law of Jewish supremacy and told us that we will always be second-class citizens." Around 1.8 million Arabs live in Israel, they are the descendents of the Palestinians who remained in what is today Israel after the 1948 “War of Independence.”
> 
> Jewish Israeli peace activists also protested the bill by unfurling a large black flag in the Knesset.


Jews have the right to self-determination to Israel.
They are not asking the right to self-determination to any other part of their ancient homeland, now taken over by Arab Muslims in Jordan and in Gaza.

Arabs have self-determination in Jordan.
And Arabs have self-determination in Gaza.

NOT ONE JEW is allowed to live in Jordan or Gaza, while 20% of the population of Israel in non-Jewish.

Distort what the law is all about all you like, you and others do not have the guts to deal with the real Apartheid which exists in Muslim countries against Jews, where you will hardly find any Jew being allowed to live in them.


Israel is the Jewish State, always has been, and always will be.


The People of Israel Live


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL

barryqwalsh said:


> The controversial law states only Jewish people have the right to self-determination in the State of Israel, denying the right to 1.8 million Palestians who hold Israeli citizenship.
> 
> Israel’s Parliament, the Knesset, approved the controversial nationality bill Thursday declaring Israel a nation-state for the Jewish people and downgrading the status of Arabic from official language to “special status.” Arabs make up 21 percent of Israel’s population.
> 
> 
> The basic law, approved with 62 votes in favor and 55 against, recognizes the Jewish people in Israel “have an exclusive right to national self-determination." It also includes the declaration of a “united Jerusalem” as the capital of Israel, despite the fact that East Jerusalem is internationally recognized as being under Israeli occupation.
> 
> Furthermore, the law affirms "the state sees the development of Jewish settlement as a national value and will act to encourage and promote its establishment and consolidation."
> 
> "One-hundred-and-twenty-two years after Herzl (father of Zionism) published his vision, we've enshrined into the law the basic principle of our existence," prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu said, prising the law.
> 
> Legislator Avi Dichter of the ruling Likud party, who also sponsored the bill, explained “we are enshrining this important bill into a law today to prevent even the slightest thought, let alone attempt, to transform Israel to a country of all its citizens."
> 
> 
> Zionist Union leader Tzipi Livni argued the bill sought to strengthen Netanyahu. “Netanyahu wants the bill in order to fight. Otherwise how will people know he is more of a nationalist than you’” she said.
> 
> Arab lawmakers protested the bill’s approval arguing it is a codification of apartheid and ripping papers in a symbolic gesture, which prompted Knesset Speaker Yuli Edelstein to remove them from the plenum.
> 
> Legislators Ahmad Tibi and Ayeda Touma-Souliman yelled at Netanyahu: "You passed an apartheid law, a racist law."
> 
> "I announce with shock and sorrow the death of democracy," Ahmed Tibi told reporters.
> 
> Lawmaker Ayman Odeh, chairman of the Joint List, released a statement saying that Israel "passed a law of Jewish supremacy and told us that we will always be second-class citizens." Around 1.8 million Arabs live in Israel, they are the descendents of the Palestinians who remained in what is today Israel after the 1948 “War of Independence.”
> 
> Jewish Israeli peace activists also protested the bill by unfurling a large black flag in the Knesset.



So what’s your problem?  Abbas has made it clear; No Israelis Allowed. They have even gone so far as to state that the Israelis have no rights to the Western Wall. See anything wrong with that? Of course not
   The Jewish Holy Sites are in E. Jerusalem and the Jewish people will never be deprived of their access again


----------



## Sunni Man

American citizens and their government go on and on about the separation of church and state, and make countless laws to enforce it.

Yet we finance and support the apartheid state of Israel with billions of U.S. taxpayer dollars and weapons to maintain their zionist Jew enclave.  ....


----------



## Sixties Fan

Sunni Man said:


> American citizens and their government go on and on about the separation of church and state, and make countless laws to enforce it.
> 
> Yet we finance and support the apartheid state of Israel with billions of U.S. taxpayer dollars and weapons to maintain their zionist Jew enclave.  ....


Do not forget, and be very proud, that you, the US,  are also supporting the Apartheid States of Saudi Arabia, the enclave known as Gaza, and the Apartheid wannabe State known as "State of Palestine" amongst many other Apartheid enclaves.

Withdraw from Israel, withdraw from all.


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL

Sunni Man said:


> American citizens and their government go on and on about the separation of church and state, and make countless laws to enforce it.
> 
> Yet we finance and support the apartheid state of Israel with billions of U.S. taxpayer dollars and weapons to maintain their zionist Jew enclave.  ....



You mean unlike the Democratic Countries of the Arab World?


----------



## cnm

ILOVEISRAEL said:


> You mean unlike the Democratic Countries of the Arab World?


I get the impression you're agreeing Israel behaves like Arabs. True?


----------



## Sixties Fan

cnm said:


> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> You mean unlike the Democratic Countries of the Arab World?
> 
> 
> 
> I get the impression you're agreeing Israel behaves like Arabs. True?
Click to expand...

Do tell us the ways Israel behaves like its Arab neighbors.


----------



## frigidweirdo

barryqwalsh said:


> The controversial law states only Jewish people have the right to self-determination in the State of Israel, denying the right to 1.8 million Palestians who hold Israeli citizenship.
> 
> Israel’s Parliament, the Knesset, approved the controversial nationality bill Thursday declaring Israel a nation-state for the Jewish people and downgrading the status of Arabic from official language to “special status.” Arabs make up 21 percent of Israel’s population.
> 
> 
> The basic law, approved with 62 votes in favor and 55 against, recognizes the Jewish people in Israel “have an exclusive right to national self-determination." It also includes the declaration of a “united Jerusalem” as the capital of Israel, despite the fact that East Jerusalem is internationally recognized as being under Israeli occupation.
> 
> Furthermore, the law affirms "the state sees the development of Jewish settlement as a national value and will act to encourage and promote its establishment and consolidation."
> 
> "One-hundred-and-twenty-two years after Herzl (father of Zionism) published his vision, we've enshrined into the law the basic principle of our existence," prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu said, prising the law.
> 
> Legislator Avi Dichter of the ruling Likud party, who also sponsored the bill, explained “we are enshrining this important bill into a law today to prevent even the slightest thought, let alone attempt, to transform Israel to a country of all its citizens."
> 
> 
> Zionist Union leader Tzipi Livni argued the bill sought to strengthen Netanyahu. “Netanyahu wants the bill in order to fight. Otherwise how will people know he is more of a nationalist than you’” she said.
> 
> Arab lawmakers protested the bill’s approval arguing it is a codification of apartheid and ripping papers in a symbolic gesture, which prompted Knesset Speaker Yuli Edelstein to remove them from the plenum.
> 
> Legislators Ahmad Tibi and Ayeda Touma-Souliman yelled at Netanyahu: "You passed an apartheid law, a racist law."
> 
> "I announce with shock and sorrow the death of democracy," Ahmed Tibi told reporters.
> 
> Lawmaker Ayman Odeh, chairman of the Joint List, released a statement saying that Israel "passed a law of Jewish supremacy and told us that we will always be second-class citizens." Around 1.8 million Arabs live in Israel, they are the descendents of the Palestinians who remained in what is today Israel after the 1948 “War of Independence.”
> 
> Jewish Israeli peace activists also protested the bill by unfurling a large black flag in the Knesset.



The right in Israel are very much like the right in the US. They create situations where they know they can benefit from them. Like war, they'll get their war, and then use war as an excuse for taking away rights in order to protect people. They need the war to continue so they can continue to fob the people off on their bullshit of protecting them, while causing the problems in the first place.


----------



## Sixties Fan

frigidweirdo said:


> barryqwalsh said:
> 
> 
> 
> The controversial law states only Jewish people have the right to self-determination in the State of Israel, denying the right to 1.8 million Palestians who hold Israeli citizenship.
> 
> Israel’s Parliament, the Knesset, approved the controversial nationality bill Thursday declaring Israel a nation-state for the Jewish people and downgrading the status of Arabic from official language to “special status.” Arabs make up 21 percent of Israel’s population.
> 
> 
> The basic law, approved with 62 votes in favor and 55 against, recognizes the Jewish people in Israel “have an exclusive right to national self-determination." It also includes the declaration of a “united Jerusalem” as the capital of Israel, despite the fact that East Jerusalem is internationally recognized as being under Israeli occupation.
> 
> Furthermore, the law affirms "the state sees the development of Jewish settlement as a national value and will act to encourage and promote its establishment and consolidation."
> 
> "One-hundred-and-twenty-two years after Herzl (father of Zionism) published his vision, we've enshrined into the law the basic principle of our existence," prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu said, prising the law.
> 
> Legislator Avi Dichter of the ruling Likud party, who also sponsored the bill, explained “we are enshrining this important bill into a law today to prevent even the slightest thought, let alone attempt, to transform Israel to a country of all its citizens."
> 
> 
> Zionist Union leader Tzipi Livni argued the bill sought to strengthen Netanyahu. “Netanyahu wants the bill in order to fight. Otherwise how will people know he is more of a nationalist than you’” she said.
> 
> Arab lawmakers protested the bill’s approval arguing it is a codification of apartheid and ripping papers in a symbolic gesture, which prompted Knesset Speaker Yuli Edelstein to remove them from the plenum.
> 
> Legislators Ahmad Tibi and Ayeda Touma-Souliman yelled at Netanyahu: "You passed an apartheid law, a racist law."
> 
> "I announce with shock and sorrow the death of democracy," Ahmed Tibi told reporters.
> 
> Lawmaker Ayman Odeh, chairman of the Joint List, released a statement saying that Israel "passed a law of Jewish supremacy and told us that we will always be second-class citizens." Around 1.8 million Arabs live in Israel, they are the descendents of the Palestinians who remained in what is today Israel after the 1948 “War of Independence.”
> 
> Jewish Israeli peace activists also protested the bill by unfurling a large black flag in the Knesset.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The right in Israel are very much like the right in the US. They create situations where they know they can benefit from them. Like war, they'll get their war, and then use war as an excuse for taking away rights in order to protect people. They need the war to continue so they can continue to fob the people off on their bullshit of protecting them, while causing the problems in the first place.
Click to expand...

How many lies are in this amazing paragraph you bothered to spit on this thread?

I will not bother.


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL

cnm said:


> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> You mean unlike the Democratic Countries of the Arab World?
> 
> 
> 
> I get the impression you're agreeing Israel behaves like Arabs. True?
Click to expand...


I get the impression you are a Pro Palestinian Kool Aid Drinker. Arabs reside in Israel unlike Jews residing in most Muslim/ Arab Countries. The PA even declared the Israelis have no rights to the Western Wall . Typical Racist Double Standard


----------



## Billo_Really

barryqwalsh said:


> The controversial law states only Jewish people have the right to self-determination in the State of Israel, denying the right to 1.8 million Palestians who hold Israeli citizenship.
> 
> Israel’s Parliament, the Knesset, approved the controversial nationality bill Thursday declaring Israel a nation-state for the Jewish people and downgrading the status of Arabic from official language to “special status.” Arabs make up 21 percent of Israel’s population.
> 
> 
> The basic law, approved with 62 votes in favor and 55 against, recognizes the Jewish people in Israel “have an exclusive right to national self-determination." It also includes the declaration of a “united Jerusalem” as the capital of Israel, despite the fact that East Jerusalem is internationally recognized as being under Israeli occupation.
> 
> Furthermore, the law affirms "the state sees the development of Jewish settlement as a national value and will act to encourage and promote its establishment and consolidation."
> 
> "One-hundred-and-twenty-two years after Herzl (father of Zionism) published his vision, we've enshrined into the law the basic principle of our existence," prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu said, prising the law.
> 
> Legislator Avi Dichter of the ruling Likud party, who also sponsored the bill, explained “we are enshrining this important bill into a law today to prevent even the slightest thought, let alone attempt, to transform Israel to a country of all its citizens."
> 
> 
> Zionist Union leader Tzipi Livni argued the bill sought to strengthen Netanyahu. “Netanyahu wants the bill in order to fight. Otherwise how will people know he is more of a nationalist than you’” she said.
> 
> Arab lawmakers protested the bill’s approval arguing it is a codification of apartheid and ripping papers in a symbolic gesture, which prompted Knesset Speaker Yuli Edelstein to remove them from the plenum.
> 
> Legislators Ahmad Tibi and Ayeda Touma-Souliman yelled at Netanyahu: "You passed an apartheid law, a racist law."
> 
> "I announce with shock and sorrow the death of democracy," Ahmed Tibi told reporters.
> 
> Lawmaker Ayman Odeh, chairman of the Joint List, released a statement saying that Israel "passed a law of Jewish supremacy and told us that we will always be second-class citizens." Around 1.8 million Arabs live in Israel, they are the descendents of the Palestinians who remained in what is today Israel after the 1948 “War of Independence.”
> 
> Jewish Israeli peace activists also protested the bill by unfurling a large black flag in the Knesset.


Israel is one fucked up country!


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL

Billo_Really said:


> barryqwalsh said:
> 
> 
> 
> The controversial law states only Jewish people have the right to self-determination in the State of Israel, denying the right to 1.8 million Palestians who hold Israeli citizenship.
> 
> Israel’s Parliament, the Knesset, approved the controversial nationality bill Thursday declaring Israel a nation-state for the Jewish people and downgrading the status of Arabic from official language to “special status.” Arabs make up 21 percent of Israel’s population.
> 
> 
> The basic law, approved with 62 votes in favor and 55 against, recognizes the Jewish people in Israel “have an exclusive right to national self-determination." It also includes the declaration of a “united Jerusalem” as the capital of Israel, despite the fact that East Jerusalem is internationally recognized as being under Israeli occupation.
> 
> Furthermore, the law affirms "the state sees the development of Jewish settlement as a national value and will act to encourage and promote its establishment and consolidation."
> 
> "One-hundred-and-twenty-two years after Herzl (father of Zionism) published his vision, we've enshrined into the law the basic principle of our existence," prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu said, prising the law.
> 
> Legislator Avi Dichter of the ruling Likud party, who also sponsored the bill, explained “we are enshrining this important bill into a law today to prevent even the slightest thought, let alone attempt, to transform Israel to a country of all its citizens."
> 
> 
> Zionist Union leader Tzipi Livni argued the bill sought to strengthen Netanyahu. “Netanyahu wants the bill in order to fight. Otherwise how will people know he is more of a nationalist than you’” she said.
> 
> Arab lawmakers protested the bill’s approval arguing it is a codification of apartheid and ripping papers in a symbolic gesture, which prompted Knesset Speaker Yuli Edelstein to remove them from the plenum.
> 
> Legislators Ahmad Tibi and Ayeda Touma-Souliman yelled at Netanyahu: "You passed an apartheid law, a racist law."
> 
> "I announce with shock and sorrow the death of democracy," Ahmed Tibi told reporters.
> 
> Lawmaker Ayman Odeh, chairman of the Joint List, released a statement saying that Israel "passed a law of Jewish supremacy and told us that we will always be second-class citizens." Around 1.8 million Arabs live in Israel, they are the descendents of the Palestinians who remained in what is today Israel after the 1948 “War of Independence.”
> 
> Jewish Israeli peace activists also protested the bill by unfurling a large black flag in the Knesset.
> 
> 
> 
> Israel is one fucked up country!
Click to expand...


What you “ think?”


----------



## Sixties Fan

Billo_Really said:


> barryqwalsh said:
> 
> 
> 
> The controversial law states only Jewish people have the right to self-determination in the State of Israel, denying the right to 1.8 million Palestians who hold Israeli citizenship.
> 
> Israel’s Parliament, the Knesset, approved the controversial nationality bill Thursday declaring Israel a nation-state for the Jewish people and downgrading the status of Arabic from official language to “special status.” Arabs make up 21 percent of Israel’s population.
> 
> 
> The basic law, approved with 62 votes in favor and 55 against, recognizes the Jewish people in Israel “have an exclusive right to national self-determination." It also includes the declaration of a “united Jerusalem” as the capital of Israel, despite the fact that East Jerusalem is internationally recognized as being under Israeli occupation.
> 
> Furthermore, the law affirms "the state sees the development of Jewish settlement as a national value and will act to encourage and promote its establishment and consolidation."
> 
> "One-hundred-and-twenty-two years after Herzl (father of Zionism) published his vision, we've enshrined into the law the basic principle of our existence," prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu said, prising the law.
> 
> Legislator Avi Dichter of the ruling Likud party, who also sponsored the bill, explained “we are enshrining this important bill into a law today to prevent even the slightest thought, let alone attempt, to transform Israel to a country of all its citizens."
> 
> 
> Zionist Union leader Tzipi Livni argued the bill sought to strengthen Netanyahu. “Netanyahu wants the bill in order to fight. Otherwise how will people know he is more of a nationalist than you’” she said.
> 
> Arab lawmakers protested the bill’s approval arguing it is a codification of apartheid and ripping papers in a symbolic gesture, which prompted Knesset Speaker Yuli Edelstein to remove them from the plenum.
> 
> Legislators Ahmad Tibi and Ayeda Touma-Souliman yelled at Netanyahu: "You passed an apartheid law, a racist law."
> 
> "I announce with shock and sorrow the death of democracy," Ahmed Tibi told reporters.
> 
> Lawmaker Ayman Odeh, chairman of the Joint List, released a statement saying that Israel "passed a law of Jewish supremacy and told us that we will always be second-class citizens." Around 1.8 million Arabs live in Israel, they are the descendents of the Palestinians who remained in what is today Israel after the 1948 “War of Independence.”
> 
> Jewish Israeli peace activists also protested the bill by unfurling a large black flag in the Knesset.
> 
> 
> 
> Israel is one fucked up country!
Click to expand...

Oh, look, Billo is on his "Israel is a very bad country" marathon today.


----------



## Billo_Really

ILOVEISRAEL said:


> What you “ think?”


Well then you're missin' out!


----------



## Billo_Really

Sixties Fan said:


> Oh, look, Billo is on his "Israel is a very bad country" marathon today.


What was that?
I xxxxx hear you.
I have an ear infucktion.
Bear ass me again.

*Do not bypass the word filter. * Billo_Really


----------



## Sixties Fan

Mohammed Kabiya, one of the speakers at the ACCESS event, addressed one of the Irvine protesters in a hijab in Arabic, resulting in this exchange:

“You’re a Jewish Muslim?”

“No, I’m no Jewish Muslim. I’m an Arab Israeli Muslim.”

Elkhoury told the ACCESS crowd, “We are sure of our message.”

He said those who resort to vitriol, such as the Irvine protesters, are not as secure in their beliefs and thus resort to anger and insults.

“We know our facts. We know what is going on on the ground,” Elkhoury said. “And we came there to have this dialogue. And they just weren’t able to listen or able to have this dialogue and conversation.”

The video set the tone for the presentation. The reservists came to express their fervent support for their home, not to delve into the nuances of Israeli society.


(full article online)

Non-Jewish Israelis Defend Their Country


----------



## Sixties Fan

[ Here are a few ways in which Israel IS an Apartheid country ]


Why this Muslim Arab joined Israel's military

Christian Arabs increase integration into Israeli society

Arabs Are Prominent in Israel’s Government | National Review


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL

Sixties Fan said:


> [ Here are a few ways in which Israel IS an Apartheid country ]
> 
> 
> Why this Muslim Arab joined Israel's military
> 
> Christian Arabs increase integration into Israeli society
> 
> Arabs Are Prominent in Israel’s Government | National Review



You are Very Inconsiderate. Those Israeli Haters.,, You’re ruining their day !!!!


----------



## Sixties Fan

ILOVEISRAEL said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> [ Here are a few ways in which Israel IS an Apartheid country ]
> 
> 
> Why this Muslim Arab joined Israel's military
> 
> Christian Arabs increase integration into Israeli society
> 
> Arabs Are Prominent in Israel’s Government | National Review
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are Very Inconsiderate. Those Israeli Haters.,, You’re ruining their day !!!!
Click to expand...

The only thing which ruins their day is Israel's existence .


----------



## Shusha

Billo_Really said:


> Israel is one fucked up country!



Then so are the dozens of other countries with constitutions nearly identical to this new law of Israel's.  The hypocrisy of the international community is astounding.  Again.


----------



## cnm

Sixties Fan said:


> cnm said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> You mean unlike the Democratic Countries of the Arab World?
> 
> 
> 
> I get the impression you're agreeing Israel behaves like Arabs. True?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Do tell us the ways Israel behaves like its Arab neighbors.
Click to expand...

I'm trying to understand what this meant...





> You mean unlike the Democratic Countries of the Arab World?


What did it mean?


----------



## cnm

Shusha said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> 
> Israel is one fucked up country!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then so are the dozens of other countries with constitutions nearly identical to this new law of Israel's.  The hypocrisy of the international community is astounding.  Again.
Click to expand...

Which countries are those? Arab countries?


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL

cnm said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cnm said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> You mean unlike the Democratic Countries of the Arab World?
> 
> 
> 
> I get the impression you're agreeing Israel behaves like Arabs. True?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Do tell us the ways Israel behaves like its Arab neighbors.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I'm trying to understand what this meant...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You mean unlike the Democratic Countries of the Arab World?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What did it mean?
Click to expand...


You have a lot to say about Israel who does have Arabs but when it pertains to the Arab World with their bigotry and intolerance towards the Jewish people and many of those Countries don’t have any Jewish residents there is no response. Typical
Pro Palestinian Mentality of an.


----------



## Shusha

cnm said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> 
> Israel is one fucked up country!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then so are the dozens of other countries with constitutions nearly identical to this new law of Israel's.  The hypocrisy of the international community is astounding.  Again.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Which countries are those? Arab countries?
Click to expand...


See?!  You don't even KNOW what is in the constitutions of other countries.  And yet you demonize Israel for this Basic Law.  THAT is exactly the sort of ignorance that fuels unreasonable hatred.  

Yes, certainly Arab countries, including Palestine.  Did you recall any UPROAR about Palestine's Basic Law ratified in 2002?  No?  Why not?  It is near identical to the Israeli one, including the claim to Jerusalem, Arabic as its only official language, Islam as its official religion, and loyalty to the Arab Nation.  And we won't even have to mention the Hamas Charter, do we?  

But also countries like Ireland, Spain, Latvia, Slovakia, Greece, Poland.  There are dozens more.  Easier, perhaps, to name the countries which don't have a national heritage and culture embedded in their constitution.


----------



## Shusha

For those who continue to demonize Israel for its new Basic Law, here is Palestine's Basic Law:

_Palestine is part of the large Arab World, and the Palestinian People are part of the Arab Nation. Arab Unity is an objective which the Palestinian People shall work to achieve.

Jerusalem is the Capital of Palestine.

1. Islam is the official religion in Palestine. Respect and sanctity of all other heavenly religions shall be maintained. 2. The principles of Islamic Shari’a shall be the main source of legislation. 3. Arabic shall be the official language._


Where's the uproar about the treatment of the indigenous Jewish people in Palestine?  Oh WAIT, there are NO JEWS in Palestine.  They were all ethnically cleansed.


----------



## cnm

So you can't say what it means? Poor hasbara.


----------



## cnm

Shusha said:


> But also countries like Ireland,


Yeah? Where does the Constitution of Eire give the right of self determination to a religious sect?
https://www.taoiseach.gov.ie/eng/Hi...unreacht_na_hÉireann_October_2015_Edition.pdf


----------



## cnm

Shusha said:


> For those who continue to demonize Israel for its new Basic Law, here is Palestine's Basic Law:


So you're just like the Arabs, the people you insist you are different from.  Now that's proper hasbara.


----------



## cnm

Shusha said:


> But also countries like Ireland, Spain, Latvia, Slovakia, Greece, Poland. There are dozens more. Easier, perhaps, to name the countries which don't have a national heritage and culture embedded in their constitution.


But Israel has embedded a religion, thereby excluding a portion of its population. Segregation, apartheid.


----------



## rylah

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting and disturbing.  I guess this doesn’t bode well for the Arab Israeli citizens down the road.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What is disturbing about it?  Before you answer, have you read the declarations of independence and constitutions of other States?  Which ones?  Because there is nothing disturbing in this law. It's as typical as dozens of other States.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Because Arab was the language there for centuries.  It seems it is aime at furthet marginslizing the Arab population.  Canada has two, foe example.  I think an Arab Israeli citizen would have a hard time feeling a fully equal citizen.  The part about Jewish settlements....can Arab Israeli's live in them or expand their own with equak access to land and rezources under this?   What is really disturbing are the portions that wete eventually rejected.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> There are dozens of nations which have one official language and minority populations.  Spain, for example, requires all citizens to speak Castilian even if their mother tongue is Catalan or Basque.
> 
> And current law in Israel permits Arabs to have Arab-only settlements while forbidding Jews to do the same.  Much like Jews are not permitted to worship, pray or equally access the Temple Mount.
> 
> It is hypocrisy to demand something of Israel that is not demanded of other nations.  Have you read the constitutions of other nations?  For that matter have you read the Palestinian one?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What law forbids Jews from living in Arab settlements?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'd have to look it up.  Read it in Eugene Kontorovitch's article this morning.
Click to expand...



*And who are discriminated against in tenders for construction? Unexpectedly the Jews*
*Israel Land Authority tenders in Arab communities are open to "local residents" only, while in Jewish communities the tenders appeal to everyone.*

The "Israel Today" test reveals that while tenders for land offered for sale by ILA in small Arab communities are only open to " Local residents , "tenders for land in small Jewish communities do not show a similar reservation .

A review of about 200 tenders for the sale of state land, which are published on the Authority's website, shows the same picture. The land is offered for sale through tenders published on its website and open to private purchasers.

According to the policy of the Israel Lands Authority, in tenders of small localities or localities in national priority areas, only part of the land can be allocated to members of the community. Moreover, when it comes to minority communities, even 100 percent of the land can be allocated to local residents.


----------



## cnm

ILOVEISRAEL said:


> You have a lot to say about Israel who does have Arabs but when it pertains to the Arab World with their bigotry and intolerance towards the Jewish people and many of those Countries don’t have any Jewish residents there is no response. Typical
> Pro Palestinian Mentality of an.


I'm quite happy to say Israel behaves like Arab nations, which I don't consider to be 'western' democracies.


----------



## Shusha

cnm said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> But also countries like Ireland,
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah? Where does the Constitution of Eire give the right of self determination to a religious sect?
> https://www.taoiseach.gov.ie/eng/Historical_Information/The_Constitution/Bunreacht_na_hÉireann_October_2015_Edition.pdf
Click to expand...


Well, the first hump to get over is that the Jewish people are an indigenous ethnic group and not a religion.  While religion is PART of their ethnicity, their ethnicity is distinct and stands on its own grounds just as Irish ethnicity does.

Ireland was mentioned for a couple of reasons:

1.  Its notation of the "Irish Nation" (not unlike the Jewish Nation) and affinity to Irish people living abroad.  _The Irish nation hereby affirms its inalienable, indefeasible, and sovereign right to choose its own form of Government, to determine its relations with other nations, and *to develop its life, political, economic and cultural, in accordance with its own genius and traditions*. _(emphasis mine). ... T_he Irish nation cherishes its special affinity with people of Irish ancestry living abroad _*who share its cultural identity and heritage.  *(emphasis mine)

2.  Special consideration for only one religion _In the Name of the Most Holy Trinity, from Whom is all authority and to Whom, as our final end, all actions both of men and States must be referred, We, the people of Éire, Humbly acknowledging all our obligations to our Divine Lord, Jesus Christ, Who sustained our fathers through centuries of trial..._


----------



## Sixties Fan

cnm said:


> So you can't say what it means? Poor hasbara.


What it means it that you have no idea how many Arab countries are a Democracy.


----------



## Sixties Fan

cnm said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> For those who continue to demonize Israel for its new Basic Law, here is Palestine's Basic Law:
> 
> 
> 
> So you're just like the Arabs, the people you insist you are different from.  Now that's proper hasbara.
Click to expand...

Arabs have done their best, and succeeded, in allowing no Jews to live in Arab conquered lands since 1950.

Israel has nearly 20% of its population of Arab decent.

So much for your snotty remarks.


----------



## Shusha

cnm said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> But also countries like Ireland, Spain, Latvia, Slovakia, Greece, Poland. There are dozens more. Easier, perhaps, to name the countries which don't have a national heritage and culture embedded in their constitution.
> 
> 
> 
> But Israel has embedded a religion, thereby excluding a portion of its population. Segregation, apartheid.
Click to expand...


Actually, Israel has NOT embedded a religion, unlike many Arab and Christian states.  There is no official religion in Israel.  That was not included in the Basic Law, though it could have been.

Many nations, built around a single ethnic culture, including Ireland, address only that specific culture in their constitution.  Are you saying Ireland is apartheid for not addressing its non-Christian minorities in its constitution?


----------



## Shusha

Also, there is nothing in Israel's Basic Law demanding segregation.  That is just a lie.


----------



## Sixties Fan

cnm said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> But also countries like Ireland, Spain, Latvia, Slovakia, Greece, Poland. There are dozens more. Easier, perhaps, to name the countries which don't have a national heritage and culture embedded in their constitution.
> 
> 
> 
> But Israel has embedded a religion, thereby excluding a portion of its population. Segregation, apartheid.
Click to expand...

It excludes no one.  They all have freedom of religion.

Are you going to somehow find a a non Jewish group in Israel which is being kept from freely practicing their religion?
Or are being segregated because they are not Jewish?

Give us some examples.


----------



## Sixties Fan

cnm said:


> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> You have a lot to say about Israel who does have Arabs but when it pertains to the Arab World with their bigotry and intolerance towards the Jewish people and many of those Countries don’t have any Jewish residents there is no response. Typical
> Pro Palestinian Mentality of an.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm quite happy to say Israel behaves like Arab nations, which I don't consider to be 'western' democracies.
Click to expand...

Oh, Look !!!!

You know even less about Arab countries than you think you know about Israel


----------



## Shusha

Theoretically, the Palestine Basic Law also allows for freedom of religion, but it includes a clause stating that freedom of religion can be removed in the interest of "public order and public morals".  Which is pretty broad and the kind of thing that Arab countries use to prevent women from showing their hair or driving.


----------



## cnm

Shusha said:


> Well, the first hump to get over is that the Jewish people are an indigenous ethnic group and not a religion.


Except anyone can convert. Even all those atheist Russian immigrants.


----------



## cnm

Shusha said:


> We, the people of Éire


Not the Catholics of Eire.


----------



## cnm

Sixties Fan said:


> It excludes no one.


It excludes non Jews from the right to determine Israel.


----------



## cnm

Sixties Fan said:


> Or are being segregated because they are not Jewish?
> 
> Give us some examples.





> "the state sees the development of Jewish settlement as a national value and will act to encourage and promote its establishment and consolidation."


----------



## cnm

Look, no one's denying your right to love apartheid, it's just you have to accept you're going to be called on it.


----------



## Sixties Fan

cnm said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well, the first hump to get over is that the Jewish people are an indigenous ethnic group and not a religion.
> 
> 
> 
> Except anyone can convert. Even all those atheist Russian immigrants.
Click to expand...

Most Jews are indigenous of the Land of Israel.  Get over it.


----------



## Sixties Fan

cnm said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Or are being segregated because they are not Jewish?
> 
> Give us some examples.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "the state sees the development of Jewish settlement as a national value and will act to encourage and promote its establishment and consolidation."
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Where in that paragraph is segregation of non Jews?


----------



## Sixties Fan

cnm said:


> Look, no one's denying your right to love apartheid, it's just you have to accept you're going to be called on it.


Sorry, we shall be calling you on calling what Israel is - Apartheid.

That is your ignorance and absolute need to call Israel an Apartheid country without knowing or wanting to know anything about it.

You are not discussing. Much less wanting to know.

You are making endless Apartheid allegations even those who went through Apartheid in South Africa reject.

South African Leader Rejects Apartheid Slander Against Israel

Opinion | Why Israel Is Nothing Like Apartheid South Africa


You clearly have no idea what Apartheid was like in South Africa to be comparing it to Israel.

And I would venture to say that you have never been to either country.


----------



## Sixties Fan

cnm said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> It excludes no one.
> 
> 
> 
> It excludes non Jews from the right to determine Israel.
Click to expand...

Where in the world does any minority determine what the country they live in is going to be like, going to be called, what religion, etc, etc ?

What a master of the absurd you are


----------



## Billo_Really

Shusha said:


> Then so are the dozens of other countries with constitutions nearly identical to this new law of Israel's.  The hypocrisy of the international community is astounding.  Again.


Other countries don't codify apartheid.

You people are disgusting!


----------



## Billo_Really

Shusha said:


> See?!  You don't even KNOW what is in the constitutions of other countries.  And yet you demonize Israel for this Basic Law.  THAT is exactly the sort of ignorance that fuels unreasonable hatred.
> 
> Yes, certainly Arab countries, including Palestine.  Did you recall any UPROAR about Palestine's Basic Law ratified in 2002?  No?  Why not?  It is near identical to the Israeli one, including the claim to Jerusalem, Arabic as its only official language, Islam as its official religion, and loyalty to the Arab Nation.  And we won't even have to mention the Hamas Charter, do we?
> 
> But also countries like Ireland, Spain, Latvia, Slovakia, Greece, Poland.  There are dozens more.  Easier, perhaps, to name the countries which don't have a national heritage and culture embedded in their constitution.


When did Israelis lose their humanity?  Or do you even care?


----------



## cnm

Sixties Fan said:


> Where in the world does any minority determine what the country they live in is going to be like, going to be called, what religion, etc, etc ?


In all countries I call Western Democracies, minorities have the same rights to national determination as the majority. I exclude Middle Eastern apartheid states from that description.


----------



## cnm

Sixties Fan said:


> cnm said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Or are being segregated because they are not Jewish?
> 
> Give us some examples.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "the state sees the development of Jewish settlement as a national value and will act to encourage and promote its establishment and consolidation."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Where in that paragraph is segregation of non Jews?
Click to expand...

Jewish settlement. Especially as that is on land Israel is stealing from its owners while denying them rights.


----------



## Sixties Fan

cnm said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Where in the world does any minority determine what the country they live in is going to be like, going to be called, what religion, etc, etc ?
> 
> 
> 
> In all countries I call Western Democracies, minorities have the same rights to national determination as the majority. I exclude Middle Eastern apartheid states from that description.
Click to expand...

Name the countries and the minorities which have achieved self determination in those countries.
And where in their constitution is it written?
Be specific .

By the way, are you sure that you do know the meaning of self-determination when it applies to Israel and its minorities ?

Israel's minorities would have the right to create what laws which would not affect the Jewish majority?

The USA's minorities would have the right to create what laws which would not affect other minorities or any majority?

How would they pass those laws?


----------



## Sixties Fan

cnm said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cnm said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Or are being segregated because they are not Jewish?
> 
> Give us some examples.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "the state sees the development of Jewish settlement as a national value and will act to encourage and promote its establishment and consolidation."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Where in that paragraph is segregation of non Jews?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Jewish settlement.
Click to expand...

Again, your knowledge of Israel, the Middle East and possibly most of the world is nil.

Settlements is not a dirty word.

There are Arab settlements.  Druze settlements and Bedouin settlements.  

They are known as clans.

Clans have existed since forever, especially in Arabia and many parts of the Middle East.

Jews are to Settle their land.  It is part of who they are, what they have always done.  Settle ON Their  Land.

It is not any different now, and it is not going to turn into an ugly word, or a forbidden action simply because you do not understand what you are talking about.


----------



## cnm

Sixties Fan said:


> Name the countries and the minorities which have achieved self determination in those countries.
> And where in their constitution is it written?
> Be specific .


Your reading comprehension is not my problem.


----------



## cnm

Sixties Fan said:


> Jews are to Settle their land. It is part of who they are, what they have always done. Settle ON Their Land


Segregation. Apartheid. Stealing land. Seems you refuse to accept the meaning of those words. That's ok, it's understood Israel's position as a western democracy cannot survive if you accept the usual meanings. Really it should just settle for being a Middle Eastern apartheid state. It would all make sense then and you could stop pretending.


----------



## Shusha

cnm said:


> It excludes non Jews from the right to determine Israel.



Just like non-Irish are excluded from the right to determine Ireland.  That is what self-determination is FOR. That is what national identity is for the majority of countries.  The Arab Palestinians are not excluded from having self-determination -- they are only excluded from having self-determination in Israel and in other places where other people have their own self-determination.  

Are you going to likewise argue that Arab Palestinians can't declare a State of Palestine for the Palestinians?


----------



## Shusha

Billo_Really said:


> [Other countries don't codify apartheid.
> 
> You people are disgusting!



Other countries have the same language in their constitutions.  Why is it "apartheid" when Israel does it and not when Spain does it?


----------



## Shusha

cnm said:


> In all countries I call Western Democracies, minorities have the same rights to national determination as the majority.



Wait, what?!  I don't believe you understand what you are talking about.  You don't seem to understand what "national self-determination" means.  

Do the Jewish people have a right to national self-determination, in, say, Spain?  Why or why not?  What about Morocco?  Or Iraq?  Why or why not?

Look, NO ONE is saying that the Arab Palestinians are excluded from national self-determination.  But when they get it -- it will be in Palestine and not in Israel.  Just as Jewish self-determination will be in Israel.  That is the normative, acceptable way of solving these types of civil conflicts.  Its happened to dozens of former Empires and larger Nations -- they become self-determining new nations.  Yugoslavia.  Czechoslovakia.  USSR.  The Ottoman Empire.  Palestine.  

It is you who are excluding the Jewish people from the same rights enjoyed by those other peoples.


----------



## Shusha

cnm said:


> Segregation. Apartheid. Stealing land. Seems you refuse to accept the meaning of those words. That's ok, it's understood Israel's position as a western democracy cannot survive if you accept the usual meanings. Really it should just settle for being a Middle Eastern apartheid state. It would all make sense then and you could stop pretending.



There is no call for either segregation or apartheid in this Basic Law passed by Israel.  It is you who are placing special meanings on Israel.  

Is Czechoslovakia segregated?  Is it apartheid?  What about Yugoslavia?  What about the territories of the former Ottoman Empire?  What about North and South Korea?  Segregation?  Apartheid?  What about Catalonia wanting to separate from Spain?  Segregation?  Apartheid?


----------



## Coyote

rylah said:


> cnm said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Unlike the Dutch people, Jews originated in the land of Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> Of course YHWH gave South Africa to the Boers. They said so.
> 
> _Canaan is the ancient name for the land of Israel. The Torah gave Abraham the land of Canaan, which in some cases stretched from southern Syria to the Eastern Sinai and, in other Torah references, was only a small strip hugging the Mediterranean. Under the leadership of Joshua the Israelites conquered Canaan, which had previously been divided into seven city states. Today, the land of Canaan is known as Palestine, Eretz Yisrael and Israel.
> The Canaanites_​
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> But Penelope says my mother was a Hittite and my father an Amorite.
Click to expand...

That sounds like something out of Monty Python....


----------



## Coyote

rylah said:


> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> 
> Update:
> An important part of the law was rejected, among the opponents was President Rivlin.
> The law was about to allow municipalities to reject non-Jewish residents.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The clause would _allow for communities, including "of a single religion or a single nationality", to build separate towns._
> http://www.iataskforce.org/sites/default/files/resource/resource-1586.pdf
> 
> This includes Arab municipalities.
Click to expand...

I think it is bad idea for communities to be legally segregated.  For one thing, it almost always seems to lead to inequitable division of resources.  Minority  communities, usually poorer and fighting discrimination, end up with substandard infrastructure and education.  Lest you think I am picking on Israel, it’s true of many countries including the US.


----------



## Coyote

rylah said:


> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> fncceo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> 
> Update:
> An important part of the law was rejected, among the opponents was President Rivlin.
> The law was about to allow municipalities to reject non-Jewish residents.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Baby steps.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sounds not so democratic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It sounds middle eastern.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Such is impossible in Syria.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This is how middle eastern society has lived for millennias. Jewish, Druze and Kurdish villages in different countries. A natural human instinct is to gather around people with similar behavior.
> Actually it's the basis of every society/country.
> 
> I don't have a problem with either mixed or homogeneous villages and towns.
> *It's actually nice to have both.*
Click to expand...

I agree as long people have the freedom to choose and are not barred.


----------



## Coyote

BlackFlag said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Another one of your lies.
> 
> Israel will definitely attempt to "kick out" any Arab or Muslim who perpetrates any act of terrorism in Israel.  All countries do it.
> 
> You are truly ill informed about Israel and what happens there.  Who comes, who stays, who is allowed to stay.
> 
> Think most asylum seekers in Israel are African? Try Ukrainian
> 
> 
> More.  Give me more of what you read in your "We hate Israel" sites
> 
> 
> 
> Again, you abandon the conversation because you have no argument.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> "I" abandoned the conversation !!!!
> 
> I will wait for all of your evidence to what you were alleging. I have seen none so far.
> 
> Links, please, to all the allegations you insist we are not discussing and have abandoned.
> 
> Evidence.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It is an open fact that the process of becoming a citizen in Israel is prohibitive unless you are of the Jewish faith.  You cannot refute that.  Also, the entire topic of this thread is about how the theocratic Israeli government declared that onlish Jewish followers have a right of self determination in Israel.  They have no interest in a peace process with non-Jews, and the U.S. should abandon them to their fate whether it is a good one or a bad one.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 1)  Debunked
> 
> Jerusalem Palestinians still seek Israeli citizenship despite Trump declaration
> 
> More Palestinians in Jerusalem seek Israeli citizenship
> 
> 2) Debunked.
> 
> Herzl was not a religion Jew.  None of the founders was a religious Theocrat.  None of the Presidents or Prime Ministers of Israel have been Theocrats.  Theocrats do not run the State of Israel.
> 
> Secularism in Israel - Wikipedia
> 
> 3)  You are too ignorant to understand the meaning of the expression
> Self-Determination when it comes to the indigenous people of anywhere in the world. And you do it on purpose.
> 
> 4)  Debunked
> Israel has a Peace Treaty with two of its Arab neighbors.  Egypt and Jordan.  You clearly do not care how those Peace Treaties came about.
> You clearly do not know or care what the charters of the PLO, Hamas and Fatah say about negotiating peace with Israel, much less with Jews.
> 
> 5)  With the US help, or without, Israel would strive, as it is now.
> It is not money which matters but what is done with it.
> 
> Arabs choose terrorism.
> 
> Jews choose progress.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nothing was debunked in that post.  In fact, you did not address either point I made except to say that indigenous people have a right to self-determination, except that by Israel’s reasoning all people of Abrahamic faith can claim to be indigenous to Israel; of course they passed a law saying that *only those of the Jewish faith have any right to self determination*.
Click to expand...


Only within Israel.


----------



## Coyote

Circe said:


> Good for the Israelis. How I wish we would do something like that here.


Like what?


----------



## Coyote

Sixties Fan said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> Lots of nations are attacked.  What a colossally stupid thing of you to say.
> 
> 
> 
> Name the current countries which are being attacked as to their validity to exist.
> 
> Or to the rights of its indigenous people being sovereign of any part of their ancient homeland.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Off the top of my head, Catalonia and Tibet.  There are many others but I’m not sure how to look it up.  As for countries that were attacked in the last hundred years alone, too many to name.
> 
> Oh... and Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Palestine was never a country.  A Nation, or anything else but the name of a region, given by the Romans after they defeated the JEWS
> in 135 CE.
> 
> Catalonia was never a country.  It wants Independence from Spain, which is different.
> 
> Tibet is a country conquered by the Chinese.  But the Tibetans are not being denied their sovereign or indigenous rights to Tibet.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> All 3 of those countries are being denied their perceived indigenous rights to self-determination in their country.  And they’re not even arguing that minorities they don’t like should have lesser rights than they do.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You do not care that what you quote is nothing but a lie.
> But the Arabs, citizens and loyal to Israel do
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So, who do you believe?
> 
> The lying sites you read or watch, or the above Arabs and other minorities who have the same rights and are proud of being Israelis?
Click to expand...

Arabs do face discrimination in Israel, you do realize that don’t you?


----------



## Sixties Fan

While groups are not separated by official policy, Israel has a number of different sectors within the society that maintain their strong cultural, religious, ideological, and/or ethnic identity. The Israeli foreign ministry maintains that in spite of the existing social cleavages and economic disparities, the political systems and the courts represent strict legal and civic equality. The Israeli foreign ministry describes the country as: "Not a meltingpot society, but rather more of a mosaic made up of different population groups coexisting in the framework of a democratic state".[244]

According to Ishmael Khaldi, an Arab citizen of Israel and the nation's first high-ranking Muslim in the Israeli foreign service, while Israeli society is far from perfect, minorities in Israel fare far better than any other country in the Middle East. He wrote:[245]



In 2009, the Israeli Arab Journalist Khaled Abu Toameh, writing for the Gatestone Institute, declared to a Muslim audience during the Durban Review Conference, that, while there are serious problems facing the Arab sector in Israel: "Israel is a wonderful place to live and we are happy to be there. Israel is a free and open country. If I were given the choice, I would rather live in Israel as a second class citizen than as a first class citizen in Cairo, Gaza, Amman or Ramallah."[246]

(full article online)

Arab citizens of Israel - Wikipedia


----------



## BlackFlag

Sixties Fan said:


> While groups are not separated by official policy, Israel has a number of different sectors within the society that maintain their strong cultural, religious, ideological, and/or ethnic identity. The Israeli foreign ministry maintains that in spite of the existing social cleavages and economic disparities, the political systems and the courts represent strict legal and civic equality. The Israeli foreign ministry describes the country as: "Not a meltingpot society, but rather more of a mosaic made up of different population groups coexisting in the framework of a democratic state".[244]
> 
> According to Ishmael Khaldi, an Arab citizen of Israel and the nation's first high-ranking Muslim in the Israeli foreign service, while Israeli society is far from perfect, minorities in Israel fare far better than any other country in the Middle East. He wrote:[245]
> 
> 
> 
> In 2009, the Israeli Arab Journalist Khaled Abu Toameh, writing for the Gatestone Institute, declared to a Muslim audience during the Durban Review Conference, that, while there are serious problems facing the Arab sector in Israel: "Israel is a wonderful place to live and we are happy to be there. Israel is a free and open country. If I were given the choice, I would rather live in Israel as a second class citizen than as a first class citizen in Cairo, Gaza, Amman or Ramallah."[246]
> 
> (full article online)
> 
> Arab citizens of Israel - Wikipedia


What a standard!  Minorities fare better in Israel than they do in Yemen!  The Israeli government is working to remedy that though, as evidenced by the declaration that is the topic of this thread.


----------



## admonit

Coyote said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> 
> Update:
> An important part of the law was rejected, among the opponents was President Rivlin.
> The law was about to allow municipalities to reject non-Jewish residents.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The clause would _allow for communities, including "of a single religion or a single nationality", to build separate towns._
> http://www.iataskforce.org/sites/default/files/resource/resource-1586.pdf
> 
> This includes Arab municipalities.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I think it is bad idea for communities to be legally segregated.  For one thing, it almost always seems to lead to inequitable division of resources.  Minority  communities, usually poorer and fighting discrimination, end up with substandard infrastructure and education.  Lest you think I am picking on Israel, it’s true of many countries including the US.
Click to expand...

Permitting Arab communities and forbidding Jewish communities is a good idea?


----------



## admonit

Coyote said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> fncceo said:
> 
> 
> 
> Baby steps.
> 
> 
> 
> Sounds not so democratic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It sounds middle eastern.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Such is impossible in Syria.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This is how middle eastern society has lived for millennias. Jewish, Druze and Kurdish villages in different countries. A natural human instinct is to gather around people with similar behavior.
> Actually it's the basis of every society/country.
> 
> I don't have a problem with either mixed or homogeneous villages and towns.
> *It's actually nice to have both.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I agree as long people have the freedom to choose and are not barred.
Click to expand...

You cannot choose something that is forbidden.


----------



## admonit

Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Name the current countries which are being attacked as to their validity to exist.
> 
> Or to the rights of its indigenous people being sovereign of any part of their ancient homeland.
> 
> 
> 
> Off the top of my head, Catalonia and Tibet.  There are many others but I’m not sure how to look it up.  As for countries that were attacked in the last hundred years alone, too many to name.
> 
> Oh... and Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Palestine was never a country.  A Nation, or anything else but the name of a region, given by the Romans after they defeated the JEWS
> in 135 CE.
> 
> Catalonia was never a country.  It wants Independence from Spain, which is different.
> 
> Tibet is a country conquered by the Chinese.  But the Tibetans are not being denied their sovereign or indigenous rights to Tibet.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> All 3 of those countries are being denied their perceived indigenous rights to self-determination in their country.  And they’re not even arguing that minorities they don’t like should have lesser rights than they do.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You do not care that what you quote is nothing but a lie.
> But the Arabs, citizens and loyal to Israel do
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So, who do you believe?
> 
> The lying sites you read or watch, or the above Arabs and other minorities who have the same rights and are proud of being Israelis?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Arabs do face discrimination in Israel, you do realize that don’t you?
Click to expand...

The Teacher came.


----------



## fncceo

admonit said:


> You cannot choose something that is forbidden.



Of course you can.  You just have to be willing to accept the consequences.

Every act is a choice.


----------



## flacaltenn

*There were 3 threads on this topic. They are merged. The conversations will sort out by morning.*


----------



## fncceo

flacaltenn said:


> *There were 3 threads on this topic. They are merged. The conversations will sort out by morning.*



Not exactly sure I'd classify this as a conversation, by the strict definition of the word.


----------



## admonit

fncceo said:


> admonit said:
> 
> 
> 
> You cannot choose something that is forbidden.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Of course you can.  You just have to be willing to accept the consequences.
> 
> Every act is a choice.
Click to expand...

Crimes and illegality is not the subject of this discussion.


----------



## Billo_Really

Shusha said:


> Other countries have the same language in their constitutions.  Why is it "apartheid" when Israel does it and not when Spain does it?


You fuckers are much worse than South Africa.


----------



## rylah

Billo_Really said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Other countries have the same language in their constitutions.  Why is it "apartheid" when Israel does it and not when Spain does it?
> 
> 
> 
> You fuckers are much worse than South Africa.
Click to expand...


There's no way of putting Israel in that category, without exercising the discrimination mentioned in the accusation.


----------



## rylah

Coyote said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cnm said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Unlike the Dutch people, Jews originated in the land of Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> Of course YHWH gave South Africa to the Boers. They said so.
> 
> _Canaan is the ancient name for the land of Israel. The Torah gave Abraham the land of Canaan, which in some cases stretched from southern Syria to the Eastern Sinai and, in other Torah references, was only a small strip hugging the Mediterranean. Under the leadership of Joshua the Israelites conquered Canaan, which had previously been divided into seven city states. Today, the land of Canaan is known as Palestine, Eretz Yisrael and Israel.
> The Canaanites_​
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> But Penelope says my mother was a Hittite and my father an Amorite.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That sounds like something out of Monty Python....
Click to expand...


I could say it in the last surviving Canaanite dialect if You like...


----------



## rylah

Coyote said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> 
> Update:
> An important part of the law was rejected, among the opponents was President Rivlin.
> The law was about to allow municipalities to reject non-Jewish residents.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The clause would _allow for communities, including "of a single religion or a single nationality", to build separate towns._
> http://www.iataskforce.org/sites/default/files/resource/resource-1586.pdf
> 
> This includes Arab municipalities.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I think it is bad idea for communities to be legally segregated.  For one thing, it almost always seems to lead to inequitable division of resources.  Minority  communities, usually poorer and fighting discrimination, end up with substandard infrastructure and education.  Lest you think I am picking on Israel, it’s true of many countries including the US.
Click to expand...

Minorities are supposed to be "weak" by default in a stigmatic liberal doctrine.
In this case too it's hard to measure where a systematic focus on eliminating discrimination turns into an evident privilege in the face of the law in practice. 
In my opinion, the Arab community is privileged in many ways.

Without going into a cliché line of accusations, this is a very interesting subject of safeguarding culture vs city planning and all around it.

I agree that it's a bad idea for a state to segregate communities, but at the same time it raises other comparable issues. For example should a state force communities to mix? Should a state at the same time enable safeguarding the cultural diversity/distinction for developing tourism, and simply the tradition of the inhabitants?
If we put in percentage - how does a state develop a plan where it can assure the proportion between promoting minorities move into mixed cities, versus the existing number of homogeneous villages for each minority?


----------



## rylah

Coyote said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> fncceo said:
> 
> 
> 
> Baby steps.
> 
> 
> 
> Sounds not so democratic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It sounds middle eastern.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Such is impossible in Syria.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This is how middle eastern society has lived for millennias. Jewish, Druze and Kurdish villages in different countries. A natural human instinct is to gather around people with similar behavior.
> Actually it's the basis of every society/country.
> 
> I don't have a problem with either mixed or homogeneous villages and towns.
> *It's actually nice to have both.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I agree as long people have the freedom to choose and are not barred.
Click to expand...


Now tell me what happens when an Arab family sues Israel for not being allowed into a Druze village?


----------



## Coyote

admonit said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> 
> Update:
> An important part of the law was rejected, among the opponents was President Rivlin.
> The law was about to allow municipalities to reject non-Jewish residents.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The clause would _allow for communities, including "of a single religion or a single nationality", to build separate towns._
> http://www.iataskforce.org/sites/default/files/resource/resource-1586.pdf
> 
> This includes Arab municipalities.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I think it is bad idea for communities to be legally segregated.  For one thing, it almost always seems to lead to inequitable division of resources.  Minority  communities, usually poorer and fighting discrimination, end up with substandard infrastructure and education.  Lest you think I am picking on Israel, it’s true of many countries including the US.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Permitting Arab communities and forbidding Jewish communities is a good idea?
Click to expand...


I did not say that.


----------



## Coyote

rylah said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sounds not so democratic.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It sounds middle eastern.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Such is impossible in Syria.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This is how middle eastern society has lived for millennias. Jewish, Druze and Kurdish villages in different countries. A natural human instinct is to gather around people with similar behavior.
> Actually it's the basis of every society/country.
> 
> I don't have a problem with either mixed or homogeneous villages and towns.
> *It's actually nice to have both.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I agree as long people have the freedom to choose and are not barred.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Now tell me what happens when an Arab family sues Israel for not being allowed into a Druze village?
Click to expand...

Why should be legally barred from living somewhere based on ethnicity, race or religion?


----------



## Coyote

admonit said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sounds not so democratic.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It sounds middle eastern.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Such is impossible in Syria.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This is how middle eastern society has lived for millennias. Jewish, Druze and Kurdish villages in different countries. A natural human instinct is to gather around people with similar behavior.
> Actually it's the basis of every society/country.
> 
> I don't have a problem with either mixed or homogeneous villages and towns.
> *It's actually nice to have both.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I agree as long people have the freedom to choose and are not barred.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You cannot choose something that is forbidden.
Click to expand...

Duh...that is my point.


----------



## P F Tinmore

*Israel Legislates Apartheid into Law*

**


----------



## Sixties Fan

P F Tinmore said:


> *Israel Legislates Apartheid into Law*
> 
> **


Now, for our benefit, list the ways in which Israel is establishing the same laws, etc as was done in South Africa.

Because if there is Zero ways in your list.....(and that is what we are going to get) it is not Apartheid.

Never has been and never will be in Israel.

Anti Israel "News Organizations" do not create the truth or reality.

Definitely NOT  "The Real News"


----------



## Coyote

rylah said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> 
> Update:
> An important part of the law was rejected, among the opponents was President Rivlin.
> The law was about to allow municipalities to reject non-Jewish residents.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The clause would _allow for communities, including "of a single religion or a single nationality", to build separate towns._
> http://www.iataskforce.org/sites/default/files/resource/resource-1586.pdf
> 
> This includes Arab municipalities.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I think it is bad idea for communities to be legally segregated.  For one thing, it almost always seems to lead to inequitable division of resources.  Minority  communities, usually poorer and fighting discrimination, end up with substandard infrastructure and education.  Lest you think I am picking on Israel, it’s true of many countries including the US.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Minorities are supposed to be "weak" by default in a stigmatic liberal doctrine.
> In this case too it's hard to measure where a systematic focus on eliminating discrimination turns into an evident privilege in the face of the law in practice.
> In my opinion, the Arab community is privileged in many ways.
> 
> Without going into a cliché line of accusations, this is a very interesting subject of safeguarding culture vs city planning and all around it.
> 
> I agree that it's a bad idea for a state to segregate communities, but at the same time it raises other comparable issues. For example should a state force communities to mix? Should a state at the same time enable safeguarding the cultural diversity/distinction for developing tourism, and simply the tradition of the inhabitants?
> If we put in percentage - how does a state develop a plan where it can assure the proportion between promoting minorities move into mixed cities, versus the existing number of homogeneous villages for each minority?
Click to expand...

The Arab minority is not priveledged, their communities often suffer from a lack of resources, including government spending, infrastructure and education.  Those are the sort of things that segregation reinforces.

But you actually make a really good point on protecting minority culture and communities in the face of large scale development and expansion and I don’t know the answer to that, it is a problem faced by many countries trying to balance indiginous communities with development.  Should you force desegregation?  No.   But that raises questions.

How do you protect minority communities from being overtaken by majority expansion?  Gentrification?  Cultural dominance?

How do you do it in a fair way?  You can legally prevent outside cultures from living there, but then to be fair you need to allow everyone to do that?  If the dominant culture can bar minorities from their communities what does that lead to?  De facto segregation and usually a lack of upward mobility and entrenched poverty for minority communities.  America is a good example of this.  The only way I see it working would be to allow minority communities to be protected in order to preserve their culture and viability, but keep the majority communities open as their culture is the culture of the nation.  But that would be seen as unfair I am sure.  I think America is a good example as to how these things have played out.


----------



## Coyote

rylah said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cnm said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Unlike the Dutch people, Jews originated in the land of Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> Of course YHWH gave South Africa to the Boers. They said so.
> 
> _Canaan is the ancient name for the land of Israel. The Torah gave Abraham the land of Canaan, which in some cases stretched from southern Syria to the Eastern Sinai and, in other Torah references, was only a small strip hugging the Mediterranean. Under the leadership of Joshua the Israelites conquered Canaan, which had previously been divided into seven city states. Today, the land of Canaan is known as Palestine, Eretz Yisrael and Israel.
> The Canaanites_​
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> But Penelope says my mother was a Hittite and my father an Amorite.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That sounds like something out of Monty Python....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I could say it in the last surviving Canaanite dialect if You like...
Click to expand...

Proper Monty Python dialect would be “your father was a hamster and your mother smelled of elderberries”


----------



## Billo_Really

rylah said:


> There's no way of putting Israel in that category, without exercising the discrimination mentioned in the accusation.



*Mandla Mandela calls Apartheid Israel worse than Apartheid South Africa *
_“Never before in my life has the reality of Apartheid Israel stared me so bluntly in the face as it did today on my visit to Al Aqsa, Bethlehem and Hebron. Standing in the Sacred Sanctuary on the very place that Apartheid Israel installed metal detectors and surveillance cameras against which we protested a few months ago made me realize just how intimidation, illegal occupation and brutality is meted out daily to Palestinians. We cannot be complicit by our silence.”

*Noam Chomsky: Israeli Apartheid ‘Much Worse’ Than South Africa*
Famous American linguist Noam Chomsky has described the actions of the Israeli occupation in Palestine as “worse than South African apartheid”.

*Israel Just Dropped the Pretense of Equality for Palestinian Citizens*
The so-called “Jewish nation-state” bill formalizes in Israeli law the superior rights and privileges that Jewish citizens of the state enjoy over its indigenous Palestinian minority, who comprise roughly 20% of the population.
_​So lets cut the foreplay and bullshit, just tell it for what it really is.
_
_​


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL

P F Tinmore said:


> *Israel Legislates Apartheid into Law*
> 
> **



YAWN...,,,, No Israelis in “ Palestine “.


----------



## admonit

Coyote said:


> admonit said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> 
> Update:
> An important part of the law was rejected, among the opponents was President Rivlin.
> The law was about to allow municipalities to reject non-Jewish residents.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The clause would _allow for communities, including "of a single religion or a single nationality", to build separate towns._
> http://www.iataskforce.org/sites/default/files/resource/resource-1586.pdf
> 
> This includes Arab municipalities.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I think it is bad idea for communities to be legally segregated.  For one thing, it almost always seems to lead to inequitable division of resources.  Minority  communities, usually poorer and fighting discrimination, end up with substandard infrastructure and education.  Lest you think I am picking on Israel, it’s true of many countries including the US.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Permitting Arab communities and forbidding Jewish communities is a good idea?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I did not say that.
Click to expand...

I asked your opinion. You criticize the new law, but said nothing about current situation, when there are a lot of Arab cities and towns with zero Jewish population. So again, is it a good idea?
And, where did you find segregation in the discussed law?


----------



## admonit

Coyote said:


> admonit said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> It sounds middle eastern.
> 
> 
> 
> Such is impossible in Syria.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This is how middle eastern society has lived for millennias. Jewish, Druze and Kurdish villages in different countries. A natural human instinct is to gather around people with similar behavior.
> Actually it's the basis of every society/country.
> 
> I don't have a problem with either mixed or homogeneous villages and towns.
> *It's actually nice to have both.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I agree as long people have the freedom to choose and are not barred.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You cannot choose something that is forbidden.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Duh...that is my point.
Click to expand...

No, it isn't. Your statement is internally controversial. If creation of new specific communities is barred, then there is no freedom to choose.


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL

P F Tinmore said:


> *Israel Legislates Apartheid into Law*
> 
> **



“ Either Israel is a Jewish State it it is a Democracy”.  LOL . Just one more reason why there’s shouldnt be a Palestinian State especially with a No Israelis Allowed Policy !  THANK YOU !!!!


----------



## Shusha

Billo_Really said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Other countries have the same language in their constitutions.  Why is it "apartheid" when Israel does it and not when Spain does it?
> 
> 
> 
> You fuckers are much worse than South Africa.
Click to expand...


Yes, you keep saying that.  But your only argument seems to be:  because Joooooooos.  

Again, why is it labelled apartheid when Israel does it and not when Spain does it?  Or any of a dozen other countries.  It REEKS of a double standard and fall-back position of, "well, I don't really understand all this constitution and nationality stuff -- but if Israel does it -- it must be bad."


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> *Israel Legislates Apartheid into Law*
> 
> **



The video states that having Hebrew as the only official language makes non-Jews "second class citizens" (which they are equating with apartheid).

And yet where is the uproar of Palestine being apartheid?  Spain?  Finland?  France?  Hungary?  Indonesia?  Pakistan?  Portugal?  

For that matter where is the uproar that 31 US States have English as their only official language?  Is the US an apartheid State?


----------



## Coyote

ILOVEISRAEL said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Israel Legislates Apartheid into Law*
> 
> **
> 
> 
> 
> 
> YAWN...,,,, No Israelis in “ Palestine “.
Click to expand...

There is no Palestine nation.

Until there is, there is no meaningful comparison.


----------



## Coyote

admonit said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> admonit said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> 
> Such is impossible in Syria.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is how middle eastern society has lived for millennias. Jewish, Druze and Kurdish villages in different countries. A natural human instinct is to gather around people with similar behavior.
> Actually it's the basis of every society/country.
> 
> I don't have a problem with either mixed or homogeneous villages and towns.
> *It's actually nice to have both.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I agree as long people have the freedom to choose and are not barred.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You cannot choose something that is forbidden.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Duh...that is my point.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No, it isn't. Your statement is internally controversial. If creation of new specific communities is barred, then there is no freedom to choose.
Click to expand...


There is no freedom to choose if they are legally barred from choices.  Which way is better?  Communitees will often self segregate - people choose to move into like minded areas.  But they choose, they aren't barred.


----------



## admonit

As expected, the new law caused a hysterical response from anti-Semites and haters of Israel. They react to the words "Jewish People" and "Israel" like a bull to a red rag.


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Israel Legislates Apartheid into Law*
> 
> **
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The video states that having Hebrew as the only official language makes non-Jews "second class citizens" (which they are equating with apartheid).
> 
> And yet where is the uproar of Palestine being apartheid?  Spain?  Finland?  France?  Hungary?  Indonesia?  Pakistan?  Portugal?
> 
> For that matter where is the uproar that 31 US States have English as their only official language?  Is the US an apartheid State?
Click to expand...

 
I think it depends on how Arabic is treated.  What does "protected status mean" and what does it mean in relation to an "official language"?.  Wasn't part of the various mandates and charters to not impinge on Arab culture in the Arab communities...?  Israel is somewhat unique in that these issues are occurring TODAY, not centuries ago, as in Spain.  Or France.


----------



## Coyote

admonit said:


> As expected, the new law caused a hysterical response from anti-Semites and haters of Israel. They react to the words "Jewish People" and "Israel" like a bull to a red rag.



Perhaps but I also think there is more to it than that.  Clearly in the eyes of some there is nothing Israel can do that is acceptable even though other countries do the same.  But there are also other issues.

What was particularly informing were the parts of the new law that were eventually removed.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> The Arab minority is not priveledged, their communities often suffer from a lack of resources, including government spending, infrastructure and education.  Those are the sort of things that segregation reinforces.



I think rylah's point is that one of the ways of addressing this disparity of resources is by "affirmative action", that is -- creating artificial privilege in the  form of special consideration such as allocating additional resources, creating Arab-only communities, etc.  

I would also question just how much Arab communities suffer from lack of resources and government spending, infrastructure and education and the reasons for that within Israel "proper" (not Area C).  If the Israeli government deliberately underfunds Arab communities that is obviously a problem which should be addressed, but I'm not yet convinced that is true.  



> But you actually make a really good point on protecting minority culture and communities in the face of large scale development and expansion and I don’t know the answer to that, it is a problem faced by many countries trying to balance indiginous communities with development.  Should you force desegregation?  No.   But that raises questions.
> 
> How do you protect minority communities from being overtaken by majority expansion?  Gentrification?  Cultural dominance?



Its important to point out that, globally, Israel IS the minority community and it is trying to protect itself from being overtaken by the dominant culture in the area.  That is part of the reason Israel feels the need to assert her intent to protect Jewish culture, the Jewish language, the Jewish religion and Jewish history though this sort of Basic Law.  (This would be true even without the raging antisemitism in the world that makes it so much worse and Israel's own struggle with being held to double standards -- including the double standard of creating a constitution which is normative in all other places in the world.) 

As a comparative example, France has placed constitutional protections on the French language because it is being dominated in the EU by English and German and France is invested in preserving its linguistic culture.  



> The only way I see it working would be to allow minority communities to be protected in order to preserve their culture and viability, but keep the majority communities open as their culture is the culture of the nation.  But that would be seen as unfair I am sure.  I think America is a good example as to how these things have played out.



And this is exactly what Israel has done, legislatively.  Jewish communities are prohibited from rejecting applicants for residence based on ethnicity, religion, etc.  BUT Arab-only communities are protected as such by the State.  This doesn't tend to work so well in practice, and I think the US is a good example of that.  

But another thing to consider is that the conflict itself creates significant problems.  On some level, there is an underlying hostility and fear (both sides) that places like the US don't have to deal with.  It makes the problem that much harder to engage with, let alone solve.  I think it CAN be solved, once the conflict is set aside.


----------



## admonit

Coyote said:


> admonit said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> admonit said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> This is how middle eastern society has lived for millennias. Jewish, Druze and Kurdish villages in different countries. A natural human instinct is to gather around people with similar behavior.
> Actually it's the basis of every society/country.
> 
> I don't have a problem with either mixed or homogeneous villages and towns.
> *It's actually nice to have both.*
> 
> 
> 
> I agree as long people have the freedom to choose and are not barred.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You cannot choose something that is forbidden.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Duh...that is my point.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No, it isn't. Your statement is internally controversial. If creation of new specific communities is barred, then there is no freedom to choose.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There is no freedom to choose if they are legally barred from choices.  Which way is better?  Communitees will often self segregate - people choose to move into like minded areas.  But they choose, they aren't barred.
Click to expand...

What choices? To settle in a community against the will of the members of the community?
Besides, the text of the law does not contain prohibitions.


----------



## Shusha

Billo_Really said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> There's no way of putting Israel in that category, without exercising the discrimination mentioned in the accusation.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Mandla Mandela calls Apartheid Israel worse than Apartheid South Africa *
> _“Never before in my life has the reality of Apartheid Israel stared me so bluntly in the face as it did today on my visit to Al Aqsa, Bethlehem and Hebron. Standing in the Sacred Sanctuary on the very place that Apartheid Israel installed metal detectors and surveillance cameras against which we protested a few months ago made me realize just how intimidation, illegal occupation and brutality is meted out daily to Palestinians. We cannot be complicit by our silence.”
> 
> *Noam Chomsky: Israeli Apartheid ‘Much Worse’ Than South Africa*
> Famous American linguist Noam Chomsky has described the actions of the Israeli occupation in Palestine as “worse than South African apartheid”.
> 
> *Israel Just Dropped the Pretense of Equality for Palestinian Citizens*
> The so-called “Jewish nation-state” bill formalizes in Israeli law the superior rights and privileges that Jewish citizens of the state enjoy over its indigenous Palestinian minority, who comprise roughly 20% of the population.
> _​So lets cut the foreplay and bullshit, just tell it for what it really is.
> _
> _​
Click to expand...


This is just ridiculous.  Translation:  Israel is apartheid because someone else said so.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote 

I know I say this alot, but I sure appreciate your comments on this board.  Thank you for recognizing the nuances and complexity of these discussions and being able to argue the Palestinian side with grace and intelligence.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Israel Legislates Apartheid into Law*
> 
> **
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The video states that having Hebrew as the only official language makes non-Jews "second class citizens" (which they are equating with apartheid).
> 
> And yet where is the uproar of Palestine being apartheid?  Spain?  Finland?  France?  Hungary?  Indonesia?  Pakistan?  Portugal?
> 
> For that matter where is the uproar that 31 US States have English as their only official language?  Is the US an apartheid State?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think it depends on how Arabic is treated.  What does "protected status mean" and what does it mean in relation to an "official language"?.  Wasn't part of the various mandates and charters to not impinge on Arab culture in the Arab communities...?  Israel is somewhat unique in that these issues are occurring TODAY, not centuries ago, as in Spain.  Or France.
Click to expand...


Well, I think you dodged my question.  Some of these countries developed and formed their constitutions, or renewed them, within the past hundred years.  And we have nations from former countries like Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia, USSR, and even the Ottoman Empire over the same time period who did not face the same level of scrutiny and hostility.

I appreciate your question about how Arabic will be treated going into the future, and I will address it, but first, please address my point -- that there is a double standard about how Israel's Basic Law is treated vs. the SAME LAWS in other countries.  (Including Palestine and Gaza, which are highly relevant).


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Arab minority is not priveledged, their communities often suffer from a lack of resources, including government spending, infrastructure and education.  Those are the sort of things that segregation reinforces.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think rylah's point is that one of the ways of addressing this disparity of resources is by "affirmative action", that is -- creating artificial privilege in the  form of special consideration such as allocating additional resources, creating Arab-only communities, etc.
> 
> I would also question just how much Arab communities suffer from lack of resources and government spending, infrastructure and education and the reasons for that within Israel "proper" (not Area C).  If the Israeli government deliberately underfunds Arab communities that is obviously a problem which should be addressed, but I'm not yet convinced that is true.
Click to expand...


It's interesting pointing out "affirmative action" because there are parallel's to the US and it's traditionally underpriveledged minorities - native Americans, black communities.  Difficult problems to resolve.

Israeli legislators have recognized the inequality in government spending - this article is from 2015 (I'm not sure where this legislative effort ended up) but it points out the inequities:

Israel looks to address funding gaps for Arab community with $3.9 billion plan
_The largest ever government plan to advance the economic development of Israel’s Arab population will go to the cabinet for approval on Wednesday, but Israeli Arab leaders said they were skeptical the ambitious plan would be put into effect given the current atmosphere in the country. 


The proposal calls for 15 billion shekels ($3.86 billion) in extra funding on top of anything now allocated to Arab communities in the state budget. The money is to be devoted to developing infrastructure, industry, education and healthcare. The details of the plan were ironed out over the last two weeks in discussions between treasury officials and MK Ayman Odeh, chairman of the Joint Arab List. 


But Arab lawmakers and public figures have expressed doubts about the likelihood of the plan being implemented, especially given the current atmosphere in Israel. The cabinet was supposed to approve the plan on Sunday, but the vote was delayed amid opposition from Likud ministers, including from Culture Minister Miri Regev, who said the plan did not include mixed cities of Hafia, Tel Aviv-Jaffa, Ramle and Lod. Sources said Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu felt uncomfortable approving the measure before the meeting of the Likud Central Committee Tuesday. _

_“We will be wiser after the cabinet meeting. Meanwhile, we are talking about promises and maybe a decision, which in the end has to be implemented,” said Sakhnin Mayor Mazen Ghanaim, who is also head of the Higher Arab Monitoring Committee. “If it is implemented, it will be a step in the right direction. Anyone who thinks this will lead to equality is wrong. It’s a step in the right direction on a long road,” he added. _
*

The draft resolution details the gaps between Israeli Jews and Arabs. While Arabs constitute about 20% of Israel’s population, only 7% of the government’s budget for public transportation goes to Arab communities. *_Moreover, some 34% of those killed in traffic accidents are Arab._ 

*Only 3.5% of industrial zones in Israel are in Arab communities. *
_

According to figures for 2014, 75.4% of Arab men between the ages of 25 and 64 were employed, compared with 85.7% of Jewish men who are not Haredi. Only 33.2% of adult Arab women were employed, versus 79.9% Jewish women. The plan calls for spending 24 million shekels on incentives to employers and small and medium-size businesses in the Arab community, as well as a 25% increase in the budget for building daycare centers in Arab towns. The Finance Ministry will allocate 200 million shekels to the Economy Ministry for employment-counselling centers in Arab communities. 


In education, only 59.5% of students in the Arab school system are eligible for matriculation certificates, as opposed to 75.1% in the Jewish secular and state religious systems. The plan calls for a program led by the Education Ministry to improve Arabic and Hebrew language skills, with an emphasis on speaking and writing, from kindergarten through 12th grade. 


By 2021, the plan calls for Arab undergraduates at Israeli universities to reach 17%, which would be an increase from 14% last year, and a similar boost for post-graduate students. 


In housing, the plan states that 20 percent of the investment in public institutions will be in Arab communities, and that 30 percent of the fund for protection of open spaces is to be earmarked for Arab communities. _​



> But you actually make a really good point on protecting minority culture and communities in the face of large scale development and expansion and I don’t know the answer to that, it is a problem faced by many countries trying to balance indiginous communities with development.  Should you force desegregation?  No.   But that raises questions.
> 
> How do you protect minority communities from being overtaken by majority expansion?  Gentrification?  Cultural dominance?



*Its important to point out that, globally, Israel IS the minority community and it is trying to protect itself from being overtaken by the dominant culture in the area.*  That is part of the reason Israel feels the need to assert her intent to protect Jewish culture, the Jewish language, the Jewish religion and Jewish history though this sort of Basic Law.  (This would be true even without the raging antisemitism in the world that makes it so much worse and Israel's own struggle with being held to double standards -- including the double standard of creating a constitution which is normative in all other places in the world.)[/quote]

Every nation is unique to some degree, some more than others - I don't think you can justify actions against a nation's minority communities by justifying that the majority is a world minority and needs to be protected.  That almost seems like it would justify institutional inequality based on protecting the majority.  I don't have a problem with recognizing the DOMINANT culture and language in a nation.  But it also depends on how minorities - long standing residents who's communities preceded the creation of the nation - are treated.  I think as long as Arabic enjoys a protected status, recognizing it's importance - it's workable.  IMO - it's no different than French/English in Canada.  What is questionable to me (and I don't think this is normative in most western nations) is legally segregated communities where minorities are barred from living  But I'm not clear on whether that measure is part of the bill.



> As a comparative example, France has placed constitutional protections on the French language because it is being dominated in the EU by English and German and France is invested in preserving its linguistic culture.



Interesting - I did not realize that.




> The only way I see it working would be to allow minority communities to be protected in order to preserve their culture and viability, but keep the majority communities open as their culture is the culture of the nation.  But that would be seen as unfair I am sure.  I think America is a good example as to how these things have played out.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And this is exactly what Israel has done, legislatively.*  Jewish communities are prohibited from rejecting applicants for residence based on ethnicity, religion, etc.  BUT Arab-only communities are protected as such by the State*.  This doesn't tend to work so well in practice, and I think the US is a good example of that.
> 
> But another thing to consider is that the conflict itself creates significant problems.  On some level, there is an underlying hostility and fear (both sides) that places like the US don't have to deal with.  It makes the problem that much harder to engage with, let alone solve.  I think it CAN be solved, once the conflict is set aside.
Click to expand...

 
The US has an ugly history in that regard.  And there is no easy answer to - how do you protect the integrity of minority communities without creating more problems?  If the majority communities start barring minorities - then that is going to further disenfranchise them.  IMO it's extremely important to protect the rights of minorities regardless of who they are, there are many many examples of the horrors inflicted on them from the dominant culture.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> What does "protected status mean" ... ?  Wasn't part of the various mandates and charters to not impinge on Arab culture in the Arab communities...?



What does "protected status" mean?  Well, I think it means putting a fence around certain cultural qualities such as language, celebration of holidays, religious rituals, etc so as to preserve them from destruction.  In Canada, as examples, official signage must be in both English and French in the English-speaking provinces and in French only in the French-speaking provinces.  In my area of Western Canada we also have signage in local First Nations language as well as English, and other local conventions honoring the First Nations peoples.  This is done in order to protect those minorities.  

Israel has done an EXCELLENT job of preserving the Arabic culture and religion in Israel.  I don't see any reason for this to change.  

You do bring up an interesting point, though.  "Protected status" is exactly what Israel is trying to do in this Basic Law.  As a globally insignificant culture, she is trying to create a small space in the world where the Jewish culture is protected.  And protected against a very real, very hostile and very concerted Arab and global effort to erase or deny it.  This law is a statement of intent -- "We, the Jewish people, will not permit our culture to disappear."  In practice, Israel is sensitive enough to understand how to put this into practice.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> Every nation is unique to some degree, some more than others - I don't think you can justify actions against a nation's minority communities by justifying that the majority is a world minority and needs to be protected.



There is NOTHING in this Basic Law which is "against a nation's minority communities".  The Basic Law is a preservation of Jewish culture.  Its no different than dozens of other nations who preserve their culture within their constitutions.  But I also disagree with you that being a global minority is justification for protection.  Of course it is.  All minorities should be protected.  And it is the basis of all nationalities.  Why should Israel be excluded from those protections and forming a nationality around a particular culture?  Everyone else does it.  



> But it also depends on how minorities - long standing residents who's communities preceded the creation of the nation - are treated.  I think as long as Arabic enjoys a protected status, recognizing it's importance - it's workable.


We agree then.  

Here is the language portion of the bill:  

_4 — Language

A. The state’s language is Hebrew.

B. The Arabic language has a special status in the state; Regulating the use of Arabic in state institutions or by them will be set in law.

C. This clause does not harm the status given to the Arabic language before this law came into effect._

Seems to me that Israel took special pains to ensure Arabic is protected.  




> What is questionable to me (and I don't think this is normative in most western nations) is legally segregated communities where minorities are barred from living  But I'm not clear on whether that measure is part of the bill.


This was not part of the bill that passed.


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Israel Legislates Apartheid into Law*
> 
> **
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The video states that having Hebrew as the only official language makes non-Jews "second class citizens" (which they are equating with apartheid).
> 
> And yet where is the uproar of Palestine being apartheid?  Spain?  Finland?  France?  Hungary?  Indonesia?  Pakistan?  Portugal?
> 
> For that matter where is the uproar that 31 US States have English as their only official language?  Is the US an apartheid State?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think it depends on how Arabic is treated.  What does "protected status mean" and what does it mean in relation to an "official language"?.  Wasn't part of the various mandates and charters to not impinge on Arab culture in the Arab communities...?  Israel is somewhat unique in that these issues are occurring TODAY, not centuries ago, as in Spain.  Or France.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Well, I think you dodged my question*.  Some of these countries developed and formed their constitutions, or renewed them, within the past hundred years.  And we have nations from former countries like Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia, USSR, and even the Ottoman Empire over the same time period who did not face the same level of scrutiny and hostility.
Click to expand...


I wasn't aware that I did - but, I think that a nation declaring an official language isn't comparable to apartheid in and of itself. * I don't see Israel as doing anything different in regard to language as many other countries*.  Where I put a caveat is - it depends on what happens with Arabic in the country. USSR did not just make Russian the official language, it did everything it could to wipe out minority languages and cultures.  Language is tied to culture, wiping out a language is wiping out a culture (I am not saying that is what is happening with Israel but how it can be viewed by those who feel threatened). 

Here is an interesting conversation on it:  Is language key to resolving the Israeli-Arab conflict?



> I appreciate your question about how Arabic will be treated going into the future, and I will address it, but first, please address my point -- that there is a double standard about how Israel's Basic Law is treated vs. the SAME LAWS in other countries.  (Including Palestine and Gaza, which are highly relevant).



Yes, there is a double standard.


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Every nation is unique to some degree, some more than others - I don't think you can justify actions against a nation's minority communities by justifying that the majority is a world minority and needs to be protected.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There is NOTHING in this Basic Law which is "against a nation's minority communities".  The Basic Law is a preservation of Jewish culture.  Its no different than dozens of other nations who preserve their culture within their constitutions.  But I also disagree with you that being a global minority is justification for protection.  Of course it is.  All minorities should be protected.  And it is the basis of all nationalities.  Why should Israel be excluded from those protections and forming a nationality around a particular culture?  Everyone else does it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But it also depends on how minorities - long standing residents who's communities preceded the creation of the nation - are treated.  I think as long as Arabic enjoys a protected status, recognizing it's importance - it's workable.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> We agree then.
> 
> Here is the language portion of the bill:
> 
> _4 — Language
> 
> A. The state’s language is Hebrew.
> 
> B. The Arabic language has a special status in the state; Regulating the use of Arabic in state institutions or by them will be set in law.
> 
> C. This clause does not harm the status given to the Arabic language before this law came into effect._
> 
> Seems to me that Israel took special pains to ensure Arabic is protected.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What is questionable to me (and I don't think this is normative in most western nations) is legally segregated communities where minorities are barred from living  But I'm not clear on whether that measure is part of the bill.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *This was not part of the bill that passed*.
Click to expand...


I was wondering about that - I wasn't clear on what parts passed and what parts did not.  There were some disturbing portions that did not make it through, such as falling back on religious law in situations where existing law did not address.  That did not pass but it's shocking it got that far.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> [
> USSR did not just make Russian the official language, it did everything it could to wipe out minority languages and cultures.  Language is tied to culture, wiping out a language is wiping out a culture (I am not saying that is what is happening with Israel but how it can be viewed by those who feel threatened).



Yes.  We agree.  And Israel, has done an excellent job of preserving and protecting its Arabic culture in difficult circumstances, while having to push back against Arabs trying to erase Jewish culture.  I feel as though we can trust Israel to continue to do that.


----------



## admonit

Coyote said:


> admonit said:
> 
> 
> 
> As expected, the new law caused a hysterical response from anti-Semites and haters of Israel. They react to the words "Jewish People" and "Israel" like a bull to a red rag.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Perhaps but I also think there is more to it than that.  Clearly in the eyes of some there is nothing Israel can do that is acceptable even though other countries do the same.  But there are also other issues.
> 
> What was particularly informing were the parts of the new law that were eventually removed.
Click to expand...

Particularly informing? Democracy supposes different opinions and discussions. But only the result, the law, is relevant.


----------



## Shusha

RE:  Voluntary segregation

It seems to me that voluntary segregation, done right, is a very good thing, especially with respect to cultural values and traditions.  A couple of personal comments:

Living in a culture not your own isn't necessarily hard, per se (though it can be) but it is a bit alienating.  In a society where Sunday is the "day of rest", being unavailable for Saturday activities (work, shopping, sports activities, having your dishwasher fixed, etc) is complicated.  Its constantly explaining yourself to people, and outing yourself as "other".  And speaking in a language, literally and figuratively, that is different than everyone around you.  Its a cultural disability, in a way.  

On the other hand, being in a space where everyone is doing the same things, and moving to the same music is safe and comfortable and relaxing.  Imagine how different Ramadan must be in a Muslim country vs a Christian one?  Imagine how it feels to watch the whole city shut down for Shabbat, if you belong to that culture rather than alien to it.

I think there is a measure of security and safety in that sort of voluntary segregation.  And though it may seem counter-intuitive, I think that security and safety is what gives access to tolerance for others.  If we feel safe and secure in our own communities, we feel safe and secure to explore other communities.  There is no threat.

And then, an invitation to another community becomes a wonderful celebration of what is special to them and you become a special guest and there is a joy in becoming, even temporarily, a part of another community.  I once had the very great pleasure of being invited to a Chinese New Year feast by an extended family member.  Yes, I felt awkward and out of place but they knew that and they worked very hard to include me and explain things to me and help me feel welcome.  They weren't threatened to have me in their space, because they invited me there.  I see this all the time in Israel with neighbors from different communities coming together to share celebrations and weddings and feasts and things.  

Now, all that said, voluntary segregation can also be done poorly, especially in places of conflict or perceived conflict.


----------



## rylah

Coyote said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> It sounds middle eastern.
> 
> 
> 
> Such is impossible in Syria.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This is how middle eastern society has lived for millennias. Jewish, Druze and Kurdish villages in different countries. A natural human instinct is to gather around people with similar behavior.
> Actually it's the basis of every society/country.
> 
> I don't have a problem with either mixed or homogeneous villages and towns.
> *It's actually nice to have both.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I agree as long people have the freedom to choose and are not barred.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Now tell me what happens when an Arab family sues Israel for not being allowed into a Druze village?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why should be legally barred from living somewhere based on ethnicity, race or religion?
Click to expand...


Why should Afghani Muslims or Hindu priests be legally forced into Amish communities?
It's a question with two sides which I frankly have no answer to.

I think liberalism in this case is not bad, the correct proportion of personal vs public vs security rights should applied. With that said how does one apply liberalism on hardcore-conservative communities  without using the same force these minority communities might apply against the other minority in their village?


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> [
> USSR did not just make Russian the official language, it did everything it could to wipe out minority languages and cultures.  Language is tied to culture, wiping out a language is wiping out a culture (I am not saying that is what is happening with Israel but how it can be viewed by those who feel threatened).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes.  We agree.  And Israel, has done an excellent job of preserving and protecting its Arabic culture in difficult circumstances, while having to push back against Arabs trying to erase Jewish culture. * I feel as though we can trust Israel to continue to do that.*
Click to expand...

 
I *think* so...but I won't say for certainty.  There are a lot of different factions within the government, there is discrimination against Israeli Arabs, and there is inequity.


----------



## Coyote

rylah said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> 
> Such is impossible in Syria.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is how middle eastern society has lived for millennias. Jewish, Druze and Kurdish villages in different countries. A natural human instinct is to gather around people with similar behavior.
> Actually it's the basis of every society/country.
> 
> I don't have a problem with either mixed or homogeneous villages and towns.
> *It's actually nice to have both.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I agree as long people have the freedom to choose and are not barred.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Now tell me what happens when an Arab family sues Israel for not being allowed into a Druze village?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why should be legally barred from living somewhere based on ethnicity, race or religion?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Why should Afghani Muslims or Hindu priests be legally forced into Amish communities?*
> It's a question with two sides which I frankly have no answer to.
> 
> I think liberalism in this case is not bad, the correct proportion of personal vs public vs security rights should applied. *With that said how does one apply liberalism on hardcore-conservative communities  without using the same force these minority communities might apply against the another minority?*
Click to expand...


I don't think anyone should be legally forced to live where they do not wish to based on their ethnicity, religion or race - they should be free to choose based on their ability to afford to live there.  But you are aright - no easy or "right" answers.

I'm not sure exactly what you are asking - can you expand?


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> [
> USSR did not just make Russian the official language, it did everything it could to wipe out minority languages and cultures.  Language is tied to culture, wiping out a language is wiping out a culture (I am not saying that is what is happening with Israel but how it can be viewed by those who feel threatened).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes.  We agree.  And Israel, has done an excellent job of preserving and protecting its Arabic culture in difficult circumstances, while having to push back against Arabs trying to erase Jewish culture. * I feel as though we can trust Israel to continue to do that.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I *think* so...but I won't say for certainty.  There are a lot of different factions within the government, there is discrimination against Israeli Arabs, and there is inequity.
Click to expand...


Well, there is discrimination EVERYWHERE and Israel is in the middle of a conflict.


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> RE:  Voluntary segregation
> 
> It seems to me that voluntary segregation, done right, is a very good thing, especially with respect to cultural values and traditions.  A couple of personal comments:
> 
> Living in a culture not your own isn't necessarily hard, per se (though it can be) but it is a bit alienating.  In a society where Sunday is the "day of rest", being unavailable for Saturday activities (work, shopping, sports activities, having your dishwasher fixed, etc) is complicated.  Its constantly explaining yourself to people, and outing yourself as "other".  And speaking in a language, literally and figuratively, that is different than everyone around you.  Its a cultural disability, in a way.
> 
> On the other hand, being in a space where everyone is doing the same things, and moving to the same music is safe and comfortable and relaxing.  Imagine how different Ramadan must be in a Muslim country vs a Christian one?  Imagine how it feels to watch the whole city shut down for Shabbat, if you belong to that culture rather than alien to it.
> 
> I think there is a measure of security and safety in that sort of voluntary segregation.  And though it may seem counter-intuitive, I think that security and safety is what gives access to tolerance for others.  If we feel safe and secure in our own communities, we feel safe and secure to explore other communities.  There is no threat.
> 
> And then, an invitation to another community becomes a wonderful celebration of what is special to them and you become a special guest and there is a joy in becoming, even temporarily, a part of another community.  I once had the very great pleasure of being invited to a Chinese New Year feast by an extended family member.  Yes, I felt awkward and out of place but they knew that and they worked very hard to include me and explain things to me and help me feel welcome.  They weren't threatened to have me in their space, because they invited me there.  I see this all the time in Israel with neighbors from different communities coming together to share celebrations and weddings and feasts and things.
> 
> Now, all that said, voluntary segregation can also be done poorly, especially in places of conflict or perceived conflict.




Really good points Shusha!  I hadn't thought of it from that perspective, and I agree with your points.  I don't think voluntary segregation is necessarily bad, and it's wrong to force people to live in communities they do not wish to.  What matters is freedom of choice.


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> [
> USSR did not just make Russian the official language, it did everything it could to wipe out minority languages and cultures.  Language is tied to culture, wiping out a language is wiping out a culture (I am not saying that is what is happening with Israel but how it can be viewed by those who feel threatened).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes.  We agree.  And Israel, has done an excellent job of preserving and protecting its Arabic culture in difficult circumstances, while having to push back against Arabs trying to erase Jewish culture. * I feel as though we can trust Israel to continue to do that.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I *think* so...but I won't say for certainty.  There are a lot of different factions within the government, there is discrimination against Israeli Arabs, and there is inequity.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well, there is discrimination EVERYWHERE and Israel is in the middle of a conflict.
Click to expand...


Yes, but I don't think that can be used as an excuse.  Or rather it is to readily used as an excuse.  At some point Israel will have to address it, the question is when?  And why not now?  Inequity, lack of opportunity, discrimmination - all that creates resentment and an underclass that is undeniable.  Israel is not alone - the US has the same problems.  And for a while we were addressing it.  Now not so much.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> Really good points Shusha!  I hadn't thought of it from that perspective, and I agree with your points.  I don't think voluntary segregation is necessarily bad, and it's wrong to force people to live in communities they do not wish to.  What matters is freedom of choice.



Well, here's where you aren't going to like me so much, grin.  I think that forced segregation is sometimes a good thing too.  But I mean that in the context of giving both people space to preserve and develop and celebrate their culture.  On the surface it seems bad, but its ultimately beneficial for both peoples.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> Yes, but I don't think that can be used as an excuse.  Or rather it is to readily used as an excuse.  At some point Israel will have to address it, the question is when?  And why not now?  Inequity, lack of opportunity, discrimmination - all that creates resentment and an underclass that is undeniable.  Israel is not alone - the US has the same problems.  And for a while we were addressing it.  Now not so much.



Trying to end discrimination while living alongside a hostile population who keeps trying to kill innocents?  Its impossible. It can't be addressed under hostile circumstances.  And its just another refrain of "Its Israel's responsibility to fix it".


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Really good points Shusha!  I hadn't thought of it from that perspective, and I agree with your points.  I don't think voluntary segregation is necessarily bad, and it's wrong to force people to live in communities they do not wish to.  What matters is freedom of choice.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well, here's where you aren't going to like me so much, grin.  I think that forced segregation is sometimes a good thing too.  But I mean that in the context of giving both people space to preserve and develop and celebrate their culture.  On the surface it seems bad, but its ultimately beneficial for both peoples.
Click to expand...


In most incidents that come to mind - one group usually becomes disenfranchised as a result - economically impoverished, less resources invested in it, less opportunity for economic mobility...how do you get around that?

There is another thing with segregation, both forced and voluntary that can be an issue - less knowledge of "the other".  The less everyday contact you have with the "other" the easier it is to believe myths and conspiracy theories about the other.  There is nothing like sitting down to dinner with "the other" and realizing hey - maybe we aren't so different after all.  This is a bit off topic but it's similar: Black Man Gets KKK Members To Disavow By Befriending Them | HuffPost


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, but I don't think that can be used as an excuse.  Or rather it is to readily used as an excuse.  At some point Israel will have to address it, the question is when?  And why not now?  Inequity, lack of opportunity, discrimmination - all that creates resentment and an underclass that is undeniable.  Israel is not alone - the US has the same problems.  And for a while we were addressing it.  Now not so much.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Trying to end discrimination while living alongside a hostile population who keeps trying to kill innocents?  *Its impossible. It can't be addressed under hostile circumstances.  And its just another refrain of "Its Israel's responsibility to fix it".
Click to expand...


I'm not talking about Palestinians but Arab Israeli's.  Who should be equal citizens.  don't you think that discrimination FEEDS hostility?

It IS Israel's responsibility to fix social injustice within it's nation.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> [
> In most incidents that come to mind - one group usually becomes disenfranchised as a result - economically impoverished, less resources invested in it, less opportunity for economic mobility...how do you get around that?



Ah well, I was thinking more of separating the squabbling siblings of Israel and Palestine, along the lines of Yugoslavia, etc but..


----------



## Roudy

admonit said:


> 70 years after the establishment of a Jewish state was declared, now it became a basic (constitutional) law.
> 
> The full text of the law:
> 
> *Basic Law: Israel as the Nation State of the Jewish People*
> 
> *1 — Basic principles*
> 
> A. The land of Israel is the historical homeland of the Jewish people, in which the State of Israel was established.
> 
> B. The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people, in which it fulfills its natural, cultural, religious and historical right to self-determination.
> 
> C. The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Israel is unique to the Jewish people.
> 
> *2 — The symbols of the state*
> 
> A. The name of the state is “Israel.”
> 
> B. The state flag is white with two blue stripes near the edges and a blue Star of David in the center.
> 
> C. The state emblem is a seven-branched menorah with olive leaves on both sides and the word “Israel” beneath it.
> 
> D. The state anthem is “Hatikvah.”
> 
> E. Details regarding state symbols will be determined by the law.
> 
> *3 — The capital of the state*
> 
> Jerusalem, complete and united, is the capital of Israel.
> 
> *4 — Language*
> 
> A. The state’s language is Hebrew.
> 
> B. The Arabic language has a special status in the state; Regulating the use of Arabic in state institutions or by them will be set in law.
> 
> C. This clause does not harm the status given to the Arabic language before this law came into effect.
> 
> *5 — Ingathering of the exiles*
> 
> The state will be open for Jewish immigration and the ingathering of exiles
> 
> *6 — Connection to the Jewish people*
> 
> A. The state will strive to ensure the safety of the members of the Jewish people in trouble or in captivity due to the fact of their Jewishness or their citizenship.
> 
> B. The state shall act within the Diaspora to strengthen the affinity between the state and members of the Jewish people.
> 
> C. The state shall act to preserve the cultural, historical and religious heritage of the Jewish people among Jews in the Diaspora.
> 
> *7 — Jewish settlement*
> 
> A. The state views the development of Jewish settlement as a national value and will act to encourage and promote its establishment and consolidation.
> 
> *8 — Official calendar*
> 
> The Hebrew calendar is the official calendar of the state and alongside it the Gregorian calendar will be used as an official calendar. Use of  the Hebrew calendar and the Gregorian calendar will be determined by law.
> 
> *9 — Independence Day and memorial days*
> 
> A. Independence Day is the official national holiday of the state.
> 
> B. Memorial Day for the Fallen in Israel’s Wars and Holocaust and Heroism Remembrance Day are official memorial days of the State.
> 
> *10 — Days of rest and sabbath*
> 
> The Sabbath and the festivals of Israel are the established days of rest in the state; Non-Jews have a right to maintain days of rest on their Sabbaths and festivals; Details of this issue will be determined by law.
> 
> *11 — Immutability*
> 
> This Basic Law shall not be amended, unless by another Basic Law passed by a majority of Knesset members.


The intention from the very beginning.  Going back over 3000 years and once again in 1948.


----------



## rylah

Coyote said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> 
> Update:
> An important part of the law was rejected, among the opponents was President Rivlin.
> The law was about to allow municipalities to reject non-Jewish residents.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The clause would _allow for communities, including "of a single religion or a single nationality", to build separate towns._
> http://www.iataskforce.org/sites/default/files/resource/resource-1586.pdf
> 
> This includes Arab municipalities.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I think it is bad idea for communities to be legally segregated.  For one thing, it almost always seems to lead to inequitable division of resources.  Minority  communities, usually poorer and fighting discrimination, end up with substandard infrastructure and education.  Lest you think I am picking on Israel, it’s true of many countries including the US.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Minorities are supposed to be "weak" by default in a stigmatic liberal doctrine.
> In this case too it's hard to measure where a systematic focus on eliminating discrimination turns into an evident privilege in the face of the law in practice.
> In my opinion, the Arab community is privileged in many ways.
> 
> Without going into a cliché line of accusations, this is a very interesting subject of safeguarding culture vs city planning and all around it.
> 
> I agree that it's a bad idea for a state to segregate communities, but at the same time it raises other comparable issues. For example should a state force communities to mix? Should a state at the same time enable safeguarding the cultural diversity/distinction for developing tourism, and simply the tradition of the inhabitants?
> If we put in percentage - how does a state develop a plan where it can assure the proportion between promoting minorities move into mixed cities, versus the existing number of homogeneous villages for each minority?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Arab minority is not priveledged, their communities often suffer from a lack of resources, including government spending, infrastructure and education.  Those are the sort of things that segregation reinforces.
> 
> But you actually make a really good point on protecting minority culture and communities in the face of large scale development and expansion and I don’t know the answer to that, it is a problem faced by many countries trying to balance indiginous communities with development.  Should you force desegregation?  No.   But that raises questions.
> 
> How do you protect minority communities from being overtaken by majority expansion?  Gentrification?  Cultural dominance?
> 
> How do you do it in a fair way?  You can legally prevent outside cultures from living there, but then to be fair you need to allow everyone to do that?  If the dominant culture can bar minorities from their communities what does that lead to?  De facto segregation and usually a lack of upward mobility and entrenched poverty for minority communities.  America is a good example of this.  The only way I see it working would be to allow minority communities to be protected in order to preserve their culture and viability, but keep the majority communities open as their culture is the culture of the nation.  But that would be seen as unfair I am sure.  I think America is a good example as to how these things have played out.
Click to expand...


The Arab community lives in a democratic state, in which they chose strong Arab MP's who deal with nothing but the PA and Gaza issues, and blaming Israel for all ills of the world.
When their leaders  choose to invest time in Israeli Arabs change might happen, until then no matter how much the govt invests in the community, there won't be any more result than just complaining and buying sports cars.

Here's Arabe, an Arab village in the north, those multi stories buildings are for one family,
the usual landscape of Arab communities, most Jews live in small apartments and spend 3 years serving the country, during which the former conveniently goes through a privileged education system to get a degree.





In practice, minorities are privileged in most modern democracies today.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> I'm not talking about Palestinians but Arab Israeli's.  Who should be equal citizens.  don't you think that discrimination FEEDS hostility?
> 
> It IS Israel's responsibility to fix social injustice within it's nation.



Of course its Israel's responsibility to fix social injustices within its nation.  But it is impossible to do that in the context of at least some of those Arab Israelis being hostile to the entire IDEA of Israel and a Jewish nation.  

I don't think, in this context, discrimination feeds hostility.  Rather I think the hostility emanates from a rejection of Jewish rights and self-determination.  That is the source of the conflict.  And I think once we correct for that hostility and end the conflict and allow people to choose where they would like to live, the social injustices of discrimination in Israel will ease as much or better than any other culturally diverse nation such as Canada and the US and Australia.


----------



## Shusha

rylah said:


> The Arab community lives in a democratic state, in which they chose strong Arab MP's who deal with nothing but the PA and Gaza issues, and blaming Israel for all ills of the world.
> When their leaders  choose to invest time in Israeli Arabs change might happen, until then no matter how much the govt invests in the community, there won't be any more result than just complaining and buying sports cars.
> 
> Here's Arabe, an Arab village in the north, those multi stories buildings are for one family,
> the usual landscape of Arab communities, most Jews live in small apartments and spend 3 years serving the country, during which the former conveniently goes through a privileged education system to get a degree.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In practice, minorities are privileged in most modern democracies today.



Well, I don't agree with your last sentence, but YES! to the comments about the Arabs in Parliament.  Those Arab members of the Knesset are hostile to the sovereign State of Israel.  That is what I mean by "adjusting for context".  When those Arab members start working FOR Israel and Israel isn't threatened by them, and most especially when they start working for the Arab citizens of Israel, then social justice will come.


----------



## rylah

Shusha said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Arab community lives in a democratic state, in which they chose strong Arab MP's who deal with nothing but the PA and Gaza issues, and blaming Israel for all ills of the world.
> When their leaders  choose to invest time in Israeli Arabs change might happen, until then no matter how much the govt invests in the community, there won't be any more result than just complaining and buying sports cars.
> 
> Here's Arabe, an Arab village in the north, those multi stories buildings are for one family,
> the usual landscape of Arab communities, most Jews live in small apartments and spend 3 years serving the country, during which the former conveniently goes through a privileged education system to get a degree.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In practice, minorities are privileged in most modern democracies today.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well, I don't agree with your last sentence, but YES! to the comments about the Arabs in Parliament.  Those Arab members of the Knesset are hostile to the sovereign State of Israel.  That is what I mean by "adjusting for context".  When those Arab members start working FOR Israel and Israel isn't threatened by them, and most especially when they start working for the Arab citizens of Israel, then social justice will come.
Click to expand...


In this case it's a political decision which would demand a whole new thread to analyze - the Israeli Arab MP's voluntary (and involuntary) participation in the Palestinian politics, in many cases on the account of the wellbeing of their own voters. 

Best solution in my opinion is for Israel to gradually establish Jewish neighborhoods and stronger police presence in these villages, start with the easy ones.
Competition might increase the level of life and encourage new thinking, today there's no variety or competition in those communities.


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not talking about Palestinians but Arab Israeli's.  Who should be equal citizens.  don't you think that discrimination FEEDS hostility?
> 
> It IS Israel's responsibility to fix social injustice within it's nation.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Of course its Israel's responsibility to fix social injustices within its nation.  But it is impossible to do that in the context of at least some of those Arab Israelis being hostile to the entire IDEA of Israel and a Jewish nation.
> 
> I don't think, in this context, discrimination feeds hostility.  Rather I think the hostility emanates from a rejection of Jewish rights and self-determination.  That is the source of the conflict.  And I think once we correct for that hostility and end the conflict and allow people to choose where they would like to live, the social injustices of discrimination in Israel will ease as much or better than any other culturally diverse nation such as Canada and the US and Australia.
Click to expand...


I would disagree.  You're creating a self-reinforcing cycle where Arabs do in reality, suffer discrimmination on a variety of fronts and are very aware of this, which feeds hostility on top of whatever feeling they might have in regards to Jewish sovereignty.  Continuing that inequity by never addressing it just serves to reinforce that hostility.  Respect, equality, wealth, and opportunity go a long way towards alleviating hostility.  I think it's important to note many Arab Israeli's would choose to live in Israel over a Palestinian state (according to polls I've read).


----------



## rylah

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not talking about Palestinians but Arab Israeli's.  Who should be equal citizens.  don't you think that discrimination FEEDS hostility?
> 
> It IS Israel's responsibility to fix social injustice within it's nation.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Of course its Israel's responsibility to fix social injustices within its nation.  But it is impossible to do that in the context of at least some of those Arab Israelis being hostile to the entire IDEA of Israel and a Jewish nation.
> 
> I don't think, in this context, discrimination feeds hostility.  Rather I think the hostility emanates from a rejection of Jewish rights and self-determination.  That is the source of the conflict.  And I think once we correct for that hostility and end the conflict and allow people to choose where they would like to live, the social injustices of discrimination in Israel will ease as much or better than any other culturally diverse nation such as Canada and the US and Australia.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I would disagree.  You're creating a self-reinforcing cycle where Arabs do in reality, suffer discrimmination on a variety of fronts and are very aware of this, which feeds hostility on top of whatever feeling they might have in regards to Jewish sovereignty.  Continuing that inequity by never addressing it just serves to reinforce that hostility.  Respect, equality, wealth, and opportunity go a long way towards alleviating hostility.  I think it's important to note many Arab Israeli's would choose to live in Israel over a Palestinian state (according to polls I've read).
Click to expand...


The cycle is created by introducing such vague terms as "respect, wealth, opportunity" without actually addressing anything at hand. Finding or claiming discrimination easiest thing around today, especially in the US,  in  a  way it creates a cycle in its' own - when minorities are taught to remain weak (or merely keep the image) because it's a convenient position. It has turned into a whole industry with thousands of jobs at stake.

That logic could very likely lead one to accuse the Sun for a systematic violation of basic human rights.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not talking about Palestinians but Arab Israeli's.  Who should be equal citizens.  don't you think that discrimination FEEDS hostility?
> 
> It IS Israel's responsibility to fix social injustice within it's nation.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Of course its Israel's responsibility to fix social injustices within its nation.  But it is impossible to do that in the context of at least some of those Arab Israelis being hostile to the entire IDEA of Israel and a Jewish nation.
> 
> I don't think, in this context, discrimination feeds hostility.  Rather I think the hostility emanates from a rejection of Jewish rights and self-determination.  That is the source of the conflict.  And I think once we correct for that hostility and end the conflict and allow people to choose where they would like to live, the social injustices of discrimination in Israel will ease as much or better than any other culturally diverse nation such as Canada and the US and Australia.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I would disagree.  You're creating a self-reinforcing cycle where Arabs do in reality, suffer discrimmination on a variety of fronts and are very aware of this, which feeds hostility on top of whatever feeling they might have in regards to Jewish sovereignty.  Continuing that inequity by never addressing it just serves to reinforce that hostility.  Respect, equality, wealth, and opportunity go a long way towards alleviating hostility.  I think it's important to note many Arab Israeli's would choose to live in Israel over a Palestinian state (according to polls I've read).
Click to expand...


And I disagree.  (But I still appreciate the level of discourse).  You can't end the perception of discrimination in the context of a denial of a right to sovereignty.  When Arabs believe Israel (read: Jews) have no right to "rule over them" -- everything, real or not, will be perceived as a "wrong".  And you can't end discrimination in the context of the conflict where Israelis are (legitimately) fearful of Arabs.  Those things need to sort themselves out first.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> Israeli legislators have recognized the inequality in government spending - this article is from 2015 (I'm not sure where this legislative effort ended up) but it points out the inequities:
> 
> Israel looks to address funding gaps for Arab community with $3.9 billion plan
> _The largest ever government plan to advance the economic development of Israel’s Arab population will go to the cabinet for approval on Wednesday, but Israeli Arab leaders said they were skeptical the ambitious plan would be put into effect given the current atmosphere in the country.
> 
> 
> The proposal calls for 15 billion shekels ($3.86 billion) in extra funding on top of anything now allocated to Arab communities in the state budget. The money is to be devoted to developing infrastructure, industry, education and healthcare. The details of the plan were ironed out over the last two weeks in discussions between treasury officials and MK Ayman Odeh, chairman of the Joint Arab List.
> 
> 
> But Arab lawmakers and public figures have expressed doubts about the likelihood of the plan being implemented, especially given the current atmosphere in Israel. The cabinet was supposed to approve the plan on Sunday, but the vote was delayed amid opposition from Likud ministers, including from Culture Minister Miri Regev, who said the plan did not include mixed cities of Hafia, Tel Aviv-Jaffa, Ramle and Lod. Sources said Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu felt uncomfortable approving the measure before the meeting of the Likud Central Committee Tuesday. _
> 
> _“We will be wiser after the cabinet meeting. Meanwhile, we are talking about promises and maybe a decision, which in the end has to be implemented,” said Sakhnin Mayor Mazen Ghanaim, who is also head of the Higher Arab Monitoring Committee. “If it is implemented, it will be a step in the right direction. Anyone who thinks this will lead to equality is wrong. It’s a step in the right direction on a long road,” he added. _
> *
> 
> The draft resolution details the gaps between Israeli Jews and Arabs. While Arabs constitute about 20% of Israel’s population, only 7% of the government’s budget for public transportation goes to Arab communities. *_Moreover, some 34% of those killed in traffic accidents are Arab._
> 
> *Only 3.5% of industrial zones in Israel are in Arab communities. *
> _
> 
> According to figures for 2014, 75.4% of Arab men between the ages of 25 and 64 were employed, compared with 85.7% of Jewish men who are not Haredi. Only 33.2% of adult Arab women were employed, versus 79.9% Jewish women. The plan calls for spending 24 million shekels on incentives to employers and small and medium-size businesses in the Arab community, as well as a 25% increase in the budget for building daycare centers in Arab towns. The Finance Ministry will allocate 200 million shekels to the Economy Ministry for employment-counselling centers in Arab communities.
> 
> 
> In education, only 59.5% of students in the Arab school system are eligible for matriculation certificates, as opposed to 75.1% in the Jewish secular and state religious systems. The plan calls for a program led by the Education Ministry to improve Arabic and Hebrew language skills, with an emphasis on speaking and writing, from kindergarten through 12th grade.
> 
> 
> By 2021, the plan calls for Arab undergraduates at Israeli universities to reach 17%, which would be an increase from 14% last year, and a similar boost for post-graduate students.
> 
> 
> In housing, the plan states that 20 percent of the investment in public institutions will be in Arab communities, and that 30 percent of the fund for protection of open spaces is to be earmarked for Arab communities. _​



Okay, THAT is a lot to unpack.  First, the Haaretz article is paywalled so...ugh.  Found a similar article from ToI which was long on yay Israel and short on actual facts. 

I'll see what I can find...but meantime, isn't Israel doing exactly what it should in this situation?  Providing additional funding to improve Arab communities?


Oh, and also, isn't the discrepancy between female percentage employment Arab vs Jew related to an Arab cultural issue, rather than discrimination from Israel?


----------



## RoccoR

RE:  Now it's a basic law: The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people 
※→  Coyote, Shusha, et al,

Yes, it is not easy on any plane or under any set of conditions.  Like in mathematics, some equations have more than one right answer; and some fall within a more preferable range than others. 

I would suggest that event the terms "right" and "wrong" have ranges of truth when dealing in a political environment in which there is a difference between a faith-based acceptance and an other-than faith-based acceptance. 

And in the case of the Israeli-Arab Palestinian Conflict, it becomes more complex as the number of dimensions increases ↑ --- and the levels of influence are gradually introduced.  The more complex the questions, the less likely that any single permanent solution will be found and workable.



Coyote said:


> I don't think anyone should be legally forced to live where they do not wish to based on their ethnicity, religion or race - they should be free to choose based on their ability to afford to live there.  But you are right - no easy or "right" answers.


*(COMMENT - IF I MAY INTERJECT)*

_{ A "right" answer implies there is at least one (if not more) "wrong" answer(s). }_
THE BLUF:  No matter what solution is adopted, no one solution with being accepted by all parties.  (You can't please all of the people.) 

One of the near-universal and complex premises is: That it is "wrong" _(unjust, dishonest, or immoral action)_ to hurt or injure someone either emotionally, physically, economically/financially, reputation-wise, image-wise, politically → etc.  

Once we all come to this as a realization, then two great concepts kick-in: 1)  Moral Particularism, and of course: 2)  Principle of Sufficient Reason.  Distilled down, in any complex decision on the resolution of the Israeli-Arab Palestinian Conflict, any solution based on "right" and "wrong" becomes of little or no practical relevance; and the workable solutions become a matter of:

•  The numbers of displeased 'v' satisfied.
•  Policies that are enforceable 'v' unenforceable.
•  Affordability of policised enforced.
•  Containment and Toxicity.​


Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  Voluntary segregation
> 
> 
> 
> Really good points Shusha!  I hadn't thought of it from that perspective, and I agree with your points.  I don't think voluntary segregation is necessarily bad, and it's wrong to force people to live in communities they do not wish to.  What matters is freedom of choice.
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

Well, if the action is voluntary, then technically it is not "segregation;" as it is applied politically.  It would be a lack of diversity _(not being composed of differing elements or qualities)_.  Those groups composed with a homogeneous _(NOT __being composed of differing elements or qualities; both positive and negative)_ constituency are still free to choose; but are selectively deprived of the qualities of that which it has become separated from.

However, contrived manipulations _(as seen in many Arab League nations)_ are emulated on the Arab-Palestinian of the Israeli-Arab Palestinian Conflict.  And this replicant is almost entirely based on a hold of absolute power, typically one based on a system of graft and corruption and → a measure of subservience.  

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Shusha

Coyote 

With respect to economic disparity between Arabs and Jews in Israel -- I'm also going to add that the assumption that the CAUSE of the disparity is Jewish discrimination against Arabs is probably too simplistic.  

For example, the Bedouin community is reluctant to give up its nomadic, pastoral lifestyle.  If CHOICE is the ultimate humane goal, should they be forced to modernize?  If they choose to have a life which is categorized by poverty according to the Western definition of need for wealth, is that discrimination on the part of Israel?  On the contrary, I'd argue that meeting their desire to maintain their historical lifestyle is beneficial and more "humane" than forcing them to modernize and thus their "poverty" (by Western standards) should be maintained.


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote
> 
> With respect to economic disparity between Arabs and Jews in Israel -- I'm also going to add that the assumption that the CAUSE of the disparity is Jewish discrimination against Arabs is probably too simplistic.
> 
> For example, the Bedouin community is reluctant to give up its nomadic, pastoral lifestyle.  If CHOICE is the ultimate humane goal, should they be forced to modernize?  If they choose to have a life which is categorized by poverty according to the Western definition of need for wealth, is that discrimination on the part of Israel?  On the contrary, I'd argue that meeting their desire to maintain their historical lifestyle is beneficial and more "humane" than forcing them to modernize and thus their "poverty" (by Western standards) should be maintained.




I think the Bedouin are a distinct group, with issues that are different than other Arab Israeli's, and their case is particularly difficult because it's the same issue faced by traditionally nomadic people's everywhere. I actually agree with you on that.


----------



## Coyote

rylah said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not talking about Palestinians but Arab Israeli's.  Who should be equal citizens.  don't you think that discrimination FEEDS hostility?
> 
> It IS Israel's responsibility to fix social injustice within it's nation.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Of course its Israel's responsibility to fix social injustices within its nation.  But it is impossible to do that in the context of at least some of those Arab Israelis being hostile to the entire IDEA of Israel and a Jewish nation.
> 
> I don't think, in this context, discrimination feeds hostility.  Rather I think the hostility emanates from a rejection of Jewish rights and self-determination.  That is the source of the conflict.  And I think once we correct for that hostility and end the conflict and allow people to choose where they would like to live, the social injustices of discrimination in Israel will ease as much or better than any other culturally diverse nation such as Canada and the US and Australia.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I would disagree.  You're creating a self-reinforcing cycle where Arabs do in reality, suffer discrimmination on a variety of fronts and are very aware of this, which feeds hostility on top of whatever feeling they might have in regards to Jewish sovereignty.  Continuing that inequity by never addressing it just serves to reinforce that hostility.  Respect, equality, wealth, and opportunity go a long way towards alleviating hostility.  I think it's important to note many Arab Israeli's would choose to live in Israel over a Palestinian state (according to polls I've read).
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The cycle is created by introducing such vague terms as "respect, wealth, opportunity" without actually addressing anything at hand. Finding or claiming discrimination easiest thing around today, especially in the US,  in  a  way it creates a cycle in its' own - when minorities are taught to remain weak (or merely keep the image) because it's a convenient position. It has turned into a whole industry with thousands of jobs at stake.
> 
> That logic could very likely lead one to accuse the Sun for a systematic violation of basic human rights.
Click to expand...


I don't think this is a case of "finding" or "claiming" discrimination...it does exist and can create barriers to opportunities, I'm not saying it exists in all cases, but it is there.  Once you remove it, and opportunities are equalized - then, you can look at other reasons for disparities.


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Israeli legislators have recognized the inequality in government spending - this article is from 2015 (I'm not sure where this legislative effort ended up) but it points out the inequities:
> 
> Israel looks to address funding gaps for Arab community with $3.9 billion plan
> _The largest ever government plan to advance the economic development of Israel’s Arab population will go to the cabinet for approval on Wednesday, but Israeli Arab leaders said they were skeptical the ambitious plan would be put into effect given the current atmosphere in the country.
> 
> 
> The proposal calls for 15 billion shekels ($3.86 billion) in extra funding on top of anything now allocated to Arab communities in the state budget. The money is to be devoted to developing infrastructure, industry, education and healthcare. The details of the plan were ironed out over the last two weeks in discussions between treasury officials and MK Ayman Odeh, chairman of the Joint Arab List.
> 
> 
> But Arab lawmakers and public figures have expressed doubts about the likelihood of the plan being implemented, especially given the current atmosphere in Israel. The cabinet was supposed to approve the plan on Sunday, but the vote was delayed amid opposition from Likud ministers, including from Culture Minister Miri Regev, who said the plan did not include mixed cities of Hafia, Tel Aviv-Jaffa, Ramle and Lod. Sources said Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu felt uncomfortable approving the measure before the meeting of the Likud Central Committee Tuesday. _
> 
> _“We will be wiser after the cabinet meeting. Meanwhile, we are talking about promises and maybe a decision, which in the end has to be implemented,” said Sakhnin Mayor Mazen Ghanaim, who is also head of the Higher Arab Monitoring Committee. “If it is implemented, it will be a step in the right direction. Anyone who thinks this will lead to equality is wrong. It’s a step in the right direction on a long road,” he added. _
> *
> 
> The draft resolution details the gaps between Israeli Jews and Arabs. While Arabs constitute about 20% of Israel’s population, only 7% of the government’s budget for public transportation goes to Arab communities. *_Moreover, some 34% of those killed in traffic accidents are Arab._
> 
> *Only 3.5% of industrial zones in Israel are in Arab communities. *
> _
> 
> According to figures for 2014, 75.4% of Arab men between the ages of 25 and 64 were employed, compared with 85.7% of Jewish men who are not Haredi. Only 33.2% of adult Arab women were employed, versus 79.9% Jewish women. The plan calls for spending 24 million shekels on incentives to employers and small and medium-size businesses in the Arab community, as well as a 25% increase in the budget for building daycare centers in Arab towns. The Finance Ministry will allocate 200 million shekels to the Economy Ministry for employment-counselling centers in Arab communities.
> 
> 
> In education, only 59.5% of students in the Arab school system are eligible for matriculation certificates, as opposed to 75.1% in the Jewish secular and state religious systems. The plan calls for a program led by the Education Ministry to improve Arabic and Hebrew language skills, with an emphasis on speaking and writing, from kindergarten through 12th grade.
> 
> 
> By 2021, the plan calls for Arab undergraduates at Israeli universities to reach 17%, which would be an increase from 14% last year, and a similar boost for post-graduate students.
> 
> 
> In housing, the plan states that 20 percent of the investment in public institutions will be in Arab communities, and that 30 percent of the fund for protection of open spaces is to be earmarked for Arab communities. _​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Okay, THAT is a lot to unpack.  First, the Haaretz article is paywalled so...ugh.  Found a similar article from ToI which was long on yay Israel and short on actual facts.
> 
> I'll see what I can find...but meantime, isn't Israel doing exactly what it should in this situation?  Providing additional funding to improve Arab communities?
> 
> 
> Oh, and also, isn't the discrepancy between female percentage employment Arab vs Jew related to an Arab cultural issue, rather than discrimination from Israel?
Click to expand...


I'm curious - are you not able to read the article?  I don't subscribe to Haaretz, but it allows me to read a certain number of articles for free.

On your second paragraph - I'm not sure, that article was 2015 - did the measure actually pass?  That was in question in that article.

In terms of the female percentage - yes, I agree, I think that one is more of culture than discrimination.


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not talking about Palestinians but Arab Israeli's.  Who should be equal citizens.  don't you think that discrimination FEEDS hostility?
> 
> It IS Israel's responsibility to fix social injustice within it's nation.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Of course its Israel's responsibility to fix social injustices within its nation.  But it is impossible to do that in the context of at least some of those Arab Israelis being hostile to the entire IDEA of Israel and a Jewish nation.
> 
> I don't think, in this context, discrimination feeds hostility.  Rather I think the hostility emanates from a rejection of Jewish rights and self-determination.  That is the source of the conflict.  And I think once we correct for that hostility and end the conflict and allow people to choose where they would like to live, the social injustices of discrimination in Israel will ease as much or better than any other culturally diverse nation such as Canada and the US and Australia.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I would disagree.  You're creating a self-reinforcing cycle where Arabs do in reality, suffer discrimmination on a variety of fronts and are very aware of this, which feeds hostility on top of whatever feeling they might have in regards to Jewish sovereignty.  Continuing that inequity by never addressing it just serves to reinforce that hostility.  Respect, equality, wealth, and opportunity go a long way towards alleviating hostility.  I think it's important to note many Arab Israeli's would choose to live in Israel over a Palestinian state (according to polls I've read).
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And I disagree.  (But I still appreciate the level of discourse).  You can't end the perception of discrimination in the context of a denial of a right to sovereignty.  When Arabs believe Israel (read: Jews) have no right to "rule over them" -- everything, real or not, will be perceived as a "wrong".  And you can't end discrimination in the context of the conflict where Israelis are (legitimately) fearful of Arabs.  Those things need to sort themselves out first.
Click to expand...


Arabs are also fearful of the Jews - which, creates yet another impasse.  They see the Jews as oppressers, the discrimmination reinforces that belief and so on.  What is the one thing Israel, on it's own, can change?  Not people's belief's per se - but they CAN change their situations which in turn might affect their beliefs.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> Arabs are also fearful of the Jews - which, creates yet another impasse.  They see the Jews as oppressers, ...



Interesting.  But isn't that is a direct result of the narrative of the conflict?  Absent the conflict, would they see Jews as oppressors?  Or would they see them as equals?


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> I'm curious - are you not able to read the article?  I don't subscribe to Haaretz, but it allows me to read a certain number of articles for free.



No, I'm paywalled.  I probably get a certain number of free articles per month, but I probably also use them up by the 2nd.


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Arabs are also fearful of the Jews - which, creates yet another impasse.  They see the Jews as oppressers, ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting.  But isn't that is a direct result of the narrative of the conflict?  Absent the conflict, would they see Jews as oppressors?  Or would they see them as equals?
Click to expand...


I don't know - everyone is so deep into their mistrust of the other side, and there is a powerful Arab belief in anti-Jewish conspiracy theories.  But beyond that - neither side trusts the motivations of the other.  Jews believe the Arabs will drive them into the sea, Arabs believe the Jews will prevent them from ever gaining a state.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> I don't know - everyone is so deep into their mistrust of the other side, and there is a powerful Arab belief in anti-Jewish conspiracy theories.  But beyond that - neither side trusts the motivations of the other.  Jews believe the Arabs will drive them into the sea, Arabs believe the Jews will prevent them from ever gaining a state.



And its frustrating, isn't it?  But on the other hand, one would have to evaluate the REALITY of each peoples' fears, don't you think?  To say that each side mistrusts the other gives the same weight to both sides.  And I don't think that is either true or fair.  

Just look at this thread.  Was there an uproar about Palestine making a Basic Law which is objectively "worse" than Israels?  No.  There is a double standard at play here.


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know - everyone is so deep into their mistrust of the other side, and there is a powerful Arab belief in anti-Jewish conspiracy theories.  But beyond that - neither side trusts the motivations of the other.  Jews believe the Arabs will drive them into the sea, Arabs believe the Jews will prevent them from ever gaining a state.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And its frustrating, isn't it?  But on the other hand, one would have to evaluate the REALITY of each peoples' fears, don't you think? * To say that each side mistrusts the other gives the same weight to both sides*.  And I don't think that is either true or fair.
> 
> Just look at this thread.  Was there an uproar about Palestine making a Basic Law which is objectively "worse" than Israels?  No.  There is a double standard at play here.
Click to expand...


Who are we to judge the reality of the fears though?  Do all the Palestinians really want to kill all the Jews?  Do the Jews really want all the land for themselves?  In the end it is what people believe that matters, whether it's real or not.  For example the Palestinians see Jewish settlements popping up in areas they feel are for their own future state.  They see moratoriums  on settlement expansion constantly flouted.  Whether you agree or not is irrelevant, it's the perception being fed that Israel really wants all the real estate for Jews that then feeds the fears that there will be no room for them.  Likewise, actual attacks on Jews from Palestinians reinforce their belief that Palestinians seek their eradication.  How real are each one's fears depends on where you stand and what you have to lose.


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know - everyone is so deep into their mistrust of the other side, and there is a powerful Arab belief in anti-Jewish conspiracy theories.  But beyond that - neither side trusts the motivations of the other.  Jews believe the Arabs will drive them into the sea, Arabs believe the Jews will prevent them from ever gaining a state.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And its frustrating, isn't it?  But on the other hand, one would have to evaluate the REALITY of each peoples' fears, don't you think?  To say that each side mistrusts the other gives the same weight to both sides.  And I don't think that is either true or fair.
> 
> Just look at this thread.  Was there an uproar about Palestine making a Basic Law which is objectively "worse" than Israels?  No.  There is a double standard at play here.
Click to expand...


But there is no state of Palestine.  There is only talk.  Until you HAVE a state, and you have to really think about what that means and what you want for it's future, is it really comparable to an actual state?


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> Who are we to judge the reality of the fears though?  Do all the Palestinians really want to kill all the Jews?  Do the Jews really want all the land for themselves?  In the end it is what people believe that matters, whether it's real or not.  For example the Palestinians see Jewish settlements popping up in areas they feel are for their own future state.  They see moratoriums  on settlement expansion constantly flouted.  Whether you agree or not is irrelevant, it's the perception being fed that Israel really wants all the real estate for Jews that then feeds the fears that there will be no room for them.  Likewise, actual attacks on Jews from Palestinians reinforce their belief that Palestinians seek their eradication.  How real are each one's fears depends on where you stand and what you have to lose.



Respecting people's irrational fears leads us nowhere.  Irrational fears need to be addressed, not fed.  How real one's fears are depends ONLY on the actions of the people whom you are afraid of.  

As an example -- what is the "fear' with Jewish people living in a place? Why can't Jewish people live in a future State of Palestine?  Where is the "fear" in having Jewish people live in Palestine.  Israel can do it.  Why can't Palestine.  So, objectively, is that a rational fear or an irrational fear?


----------



## Shusha

Now, don't get me wrong.  I'm not saying that all Palestinian fears are irrational.  But I am saying it is fair to evaluate those fears against reality. 

For example, Gazans can say that they fear Israeli military attacks, but the reality is that unless they provoke those attacks, they are perfectly safe from them. They just don't happen without provocation.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> Do all the Palestinians really want to kill all the Jews?  Do the Jews really want all the land for themselves?



But look at what you just typed.  Jews are afraid of being murdered (and historically, legitimate fear, yes?) while Arabs are afraid they won't get another State or two.  The discrepancy there is point enough.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> But there is no state of Palestine.  There is only talk.  Until you HAVE a state, and you have to really think about what that means and what you want for it's future, is it really comparable to an actual state?



Sure.  But Palestine can have a State in the space of a few months if she just does a couple of simple things -- the most prominent being just allowing the State of Israel to exist and ceasing the violence.  Its not a lot to ask.


----------



## MJB12741

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> But there is no state of Palestine.  There is only talk.  Until you HAVE a state, and you have to really think about what that means and what you want for it's future, is it really comparable to
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Now, don't get me wrong.  I'm not saying that all Palestinian fears are irrational.  But I saying it is fair to evaluate those fears against reality.
> 
> For example, Gazans can say that they fear Israeli military attacks, but the reality is that unless they provoke those attacks, they are perfectly safe from them. They just don't happen without provocation.
> 
> 
> 
> Agreed.  And well said.  But then Palestinian mentality cannot understand that.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


----------



## P F Tinmore

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Arab minority is not priveledged, their communities often suffer from a lack of resources, including government spending, infrastructure and education.  Those are the sort of things that segregation reinforces.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think rylah's point is that one of the ways of addressing this disparity of resources is by "affirmative action", that is -- creating artificial privilege in the  form of special consideration such as allocating additional resources, creating Arab-only communities, etc.
> 
> I would also question just how much Arab communities suffer from lack of resources and government spending, infrastructure and education and the reasons for that within Israel "proper" (not Area C).  If the Israeli government deliberately underfunds Arab communities that is obviously a problem which should be addressed, but I'm not yet convinced that is true.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's interesting pointing out "affirmative action" because there are parallel's to the US and it's traditionally underpriveledged minorities - native Americans, black communities.  Difficult problems to resolve.
> 
> Israeli legislators have recognized the inequality in government spending - this article is from 2015 (I'm not sure where this legislative effort ended up) but it points out the inequities:
> 
> Israel looks to address funding gaps for Arab community with $3.9 billion plan
> _The largest ever government plan to advance the economic development of Israel’s Arab population will go to the cabinet for approval on Wednesday, but Israeli Arab leaders said they were skeptical the ambitious plan would be put into effect given the current atmosphere in the country.
> 
> 
> The proposal calls for 15 billion shekels ($3.86 billion) in extra funding on top of anything now allocated to Arab communities in the state budget. The money is to be devoted to developing infrastructure, industry, education and healthcare. The details of the plan were ironed out over the last two weeks in discussions between treasury officials and MK Ayman Odeh, chairman of the Joint Arab List.
> 
> 
> But Arab lawmakers and public figures have expressed doubts about the likelihood of the plan being implemented, especially given the current atmosphere in Israel. The cabinet was supposed to approve the plan on Sunday, but the vote was delayed amid opposition from Likud ministers, including from Culture Minister Miri Regev, who said the plan did not include mixed cities of Hafia, Tel Aviv-Jaffa, Ramle and Lod. Sources said Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu felt uncomfortable approving the measure before the meeting of the Likud Central Committee Tuesday. _
> 
> _“We will be wiser after the cabinet meeting. Meanwhile, we are talking about promises and maybe a decision, which in the end has to be implemented,” said Sakhnin Mayor Mazen Ghanaim, who is also head of the Higher Arab Monitoring Committee. “If it is implemented, it will be a step in the right direction. Anyone who thinks this will lead to equality is wrong. It’s a step in the right direction on a long road,” he added. _
> *
> 
> The draft resolution details the gaps between Israeli Jews and Arabs. While Arabs constitute about 20% of Israel’s population, only 7% of the government’s budget for public transportation goes to Arab communities. *_Moreover, some 34% of those killed in traffic accidents are Arab._
> 
> *Only 3.5% of industrial zones in Israel are in Arab communities. *
> _
> 
> According to figures for 2014, 75.4% of Arab men between the ages of 25 and 64 were employed, compared with 85.7% of Jewish men who are not Haredi. Only 33.2% of adult Arab women were employed, versus 79.9% Jewish women. The plan calls for spending 24 million shekels on incentives to employers and small and medium-size businesses in the Arab community, as well as a 25% increase in the budget for building daycare centers in Arab towns. The Finance Ministry will allocate 200 million shekels to the Economy Ministry for employment-counselling centers in Arab communities.
> 
> 
> In education, only 59.5% of students in the Arab school system are eligible for matriculation certificates, as opposed to 75.1% in the Jewish secular and state religious systems. The plan calls for a program led by the Education Ministry to improve Arabic and Hebrew language skills, with an emphasis on speaking and writing, from kindergarten through 12th grade.
> 
> 
> By 2021, the plan calls for Arab undergraduates at Israeli universities to reach 17%, which would be an increase from 14% last year, and a similar boost for post-graduate students.
> 
> 
> In housing, the plan states that 20 percent of the investment in public institutions will be in Arab communities, and that 30 percent of the fund for protection of open spaces is to be earmarked for Arab communities. _​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But you actually make a really good point on protecting minority culture and communities in the face of large scale development and expansion and I don’t know the answer to that, it is a problem faced by many countries trying to balance indiginous communities with development.  Should you force desegregation?  No.   But that raises questions.
> 
> How do you protect minority communities from being overtaken by majority expansion?  Gentrification?  Cultural dominance?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *Its important to point out that, globally, Israel IS the minority community and it is trying to protect itself from being overtaken by the dominant culture in the area.*  That is part of the reason Israel feels the need to assert her intent to protect Jewish culture, the Jewish language, the Jewish religion and Jewish history though this sort of Basic Law.  (This would be true even without the raging antisemitism in the world that makes it so much worse and Israel's own struggle with being held to double standards -- including the double standard of creating a constitution which is normative in all other places in the world.)
Click to expand...


Every nation is unique to some degree, some more than others - I don't think you can justify actions against a nation's minority communities by justifying that the majority is a world minority and needs to be protected.  That almost seems like it would justify institutional inequality based on protecting the majority.  I don't have a problem with recognizing the DOMINANT culture and language in a nation.  But it also depends on how minorities - long standing residents who's communities preceded the creation of the nation - are treated.  I think as long as Arabic enjoys a protected status, recognizing it's importance - it's workable.  IMO - it's no different than French/English in Canada.  What is questionable to me (and I don't think this is normative in most western nations) is legally segregated communities where minorities are barred from living  But I'm not clear on whether that measure is part of the bill.



> As a comparative example, France has placed constitutional protections on the French language because it is being dominated in the EU by English and German and France is invested in preserving its linguistic culture.



Interesting - I did not realize that.




> The only way I see it working would be to allow minority communities to be protected in order to preserve their culture and viability, but keep the majority communities open as their culture is the culture of the nation.  But that would be seen as unfair I am sure.  I think America is a good example as to how these things have played out.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And this is exactly what Israel has done, legislatively.*  Jewish communities are prohibited from rejecting applicants for residence based on ethnicity, religion, etc.  BUT Arab-only communities are protected as such by the State*.  This doesn't tend to work so well in practice, and I think the US is a good example of that.
> 
> But another thing to consider is that the conflict itself creates significant problems.  On some level, there is an underlying hostility and fear (both sides) that places like the US don't have to deal with.  It makes the problem that much harder to engage with, let alone solve.  I think it CAN be solved, once the conflict is set aside.
Click to expand...

 
The US has an ugly history in that regard.  And there is no easy answer to - how do you protect the integrity of minority communities without creating more problems?  If the majority communities start barring minorities - then that is going to further disenfranchise them.  IMO it's extremely important to protect the rights of minorities regardless of who they are, there are many many examples of the horrors inflicted on them from the dominant culture.[/QUOTE]


Coyote said:


> Only 3.5% of industrial zones in Israel are in Arab communities.


This sums it up. When it comes to land, zoning, licenses, permits, financing, education, and on, the Palestinians get the short end of every stick.


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> This sums it up. When it comes to land, zoning, licenses, permits, financing, education, and on, the Palestinians get the short end of every stick.



Links?  In Israel. Not in Area C.


----------



## Olde Europe

cnm said:


> But Israel has embedded a religion, thereby excluding a portion of its population. Segregation, apartheid.



Religion has always been "embedded", if one can call it that, in Israel's nationality law, and, rather than doing it now, it enshrines that principle in the "basic law", protects it against changes by the Supreme court, and makes the whole thing explicit.  Here is what I found to be a good summary of the situation, which the basic law immunizes against court review:

The Law of Return and the Citizenship Law are two of nearly 70 Israeli laws – the number is growing – that explicitly discriminate based on whether a citizen is Jewish or Palestinian. A legal group, Adalah, representing Israel’s Palestinian citizens, has compiled a database of such measures.


*State-sanctioned racism*

But Netanyahu’s Basic Law threatens to expose the deeper significance of this bifurcated citizenship structure.

Israel’s 1.7 million Palestinian citizens, observed Zeidan, are discriminated against in a way that goes beyond that practiced against minorities in democratic states: that is, by the arbitrary, informal or unregulated decisions of officials and state bodies. In such democracies, officials are usually breaking the law when they discriminate against minority groups.

But in Israel, Zeidan pointed out, “officials are often breaking the law if they do not discriminate. It is their job to discriminate.”

This state-sanctioned racism is achieved by establishing “nationalities” separate from citizenship. The primary nationalities in Israel are “Jew” and “Arab”. The state has refused to recognise an “Israeli nationality”, a position supported by the Israeli supreme court, precisely to sanction a hierarchy of rights.

Individual rights are enjoyed by all citizens by virtue of their citizenship, whether they are Jews or Palestinians. In this regard, Israel looks like a liberal democracy. But Israel also recognises “national rights”, and reserves them almost exclusively for the Jewish population.

National rights are treated as superior to individual citizenship rights. So if there is a conflict between the two, the Jewish national right will invariably be given priority by officials and the courts.

*National rights trump citizenship*

How this hierarchy of rights works in practice is neatly illustrated by Israel’s citizenship structure. The Law of Return establishes a national right for all Jews to gain instant citizenship – as well as the many other rights that derive from citizenship.

The Citizenship Law, on the other hand, creates only an individual citizenship right for non-Jews. Israel’s Palestinian minority can pass their citizenship “downwards” to offspring but cannot extend it “outwards”, as a Jew can, to members of their extended family – in this case, the millions of Palestinians who were made refugees by Israel in 1948 and their descendants.

This privileging of Jewish national rights is equally clear in the way Israel treats its most precious material resources: land and water.

The commercial exploitation of these key resources is treated effectively as a national right, reserved for Jews only. In practice, noted Sawsan Zaher, a lawyer with Adalah, access to these resources is restricted to Jews through hundreds of rural communities across Israel, including the best-known – the kibbutz.

These rural communities are the places where Israel has made available vast swaths of land and offers subsidised water. As a result, almost all commercial agriculture and much industry is located in these communities.

*Arabs ‘socially unsuitable’*

But these resources can be exploited only by the Jewish population because each community is governed by an Admissions Committee, which blocks entry to Israel’s Palestinian citizens on the grounds that they are “socially unsuitable”.

“The committees govern entry to 550 communities in Israel, ensuring that the resources they control are available only to their Jewish populations,” Zaher told MEE. “These committees are one link in a chain of racist policies, segregation and exclusion by the state towards Palestinian citizens.”

The primary purpose of these rural communities is to enforce Israel’s “nationalisation” of 93 percent of its territory. This land is “nationalised” not for Israeli citizens – as no Israeli nationality is recognised – but for a global Jewish nation.

Meanwhile, the fifth of the population who are Palestinian are confined to less than three percent of Israeli territory, after most of their lands were confiscated by the state and are now held in trust for Jews around the world.

No new Palestinian community has been built since Israel’s creation 70 years ago, while dozens of Palestinian villages have been “unrecognised” by a 1965 Planning and Building Law. The 120,000 inhabitants of these villages, criminalised by this planning law, cannot build a home legally and are denied public services.


*‘Landlords’ of Israel*

Observers say that Netanyahu’s Basic Law risks exploding a seven-decade-old myth about Israel: that it is a liberal democracy where Israeli citizens, Jews and Palestinians alike, enjoy equal rights.

The combination of the Law of Return, which entitles all Jews around the world to instant Israeli citizenship, and Israel’s land laws, which reserve ultimate ownership to Jews as a global nation, has emptied citizenship of its accepted meaning.

Instead, according to Israel’s existing legal structure, the state belongs to Jews collectively around the world rather than to the country’s citizenry. The Jewish state is “owned” by world Jewry, even if many individual Jews have failed to actualise their citizenship by coming to live in Israel.

As Israeli scholars have noted, Israel should be classified not as a liberal democracy but as a fundamentally non-democratic state called an ethnocracy.​

It's easy enough to see, that sordid, racist state of apartheid needs a whole river of hasbara floating around to conceal the inner workings contributing to segregation, inequality, rampant legalized discrimination, with large sides of whataboutery and dozens if not hundreds of "Sqirrel! Squirrel! Squirrel!"  You may also have recognized a large dollop of invincible innocence working in exactly the same way as it does in the U.S.


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL

Coyote said:


> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Israel Legislates Apartheid into Law*
> 
> **
> 
> 
> 
> 
> YAWN...,,,, No Israelis in “ Palestine “.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There is no Palestine nation.
> 
> Until there is, there is no meaningful comparison.
Click to expand...


According to the Palestinian there is.  However that doesn’t matter. Abbas has stated several times that there is not to be one single Israeli. 
Somehow, it’s O.K. For the Palestinians to declare themselves an Israeli Free Country but Israel who has Arabs is racist and Non Democratic?You have to be kidding


----------



## Shusha

Olde Europe said:


> cnm said:
> 
> 
> 
> But Israel has embedded a religion, thereby excluding a portion of its population. Segregation, apartheid.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Religion has always been "embedded", if one can call it that, in Israel's nationality law, and, rather than doing it now, it enshrines that principle in the "basic law", protects it against changes by the Supreme court, and makes the whole thing explicit.  Here is what I found to be a good summary of the situation, which the basic law immunizes against court review:
> 
> The Law of Return and the Citizenship Law are two of nearly 70 Israeli laws – the number is growing – that explicitly discriminate based on whether a citizen is Jewish or Palestinian. A legal group, Adalah, representing Israel’s Palestinian citizens, has compiled a database of such measures.
> 
> 
> *State-sanctioned racism*
> 
> But Netanyahu’s Basic Law threatens to expose the deeper significance of this bifurcated citizenship structure.
> 
> Israel’s 1.7 million Palestinian citizens, observed Zeidan, are discriminated against in a way that goes beyond that practiced against minorities in democratic states: that is, by the arbitrary, informal or unregulated decisions of officials and state bodies. In such democracies, officials are usually breaking the law when they discriminate against minority groups.
> 
> But in Israel, Zeidan pointed out, “officials are often breaking the law if they do not discriminate. It is their job to discriminate.”
> 
> This state-sanctioned racism is achieved by establishing “nationalities” separate from citizenship. The primary nationalities in Israel are “Jew” and “Arab”. The state has refused to recognise an “Israeli nationality”, a position supported by the Israeli supreme court, precisely to sanction a hierarchy of rights.
> 
> Individual rights are enjoyed by all citizens by virtue of their citizenship, whether they are Jews or Palestinians. In this regard, Israel looks like a liberal democracy. But Israel also recognises “national rights”, and reserves them almost exclusively for the Jewish population.
> 
> National rights are treated as superior to individual citizenship rights. So if there is a conflict between the two, the Jewish national right will invariably be given priority by officials and the courts.
> 
> *National rights trump citizenship*
> 
> How this hierarchy of rights works in practice is neatly illustrated by Israel’s citizenship structure. The Law of Return establishes a national right for all Jews to gain instant citizenship – as well as the many other rights that derive from citizenship.
> 
> The Citizenship Law, on the other hand, creates only an individual citizenship right for non-Jews. Israel’s Palestinian minority can pass their citizenship “downwards” to offspring but cannot extend it “outwards”, as a Jew can, to members of their extended family – in this case, the millions of Palestinians who were made refugees by Israel in 1948 and their descendants.
> 
> This privileging of Jewish national rights is equally clear in the way Israel treats its most precious material resources: land and water.
> 
> The commercial exploitation of these key resources is treated effectively as a national right, reserved for Jews only. In practice, noted Sawsan Zaher, a lawyer with Adalah, access to these resources is restricted to Jews through hundreds of rural communities across Israel, including the best-known – the kibbutz.
> 
> These rural communities are the places where Israel has made available vast swaths of land and offers subsidised water. As a result, almost all commercial agriculture and much industry is located in these communities.
> 
> *Arabs ‘socially unsuitable’*
> 
> But these resources can be exploited only by the Jewish population because each community is governed by an Admissions Committee, which blocks entry to Israel’s Palestinian citizens on the grounds that they are “socially unsuitable”.
> 
> “The committees govern entry to 550 communities in Israel, ensuring that the resources they control are available only to their Jewish populations,” Zaher told MEE. “These committees are one link in a chain of racist policies, segregation and exclusion by the state towards Palestinian citizens.”
> 
> The primary purpose of these rural communities is to enforce Israel’s “nationalisation” of 93 percent of its territory. This land is “nationalised” not for Israeli citizens – as no Israeli nationality is recognised – but for a global Jewish nation.
> 
> Meanwhile, the fifth of the population who are Palestinian are confined to less than three percent of Israeli territory, after most of their lands were confiscated by the state and are now held in trust for Jews around the world.
> 
> No new Palestinian community has been built since Israel’s creation 70 years ago, while dozens of Palestinian villages have been “unrecognised” by a 1965 Planning and Building Law. The 120,000 inhabitants of these villages, criminalised by this planning law, cannot build a home legally and are denied public services.
> 
> 
> *‘Landlords’ of Israel*
> 
> Observers say that Netanyahu’s Basic Law risks exploding a seven-decade-old myth about Israel: that it is a liberal democracy where Israeli citizens, Jews and Palestinians alike, enjoy equal rights.
> 
> The combination of the Law of Return, which entitles all Jews around the world to instant Israeli citizenship, and Israel’s land laws, which reserve ultimate ownership to Jews as a global nation, has emptied citizenship of its accepted meaning.
> 
> Instead, according to Israel’s existing legal structure, the state belongs to Jews collectively around the world rather than to the country’s citizenry. The Jewish state is “owned” by world Jewry, even if many individual Jews have failed to actualise their citizenship by coming to live in Israel.
> 
> As Israeli scholars have noted, Israel should be classified not as a liberal democracy but as a fundamentally non-democratic state called an ethnocracy.​
> 
> It's easy enough to see, that sordid, racist state of apartheid needs a whole river of hasbara floating around to conceal the inner workings contributing to segregation, inequality, rampant legalized discrimination, with large sides of whataboutery and dozens if not hundreds of "Sqirrel! Squirrel! Squirrel!"  You may also have recognized a large dollop of invincible innocence working in exactly the same way as it does in the U.S.
Click to expand...


This long post is nothing more than the usual diatribe against Israel with few actual facts and a lot of deliberate misinformation. 

It conflates Arab Israelis with Palestinians, makes blanket statements about "laws" that have no basis in actual Israeli law and makes claims about racism and apartheid with no factual information. 

There are absolutely no "rights" in Israel arising from being Jewish as opposed to being Arab. Both Arab Israelis and Jewish Israelis are equal under the law. 

Another useful idiot.


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL

cnm said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> But also countries like Ireland, Spain, Latvia, Slovakia, Greece, Poland. There are dozens more. Easier, perhaps, to name the countries which don't have a national heritage and culture embedded in their constitution.
> 
> 
> 
> But Israel has embedded a religion, thereby excluding a portion of its population. Segregation, apartheid.
Click to expand...




cnm said:


> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> You have a lot to say about Israel who does have Arabs but when it pertains to the Arab World with their bigotry and intolerance towards the Jewish people and many of those Countries don’t have any Jewish residents there is no response. Typical
> Pro Palestinian Mentality of an.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm quite happy to say Israel behaves like Arab nations, which I don't consider to be 'western' democracies.
Click to expand...


I’m quite happy to say that considering the fact that Israel has Arabs and the majority of the Arab/Muslim Countries don’t have a Jewish Population your comment is extremely stupid


----------



## Ria_Longhorn

BlackFlag said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> The bloodstain is from the millennia of conquest and invasion of land which is the homeland of the Jewish people and the usurption of Jewish history as their own.
> 
> 
> 
> The other 2 Abrahamic religions claimed the same argument in favor of their own beliefs when it was their turn to spill blood in that cursed land.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Susha was talking exactly about the Christian and Muslim religions taking, by blood, any and all lands they could conquer Including the Land of Israel which was always respected by them as being Land belonging to the Jewish People.
> 
> ONLY with the Jews achieving sovereignty, the Christian and Muslim nutcases decided that "Jews are not Jews" and the land was never Jewish to begin with.
> 
> We know very well who and what we are dealing with.
> 
> None of it is going to ever take what remains for us, 20% of all of our ancient homeland.
> 
> The last I looked, land all over the world has spilled blood for territory .
> 
> But you, and a few others, look only at Israel and what the Jews have and demand that they give it up, especially as that would mean their death sentence.
> 
> You have not learned one thing from pogroms and the Inquisition and the Holocaust being committed against one people and one people only.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Jews conquered the indigenous residents of Israel long ago.  I wonder if their descendants claim ownership of the land.  I don't care what Israel does, I care that my country faces consequences over what they do.  The worst mistake of the 20th century was the 1st world determining that the land that is now Israel should be taken and given to foreigners, and to expel the indigenous people there.  Now the middle east has become the major pain in the modern world's ass, with religious insanity everywhere you look.
Click to expand...


Nonsense.  Let's look at some prominent Arab "Palestinian" families to see if your assertion is based on sound historical facts or just the usual Arab propaganda.

1 - The Husayni (Husseini) clan claim descent from Husayn ibn Ali, the grandson of Mohammad, the founder of Islam; Husayn hailed from Medina, which is in the Arabian Peninsula. (al-Husayni clan - Wikipedia)

2 - The Nashashibis clan are of Kurdish, Turkoman or Arab origin.(Nashashibi clan - Wikipedia)

3 - The Barghoutis are a sub-clan of the Bani Zeid tribe that hails from the Hejaz, a region in western, present-day Saudi Arabia.(Bani Zeid - Wikipedia)

4 - The al Khalids hail from Mecca.
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Khalil_(family) )

5 - The Nusseibehs hail from Medina.
(Nusaybah clan - Wikipedia)

Yeah, just as I suspected -- the usual Arab Propaganda.


----------



## Ria_Longhorn

BlackFlag said:


> Careful not to insult Christians, or the voodoo you've worked on the U.S., the ONLY country of any significance that defends your provocations, might wear off.



"God Bless America", written by Jewish composer Irving Berlin.
It is by this grace that we in America are protected.  Should America -- heaven forfend --  ever side with Israel's enemies, we lose this favor and all its concomitant benefits.[/QUOTE]


----------



## Ria_Longhorn

Plenty of Jews lived in the land that is now Israel, self-determining themselves, before the UN decided to deny the Arabs living there of their right to self-determination over their ancient homeland.[/QUOTE]

Almut Nebel's 2001 study, "The Y Chromosome Pool of Jews as Part of the Genetic Landscape of the Middle East" found that, '[T]he Y chromosomes in Palestinian Arabs and Bedouin represent, to a large extent, early lineages derived from the Neolithic inhabitants of the area and additional lineages from more-recent population movements. The early lineages are part of the common chromosome pool shared with Jews. According to our working model, the more-recent migrations were mostly from the ARABIAN PENINSULA [emphasis mine], as is seen in the Arab-specific Eu 10 chromosomes that include the modal haplotypes observed in Palestinians and Bedouins.'


----------



## Ria_Longhorn

Black Flag:
"Plenty of Jews lived in the land that is now Israel, self-determining themselves, before the UN decided to deny the Arabs living there of their right to self-determination over their ancient homeland."

Almut Nebel's 2001 study, "The Y Chromosome Pool of Jews as Part of the Genetic Landscape of the Middle East" found that, '[T]he Y chromosomes in Palestinian Arabs and Bedouin represent, to a large extent, early lineages derived from the Neolithic inhabitants of the area and additional lineages from more-recent population movements. The early lineages are part of the common chromosome pool shared with Jews. According to our working model, the more-recent migrations were mostly from the ARABIAN PENINSULA [emphasis mine], as is seen in the Arab-specific Eu 10 chromosomes that include the modal haplotypes observed in Palestinians and Bedouins.'[/QUOTE]


----------



## Ria_Longhorn

Billo_Really said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> There's no way of putting Israel in that category, without exercising the discrimination mentioned in the accusation.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Mandla Mandela calls Apartheid Israel worse than Apartheid South Africa *
> _“Never before in my life has the reality of Apartheid Israel stared me so bluntly in the face as it did today on my visit to Al Aqsa, Bethlehem and Hebron. Standing in the Sacred Sanctuary on the very place that Apartheid Israel installed metal detectors and surveillance cameras against which we protested a few months ago made me realize just how intimidation, illegal occupation and brutality is meted out daily to Palestinians. We cannot be complicit by our silence.”
> 
> *Noam Chomsky: Israeli Apartheid ‘Much Worse’ Than South Africa*
> Famous American linguist Noam Chomsky has described the actions of the Israeli occupation in Palestine as “worse than South African apartheid”.
> 
> *Israel Just Dropped the Pretense of Equality for Palestinian Citizens*
> The so-called “Jewish nation-state” bill formalizes in Israeli law the superior rights and privileges that Jewish citizens of the state enjoy over its indigenous Palestinian minority, who comprise roughly 20% of the population.
> _​So lets cut the foreplay and bullshit, just tell it for what it really is.
> _
> _​
Click to expand...


The Land belongs to the Jewish People, fatboy.


----------



## Ria_Longhorn

"On Thursday Israel finally expressed in constitutional law the basic achievement of Zionism: Israel is the nation-state of the Jewish people.  ... The law does not infringe on the individual rights of any Israeli citizen, including Arabs; nor does it create individual privileges."

Get Over It—Israel Is the Jewish State


----------



## Ria_Longhorn

"The covenant which He made with Abraham, And His oath to Isaac, And confirmed it to Jacob for a statute, To Israel as an everlasting covenant, Saying, 'To you I will give the land of Canaan . . .' " -- Psalm 105: 9-11.


----------



## RoccoR

RE: Now it's a basic law: The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people
※→ Coyote, Shusha, et al,



Coyote said:


> Who are we to judge the reality of the fears though?


*(RESPONSE)*

You're probably correct.  How can we judge without the true experience?  Yet every day we do it.



Coyote said:


> Do all the Palestinians really want to kill all the Jews?


*(RESPONSE) *

I agree - they _(probably)_ really do not want to "kill Jews" → _per say_.  They really just want the problems to go away (disappear) and they see the Jews as the cause of the problems.  No Jews → no problems.



Coyote said:


> Do the Jews really want all the land for themselves?


*(RESPONSE)*

This is one of those questions that cannot be answered with just a YES or NO.  Of course, in any diverse population of free thinkers, you will be able to find those that think the entirety of the Mandate period of Palestine should be Israel.  But that is not the prevailing opinion.  What is more likely is:






••  *SOURCE LINK*  ••​
The idea of retaining certain key terrain _(now a number of settlements)_ dates back to the Six Day War when it became necessary for Israel to block certain avenues of approach suitable for Arab invasion.

However, it also now seems that Israel will continue to establish settlements as a means of pressure to bring the Arab Palestinian Leadership to the table.



Coyote said:


> In the end, it is what people believe that matters, whether it's real or not.


*(RESPONSE)*

Absolutely → NO question...  After five decades of some serious propaganda, and the actual use of thousands and thousands of unconventional and asymmetric engagements, the lines between legitimate grievance and the justification of attacks has been blurred.



Coyote said:


> They see moratoriums on settlement expansion constantly flouted.


*(RESPONSE)*

Exactly the point.  And now, the strategy is to build settlements until the pain is unbearable and the Arab Palestinians need a Medivac to the Peace Talks.



Coyote said:


> Whether you agree or not is irrelevant, it's the perception being fed that Israel really wants all the real estate for Jews that then feeds the fears that there will be no room for them.  Likewise, actual attacks on Jews from Palestinians reinforce their belief that Palestinians seek their eradication.  How real are each one's fears depends on where you stand and what you have to lose?


*(RESPONSE)*

Yes, at least some of the general population think this.  But it is also the formal stipend process for the captured Jihadist, Fedayeen Activist, Hostile Insurgents, Radicalized Islamic Followers, and Asymmetric Fighters that makes it appear that there is a WANTED - DEAD or ALIVE _(mostly dead)_ rewards _(subsidized by Donor Contributions)_ for such attacks.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Ecocertifmrl

> *Basic Law: Israel as the Nation State of the Jewish People*





> *ow it's a basic law: The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people*



Word


----------



## admonit

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Arab minority is not priveledged, their communities often suffer from a lack of resources, including government spending, infrastructure and education.  Those are the sort of things that segregation reinforces.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think rylah's point is that one of the ways of addressing this disparity of resources is by "affirmative action", that is -- creating artificial privilege in the  form of special consideration such as allocating additional resources, creating Arab-only communities, etc.
> 
> I would also question just how much Arab communities suffer from lack of resources and government spending, infrastructure and education and the reasons for that within Israel "proper" (not Area C).  If the Israeli government deliberately underfunds Arab communities that is obviously a problem which should be addressed, but I'm not yet convinced that is true.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Israeli legislators have recognized the inequality in government spending - this article is from 2015 (I'm not sure where this legislative effort ended up) but it points out the inequities:
> 
> Israel looks to address funding gaps for Arab community with $3.9 billion plan
Click to expand...

1. It is a decision of the government and has nothing to do with legislation.
2. The gaps between different social, ethnic and religious groups are well known and you don't need to wait an article in the Haaretz to reveal it.
3. A social gap between different groups in society doesn't necessary mean discrimination. In fact, the word "inequality" appears neither in your quotes from the Haaretz, nor in the original document.


> *The draft resolution details the gaps between Israeli Jews and Arabs. While Arabs constitute about 20% of Israel’s population, only 7% of the government’s budget for public transportation goes to Arab communities. *


1. The author of the article uses the total Arab population number (20%), including Arabs in mixed cities, thus increasing the gap almost to 3, while original document considers population only in Arab cities (15.3%).
2. The public transportation is not the main point in the economic development plan. The main problem is low participation of Arab women in the total workforce. Only 33.2% of Arab women are employed, including mixed cities. In Arab cities the number is much lower. That's the point. The public transport is mostly used by working people. In fact, and it is not a big secret in Israel, Arabs prefer private transport. I don't remember when last time I saw an Arab man in a bus or in a train. But if I see in my city a new BMW jeep, I don't doubt who is the owner..
3. The same problems exist in the Jewish ultra-Orthodox sector.


----------



## admonit

RoccoR said:


> However, it also now seems that Israel will continue to establish settlements as a means of pressure to bring the Arab Palestinian Leadership to the table.


Israel at least last 20 years doesn't establish new settlements in the West bank.


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL

Ria_Longhorn said:


> Black Flag:
> "Plenty of Jews lived in the land that is now Israel, self-determining themselves, before the UN decided to deny the Arabs living there of their right to self-determination over their ancient homeland."
> 
> Almut Nebel's 2001 study, "The Y Chromosome Pool of Jews as Part of the Genetic Landscape of the Middle East" found that, '[T]he Y chromosomes in Palestinian Arabs and Bedouin represent, to a large extent, early lineages derived from the Neolithic inhabitants of the area and additional lineages from more-recent population movements. The early lineages are part of the common chromosome pool shared with Jews. According to our working model, the more-recent migrations were mostly from the ARABIAN PENINSULA [emphasis mine], as is seen in the Arab-specific Eu 10 chromosomes that include the modal haplotypes observed in Palestinians and Bedouins.'


[/QUOTE]

The.    Doesn’t have a clue to what you’re talking about


----------



## Sixties Fan

The Arabs in Israel have equal voting rights. Not only that, but Israel is one of the few places in the Middle East where Arab women have always been able to vote. The Arabs hold numerous seats in the Knesset and the only party ever banned by Israel is a Jewish one (Kach). Israeli Arabs have also held various government po‎sitions.

At the time of the foundation of Israel, only one Arab high school was open, today there are hundreds of Arab schools.

The only legal distinction between Jewish and Arab citizens of Israel is that they are not required to serve in the Israeli army. In 1999, Abdel Rahman Zuabi was the first Arab-Israeli to enter the Israeli Supreme Court.

As I wrote in my last book, Israel is the “freest Arab nation” in the world, the only country where an Arab spring really succeded, and without bloodshed..

(full article online)

The hypocrisy in opposing Israel's Nationality Law


----------



## Sixties Fan

Of the many virtues of the Israeli parliament passing a law declaring Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people, not least is the entertainment value of observing the New York Times in what I call full-fledged frothing freakout frenzy mode.

Actually, the front-page, above-the-fold, two-bylines plus a photograph treatment that the Times gave the story has not only entertainment value, but educational value. It’s an opportunity to observe the Times putting all of its worst biased techniques on display to attack Israel. Among those techniques:

(full article online)

New York Times Loses It Over Israel’s ‘Incendiary’ Nation-State Law


----------



## Roudy

rylah said:


> cnm said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Do You see any reference to skin color?
> 
> 
> 
> Only to Bantustans.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes Israel IS a Bantustan, and anywhere beyond Jews are not allowed.
> Although I prefer the term *'Reservation'*.
Click to expand...

As we can clearly see from the map, the imperialist expansionist Zionists are occupying Muslim lands!


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL

Roudy said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cnm said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Do You see any reference to skin color?
> 
> 
> 
> Only to Bantustans.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes Israel IS a Bantustan, and anywhere beyond Jews are not allowed.
> Although I prefer the term *'Reservation'*.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> As we can clearly see from the map, the imperialist expansionist Zionists are occupying Muslims lands!
Click to expand...


It’s amazing that so few can overtake an entire part of the World


----------



## Roudy

ILOVEISRAEL said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cnm said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Do You see any reference to skin color?
> 
> 
> 
> Only to Bantustans.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes Israel IS a Bantustan, and anywhere beyond Jews are not allowed.
> Although I prefer the term *'Reservation'*.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> As we can clearly see from the map, the imperialist expansionist Zionists are occupying Muslims lands!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It’s amazing that so few can overtake an entire part of the World
Click to expand...

The expansionist "Zionist Entity" must be stopped!   Maybe we can recruit the help of that newly elected communist House representative from Brooklyn?


----------



## Shusha

admonit said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> However, it also now seems that Israel will continue to establish settlements as a means of pressure to bring the Arab Palestinian Leadership to the table.
> 
> 
> 
> Israel at least last 20 years doesn't establish new settlements in the West bank.
Click to expand...


And this is why we must differentiate between the perception and the reality, and why the double standard, the propaganda and the irrational fears should not be given weight when discussing the reality.  Everyone "knows" that Israel's continued settlement building is a "problem" and an "obstacle to peace" but the reality is that Israel froze settlement-building for 20 years in hopes of negotiated secession agreement or two.


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL

Shusha said:


> admonit said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> However, it also now seems that Israel will continue to establish settlements as a means of pressure to bring the Arab Palestinian Leadership to the table.
> 
> 
> 
> Israel at least last 20 years doesn't establish new settlements in the West bank.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And this is why we must differentiate between the perception and the reality, and why the double standard, the propaganda and the irrational fears should not be given weight when discussing the reality.  Everyone "knows" that Israel's continued settlement building is a "problem" and an "obstacle to peace" but the reality is that Israel froze settlement-building for 20 years in hopes of negotiated secession agreement or two.
Click to expand...

 
There were no “ settlements” prior to 1967.  The Palestinians have made it clear; they have no interest in “ negotiations.


----------



## Shusha

ILOVEISRAEL said:


> There were no “ settlements” prior to 1967.  The Palestinians have made it clear; they have no interest in “ negotiations.



There are no settlements now.  There is no such thing as settlements, just like there is no such thing as an occupation.  "Settlements" is just a negative code word for "Jews live there".  Its an excuse to claim that there are places in the world where Jews should not be allowed to live. 

It is the most obvious and vile type of hypocrisy -- the Arab Palestinians demanding Arab presence in Israel while simultaneously demanding a Jew-free state.  Its saying that Arab Palestinians must be permitted to settle anywhere in the territory while Jews must be restricted from settling in parts of the area.  Its claiming that Arabs have every right to exclusive use of the entire Temple Mount in the name of "freedom of worship" while Jews must be prevented from accessing the very place which is the most Holy and Sacred place of their faith.  It is demanding that Israel be multi-cultural -- with two official languages, two flags, two systems of laws, two sets of holidays, two national anthems, two peoples with the rights to self-determination while simultaneously demanding that Palestine be developed as a nation for a single ethnic and national group with one language, one flag, one religion, one system of laws (based on Sharia), one set of religious holidays and calendar, one national anthem and only one people having the rights to self-determination. 

That useful idiots around the world fall for this hypocrisy speaks volumes.


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL

Shusha said:


> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> There were no “ settlements” prior to 1967.  The Palestinians have made it clear; they have no interest in “ negotiations.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There are no settlements now.  There is no such thing as settlements, just like there is no such thing as an occupation.  "Settlements" is just a negative code word for "Jews live there".  Its an excuse to claim that there are places in the world where Jews should not be allowed to live.
> 
> It is the most obvious and vile type of hypocrisy -- the Arab Palestinians demanding Arab presence in Israel while simultaneously demanding a Jew-free state.  Its saying that Arab Palestinians must be permitted to settle anywhere in the territory while Jews must be restricted from settling in parts of the area.  Its claiming that Arabs have every right to exclusive use of the entire Temple Mount in the name of "freedom of worship" while Jews must be prevented from accessing the very place which is the most Holy and Sacred place of their faith.  It is demanding that Israel be multi-cultural -- with two official languages, two flags, two systems of laws, two sets of holidays, two national anthems, two peoples with the rights to self-determination while simultaneously demanding that Palestine be developed as a nation for a single ethnic and national group with one language, one flag, one religion, one system of laws (based on Sharia), one set of religious holidays and calendar, one national anthem and only one people having the rights to self-determination.
> 
> That useful idiots around the world fall for this hypocrisy speaks volumes.
Click to expand...


“ Right of Return” isn’t going to happen . What I think is hilarious is that. Pro Pal Kool/Aid drinkers post links which claim that Israel can’t be both Jewish and Democratic but yet it’s O.K. To have a No Israelis Allowed  Palestinian Country”.


----------



## Shusha

ILOVEISRAEL said:


> “ Right of Return” isn’t going to happen . What I think is hilarious is that. Pro Pal Kool/Aid drinkers post links which claim that Israel can’t be both Jewish and Democratic but yet it’s O.K. To have a No Israelis Allowed  Palestinian Country”.



If by "right of return" you mean to flood Israel with 7 million Arabs -- nope.  Never going to happen.  Never.  Never.  Get over it.  

IF by "right of return" you mean that BOTH peoples have the right to return to settle in their homeland and develop their self-determination and cultural uniqueness in that place, then YES it should happen.  What will that look like?  The majority of Palestinians will settle in Palestine and the majority of Jews will settle in Israel.  This will allow each culture to develop fully as a nation with a unique and special culture.  Each state will have a minority of the other living in it, which poses absolutely no problems whatsoever (after all Palestinians constantly brag that Arabs and Jews lived in peace for centuries and Israel has proven it poses no problem).


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL

Shusha said:


> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> “ Right of Return” isn’t going to happen . What I think is hilarious is that. Pro Pal Kool/Aid drinkers post links which claim that Israel can’t be both Jewish and Democratic but yet it’s O.K. To have a No Israelis Allowed  Palestinian Country”.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If by "right of return" you mean to flood Israel with 7 million Arabs -- nope.  Never going to happen.  Never.  Never.  Get over it.
> 
> IF by "right of return" you mean that BOTH peoples have the right to return to settle in their homeland and develop their self-determination and cultural uniqueness in that place, then YES it should happen.  What will that look like?  The majority of Palestinians will settle in Palestine and the majority of Jews will settle in Israel.  This will allow each culture to develop fully as a nation with a unique and special culture.  Each state will have a minority of the other living in it, which poses absolutely no problems whatsoever (after all Palestinians constantly brag that Arabs and Jews lived in peace for centuries and Israel has proven it poses no problem).
Click to expand...


That’s what they want. If they can’t destro Israel externally their goal is to do it internally.   That will never happen!!!


----------



## RoccoR

RE:  Now it's a basic law: The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people
※→  ILOVEISRAEL,  et al,

I think this is, at present, the bottom line.



ILOVEISRAEL said:


> That’s what they want. If they can’t destroy Israel externally their goal is to do it internally.   That will never happen!!!


*(COMMENT)*

The Arab Palestinians are becoming more violent, and less respectful for the Rule of Law; most of which the Arab Palestinians have lost along with any 21st Century moral discipline.  The Arab Palestinians are trying every new technique available to them to incite violence and disrupt the peace.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## RoccoR

RE: Now it's a basic law: The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people
※→ ILOVEISRAEL, et al,

Something is wrong here; I think!



ILOVEISRAEL said:


> “ Right of Return” isn’t going to happen. What I think is hilarious is that. Pro Pal Kool/Aid drinkers post links which claim that Israel can’t be both Jewish and Democratic but yet it’s O.K. To have a No Israelis Allowed  Palestinian Country”.


*(COMMENT)*

I'm not sure that there is a "Right of Return" that can both law and applied retroactively in the case of the events in 1948. 



			
				The Rules of Law and Human Rights • Fundamental principles of penal law • International Commission of Jurists said:
			
		

> Chapter 4
> 2.  *Retroactive legislation*
> Certainty cannot exist in the criminal law where the law, or the penalty for its breach, is retrospective. Retroactive legislation, especially in criminal matters, is *inconsistent with the Rule of Law*.



Within the International Community, all the new UN drafts pertaining to the "Right of Return" (like A/RES/194 (III) 11 December 1948) does not apply to any allegation prior to 11 December 1948.  And it is important to note that several Arab League members _(Egypt, Iraq, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Syria, and Yemen)_ rejected Resolution 194 (III).

So I'm wondering what the Arab Palestinian is using for case law on the issue on the "Right of Return?"  What group of alleged refugees are they demanding that the "Right of Return" be applied?

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Billo_Really

Shusha said:


> Yes, you keep saying that.  But your only argument seems to be:  because Joooooooos.
> 
> Again, why is it labelled apartheid when Israel does it and not when Spain does it?  Or any of a dozen other countries.  It REEKS of a double standard and fall-back position of, "well, I don't really understand all this constitution and nationality stuff -- but if Israel does it -- it must be bad."


As long as you're determined to make shit up, you don't need me.


----------



## Billo_Really

Shusha said:


> This is just ridiculous.  Translation:  Israel is apartheid because someone else said so.


Israel is apartheid because of the shit Israel is doing.


----------



## Billo_Really

Ria_Longhorn said:


> The Land belongs to the Jewish People, fatboy.


You can't move in to an area and automatically have more rights than the people already living there, you stupid bitch!


----------



## rylah

Billo_Really said:


> Ria_Longhorn said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Land belongs to the Jewish People, fatboy.
> 
> 
> 
> You can't move in to an area and automatically have more rights than the people already living there, you stupid bitch!
Click to expand...


You can have equal rights, especially if the people of the place called You for help, in demanding those equal rights.

This is what this Basic Law is all about in what You call the "area".


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL

Billo_Really said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> This is just ridiculous.  Translation:  Israel is apartheid because someone else said so.
> 
> 
> 
> Israel is apartheid because of the shit Israel is doing.
Click to expand...


Israel has Arabs. Abbas has declared several times that the “ Palestinian State “ will not have one Israeli in it. There are many Arab Countries who don’t have a Jewish Population. You don’t see anything wrong with that, do you??


----------



## RoccoR

RE:  Now it's a basic law: The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people
※→  Billo_Really,

I'm pretty sure that you don't understand the meaning of apartheid or the elements of that offense.



Billo_Really said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> This is just ridiculous.  Translation:  Israel is apartheid because someone else said so.
> 
> 
> 
> Israel is apartheid because of the shit Israel is doing.
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

As you can see for yourself.  Israel is many more time diverse than the Arab Palestinian population.  There is no attempt to systematically oppress and dominate one racial group over any other racial group.  Jews are a matter of religion, where as the term "Arab Palestinians" describes an ethnic tribe. 

Israel is attempting to protect its sovereignty from Arab League conventional warfare assaults and Jihadism, Fedayeen Activism, Hostile Insurgency Operations, Radicalized Islamic Behaviors, and Asymmetric Violence.  The Arab Palestinians utilize threats to use force designed to bring about political change.  These Hostile Arab Palestinian (HoAP) activities exercise the unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.  What the HoAP passes-off as oppression by the Israelis are Article 43 (Hague Regulation) attempt to establish law and order, and at the same time utilizing Article 68 Authority (GCIV) to protect against the HoAP acts solely intended to harm the Occupying Power, seriously damage the property of the occupying forces or administration or the installations, and defend against  espionage, of serious acts of sabotage against the military installations of the Occupying Power or of intentional offences which have caused the death of one or more persons.  Security countermeasures in-depth to separate the HoAP from those they would openly attack, are attempts to restore and ensure, as far as possible, public order and safety.  There is no true domination or oppression.  

Article 7(2h), Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court
*"The crime of apartheid" means* inhumane acts of a character similar to those
referred to in paragraph 1, committed in the context of an institutionalized
regime of systematic oppression and domination by one racial group over any
other racial group or groups and committed with the intention of maintaining
that regime;"​
Article 7 (1j), Elements of Crimes, International Criminal Court
*Crime against humanity of apartheid*
Elements
1.  The perpetrator committed an inhumane act against one or more persons.
2.  Such act was an act referred to in article 7, paragraph 1, of the Statute, or was an act
of a character similar to any of those acts.
3.  The perpetrator was aware of the factual circumstances that established the character
of the act.
4.  The conduct was committed in the context of an institutionalized regime of systematic
oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group or groups.
5.  The perpetrator intended to maintain such regime by that conduct.
6.  The conduct was committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed
against a civilian population.
7.  The perpetrator knew that the conduct was part of or intended the conduct to be part
of a widespread or systematic attack directed against a civilian population.​
Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore




----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


>



Well, the video is right about one thing -- Israel isn't messing around any more.


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> Article 7 (1j), Elements of Crimes, International Criminal Court
> *Crime against humanity of apartheid*
> Elements
> 1. The perpetrator committed an inhumane act against one or more persons.
> 2. Such act was an act referred to in article 7, paragraph 1, of the Statute, or was an act
> of a character similar to any of those acts.
> 3. The perpetrator was aware of the factual circumstances that established the character
> of the act.
> 4. The conduct was committed in the context of an institutionalized regime of systematic
> oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group or groups.
> 5. The perpetrator intended to maintain such regime by that conduct.
> 6. The conduct was committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed
> against a civilian population.
> 7. The perpetrator knew that the conduct was part of or intended the conduct to be part
> of a widespread or systematic attack directed against a civilian population.


This fits Israel to a T.


----------



## Mindful

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> Article 7 (1j), Elements of Crimes, International Criminal Court
> *Crime against humanity of apartheid*
> Elements
> 1. The perpetrator committed an inhumane act against one or more persons.
> 2. Such act was an act referred to in article 7, paragraph 1, of the Statute, or was an act
> of a character similar to any of those acts.
> 3. The perpetrator was aware of the factual circumstances that established the character
> of the act.
> 4. The conduct was committed in the context of an institutionalized regime of systematic
> oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group or groups.
> 5. The perpetrator intended to maintain such regime by that conduct.
> 6. The conduct was committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed
> against a civilian population.
> 7. The perpetrator knew that the conduct was part of or intended the conduct to be part
> of a widespread or systematic attack directed against a civilian population.
> 
> 
> 
> This fits Israel to a T.
Click to expand...


You've read the PA declaration of principles, I take it?


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> are attempts to restore and ensure, as far as possible, public order and safety. There is no true domination or oppression.


Does stealing land and shooting those who protest ensure public order and safety?


----------



## P F Tinmore

Mindful said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> Article 7 (1j), Elements of Crimes, International Criminal Court
> *Crime against humanity of apartheid*
> Elements
> 1. The perpetrator committed an inhumane act against one or more persons.
> 2. Such act was an act referred to in article 7, paragraph 1, of the Statute, or was an act
> of a character similar to any of those acts.
> 3. The perpetrator was aware of the factual circumstances that established the character
> of the act.
> 4. The conduct was committed in the context of an institutionalized regime of systematic
> oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group or groups.
> 5. The perpetrator intended to maintain such regime by that conduct.
> 6. The conduct was committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed
> against a civilian population.
> 7. The perpetrator knew that the conduct was part of or intended the conduct to be part
> of a widespread or systematic attack directed against a civilian population.
> 
> 
> 
> This fits Israel to a T.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You've read the PA declaration of principles, I take it?
Click to expand...

Deflection.


----------



## Mindful

P F Tinmore said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> Article 7 (1j), Elements of Crimes, International Criminal Court
> *Crime against humanity of apartheid*
> Elements
> 1. The perpetrator committed an inhumane act against one or more persons.
> 2. Such act was an act referred to in article 7, paragraph 1, of the Statute, or was an act
> of a character similar to any of those acts.
> 3. The perpetrator was aware of the factual circumstances that established the character
> of the act.
> 
> 4. The conduct was committed in the context of an institutionalized regime of systematic
> oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group or groups.
> 5. The perpetrator intended to maintain such regime by that conduct.
> 6. The conduct was committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed
> against a civilian population.
> 7. The perpetrator knew that the conduct was part of or intended the conduct to be part
> of a widespread or systematic attack directed against a civilian population.
> 
> 
> 
> This fits Israel to a T.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You've read the PA declaration of principles, I take it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Deflection.
Click to expand...


----------



## admonit

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> are attempts to restore and ensure, as far as possible, public order and safety. There is no true domination or oppression.
> 
> 
> 
> Does stealing land
Click to expand...

This thread is about Israel.
Feel free to create a separate thread about your country.


----------



## Mindful

Gaza Mothers send balloon bombs over the border to Israel, destroying thousands of acres of wildlife and fields and not to mention putting innocent children at risk, who might pick up the colourful balloons.
The U.N needs to put a stop to this outrageous provocation by Hamas.


----------



## Ecocertifmrl

admonit said:


> This thread is about Israel.
> Feel free to create a separate thread about your country.


but israel steals land.


----------



## Mindful

Ecocertifmrl said:


> admonit said:
> 
> 
> 
> This thread is about Israel.
> Feel free to create a separate thread about your country.
> 
> 
> 
> but israel steals land.
Click to expand...


No it does not.


----------



## Ecocertifmrl

admonit said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> However, it also now seems that Israel will continue to establish settlements as a means of pressure to bring the Arab Palestinian Leadership to the table.
> 
> 
> 
> Israel at least last 20 years doesn't establish new settlements in the West bank.
Click to expand...

What?


----------



## Ecocertifmrl

rylah said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ria_Longhorn said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Land belongs to the Jewish People, fatboy.
> 
> 
> 
> You can't move in to an area and automatically have more rights than the people already living there, you stupid bitch!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You can have equal rights, especially if the people of the place called You for help, in demanding those equal rights.
> 
> This is what this Basic Law is all about in what You call the "area".
Click to expand...

What is "area"?


----------



## rylah

Ecocertifmrl said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ria_Longhorn said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Land belongs to the Jewish People, fatboy.
> 
> 
> 
> You can't move in to an area and automatically have more rights than the people already living there, you stupid bitch!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You can have equal rights, especially if the people of the place called You for help, in demanding those equal rights.
> 
> This is what this Basic Law is all about in what You call the "area".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What is "area"?
Click to expand...


Try looking for this word in the given law.


----------



## rylah

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> are attempts to restore and ensure, as far as possible, public order and safety. There is no true domination or oppression.
> 
> 
> 
> Does stealing land and shooting those who protest ensure public order and safety?
Click to expand...

Where do You find this in the law?

That was exactly the Arab choice, now they play dumb about the reason Palestinian Jews got arms and a state.


----------



## Ecocertifmrl

rylah said:


> Ecocertifmrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ria_Longhorn said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Land belongs to the Jewish People, fatboy.
> 
> 
> 
> You can't move in to an area and automatically have more rights than the people already living there, you stupid bitch!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You can have equal rights, especially if the people of the place called You for help, in demanding those equal rights.
> 
> This is what this Basic Law is all about in what You call the "area".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What is "area"?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Try looking for this word in the given law.
Click to expand...

What law?


----------



## admonit

Ecocertifmrl said:


> admonit said:
> 
> 
> 
> This thread is about Israel.
> Feel free to create a separate thread about your country.
> 
> 
> 
> but israel steals land.
Click to expand...

Who told you that? You can spit in his face..


----------



## admonit

Ecocertifmrl said:


> admonit said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> However, it also now seems that Israel will continue to establish settlements as a means of pressure to bring the Arab Palestinian Leadership to the table.
> 
> 
> 
> Israel at least last 20 years doesn't establish new settlements in the West bank.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What?
Click to expand...

Which words in my post you did not understand?


----------



## Ecocertifmrl

admonit said:


> Ecocertifmrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> admonit said:
> 
> 
> 
> This thread is about Israel.
> Feel free to create a separate thread about your country.
> 
> 
> 
> but israel steals land.
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Who told you that? You can spit in his face..
Click to expand...

Half the world.


----------



## Ecocertifmrl

admonit said:


> Ecocertifmrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> admonit said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> However, it also now seems that Israel will continue to establish settlements as a means of pressure to bring the Arab Palestinian Leadership to the table.
> 
> 
> 
> Israel at least last 20 years doesn't establish new settlements in the West bank.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Which words in my post you did not understand?
Click to expand...

No offence, but I _don't read all your posts.._


----------



## P F Tinmore

rylah said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> are attempts to restore and ensure, as far as possible, public order and safety. There is no true domination or oppression.
> 
> 
> 
> Does stealing land and shooting those who protest ensure public order and safety?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Where do You find this in the law?
> 
> That was exactly the Arab choice, now they play dumb about the reason Palestinian Jews got arms and a state.
Click to expand...

It is illegal for an occupying power to steal or destroy property in the occupied territory.

Look it up.


----------



## rylah

P F Tinmore said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> are attempts to restore and ensure, as far as possible, public order and safety. There is no true domination or oppression.
> 
> 
> 
> Does stealing land and shooting those who protest ensure public order and safety?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Where do You find this in the law?
> 
> That was exactly the Arab choice, now they play dumb about the reason Palestinian Jews got arms and a state.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It is illegal for an occupying power to steal or destroy property in the occupied territory.
> 
> Look it up.
Click to expand...


Where do You find this in the given law?


----------



## P F Tinmore

rylah said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> are attempts to restore and ensure, as far as possible, public order and safety. There is no true domination or oppression.
> 
> 
> 
> Does stealing land and shooting those who protest ensure public order and safety?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Where do You find this in the law?
> 
> That was exactly the Arab choice, now they play dumb about the reason Palestinian Jews got arms and a state.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It is illegal for an occupying power to steal or destroy property in the occupied territory.
> 
> Look it up.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Where do You find this in the given law?
Click to expand...

Destruction of property.
The occupying power is not allowed to destroy real or personal property belonging individually or collectively to private persons, to the State, to other public authorities or to social or co-operative organizations, except where such destruction is made absolutely necessary by military operations.

Private property cannot be confiscated.

https://www.icrc.org/eng/assets/files/other/law9_final.pdf


----------



## RoccoR

RE:  Now it's a basic law: The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people
※→  P F Tinmore, et al,

Oh, your cognitive skills and eyesight are bad; quite bad!



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> Article 7 (1j), Elements of Crimes, International Criminal Court
> *Crime against humanity of apartheid*
> Elements
> 1. The perpetrator committed an inhumane act against one or more persons.
> 2. Such act was an act referred to in article 7, paragraph 1, of the Statute, or was an act
> of a character similar to any of those acts.
> 3. The perpetrator was aware of the factual circumstances that established the character
> of the act.
> 4. The conduct was committed in the context of an institutionalized regime of systematic
> oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group or groups.
> 5. The perpetrator intended to maintain such regime by that conduct.
> 6. The conduct was committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed
> against a civilian population.
> 7. The perpetrator knew that the conduct was part of or intended the conduct to be part
> of a widespread or systematic attack directed against a civilian population.
> 
> 
> 
> This fits Israel to a T.
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

•  There is no institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination.
•  The conflict between Israel and the  Hostile Arab Palestinians one that opposes provide direct support for Jihadism, Fedayeen Activism, Hostile Insurgency Operations, Radicalized Islamic Behaviors, and Asymmetric Violence.
•  The conflict between Israel and the Hostile Arab Palestinians is about the defense of Israeli sovereignty and territorial integrity against the state supported apparatus of terrorism.
•  The conflict between Israel and the Hostile Arab Palestinians is a conflict against a quasi-State (Palestine) and its open attempt to incite regional violence.
•  The Hostile Arab Palestinians intended to maintain and further spread such regime by Armed struggle until the entirety of the territory with the boundaries it had during the British Mandate dominated by the Hostile Arab Palestinians.
•  The Hostile Arab Palestinians have, for the last 50 years, launched thousands and thousands of attacks directly against the Israeli citizenry and then → glorified the terrorists that slaughtered the woment and children.  And such attacks are still happening today.
•  The Hostile Arab Palestinians knew that the conduct of such attacks was part of or intended the conduct to be part of a widespread and systematic attack directed against a Israeli civilian population.
•  The Hostile Arab Palestinians knew that the conduct of such attacks were not in keeping with the Customary and International Humanitarian Law.​
Now the Hostile Arab Palestinians know that the State of Israel did not assume any control over any territory that was under the sovereign control of any Arab Palestinian regime.

Most Respectfully,
R



Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> RE:  Now it's a basic law: The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people
> ※→  P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> Oh, your cognitive skills and eyesight are bad; quite bad!
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> Article 7 (1j), Elements of Crimes, International Criminal Court
> *Crime against humanity of apartheid*
> Elements
> 1. The perpetrator committed an inhumane act against one or more persons.
> 2. Such act was an act referred to in article 7, paragraph 1, of the Statute, or was an act
> of a character similar to any of those acts.
> 3. The perpetrator was aware of the factual circumstances that established the character
> of the act.
> 4. The conduct was committed in the context of an institutionalized regime of systematic
> oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group or groups.
> 5. The perpetrator intended to maintain such regime by that conduct.
> 6. The conduct was committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed
> against a civilian population.
> 7. The perpetrator knew that the conduct was part of or intended the conduct to be part
> of a widespread or systematic attack directed against a civilian population.
> 
> 
> 
> This fits Israel to a T.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> •  There is no institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination.
> •  The conflict between Israel and the  Hostile Arab Palestinians one that opposes provide direct support for Jihadism, Fedayeen Activism, Hostile Insurgency Operations, Radicalized Islamic Behaviors, and Asymmetric Violence.
> •  The conflict between Israel and the Hostile Arab Palestinians is about the defense of Israeli sovereignty and territorial integrity against the state supported apparatus of terrorism.
> •  The conflict between Israel and the Hostile Arab Palestinians is a conflict against a quasi-State (Palestine) and its open attempt to incite regional violence.
> •  The Hostile Arab Palestinians intended to maintain and further spread such regime by Armed struggle until the entirety of the territory with the boundaries it had during the British Mandate dominated by the Hostile Arab Palestinians.
> •  The Hostile Arab Palestinians have, for the last 50 years, launched thousands and thousands of attacks directly against the Israeli citizenry and then → glorified the terrorists that slaughtered the woment and children.  And such attacks are still happening today.
> •  The Hostile Arab Palestinians knew that the conduct of such attacks was part of or intended the conduct to be part of a widespread and systematic attack directed against a Israeli civilian population.
> •  The Hostile Arab Palestinians knew that the conduct of such attacks were not in keeping with the Customary and International Humanitarian Law.​
> Now the Hostile Arab Palestinians know that the State of Israel did not assume any control over any territory that was under the sovereign control of any Arab Palestinian regime.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> 
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...

What does all that verbosity have to do with the Palestinians defending themselves?


----------



## Mindful

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  Now it's a basic law: The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people
> ※→  P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> Oh, your cognitive skills and eyesight are bad; quite bad!
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> Article 7 (1j), Elements of Crimes, International Criminal Court
> *Crime against humanity of apartheid*
> Elements
> 1. The perpetrator committed an inhumane act against one or more persons.
> 2. Such act was an act referred to in article 7, paragraph 1, of the Statute, or was an act
> of a character similar to any of those acts.
> 3. The perpetrator was aware of the factual circumstances that established the character
> of the act.
> 4. The conduct was committed in the context of an institutionalized regime of systematic
> oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group or groups.
> 5. The perpetrator intended to maintain such regime by that conduct.
> 6. The conduct was committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed
> against a civilian population.
> 7. The perpetrator knew that the conduct was part of or intended the conduct to be part
> of a widespread or systematic attack directed against a civilian population.
> 
> 
> 
> This fits Israel to a T.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> •  There is no institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination.
> •  The conflict between Israel and the  Hostile Arab Palestinians one that opposes provide direct support for Jihadism, Fedayeen Activism, Hostile Insurgency Operations, Radicalized Islamic Behaviors, and Asymmetric Violence.
> •  The conflict between Israel and the Hostile Arab Palestinians is about the defense of Israeli sovereignty and territorial integrity against the state supported apparatus of terrorism.
> •  The conflict between Israel and the Hostile Arab Palestinians is a conflict against a quasi-State (Palestine) and its open attempt to incite regional violence.
> •  The Hostile Arab Palestinians intended to maintain and further spread such regime by Armed struggle until the entirety of the territory with the boundaries it had during the British Mandate dominated by the Hostile Arab Palestinians.
> •  The Hostile Arab Palestinians have, for the last 50 years, launched thousands and thousands of attacks directly against the Israeli citizenry and then → glorified the terrorists that slaughtered the woment and children.  And such attacks are still happening today.
> •  The Hostile Arab Palestinians knew that the conduct of such attacks was part of or intended the conduct to be part of a widespread and systematic attack directed against a Israeli civilian population.
> •  The Hostile Arab Palestinians knew that the conduct of such attacks were not in keeping with the Customary and International Humanitarian Law.​
> Now the Hostile Arab Palestinians know that the State of Israel did not assume any control over any territory that was under the sovereign control of any Arab Palestinian regime.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> 
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What does all that verbosity have to do with the Palestinians defending themselves?
Click to expand...


----------



## RoccoR

RE:  Now it's a basic law: The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people
※→  rylah, P F Tinmore, et al

I believe that our friend PF Tinmore is referring to Rule #50 • Customary and International Humanitarian Law → The destruction or seizure of the property of an adversary is prohibited, unless required by imperative military necessity.

*•  Article 50 First Geneva Convention*
Grave breaches to which the preceding Article relates shall be those involving any of the following acts, if committed against persons or property protected by the Convention: wilful killing, torture or inhuman treatment, including biological experiments, wilfully causing great suffering or serious injury to body or health, and extensive destruction and appropriation of property, not justified by military necessity and carried out unlawfully and wantonly.​*•  Article 51 Second Geneva Convention*
Grave breaches to which the preceding Article relates shall be those involving any of the following acts, if committed against persons or property protected by the Convention: wilful killing, torture or inhuman treatment, including biological experiments, wilfully causing great suffering or serious injury to body or health, and extensive destruction and appropriation of property, not justified by military necessity and carried out unlawfully and wantonly.​*•  Article 147 Fourth Geneva Convention*
Grave breaches to which the preceding Article relates shall be those involving any of the following acts, if committed against persons or property protected by the present Convention: wilful killing, torture or inhuman treatment, including biological experiments, wilfully causing great suffering or serious injury to body or health, unlawful deportation or transfer or unlawful confinement of a protected person, compelling a protected person to serve in the forces of a hostile Power, or wilfully depriving a protected person of the rights of fair and regular trial prescribed in the present Convention, taking of hostages and extensive destruction and appropriation of property, not justified by military necessity and carried out unlawfully and wantonly.​*•  ICC Statute, Article 8(2)(b)(xiii)* 
Destroying or seizing the enemy's property unless such destruction or seizure be imperatively demanded by the necessities of war;​ 


rylah said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> It is illegal for an occupying power to steal or destroy property in the occupied territory.
> Look it up.
> 
> 
> 
> Where do You find this in the given law?
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

Having said that, you must take into consideration three points:

✪  Each source reference is not hard and fast.  Each states that such destruction and appropriation of property is allowed when imperatively demanded by the necessities of war.
✪  It is generally understood that such destruction of appropriation of property is allowed when such property was used to:
•  To harm the Occupying Power,
•  To seriously damage the property of the occupying forces or administration or the installations of the Occupying Power,
•  In cases of espionage, or serious acts of sabotage against the military installations of the Occupying Power or in cases of intentional acts which have caused the death of one or more persons.​✪  Since the turn of the 20th Century, may nations recognize that the Ocupying Power (like most governments) have the authority to take private property for public use by a state, municipality, or private person or corporation authorized to exercise functions of public character.  The matter of payment or just compensation to the owner of that property is a matter of domenstic law.  Members of the UN understand that the members shall NOT intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction.​

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> What does all that verbosity have to do with the Palestinians defending themselves?



Arab Palestinians are not defending themselves.  They are trying, through terrorism and other illegal and immoral means, to deny Jewish Palestinians sovereignty and self-determination in the homeland of the Jewish people and trying to re-conquer land which has been restored to the original owners.


----------



## RoccoR

RE:  Now it's a basic law: The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people
※→  P F Tinmore, et al,

OH, get off your high horse.  



P F Tinmore said:


> What does all that verbosity have to do with the Palestinians defending themselves?


*(COMMENT)*

You know as well as I do that the Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP) are just trying OH so desperately to twist the law to support their Jihadism, Fedayeen Activism, Hostile Insurgency Operations, Radicalized Islamic Behaviors, and Asymmetric Violence.   The HoAP are NOT attempting to defend themselves, and they have never been.  They are attempting by hook or crook to intimidate and coerce the Israelis into surrendering their sovereignty.  _(I don't see that happening in my life time.)_

 The HoAP are not defending themselves, any more than the violence of the "Islamic State" is a defensive measure.

In fact, since the turn into the 21st Century, I have not seen a single act of major violence - in the sense of recognized Israeli - Arab Palestinian Conflict where the confrontation was not triggered by the Arab Palestinians.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> RE:  Now it's a basic law: The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people
> ※→  rylah, P F Tinmore, et al
> 
> I believe that our friend PF Tinmore is referring to Rule #50 • Customary and International Humanitarian Law → The destruction or seizure of the property of an adversary is prohibited, unless required by imperative military necessity.
> 
> *•  Article 50 First Geneva Convention*
> Grave breaches to which the preceding Article relates shall be those involving any of the following acts, if committed against persons or property protected by the Convention: wilful killing, torture or inhuman treatment, including biological experiments, wilfully causing great suffering or serious injury to body or health, and extensive destruction and appropriation of property, not justified by military necessity and carried out unlawfully and wantonly.​*•  Article 51 Second Geneva Convention*
> Grave breaches to which the preceding Article relates shall be those involving any of the following acts, if committed against persons or property protected by the Convention: wilful killing, torture or inhuman treatment, including biological experiments, wilfully causing great suffering or serious injury to body or health, and extensive destruction and appropriation of property, not justified by military necessity and carried out unlawfully and wantonly.​*•  Article 147 Fourth Geneva Convention*
> Grave breaches to which the preceding Article relates shall be those involving any of the following acts, if committed against persons or property protected by the present Convention: wilful killing, torture or inhuman treatment, including biological experiments, wilfully causing great suffering or serious injury to body or health, unlawful deportation or transfer or unlawful confinement of a protected person, compelling a protected person to serve in the forces of a hostile Power, or wilfully depriving a protected person of the rights of fair and regular trial prescribed in the present Convention, taking of hostages and extensive destruction and appropriation of property, not justified by military necessity and carried out unlawfully and wantonly.​*•  ICC Statute, Article 8(2)(b)(xiii)*
> Destroying or seizing the enemy's property unless such destruction or seizure be imperatively demanded by the necessities of war;​
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> It is illegal for an occupying power to steal or destroy property in the occupied territory.
> Look it up.
> 
> 
> 
> Where do You find this in the given law?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Having said that, you must take into consideration three points:
> 
> ✪  Each source reference is not hard and fast.  Each states that such destruction and appropriation of property is allowed when imperatively demanded by the necessities of war.
> ✪  It is generally understood that such destruction of appropriation of property is allowed when such property was used to:
> •  To harm the Occupying Power,
> •  To seriously damage the property of the occupying forces or administration or the installations of the Occupying Power,
> •  In cases of espionage, or serious acts of sabotage against the military installations of the Occupying Power or in cases of intentional acts which have caused the death of one or more persons.​✪  Since the turn of the 20th Century, may nations recognize that the Ocupying Power (like most governments) have the authority to take private property for public use by a state, municipality, or private person or corporation authorized to exercise functions of public character.  The matter of payment or just compensation to the owner of that property is a matter of domenstic law.  Members of the UN understand that the members shall NOT intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction.​
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...

OK, and?

How does that refute my post?


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> RE:  Now it's a basic law: The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people
> ※→  P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> OH, get off your high horse.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> What does all that verbosity have to do with the Palestinians defending themselves?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> You know as well as I do that the Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP) are just trying OH so desperately to twist the law to support their Jihadism, Fedayeen Activism, Hostile Insurgency Operations, Radicalized Islamic Behaviors, and Asymmetric Violence.   The HoAP are NOT attempting to defend themselves, and they have never been.  They are attempting by hook or crook to intimidate and coerce the Israelis into surrendering their sovereignty.  _(I don't see that happening in my life time.)_
> 
> The HoAP are not defending themselves, any more than the violence of the "Islamic State" is a defensive measure.
> 
> In fact, since the turn into the 21st Century, I have not seen a single act of major violence - in the sense of recognized Israeli - Arab Palestinian Conflict where the confrontation was not triggered by the Arab Palestinians.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...

You forget that the Palestinians only operate inside their own international borders.


----------



## admonit

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  Now it's a basic law: The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people
> ※→  P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> Oh, your cognitive skills and eyesight are bad; quite bad!
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> Article 7 (1j), Elements of Crimes, International Criminal Court
> *Crime against humanity of apartheid*
> Elements
> 1. The perpetrator committed an inhumane act against one or more persons.
> 2. Such act was an act referred to in article 7, paragraph 1, of the Statute, or was an act
> of a character similar to any of those acts.
> 3. The perpetrator was aware of the factual circumstances that established the character
> of the act.
> 4. The conduct was committed in the context of an institutionalized regime of systematic
> oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group or groups.
> 5. The perpetrator intended to maintain such regime by that conduct.
> 6. The conduct was committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed
> against a civilian population.
> 7. The perpetrator knew that the conduct was part of or intended the conduct to be part
> of a widespread or systematic attack directed against a civilian population.
> 
> 
> 
> This fits Israel to a T.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> •  There is no institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination.
> •  The conflict between Israel and the  Hostile Arab Palestinians one that opposes provide direct support for Jihadism, Fedayeen Activism, Hostile Insurgency Operations, Radicalized Islamic Behaviors, and Asymmetric Violence.
> •  The conflict between Israel and the Hostile Arab Palestinians is about the defense of Israeli sovereignty and territorial integrity against the state supported apparatus of terrorism.
> •  The conflict between Israel and the Hostile Arab Palestinians is a conflict against a quasi-State (Palestine) and its open attempt to incite regional violence.
> •  The Hostile Arab Palestinians intended to maintain and further spread such regime by Armed struggle until the entirety of the territory with the boundaries it had during the British Mandate dominated by the Hostile Arab Palestinians.
> •  The Hostile Arab Palestinians have, for the last 50 years, launched thousands and thousands of attacks directly against the Israeli citizenry and then → glorified the terrorists that slaughtered the woment and children.  And such attacks are still happening today.
> •  The Hostile Arab Palestinians knew that the conduct of such attacks was part of or intended the conduct to be part of a widespread and systematic attack directed against a Israeli civilian population.
> •  The Hostile Arab Palestinians knew that the conduct of such attacks were not in keeping with the Customary and International Humanitarian Law.​
> Now the Hostile Arab Palestinians know that the State of Israel did not assume any control over any territory that was under the sovereign control of any Arab Palestinian regime.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> 
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What does all that verbosity have to do with the Palestinians defending themselves?
Click to expand...

What your BS has to do with the subject of this thread?


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> You forget that the Palestinians only operate inside their own international borders.



Sure.  Both the Arab Palestinians and the Jewish Palestinians are operating within the international borders of "Palestine" (now called Israel).  Its a civil war.  With the Arabs attempting to force the Jews to surrender their sovereignty.


----------



## Mindful

admonit said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  Now it's a basic law: The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people
> ※→  P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> Oh, your cognitive skills and eyesight are bad; quite bad!
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> Article 7 (1j), Elements of Crimes, International Criminal Court
> *Crime against humanity of apartheid*
> Elements
> 1. The perpetrator committed an inhumane act against one or more persons.
> 2. Such act was an act referred to in article 7, paragraph 1, of the Statute, or was an act
> of a character similar to any of those acts.
> 3. The perpetrator was aware of the factual circumstances that established the character
> of the act.
> 4. The conduct was committed in the context of an institutionalized regime of systematic
> oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group or groups.
> 5. The perpetrator intended to maintain such regime by that conduct.
> 6. The conduct was committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed
> against a civilian population.
> 7. The perpetrator knew that the conduct was part of or intended the conduct to be part
> of a widespread or systematic attack directed against a civilian population.
> 
> 
> 
> This fits Israel to a T.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> •  There is no institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination.
> •  The conflict between Israel and the  Hostile Arab Palestinians one that opposes provide direct support for Jihadism, Fedayeen Activism, Hostile Insurgency Operations, Radicalized Islamic Behaviors, and Asymmetric Violence.
> •  The conflict between Israel and the Hostile Arab Palestinians is about the defense of Israeli sovereignty and territorial integrity against the state supported apparatus of terrorism.
> •  The conflict between Israel and the Hostile Arab Palestinians is a conflict against a quasi-State (Palestine) and its open attempt to incite regional violence.
> •  The Hostile Arab Palestinians intended to maintain and further spread such regime by Armed struggle until the entirety of the territory with the boundaries it had during the British Mandate dominated by the Hostile Arab Palestinians.
> •  The Hostile Arab Palestinians have, for the last 50 years, launched thousands and thousands of attacks directly against the Israeli citizenry and then → glorified the terrorists that slaughtered the woment and children.  And such attacks are still happening today.
> •  The Hostile Arab Palestinians knew that the conduct of such attacks was part of or intended the conduct to be part of a widespread and systematic attack directed against a Israeli civilian population.
> •  The Hostile Arab Palestinians knew that the conduct of such attacks were not in keeping with the Customary and International Humanitarian Law.​
> Now the Hostile Arab Palestinians know that the State of Israel did not assume any control over any territory that was under the sovereign control of any Arab Palestinian regime.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> 
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What does all that verbosity have to do with the Palestinians defending themselves?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What your BS has to do with the subject of this thread?
Click to expand...




P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  Now it's a basic law: The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people
> ※→  P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> OH, get off your high horse.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> What does all that verbosity have to do with the Palestinians defending themselves?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> You know as well as I do that the Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP) are just trying OH so desperately to twist the law to support their Jihadism, Fedayeen Activism, Hostile Insurgency Operations, Radicalized Islamic Behaviors, and Asymmetric Violence.   The HoAP are NOT attempting to defend themselves, and they have never been.  They are attempting by hook or crook to intimidate and coerce the Israelis into surrendering their sovereignty.  _(I don't see that happening in my life time.)_
> 
> The HoAP are not defending themselves, any more than the violence of the "Islamic State" is a defensive measure.
> 
> In fact, since the turn into the 21st Century, I have not seen a single act of major violence - in the sense of recognized Israeli - Arab Palestinian Conflict where the confrontation was not triggered by the Arab Palestinians.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You forget that the Palestinians only operate inside their own international borders.
Click to expand...


You mean armistice lines?


----------



## P F Tinmore

Mindful said:


> admonit said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  Now it's a basic law: The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people
> ※→  P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> Oh, your cognitive skills and eyesight are bad; quite bad!
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> Article 7 (1j), Elements of Crimes, International Criminal Court
> *Crime against humanity of apartheid*
> Elements
> 1. The perpetrator committed an inhumane act against one or more persons.
> 2. Such act was an act referred to in article 7, paragraph 1, of the Statute, or was an act
> of a character similar to any of those acts.
> 3. The perpetrator was aware of the factual circumstances that established the character
> of the act.
> 4. The conduct was committed in the context of an institutionalized regime of systematic
> oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group or groups.
> 5. The perpetrator intended to maintain such regime by that conduct.
> 6. The conduct was committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed
> against a civilian population.
> 7. The perpetrator knew that the conduct was part of or intended the conduct to be part
> of a widespread or systematic attack directed against a civilian population.
> 
> 
> 
> This fits Israel to a T.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> •  There is no institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination.
> •  The conflict between Israel and the  Hostile Arab Palestinians one that opposes provide direct support for Jihadism, Fedayeen Activism, Hostile Insurgency Operations, Radicalized Islamic Behaviors, and Asymmetric Violence.
> •  The conflict between Israel and the Hostile Arab Palestinians is about the defense of Israeli sovereignty and territorial integrity against the state supported apparatus of terrorism.
> •  The conflict between Israel and the Hostile Arab Palestinians is a conflict against a quasi-State (Palestine) and its open attempt to incite regional violence.
> •  The Hostile Arab Palestinians intended to maintain and further spread such regime by Armed struggle until the entirety of the territory with the boundaries it had during the British Mandate dominated by the Hostile Arab Palestinians.
> •  The Hostile Arab Palestinians have, for the last 50 years, launched thousands and thousands of attacks directly against the Israeli citizenry and then → glorified the terrorists that slaughtered the woment and children.  And such attacks are still happening today.
> •  The Hostile Arab Palestinians knew that the conduct of such attacks was part of or intended the conduct to be part of a widespread and systematic attack directed against a Israeli civilian population.
> •  The Hostile Arab Palestinians knew that the conduct of such attacks were not in keeping with the Customary and International Humanitarian Law.​
> Now the Hostile Arab Palestinians know that the State of Israel did not assume any control over any territory that was under the sovereign control of any Arab Palestinian regime.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> 
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What does all that verbosity have to do with the Palestinians defending themselves?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What your BS has to do with the subject of this thread?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  Now it's a basic law: The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people
> ※→  P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> OH, get off your high horse.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> What does all that verbosity have to do with the Palestinians defending themselves?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> You know as well as I do that the Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP) are just trying OH so desperately to twist the law to support their Jihadism, Fedayeen Activism, Hostile Insurgency Operations, Radicalized Islamic Behaviors, and Asymmetric Violence.   The HoAP are NOT attempting to defend themselves, and they have never been.  They are attempting by hook or crook to intimidate and coerce the Israelis into surrendering their sovereignty.  _(I don't see that happening in my life time.)_
> 
> The HoAP are not defending themselves, any more than the violence of the "Islamic State" is a defensive measure.
> 
> In fact, since the turn into the 21st Century, I have not seen a single act of major violence - in the sense of recognized Israeli - Arab Palestinian Conflict where the confrontation was not triggered by the Arab Palestinians.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You forget that the Palestinians only operate inside their own international borders.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You mean armistice lines?
Click to expand...

No.


----------



## Mindful

P F Tinmore said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> admonit said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  Now it's a basic law: The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people
> ※→  P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> Oh, your cognitive skills and eyesight are bad; quite bad!
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> This fits Israel to a T.
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> •  There is no institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination.
> •  The conflict between Israel and the  Hostile Arab Palestinians one that opposes provide direct support for Jihadism, Fedayeen Activism, Hostile Insurgency Operations, Radicalized Islamic Behaviors, and Asymmetric Violence.
> •  The conflict between Israel and the Hostile Arab Palestinians is about the defense of Israeli sovereignty and territorial integrity against the state supported apparatus of terrorism.
> •  The conflict between Israel and the Hostile Arab Palestinians is a conflict against a quasi-State (Palestine) and its open attempt to incite regional violence.
> •  The Hostile Arab Palestinians intended to maintain and further spread such regime by Armed struggle until the entirety of the territory with the boundaries it had during the British Mandate dominated by the Hostile Arab Palestinians.
> •  The Hostile Arab Palestinians have, for the last 50 years, launched thousands and thousands of attacks directly against the Israeli citizenry and then → glorified the terrorists that slaughtered the woment and children.  And such attacks are still happening today.
> •  The Hostile Arab Palestinians knew that the conduct of such attacks was part of or intended the conduct to be part of a widespread and systematic attack directed against a Israeli civilian population.
> •  The Hostile Arab Palestinians knew that the conduct of such attacks were not in keeping with the Customary and International Humanitarian Law.​
> Now the Hostile Arab Palestinians know that the State of Israel did not assume any control over any territory that was under the sovereign control of any Arab Palestinian regime.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> 
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What does all that verbosity have to do with the Palestinians defending themselves?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What your BS has to do with the subject of this thread?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  Now it's a basic law: The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people
> ※→  P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> OH, get off your high horse.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> What does all that verbosity have to do with the Palestinians defending themselves?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> You know as well as I do that the Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP) are just trying OH so desperately to twist the law to support their Jihadism, Fedayeen Activism, Hostile Insurgency Operations, Radicalized Islamic Behaviors, and Asymmetric Violence.   The HoAP are NOT attempting to defend themselves, and they have never been.  They are attempting by hook or crook to intimidate and coerce the Israelis into surrendering their sovereignty.  _(I don't see that happening in my life time.)_
> 
> The HoAP are not defending themselves, any more than the violence of the "Islamic State" is a defensive measure.
> 
> In fact, since the turn into the 21st Century, I have not seen a single act of major violence - in the sense of recognized Israeli - Arab Palestinian Conflict where the confrontation was not triggered by the Arab Palestinians.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You forget that the Palestinians only operate inside their own international borders.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You mean armistice lines?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No.
Click to expand...


Well you wouldn't, would you? lol.


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Who are we to judge the reality of the fears though?  Do all the Palestinians really want to kill all the Jews?  Do the Jews really want all the land for themselves?  In the end it is what people believe that matters, whether it's real or not.  For example the Palestinians see Jewish settlements popping up in areas they feel are for their own future state.  They see moratoriums  on settlement expansion constantly flouted.  Whether you agree or not is irrelevant, it's the perception being fed that Israel really wants all the real estate for Jews that then feeds the fears that there will be no room for them.  Likewise, actual attacks on Jews from Palestinians reinforce their belief that Palestinians seek their eradication.  How real are each one's fears depends on where you stand and what you have to lose.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Respecting people's irrational fears leads us nowhere.  Irrational fears need to be addressed, not fed.  How real one's fears are depends ONLY on the actions of the people whom you are afraid of.
> 
> As an example -- what is the "fear' with Jewish people living in a place? Why can't Jewish people live in a future State of Palestine?  Where is the "fear" in having Jewish people live in Palestine.  Israel can do it.  Why can't Palestine.  So, objectively, is that a rational fear or an irrational fear?
Click to expand...

The fear is there because that is not how they see events unfolding and there is some legitimacy in those fears.  Land loss and confiscations through absentee landowner laws look VERY DIFFERENT to an Arab than to a Jew.  Where as Israeli Jews are seeing a society where Arab citizens have the same “rights” as Jews, Arabs see a society where they are discriminated against, despised, do not have the same land rights.   They have seen some of their political parties banned, make a fraction of the income their Jewish counterparts do and receive a fraction of the investment in their communities but by the Israeli government.  Are the fears really irrational?  I don’t think so.


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Now, don't get me wrong.  I'm not saying that all Palestinian fears are irrational.  But I am saying it is fair to evaluate those fears against reality.
> 
> For example, Gazans can say that they fear Israeli military attacks, but the reality is that unless they provoke those attacks, they are perfectly safe from them. They just don't happen without provocation.



I answered before seeing this post ( the downfall of reading and answering one at a time).  It is good to evaluate against reality, and your example is a good one.  But a lot of fears on both sides are hard to measure in that way because they are far from clear and involve people’s motivations, which are murky at best.


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Do all the Palestinians really want to kill all the Jews?  Do the Jews really want all the land for themselves?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But look at what you just typed.  Jews are afraid of being murdered (and historically, legitimate fear, yes?) while Arabs are afraid they won't get another State or two.  The discrepancy there is point enough.
Click to expand...


I think the fear is not getting a state so much as a home.  They see themselves increasingly marginalized, squeezed and eventually run of the land they regard as theirs. They see increased government supported  settlements for Jews (not for Arabs) as evidence.


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Olde Europe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cnm said:
> 
> 
> 
> But Israel has embedded a religion, thereby excluding a portion of its population. Segregation, apartheid.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Religion has always been "embedded", if one can call it that, in Israel's nationality law, and, rather than doing it now, it enshrines that principle in the "basic law", protects it against changes by the Supreme court, and makes the whole thing explicit.  Here is what I found to be a good summary of the situation, which the basic law immunizes against court review:
> 
> The Law of Return and the Citizenship Law are two of nearly 70 Israeli laws – the number is growing – that explicitly discriminate based on whether a citizen is Jewish or Palestinian. A legal group, Adalah, representing Israel’s Palestinian citizens, has compiled a database of such measures.
> 
> 
> *State-sanctioned racism*
> 
> But Netanyahu’s Basic Law threatens to expose the deeper significance of this bifurcated citizenship structure.
> 
> Israel’s 1.7 million Palestinian citizens, observed Zeidan, are discriminated against in a way that goes beyond that practiced against minorities in democratic states: that is, by the arbitrary, informal or unregulated decisions of officials and state bodies. In such democracies, officials are usually breaking the law when they discriminate against minority groups.
> 
> But in Israel, Zeidan pointed out, “officials are often breaking the law if they do not discriminate. It is their job to discriminate.”
> 
> This state-sanctioned racism is achieved by establishing “nationalities” separate from citizenship. The primary nationalities in Israel are “Jew” and “Arab”. The state has refused to recognise an “Israeli nationality”, a position supported by the Israeli supreme court, precisely to sanction a hierarchy of rights.
> 
> Individual rights are enjoyed by all citizens by virtue of their citizenship, whether they are Jews or Palestinians. In this regard, Israel looks like a liberal democracy. But Israel also recognises “national rights”, and reserves them almost exclusively for the Jewish population.
> 
> National rights are treated as superior to individual citizenship rights. So if there is a conflict between the two, the Jewish national right will invariably be given priority by officials and the courts.
> 
> *National rights trump citizenship*
> 
> How this hierarchy of rights works in practice is neatly illustrated by Israel’s citizenship structure. The Law of Return establishes a national right for all Jews to gain instant citizenship – as well as the many other rights that derive from citizenship.
> 
> The Citizenship Law, on the other hand, creates only an individual citizenship right for non-Jews. Israel’s Palestinian minority can pass their citizenship “downwards” to offspring but cannot extend it “outwards”, as a Jew can, to members of their extended family – in this case, the millions of Palestinians who were made refugees by Israel in 1948 and their descendants.
> 
> This privileging of Jewish national rights is equally clear in the way Israel treats its most precious material resources: land and water.
> 
> The commercial exploitation of these key resources is treated effectively as a national right, reserved for Jews only. In practice, noted Sawsan Zaher, a lawyer with Adalah, access to these resources is restricted to Jews through hundreds of rural communities across Israel, including the best-known – the kibbutz.
> 
> These rural communities are the places where Israel has made available vast swaths of land and offers subsidised water. As a result, almost all commercial agriculture and much industry is located in these communities.
> 
> *Arabs ‘socially unsuitable’*
> 
> But these resources can be exploited only by the Jewish population because each community is governed by an Admissions Committee, which blocks entry to Israel’s Palestinian citizens on the grounds that they are “socially unsuitable”.
> 
> “The committees govern entry to 550 communities in Israel, ensuring that the resources they control are available only to their Jewish populations,” Zaher told MEE. “These committees are one link in a chain of racist policies, segregation and exclusion by the state towards Palestinian citizens.”
> 
> The primary purpose of these rural communities is to enforce Israel’s “nationalisation” of 93 percent of its territory. This land is “nationalised” not for Israeli citizens – as no Israeli nationality is recognised – but for a global Jewish nation.
> 
> Meanwhile, the fifth of the population who are Palestinian are confined to less than three percent of Israeli territory, after most of their lands were confiscated by the state and are now held in trust for Jews around the world.
> 
> No new Palestinian community has been built since Israel’s creation 70 years ago, while dozens of Palestinian villages have been “unrecognised” by a 1965 Planning and Building Law. The 120,000 inhabitants of these villages, criminalised by this planning law, cannot build a home legally and are denied public services.
> 
> 
> *‘Landlords’ of Israel*
> 
> Observers say that Netanyahu’s Basic Law risks exploding a seven-decade-old myth about Israel: that it is a liberal democracy where Israeli citizens, Jews and Palestinians alike, enjoy equal rights.
> 
> The combination of the Law of Return, which entitles all Jews around the world to instant Israeli citizenship, and Israel’s land laws, which reserve ultimate ownership to Jews as a global nation, has emptied citizenship of its accepted meaning.
> 
> Instead, according to Israel’s existing legal structure, the state belongs to Jews collectively around the world rather than to the country’s citizenry. The Jewish state is “owned” by world Jewry, even if many individual Jews have failed to actualise their citizenship by coming to live in Israel.
> 
> As Israeli scholars have noted, Israel should be classified not as a liberal democracy but as a fundamentally non-democratic state called an ethnocracy.​
> 
> It's easy enough to see, that sordid, racist state of apartheid needs a whole river of hasbara floating around to conceal the inner workings contributing to segregation, inequality, rampant legalized discrimination, with large sides of whataboutery and dozens if not hundreds of "Sqirrel! Squirrel! Squirrel!"  You may also have recognized a large dollop of invincible innocence working in exactly the same way as it does in the U.S.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This long post is nothing more than the usual diatribe against Israel with few actual facts and a lot of deliberate misinformation.
> 
> It conflates Arab Israelis with Palestinians, makes blanket statements about "laws" that have no basis in actual Israeli law and makes claims about racism and apartheid with no factual information.
> 
> There are absolutely no "rights" in Israel arising from being Jewish as opposed to being Arab. Both Arab Israelis and Jewish Israelis are equal under the law.
> 
> Another useful idiot.
Click to expand...

I thought the article  interesting, though the paragraph at the end tainted it.

Is it that wrong regarding land rights?


----------



## Coyote

Ria_Longhorn said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> There's no way of putting Israel in that category, without exercising the discrimination mentioned in the accusation.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Mandla Mandela calls Apartheid Israel worse than Apartheid South Africa *
> _“Never before in my life has the reality of Apartheid Israel stared me so bluntly in the face as it did today on my visit to Al Aqsa, Bethlehem and Hebron. Standing in the Sacred Sanctuary on the very place that Apartheid Israel installed metal detectors and surveillance cameras against which we protested a few months ago made me realize just how intimidation, illegal occupation and brutality is meted out daily to Palestinians. We cannot be complicit by our silence.”
> 
> *Noam Chomsky: Israeli Apartheid ‘Much Worse’ Than South Africa*
> Famous American linguist Noam Chomsky has described the actions of the Israeli occupation in Palestine as “worse than South African apartheid”.
> 
> *Israel Just Dropped the Pretense of Equality for Palestinian Citizens*
> The so-called “Jewish nation-state” bill formalizes in Israeli law the superior rights and privileges that Jewish citizens of the state enjoy over its indigenous Palestinian minority, who comprise roughly 20% of the population.
> _​So lets cut the foreplay and bullshit, just tell it for what it really is.
> _
> _​
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Land belongs to the Jewish People, fatboy.
Click to expand...

No.  It belongs to multiple groups of people, with long historical ties to the region, including but not limited to the Jewish people, the people who are now known as Palestinians, Druze and others.


----------



## Billo_Really

rylah said:


> You can have equal rights, especially if the people of the place called You for help, in demanding those equal rights.
> 
> This is what this Basic Law is all about in what You call the "area".


I don't have a problem with equal rights.

Maybe we should be arguing whose leader is more nuts?

We seem to have elected a fruit loop!  I know that's off topic, but that's where my head is at right now.


----------



## Billo_Really

ILOVEISRAEL said:


> Israel has Arabs. Abbas has declared several times that the “ Palestinian State “ will not have one Israeli in it. There are many Arab Countries who don’t have a Jewish Population. You don’t see anything wrong with that, do you??


Iran has a Jewish population and they love living there!


----------



## Billo_Really

RoccoR said:


> RE:  Now it's a basic law: The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people
> ※→  Billo_Really,
> 
> I'm pretty sure that you don't understand the meaning of apartheid or the elements of that offense.
> 
> 
> 
> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> This is just ridiculous.  Translation:  Israel is apartheid because someone else said so.
> 
> 
> 
> Israel is apartheid because of the shit Israel is doing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> As you can see for yourself.  Israel is many more time diverse than the Arab Palestinian population.  There is no attempt to systematically oppress and dominate one racial group over any other racial group.  Jews are a matter of religion, where as the term "Arab Palestinians" describes an ethnic tribe.
> 
> Israel is attempting to protect its sovereignty from Arab League conventional warfare assaults and Jihadism, Fedayeen Activism, Hostile Insurgency Operations, Radicalized Islamic Behaviors, and Asymmetric Violence.  The Arab Palestinians utilize threats to use force designed to bring about political change.  These Hostile Arab Palestinian (HoAP) activities exercise the unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.  What the HoAP passes-off as oppression by the Israelis are Article 43 (Hague Regulation) attempt to establish law and order, and at the same time utilizing Article 68 Authority (GCIV) to protect against the HoAP acts solely intended to harm the Occupying Power, seriously damage the property of the occupying forces or administration or the installations, and defend against  espionage, of serious acts of sabotage against the military installations of the Occupying Power or of intentional offences which have caused the death of one or more persons.  Security countermeasures in-depth to separate the HoAP from those they would openly attack, are attempts to restore and ensure, as far as possible, public order and safety.  There is no true domination or oppression.
> 
> Article 7(2h), Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court
> *"The crime of apartheid" means* inhumane acts of a character similar to those
> referred to in paragraph 1, committed in the context of an institutionalized
> regime of systematic oppression and domination by one racial group over any
> other racial group or groups and committed with the intention of maintaining
> that regime;"​
> Article 7 (1j), Elements of Crimes, International Criminal Court
> *Crime against humanity of apartheid*
> Elements
> 1.  The perpetrator committed an inhumane act against one or more persons.
> 2.  Such act was an act referred to in article 7, paragraph 1, of the Statute, or was an act
> of a character similar to any of those acts.
> 3.  The perpetrator was aware of the factual circumstances that established the character
> of the act.
> 4.  The conduct was committed in the context of an institutionalized regime of systematic
> oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group or groups.
> 5.  The perpetrator intended to maintain such regime by that conduct.
> 6.  The conduct was committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed
> against a civilian population.
> 7.  The perpetrator knew that the conduct was part of or intended the conduct to be part
> of a widespread or systematic attack directed against a civilian population.​
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...

I'm sure you don't know the meaning of the word 'succinct'.


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> admonit said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> However, it also now seems that Israel will continue to establish settlements as a means of pressure to bring the Arab Palestinian Leadership to the table.
> 
> 
> 
> Israel at least last 20 years doesn't establish new settlements in the West bank.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And this is why we must differentiate between the perception and the reality, and why the double standard, the propaganda and the irrational fears should not be given weight when discussing the reality.  Everyone "knows" that Israel's continued settlement building is a "problem" and an "obstacle to peace" but the reality is that Israel froze settlement-building for 20 years in hopes of negotiated secession agreement or two.
Click to expand...

Did they really freeze it?  They have legalized hundreds of illegal settlements and outposts.  That does not sound like a freeze to me.


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> “ Right of Return” isn’t going to happen . What I think is hilarious is that. Pro Pal Kool/Aid drinkers post links which claim that Israel can’t be both Jewish and Democratic but yet it’s O.K. To have a No Israelis Allowed  Palestinian Country”.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If by "right of return" you mean to flood Israel with 7 million Arabs -- nope.  Never going to happen.  Never.  Never.  Get over it.
> 
> IF by "right of return" you mean that BOTH peoples have the right to return to settle in their homeland and develop their self-determination and cultural uniqueness in that place, then YES it should happen.  What will that look like?  The majority of Palestinians will settle in Palestine and the majority of Jews will settle in Israel.  This will allow each culture to develop fully as a nation with a unique and special culture.  Each state will have a minority of the other living in it, which poses absolutely no problems whatsoever (after all Palestinians constantly brag that Arabs and Jews lived in peace for centuries and Israel has proven it poses no problem).
Click to expand...

Exactly...wish more people support your vision here.


----------



## Coyote

RoccoR said:


> RE:  Now it's a basic law: The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people
> ※→  ILOVEISRAEL,  et al,
> 
> I think this is, at present, the bottom line.
> 
> 
> 
> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> That’s what they want. If they can’t destroy Israel externally their goal is to do it internally.   That will never happen!!!
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> The Arab Palestinians are becoming more violent, and less respectful for the Rule of Law; most of which the Arab Palestinians have lost along with any 21st Century moral discipline.  The Arab Palestinians are trying every new technique available to them to incite violence and disrupt the peace.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...

Do you think it is because now they have nothing left to lose?  The US has now shown itself to be incapable of being an honest broker, they were punished for going directly to the UN.  They are under a blockade.  What peace are they disrupting?


----------



## Indeependent

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Who are we to judge the reality of the fears though?  Do all the Palestinians really want to kill all the Jews?  Do the Jews really want all the land for themselves?  In the end it is what people believe that matters, whether it's real or not.  For example the Palestinians see Jewish settlements popping up in areas they feel are for their own future state.  They see moratoriums  on settlement expansion constantly flouted.  Whether you agree or not is irrelevant, it's the perception being fed that Israel really wants all the real estate for Jews that then feeds the fears that there will be no room for them.  Likewise, actual attacks on Jews from Palestinians reinforce their belief that Palestinians seek their eradication.  How real are each one's fears depends on where you stand and what you have to lose.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Respecting people's irrational fears leads us nowhere.  Irrational fears need to be addressed, not fed.  How real one's fears are depends ONLY on the actions of the people whom you are afraid of.
> 
> As an example -- what is the "fear' with Jewish people living in a place? Why can't Jewish people live in a future State of Palestine?  Where is the "fear" in having Jewish people live in Palestine.  Israel can do it.  Why can't Palestine.  So, objectively, is that a rational fear or an irrational fear?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The fear is there because that is not how they see events unfolding and there is some legitimacy in those fears.  Land loss and confiscations through absentee landowner laws look VERY DIFFERENT to an Arab than to a Jew.  Where as Israeli Jews are seeing a society where Arab citizens have the same “rights” as Jews, Arabs see a society where they are discriminated against, despised, do not have the same land rights.   They have seen some of their political parties banned, make a fraction of the income their Jewish counterparts do and receive a fraction of the investment in their communities but by the Israeli government.  Are the fears really irrational?  I don’t think so.
Click to expand...

Jews being alive pisses off Arabs.


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL

Coyote said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  Now it's a basic law: The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people
> ※→  ILOVEISRAEL,  et al,
> 
> I think this is, at present, the bottom line.
> 
> 
> 
> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> That’s what they want. If they can’t destroy Israel externally their goal is to do it internally.   That will never happen!!!
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> The Arab Palestinians are becoming more violent, and less respectful for the Rule of Law; most of which the Arab Palestinians have lost along with any 21st Century moral discipline.  The Arab Palestinians are trying every new technique available to them to incite violence and disrupt the peace.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Do you think it is because now they have nothing left to lose?  The US has now shown itself to be incapable of being an honest broker, they were punished for going directly to the UN.  They are under a blockade.  What peace are they disrupting?
Click to expand...


You say the U.S. has shown itself incapable of being an honest broker. In order to do that both sides have to negotiate; it can’t be “ my way or the highway”   If the U.S. were an “ honest broker” , seriously what could they have done?


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Olde Europe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cnm said:
> 
> 
> 
> But Israel has embedded a religion, thereby excluding a portion of its population. Segregation, apartheid.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Religion has always been "embedded", if one can call it that, in Israel's nationality law, and, rather than doing it now, it enshrines that principle in the "basic law", protects it against changes by the Supreme court, and makes the whole thing explicit.  Here is what I found to be a good summary of the situation, which the basic law immunizes against court review:
> 
> The Law of Return and the Citizenship Law are two of nearly 70 Israeli laws – the number is growing – that explicitly discriminate based on whether a citizen is Jewish or Palestinian. A legal group, Adalah, representing Israel’s Palestinian citizens, has compiled a database of such measures.
> 
> 
> *State-sanctioned racism*
> 
> But Netanyahu’s Basic Law threatens to expose the deeper significance of this bifurcated citizenship structure.
> 
> Israel’s 1.7 million Palestinian citizens, observed Zeidan, are discriminated against in a way that goes beyond that practiced against minorities in democratic states: that is, by the arbitrary, informal or unregulated decisions of officials and state bodies. In such democracies, officials are usually breaking the law when they discriminate against minority groups.
> 
> But in Israel, Zeidan pointed out, “officials are often breaking the law if they do not discriminate. It is their job to discriminate.”
> 
> This state-sanctioned racism is achieved by establishing “nationalities” separate from citizenship. The primary nationalities in Israel are “Jew” and “Arab”. The state has refused to recognise an “Israeli nationality”, a position supported by the Israeli supreme court, precisely to sanction a hierarchy of rights.
> 
> Individual rights are enjoyed by all citizens by virtue of their citizenship, whether they are Jews or Palestinians. In this regard, Israel looks like a liberal democracy. But Israel also recognises “national rights”, and reserves them almost exclusively for the Jewish population.
> 
> National rights are treated as superior to individual citizenship rights. So if there is a conflict between the two, the Jewish national right will invariably be given priority by officials and the courts.
> 
> *National rights trump citizenship*
> 
> How this hierarchy of rights works in practice is neatly illustrated by Israel’s citizenship structure. The Law of Return establishes a national right for all Jews to gain instant citizenship – as well as the many other rights that derive from citizenship.
> 
> The Citizenship Law, on the other hand, creates only an individual citizenship right for non-Jews. Israel’s Palestinian minority can pass their citizenship “downwards” to offspring but cannot extend it “outwards”, as a Jew can, to members of their extended family – in this case, the millions of Palestinians who were made refugees by Israel in 1948 and their descendants.
> 
> This privileging of Jewish national rights is equally clear in the way Israel treats its most precious material resources: land and water.
> 
> The commercial exploitation of these key resources is treated effectively as a national right, reserved for Jews only. In practice, noted Sawsan Zaher, a lawyer with Adalah, access to these resources is restricted to Jews through hundreds of rural communities across Israel, including the best-known – the kibbutz.
> 
> These rural communities are the places where Israel has made available vast swaths of land and offers subsidised water. As a result, almost all commercial agriculture and much industry is located in these communities.
> 
> *Arabs ‘socially unsuitable’*
> 
> But these resources can be exploited only by the Jewish population because each community is governed by an Admissions Committee, which blocks entry to Israel’s Palestinian citizens on the grounds that they are “socially unsuitable”.
> 
> “The committees govern entry to 550 communities in Israel, ensuring that the resources they control are available only to their Jewish populations,” Zaher told MEE. “These committees are one link in a chain of racist policies, segregation and exclusion by the state towards Palestinian citizens.”
> 
> The primary purpose of these rural communities is to enforce Israel’s “nationalisation” of 93 percent of its territory. This land is “nationalised” not for Israeli citizens – as no Israeli nationality is recognised – but for a global Jewish nation.
> 
> Meanwhile, the fifth of the population who are Palestinian are confined to less than three percent of Israeli territory, after most of their lands were confiscated by the state and are now held in trust for Jews around the world.
> 
> No new Palestinian community has been built since Israel’s creation 70 years ago, while dozens of Palestinian villages have been “unrecognised” by a 1965 Planning and Building Law. The 120,000 inhabitants of these villages, criminalised by this planning law, cannot build a home legally and are denied public services.
> 
> 
> *‘Landlords’ of Israel*
> 
> Observers say that Netanyahu’s Basic Law risks exploding a seven-decade-old myth about Israel: that it is a liberal democracy where Israeli citizens, Jews and Palestinians alike, enjoy equal rights.
> 
> The combination of the Law of Return, which entitles all Jews around the world to instant Israeli citizenship, and Israel’s land laws, which reserve ultimate ownership to Jews as a global nation, has emptied citizenship of its accepted meaning.
> 
> Instead, according to Israel’s existing legal structure, the state belongs to Jews collectively around the world rather than to the country’s citizenry. The Jewish state is “owned” by world Jewry, even if many individual Jews have failed to actualise their citizenship by coming to live in Israel.
> 
> As Israeli scholars have noted, Israel should be classified not as a liberal democracy but as a fundamentally non-democratic state called an ethnocracy.​
> 
> It's easy enough to see, that sordid, racist state of apartheid needs a whole river of hasbara floating around to conceal the inner workings contributing to segregation, inequality, rampant legalized discrimination, with large sides of whataboutery and dozens if not hundreds of "Sqirrel! Squirrel! Squirrel!"  You may also have recognized a large dollop of invincible innocence working in exactly the same way as it does in the U.S.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This long post is nothing more than the usual diatribe against Israel with few actual facts and a lot of deliberate misinformation.
> 
> It conflates Arab Israelis with Palestinians, makes blanket statements about "laws" that have no basis in actual Israeli law and makes claims about racism and apartheid with no factual information.
> 
> There are absolutely no "rights" in Israel arising from being Jewish as opposed to being Arab. Both Arab Israelis and Jewish Israelis are equal under the law.
> 
> Another useful idiot.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I thought the article  interesting, though the paragraph at the end tainted it.
> 
> Is it that wrong regarding land rights?
Click to expand...

Not sure what you are asking.  What about land rights?


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> Did they really freeze it?  They have legalized hundreds of illegal settlements and outposts.  That does not sound like a freeze to me.



Well, I'll argue that there are NO illegal "settlements", of course.  Though there are illegal outposts (as in outposts built in Area C without the permission of Israel).  But Israel did actually freeze all "settlements" for twenty years in the anticipation of a negotiation which never came.  Israel is done playing that game.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> Do you think it is because now they have nothing left to lose?


Oh, the Arab Palestinians have a LOT more to lose.  A LOT.  It can get much, much worse for them.  



> The US has now shown itself to be incapable of being an honest broker,


I disagree, though I suppose it depends on what you mean by "honest broker".  I think one of the roles of an honest broker is to acknowledge simple reality.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> The fear is there because that is not how they see events unfolding and there is some legitimacy in those fears.  Land loss and confiscations through absentee landowner laws look VERY DIFFERENT to an Arab than to a Jew.  Where as Israeli Jews are seeing a society where Arab citizens have the same “rights” as Jews, Arabs see a society where they are discriminated against, despised, do not have the same land rights.   They have seen some of their political parties banned, make a fraction of the income their Jewish counterparts do and receive a fraction of the investment in their communities but by the Israeli government.  Are the fears really irrational?  I don’t think so.



I think maybe you are in some respects conflating Arab Palestinians and Arab Israelis.  We are speaking here strictly of Arab Israeli citizens.  

Confiscations happened to BOTH Arabs and Jews.  Internally displaced absentee landowners should be restored where possible, and compensated where not.  For BOTH Arabs and Jews.  Sorting it out is a mess, but Israel's court system appears to me to be fair and if anything slightly discriminatory towards Israeli Jews rather than Israeli Arabs. If you have specific examples you want to discuss, I'd be glad to go into more detail.

Israeli Arabs, by definition, have not had ANY land loss in terms of sovereignty.  (And actually, Palestine has not experienced any actual "land loss" either since the territory is still disputed.)

I disagree with you that Arab Israelis see a society where they are discriminated against, despised and do not have the same rights.  Again, I'd be glad to discuss any specific cases with you, but I think you are conflating Arab Israelis with Arab Palestinian rights, especially in Area C.  Remember the Supreme Court has upheld the decision that there can be no such thing as Jew-only communities while there can be Arab-only communities.  Its affirmative action.  

Yes, I don't disagree that there is discrimination (as there is everywhere in the world) but I also see Israel working to address that discrimination for all its citizens.  

To my knowledge, the only political party banned in Israel was a Jewish one, but feel free to link me.  

I did a LOT of research into the economic disparity between Israeli Arabs and Israeli Jews and if you correct for the very small number of working Arab women (a cultural thing and not a discrimination thing) and for the Bedouin peoples (again a cultural thing and not a discrimination thing) there is not much of a wage gap between Arab and Jewish Israelis.  And that wage gap can be largely attributed to education -- the more highly educated, the higher the wage.  Arabs tend to go to school for fewer years than Jews.  Why is that?  Is it a cultural thing or a discrimination thing?  Or something else at play?


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> I think that is true of Arab Palestinians in general, though I'd argue that fear is largely unfounded.  But not of Arab Israelis, which is what we are talking about on this thread.


----------



## Shusha

Also, with respect to "land loss" -- please no one post that tired old land loss canard map.  The reality is that NEITHER Israel nor Palestine has held sovereignty over the entire territory so starting with that is just silly.  Second, until the dispute is solved -- no one has lost any land, we simply do not know how much will eventually fall to Israel and how much will fall to Palestine.  

(this wasn't directed at you, Coyote)


----------



## admonit

Shusha said:


> If you have specific examples you want to discuss, I'd be glad to go into more detail.





Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> The fear is there because that is not how they see events unfolding and there is some legitimacy in those fears.  Land loss and confiscations through absentee landowner laws look VERY DIFFERENT to an Arab than to a Jew.  Where as Israeli Jews are seeing a society where Arab citizens have the same “rights” as Jews, Arabs see a society where they are discriminated against, despised, do not have the same land rights.   They have seen some of their political parties banned, make a fraction of the income their Jewish counterparts do and receive a fraction of the investment in their communities but by the Israeli government.  Are the fears really irrational?  I don’t think so.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think maybe you are in some respects conflating Arab Palestinians and Arab Israelis.
Click to expand...

No, he doesn't. The discrimination of Arabs in Israel is his favorite song.


> If you have specific examples you want to discuss, I'd be glad to go into more detail.


You already asked him. And until now he presented only one article from a left newspaper, which says nothing about discrimination. I explained it and there were no response. Instead the poster again repeats his mantra about discrimination.of Arabs in Israel.
He even didn't bother to read the OP. This person is not interested in honest debates.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Shusha said:


> Also, with respect to "land loss" -- please no one post that tired old land loss canard map.  The reality is that NEITHER Israel nor Palestine has held sovereignty over the entire territory so starting with that is just silly.  Second, until the dispute is solved -- no one has lost any land, we simply do not know how much will eventually fall to Israel and how much will fall to Palestine.
> 
> (this wasn't directed at you, Coyote)


Good point. Until there is an agreement, Israel has won nothing.


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> Good point. Until there is an agreement, Israel has won nothing.



The point is not to see it as a zero sum game where one side had everything and will have "lost" -- but to see it as a win-win where BOTH peoples gain self-determination and sovereignty which was inconceivable for either of them 100 years ago.  With that in mind, Israel has indeed "won", but the Palestinians have not.


----------



## Olde Europe

Coyote said:


> I thought the article  interesting, though the paragraph at the end tainted it.



No it did not.  It merely found the appropriate expressions for the situation and for the ways in which this (ultra-) right government and its shills defend, or distract from, the sordid state of affairs.

Jews have the right of "return", even if they didn't set foot anywhere near what is now Israel, and neither did 50 generations of their forebears.  Arabs do not have that right, not even those still carrying around the keys to their house, which the Jews blew up or bulldozed 70 years ago.  Everyone with the most superficial knowledge about Israel knows this, and none posting on this thread belongs into that category.

In that light:

"There are absolutely no 'rights' in Israel arising from being Jewish as opposed to being Arab."​
Followed by:

"Another useful idiot."​

Quite.

As much as I admire your posting style - I am not sure treating hasbara peddlers as serious interlocutors isn't a disservice to debate.


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Also, with respect to "land loss" -- please no one post that tired old land loss canard map.  The reality is that NEITHER Israel nor Palestine has held sovereignty over the entire territory so starting with that is just silly.  Second, until the dispute is solved -- no one has lost any land, we simply do not know how much will eventually fall to Israel and how much will fall to Palestine.
> 
> (this wasn't directed at you, Coyote)
> 
> 
> 
> Good point. Until there is an agreement, Israel has won nothing.
Click to expand...


Your idea of an “ agreement “ is the destruction of Israel and being deprived of their religious sites and that will never happen. Israel exists whereas “ Palestine” does not


----------



## Shusha

Olde Europe said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I thought the article  interesting, though the paragraph at the end tainted it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No it did not.  It merely found the appropriate expressions for the situation and for the ways in which this (ultra-) right government and its shills defend, or distract from, the sordid state of affairs.
> 
> Jews have the right of "return", even if they didn't set foot anywhere near what is now Israel, and neither did 50 generations of their forebears.  Arabs do not have that right, not even those still carrying around the keys to their house, which the Jews blew up or bulldozed 70 years ago.  Everyone with the most superficial knowledge about Israel knows this, and none posting on this thread belongs into that category.
> 
> In that light:
> 
> "There are absolutely no 'rights' in Israel arising from being Jewish as opposed to being Arab."​
> Followed by:
> 
> "Another useful idiot."​
> 
> Quite.
> 
> As much as I admire your posting style - I am not sure treating hasbara peddlers as serious interlocutors isn't a disservice to debate.
Click to expand...


To be clear, I advocate for the right of return for both peoples.


----------



## Mindful

Arab ROR?

But they are there already. In lands they invaded and occupied.


----------



## Mindful

What is Hasbera? A word used by ignorant anti Semites, who don't really know what it means?


----------



## Shusha

Olde Europe said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I thought the article  interesting, though the paragraph at the end tainted it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No it did not.  It merely found the appropriate expressions for the situation and for the ways in which this (ultra-) right government and its shills defend, or distract from, the sordid state of affairs.
> 
> Jews have the right of "return", even if they didn't set foot anywhere near what is now Israel, and neither did 50 generations of their forebears.  Arabs do not have that right, not even those still carrying around the keys to their house, which the Jews blew up or bulldozed 70 years ago.  Everyone with the most superficial knowledge about Israel knows this, and none posting on this thread belongs into that category.
> 
> In that light:
> 
> "There are absolutely no 'rights' in Israel arising from being Jewish as opposed to being Arab."​
> Followed by:
> 
> "Another useful idiot."​
> 
> Quite.
> 
> As much as I admire your posting style - I am not sure treating hasbara peddlers as serious interlocutors isn't a disservice to debate.
Click to expand...


Also mind my actual words. There are no rights IN Israel which advantage Jews over Arabs. All are equal in law.


----------



## admonit

Shusha said:


> Olde Europe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I thought the article  interesting, though the paragraph at the end tainted it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No it did not.  It merely found the appropriate expressions for the situation and for the ways in which this (ultra-) right government and its shills defend, or distract from, the sordid state of affairs.
> 
> Jews have the right of "return", even if they didn't set foot anywhere near what is now Israel, and neither did 50 generations of their forebears.  Arabs do not have that right, not even those still carrying around the keys to their house, which the Jews blew up or bulldozed 70 years ago.  Everyone with the most superficial knowledge about Israel knows this, and none posting on this thread belongs into that category.
> 
> In that light:
> 
> "There are absolutely no 'rights' in Israel arising from being Jewish as opposed to being Arab."​
> Followed by:
> 
> "Another useful idiot."​
> 
> Quite.
> 
> As much as I admire your posting style - I am not sure treating hasbara peddlers as serious interlocutors isn't a disservice to debate.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Also mind my actual words. There are no rights IN Israel which advantage Jews over Arabs. All are equal in law.
Click to expand...

Actually there is inequality. Arabs don't have to serve 3 years in the army and risk their lives fighting for their country.


----------



## Mindful

admonit said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Olde Europe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I thought the article  interesting, though the paragraph at the end tainted it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No it did not.  It merely found the appropriate expressions for the situation and for the ways in which this (ultra-) right government and its shills defend, or distract from, the sordid state of affairs.
> 
> Jews have the right of "return", even if they didn't set foot anywhere near what is now Israel, and neither did 50 generations of their forebears.  Arabs do not have that right, not even those still carrying around the keys to their house, which the Jews blew up or bulldozed 70 years ago.  Everyone with the most superficial knowledge about Israel knows this, and none posting on this thread belongs into that category.
> 
> In that light:
> 
> "There are absolutely no 'rights' in Israel arising from being Jewish as opposed to being Arab."​
> Followed by:
> 
> "Another useful idiot."​
> 
> Quite.
> 
> As much as I admire your posting style - I am not sure treating hasbara peddlers as serious interlocutors isn't a disservice to debate.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Also mind my actual words. There are no rights IN Israel which advantage Jews over Arabs. All are equal in law.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Actually there is inequality. Arabs don't have to serve 3 years in the army and risk their lives fighting for their country.
Click to expand...


Whether they have to or not, growing numbers are joining the IDF:


----------



## Sixties Fan

The examples given by Barenboim where the Basic Law is supposedly racist are all in the declaration of independence that he praises.

Of course, Israel's other laws enshrine equality of all citizens. None of them are rescinded as a result of the Basic Law.
Barenboim is lying. Ken Roth is lying. The entire world cannot be bothered to actually read the texts before jumping on the bandwagon of calling the Jewish State racist.

I replied to Roth asking, "Ken, please name one specific thing the Basic Law denies Arab citizens of Israel that is allows Jewish citizens of Israel. Just one. Because I have yet to see anything. Please, enlighten us."

Of course he didn't answer. Because he can't. And neither can anyone else. 

(full article online)

HRW's Ken Roth says new Basic Law makes Arabs "second class citizens." Can't say how, though. ~ Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News


----------



## Sixties Fan

Opinion | Everything You’ve Heard About Israel’s Nation State Bill Is Wrong


----------



## Dogmaphobe

Mindful said:


> What is Hasbera??




Considering the level of intellect of those using the term, I just figured they were referring to their favorite toy manufacturer but couldn't spell it correctly.


----------



## Mindful

Sixties Fan said:


> The examples given by Barenboim where the Basic Law is supposedly racist are all in the declaration of independence that he praises.
> 
> Of course, Israel's other laws enshrine equality of all citizens. None of them are rescinded as a result of the Basic Law.
> Barenboim is lying. Ken Roth is lying. The entire world cannot be bothered to actually read the texts before jumping on the bandwagon of calling the Jewish State racist.
> 
> I replied to Roth asking, "Ken, please name one specific thing the Basic Law denies Arab citizens of Israel that is allows Jewish citizens of Israel. Just one. Because I have yet to see anything. Please, enlighten us."
> 
> Of course he didn't answer. Because he can't. And neither can anyone else.
> 
> (full article online)
> 
> HRW's Ken Roth says new Basic Law makes Arabs "second class citizens." Can't say how, though. ~ Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News



I've been to Israel enough times to see for myself. Arabs are allowed on the same buses as Jews, would you believe!!

As for Barenboim's self serving celebrity idealism. His Divan Orchestra playing at the Proms in London is quite nice. 

Jews have tried that leaning over the aisle appeasement posturing, too many times. They never learn. Too many times have I read about it in the Torah.

Take Corbyn's Labour Party in the UK. That's another story; with a common link.


----------



## RoccoR

RE:  Now it's a basic law: The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people
SUB:REF:  The reality is that NEITHER Israel nor Palestine has held sovereignty over the entire territory
※→  P F Tinmore, Shusha, et al,

I agree with our friend  "Shusha" on the matter of "sovereignty over the entire territory."



P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Also, with respect to "land loss" -- please no one post that tired old land loss canard map.  The reality is that NEITHER Israel nor Palestine has held sovereignty over the entire territory so starting with that is just silly.  Second, until the dispute is solved -- no one has lost any land, we simply do not know how much will eventually fall to Israel and how much will fall to Palestine.
> 
> (this wasn't directed at you, Coyote)
> 
> 
> 
> Good point. Until there is an agreement, Israel has won nothing.
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

BUT, make no mistake...  While there is always the possibility that some future negotiation may alter the current status quo, Israel does exercise sovereignty over selected territory that they recognized as theirs and maintain the full right and power of a governing body over itself, to the exclusion of ALL other external powers.  However, any of the factions, representing some aspect of authority over what either the Ramallah or Gaza Governments, would be hard-pressed to outline any segment of the territory they individually purport to control _(either now or in the past)_.  No one single faction of Arab Palestinian Government has exercised sovereignty over the entirety of all they territory they currently claim.

*(SIDEBAR)*

The term "win" is really a word without meaning in the perspective of the conflict as seen from 1948 to present.  The greatest accomplishments _(really worthy of Nobel attention)_ were the 1949 Armistice Agreements and the two Peace Treaties  _(1979 and 1994 respectively)_.  History, written a century from now, will record that the leaders of the great nations of the world were not up to the task of creating the peace.

*(EPILOG)*

Of the Arab League nations that participated in the 1948 conflict, they are today:





Egypt:  Egyptian Movement for Change (2003 → AKA: Kefaya) attempted to secure a return to democracy and promote an atmosphere of greater civil liberties. It is now a relatively quite county.  1979 Peace Treaty with Israeli.  Ranks 111th on the Human Development Index.




Jordan:  1994 Peace Treaty with Israel.  Ranks 86th on the Human Development Index.




Iraq:  The country is fragmented.  It remains confused as to what form it should take.  The population is still in fear of Jihadist activities, Hostile Insurgents, and Asymmetric Fighters.  Ranks 111 on the Human Development Index.




Syria:  Now in the 8th year of a Civil War with the added complication of incursions from the Islamic State.  Broken up into six areas of influence.  Ranks 149th on the Human Development Index.




Lebanon:  Just emerging from a near 16 year Civil War,  While considered sovereignty, nearly the entire al-Bekka Valley is controlled by Hezbollah.  Ranks 76th on the Human Development Index. 





Saudi Arabia:  A fairly stable monarchy ruled by the hereditary males heirs of the first king.  Ranks 39th on the Human Development Index.




Yemen:  Fragmented Failed State.
Whereas:
*



Israel:  *Is a very stable Republic.  Ranks 19th on the Human Development Index; above all other Middle Eastern, Persian Gulf Coast State, North African and all European Mediterranean States.​
Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Dogmaphobe

RoccoR said:


> RE
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lebanon:  Just emerging from a near 16 year Civil War,  While considered sovereignty, nearly the entire al-Bekka Valley is controlled by Hezbollah.  Ranks 76th on the Human Development Index. .
> 
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R



…...which represents a drastic change from 50 years ago, when it was a majority Christian state and Beirut was called the Paris of the Middle East.

 Lebanon is THE cautionary tale that Europeans should learn from, yet they refuse.


----------



## RoccoR

RE: Now it's a basic law: The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people
SUB:REF: *Hasbara*:  What is it?
※→ Dogmaphobe, Mindful, et al,

Actually, I have been accused of being Hasbara a couupleof times; as if it were a derogatory accusation.



Dogmaphobe said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> What is Hasbera??
> 
> 
> 
> Considering the level of intellect of those using the term, I just figured they were referring to their favorite toy manufacturer but couldn't spell it correctly.
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

I do not think of myself as "Hasbara;" yet I do find myself explaining and defending the actions of Israel.  And it is that "explaining and defending" is were it step into the grey area.  What I say, should not be construed as speaking on behalf of the Israelis.  Instead, I like to think of myself as an "Advocate."  I cannot speak to domestic Israeli issues, except when it is necessary to untangle them for the Israeli-Arab Palestinian Conflict.

There is a difference between being "Hasbara" _(someone that explains the actions/response of Israel)_ and being an "Advocate" _(someone who supports the actions and responses)_ for Israeli sovereignty.

Believe you me, I've been told more than once:  "Goy" --- mind you own business.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Mindful

RoccoR said:


> RE: Now it's a basic law: The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people
> SUB:REF: *Hasbara*:  What is it?
> ※→ Dogmaphobe, Mindful, et al,
> 
> Actually, I have been accused of being Hasbara a couupleof times; as if it were a derogatory accusation.
> 
> 
> 
> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> What is Hasbera??
> 
> 
> 
> Considering the level of intellect of those using the term, I just figured they were referring to their favorite toy manufacturer but couldn't spell it correctly.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> I do not think of myself as "Hasbara;" yet I do find myself explaining and defending the actions of Israel.  And it is that "explaining and defending" is were it step into the grey area.  What I say, should not be construed as speaking on behalf of the Israelis.  Instead, I like to think of myself as an "Advocate."  I cannot speak to domestic Israeli issues, except when it is necessary to untangle them for the Israeli-Arab Palestinian Conflict.
> 
> There is a difference between being "Hasbara" _(someone that explains the actions/response of Israel)_ and being an "Advocate" _(someone who supports the actions and responses)_ for Israeli sovereignty.
> 
> Believe you me, I've been told more than once:  "Goy" --- mind you own business.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...


As I said, if it's a corrupted term, it's used by Jew haters, who wouldn't even know what it really means. It's certainly not common parlance as far as I am concerned.


----------



## Mindful

.
Lies, lies, and more damn lies. Including word of the year. There's always one:

    ^^ What’s more, the bigger the porkies – for those ignorant of Cockney rhyming slang porkies (pork pies) = lies – the greater they are believable.

   The year’s apogee of Palestinian ‘post-truth’ must surely be UNESCO bigots enshrining Jerusalem’s holiest of holies as exclusively Muslim, summarily dismissing Judaism’s rights to a city Jews built eons before Muhammad and Christianity’s founding tenet that Christ lived and died there centuries prior to Islam’s prophet hearing the word of Allah.

So, viewed through this ‘post-truth’ lens, it must surely be the case Palestinians really are the ‘true’ descendants of Canaanites, a people conquered and consumed by the ancient Israelites, but whose celebrity survives, much like Santa and the Tooth Fairy.

  That adds credence to the PLO’s assertion that, as the only indigenous people, they are merely trying to wrest back land criminally allotted to ‘white, European, colonial-settler’ Jews by the perfidious British in their outrageous Balfour Declaration of 1917.^^

‘Post-truth’: Why Jew-haters will adore 2016's Word of the Year - Blogs - Jerusalem Post


----------



## Mindful

And there's more. Even more after this "more".

^^Therefore pay no heed to the 1920 San Remo Agreement (a shameful carve-up of the Levant that incorporated Balfour), keep shtum about any offers of nationhood the Arabs spurned and, crucially, dismiss the then-honorable UN’s 1947 restoration of a Jewish state in its biblical homeland (post-WW2 guilt).

 I could bang on deconstructing Palestinians’ mythology, which is watertight as a sieve by any established historical reckoning, but ‘post-truth’ renders that irrelevant.

As Rod Liddle noted in the Sunday Times, “Truth is only beauty if it’s _your_ truth. When it’s somebody else’s truth it can be very ugly indeed, often best not mentioned.”

It’s a fair bet, then, that the next strand of Ramallah’s chutzpah will declare that America was discovered by a Palestinian, since Christopher Columbus was descended from Jewish converts and, ergo, was really a…well, you know what. Oh, and Hamas want the US back.

   So watch this space and for heaven’s sake don’t tell Donald Trump.

 What beggars belief is how this mendacious game is played out by the Left-leaning mainstream media (MSM) – New York Times, Guardian, BBC, Reuters and Agence France Presse to mention some of the usual suspects – not merely the internet’s self-anointed ‘citizen journalists’.

   To some extent I can understand, though not pardon, the latter, since they are a confusion of pious, purblind, socialist ultras – like British Labor leader Jeremy Corbyn – who won’t comprehend that anti-Zionism means anti-Semitism, and certifiable racist loons who bash Israel as a cipher for Jews.

Uncomfortable as it may be for Trots and neo-Nazis to acknowledge, where Jews and the Jewish state are concerned, they’re closer allies than they imagine.

   Because the staple diet of both is conspiracy theories…anything from the hardy annual of Jewish financiers controlling the world – that includes you, George Soros – to diabolical smears, like calling on Israel to investigate faux allegations IDF emergency medical teams abroad harvested kiddies' organs (once a pet hobbyhorse of disgraced British peeress, Jenny Tonge).

   The ‘net is awash with such ‘post-truth’ tosh and it’s resonating, not just among dorks, but those who claim to own a brain, notably college undergrads and their educators.^^


----------



## Coyote

admonit said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Olde Europe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I thought the article  interesting, though the paragraph at the end tainted it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No it did not.  It merely found the appropriate expressions for the situation and for the ways in which this (ultra-) right government and its shills defend, or distract from, the sordid state of affairs.
> 
> Jews have the right of "return", even if they didn't set foot anywhere near what is now Israel, and neither did 50 generations of their forebears.  Arabs do not have that right, not even those still carrying around the keys to their house, which the Jews blew up or bulldozed 70 years ago.  Everyone with the most superficial knowledge about Israel knows this, and none posting on this thread belongs into that category.
> 
> In that light:
> 
> "There are absolutely no 'rights' in Israel arising from being Jewish as opposed to being Arab."​
> Followed by:
> 
> "Another useful idiot."​
> 
> Quite.
> 
> As much as I admire your posting style - I am not sure treating hasbara peddlers as serious interlocutors isn't a disservice to debate.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Also mind my actual words. There are no rights IN Israel which advantage Jews over Arabs. All are equal in law.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Actually there is inequality. Arabs don't have to serve 3 years in the army and risk their lives fighting for their country.
Click to expand...

And the price they pay for not serving is they are locked out of a lot of jobs and promotions that IDF service confers.  Jews don’t have to serve either, if they are Hasidic.


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Olde Europe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I thought the article  interesting, though the paragraph at the end tainted it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No it did not.  It merely found the appropriate expressions for the situation and for the ways in which this (ultra-) right government and its shills defend, or distract from, the sordid state of affairs.
> 
> Jews have the right of "return", even if they didn't set foot anywhere near what is now Israel, and neither did 50 generations of their forebears.  Arabs do not have that right, not even those still carrying around the keys to their house, which the Jews blew up or bulldozed 70 years ago.  Everyone with the most superficial knowledge about Israel knows this, and none posting on this thread belongs into that category.
> 
> In that light:
> 
> "There are absolutely no 'rights' in Israel arising from being Jewish as opposed to being Arab."​
> Followed by:
> 
> "Another useful idiot."​
> 
> Quite.
> 
> As much as I admire your posting style - I am not sure treating hasbara peddlers as serious interlocutors isn't a disservice to debate.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Also mind my actual words. There are no rights IN Israel which advantage Jews over Arabs. All are equal in law.
Click to expand...

No they are not...not in terms of absentee landowner laws and in areas available to them to build communities.


----------



## Coyote

Olde Europe said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I thought the article  interesting, though the paragraph at the end tainted it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No it did not.  It merely found the appropriate expressions for the situation and for the ways in which this (ultra-) right government and its shills defend, or distract from, the sordid state of affairs.
> 
> Jews have the right of "return", even if they didn't set foot anywhere near what is now Israel, and neither did 50 generations of their forebears.  Arabs do not have that right, not even those still carrying around the keys to their house, which the Jews blew up or bulldozed 70 years ago.  Everyone with the most superficial knowledge about Israel knows this, and none posting on this thread belongs into that category.
> 
> In that light:
> 
> "There are absolutely no 'rights' in Israel arising from being Jewish as opposed to being Arab."​
> Followed by:
> 
> "Another useful idiot."​
> 
> Quite.
> 
> As much as I admire your posting style - I am not sure treating hasbara peddlers as serious interlocutors isn't a disservice to debate.
Click to expand...

I have a lot of respect for the postings of Rocco and Shusha...I don’t consider them hasbara peddlers by any means.

The right of return is problematic.  Shusha supports it for both sides and has consistently argued this.  I don’t believe in any right of return beyond the generation directly affected, for both sides.  

The other thing is...a nation can determine for itself who has a right to come, whether right or wrong, every nation does this.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> No they are not...not in terms of absentee landowner laws and in areas available to them to build communities.



You will have to provide me with a representative example case study to discuss, then, as I am unaware of laws in place in Israel which prohibit Arab Israelis from building communities.


----------



## Olde Europe

Coyote said:


> The other thing is...a nation can determine for itself who has a right to come, whether right or wrong, every nation does this.



The point was different laws governing different sects / ethnic groups.  No doubt, nations do religious / ethnic bigotry.  If I had a choice, I'd opt for less thereof.


----------



## Shusha

Olde Europe said:


> The point was different laws governing different sects / ethnic groups.  No doubt, nations do religious / ethnic bigotry.  If I had a choice, I'd opt for less thereof.



That is the BASIS for our current global system of nations -- the idea that ethnic groups can self-determine and create a nationality and have sovereignty.  That is the basis for the formation of probably every new country in the past 100 years.  And yet it doesn't cause a stir in the world until the Jewish people do it.  Why is that, do you think?


----------



## Mindful

Shusha said:


> Olde Europe said:
> 
> 
> 
> The point was different laws governing different sects / ethnic groups.  No doubt, nations do religious / ethnic bigotry.  If I had a choice, I'd opt for less thereof.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That is the BASIS for our current global system of nations -- the idea that ethnic groups can self-determine and create a nationality and have sovereignty.  That is the basis for the formation of probably every new country in the past 100 years.  And yet it doesn't cause a stir in the world until the Jewish people do it.  Why is that, do you think?
Click to expand...


Is modern Greece an artificial creation? Not much of a stir about that.

But if it's Israel...... Need I say more?


----------



## Shusha

Mindful said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Olde Europe said:
> 
> 
> 
> The point was different laws governing different sects / ethnic groups.  No doubt, nations do religious / ethnic bigotry.  If I had a choice, I'd opt for less thereof.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That is the BASIS for our current global system of nations -- the idea that ethnic groups can self-determine and create a nationality and have sovereignty.  That is the basis for the formation of probably every new country in the past 100 years.  And yet it doesn't cause a stir in the world until the Jewish people do it.  Why is that, do you think?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Is modern Greece an artificial creation? Not much of a stir about that.
> 
> But if it's Israel...... Need I say more?
Click to expand...



There are DOZENS of countries which give preferential citizenship to immigrants with an ethnic background from that country.  Yet somehow when Israel does it....Makes you go hmmmmmm, doesn't it?


----------



## Humanity

Shusha said:


> Olde Europe said:
> 
> 
> 
> The point was different laws governing different sects / ethnic groups.  No doubt, nations do religious / ethnic bigotry.  If I had a choice, I'd opt for less thereof.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That is the BASIS for our current global system of nations -- the idea that ethnic groups can self-determine and create a nationality and have sovereignty.  That is the basis for the formation of probably every new country in the past 100 years.  And yet it doesn't cause a stir in the world until the Jewish people do it.  Why is that, do you think?
Click to expand...


I wonder how many of those "new" countries created in the last 100 years illegally occupy territory and suppress and blockade their neighbours?


----------



## Hollie

Shusha said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Olde Europe said:
> 
> 
> 
> The point was different laws governing different sects / ethnic groups.  No doubt, nations do religious / ethnic bigotry.  If I had a choice, I'd opt for less thereof.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That is the BASIS for our current global system of nations -- the idea that ethnic groups can self-determine and create a nationality and have sovereignty.  That is the basis for the formation of probably every new country in the past 100 years.  And yet it doesn't cause a stir in the world until the Jewish people do it.  Why is that, do you think?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Is modern Greece an artificial creation? Not much of a stir about that.
> 
> But if it's Israel...... Need I say more?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> There are DOZENS of countries which give preferential citizenship to immigrants with an ethnic background from that country.  Yet somehow when Israel does it....Makes you go hmmmmmm, doesn't it?
Click to expand...


We can also acknowledge that an identifiable portion of the posters in these threads will refuse to discuss that a great many nations under the strictures of _one_ particular politico-religious ideology specifically and ruthlessly discriminate against those not of the "correct" politico-religious ideology.


----------



## Shusha

Humanity said:


> I wonder how many of those "new" countries created in the last 100 years illegally occupy territory and suppress and blockade their neighbours?



I wonder how many of them have been under continual attack from foreign armies and internal terrorism?  I wonder how many of them have been told that they have no right to have a State.  I wonder how many of them have been subjected to thousands of years of a Diaspora, under constant threat of discrimination, pogroms and genocide?


----------



## Hollie

Humanity said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Olde Europe said:
> 
> 
> 
> The point was different laws governing different sects / ethnic groups.  No doubt, nations do religious / ethnic bigotry.  If I had a choice, I'd opt for less thereof.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That is the BASIS for our current global system of nations -- the idea that ethnic groups can self-determine and create a nationality and have sovereignty.  That is the basis for the formation of probably every new country in the past 100 years.  And yet it doesn't cause a stir in the world until the Jewish people do it.  Why is that, do you think?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I wonder how many of those "new" countries created in the last 100 years illegally occupy territory and suppress and blockade their neighbours?
Click to expand...


How many of those "new" countries are surrounded politically, geographically and ideologically by angry retrogrades who believe that their fascist, 7th century worldview must be imposed on all?


----------



## Shusha

Hollie said:


> We can also acknowledge that an identifiable portion of the posters in these threads will refuse to discuss that a great many nations under the strictures of _one_ particular politico-religious ideology specifically and ruthlessly discriminate against those not of the "correct" politico-religious ideology.



No kidding.  Somehow when the discussion turns to actual discrimination in law -- like Iran's law that Jews are subject to different legal punishments -- they can't be found anywhere.  Or they insist Jews are very happy in Iran, apartheid laws and all.


----------



## Mindful

Humanity said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Olde Europe said:
> 
> 
> 
> The point was different laws governing different sects / ethnic groups.  No doubt, nations do religious / ethnic bigotry.  If I had a choice, I'd opt for less thereof.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That is the BASIS for our current global system of nations -- the idea that ethnic groups can self-determine and create a nationality and have sovereignty.  That is the basis for the formation of probably every new country in the past 100 years.  And yet it doesn't cause a stir in the world until the Jewish people do it.  Why is that, do you think?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I wonder how many of those "new" countries created in the last 100 years illegally occupy territory and suppress and blockade their neighbours?
Click to expand...


Like North Cyprus, you mean?


----------



## Shusha

Mindful said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Olde Europe said:
> 
> 
> 
> The point was different laws governing different sects / ethnic groups.  No doubt, nations do religious / ethnic bigotry.  If I had a choice, I'd opt for less thereof.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That is the BASIS for our current global system of nations -- the idea that ethnic groups can self-determine and create a nationality and have sovereignty.  That is the basis for the formation of probably every new country in the past 100 years.  And yet it doesn't cause a stir in the world until the Jewish people do it.  Why is that, do you think?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I wonder how many of those "new" countries created in the last 100 years illegally occupy territory and suppress and blockade their neighbours?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Like North Cyprus, you mean?
Click to expand...


Or Morocco.


----------



## Shusha

Indonesia


----------



## Shusha

Coyote 

For example, here is an article from a few years ago which discusses the tendering of land plots for purchase.  It clearly identifies a discrimination concerning mixed communities.  It seems apparent that this discrimination works both ways -- as in BOTH groups are wary of losing the ethnic nature of their communities and resist inclusivity.  And there is definitely an element of fear on both sides.  

What I DON'T see is active Israeli government and legal support for one-sided discrimination against Arabs.  On the contrary, Israel appears to be working conscientiously to walk a very, very fine line between support and respect for certain groups and fairness for all.  In a volatile and conflict-ridden reality.  Might they do better?  Perhaps.  How would you suggest they do better?


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> The fear is there because that is not how they see events unfolding and there is some legitimacy in those fears.  Land loss and confiscations through absentee landowner laws look VERY DIFFERENT to an Arab than to a Jew.  Where as Israeli Jews are seeing a society where Arab citizens have the same “rights” as Jews, Arabs see a society where they are discriminated against, despised, do not have the same land rights.   They have seen some of their political parties banned, make a fraction of the income their Jewish counterparts do and receive a fraction of the investment in their communities but by the Israeli government.  Are the fears really irrational?  I don’t think so.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think maybe you are in some respects conflating Arab Palestinians and Arab Israelis.  We are speaking here strictly of Arab Israeli citizens.
> 
> Confiscations happened to BOTH Arabs and Jews.  Internally displaced absentee landowners should be restored where possible, and compensated where not.  For BOTH Arabs and Jews.  Sorting it out is a mess, but Israel's court system appears to me to be fair and if anything slightly discriminatory towards Israeli Jews rather than Israeli Arabs. If you have specific examples you want to discuss, I'd be glad to go into more detail.
> 
> Israeli Arabs, by definition, have not had ANY land loss in terms of sovereignty.  (And actually, Palestine has not experienced any actual "land loss" either since the territory is still disputed.)
> 
> I disagree with you that Arab Israelis see a society where they are discriminated against, despised and do not have the same rights.  Again, I'd be glad to discuss any specific cases with you, but I think you are conflating Arab Israelis with Arab Palestinian rights, especially in Area C.  Remember the Supreme Court has upheld the decision that there can be no such thing as Jew-only communities while there can be Arab-only communities.  Its affirmative action.
> 
> Yes, I don't disagree that there is discrimination (as there is everywhere in the world) but I also see Israel working to address that discrimination for all its citizens.
> 
> To my knowledge, the only political party banned in Israel was a Jewish one, but feel free to link me.
> 
> I did a LOT of research into the economic disparity between Israeli Arabs and Israeli Jews and if you correct for the very small number of working Arab women (a cultural thing and not a discrimination thing) and for the Bedouin peoples (again a cultural thing and not a discrimination thing) there is not much of a wage gap between Arab and Jewish Israelis.  And that wage gap can be largely attributed to education -- the more highly educated, the higher the wage.  Arabs tend to go to school for fewer years than Jews.  Why is that?  Is it a cultural thing or a discrimination thing?  Or something else at play?
Click to expand...


Well, I have on other threads posted articles on how the absentee landlord laws target Arabs.  That was one issue brought up before.  And I provided one article on the very unequal government funding.

Here is something on banning political parties:
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2016/02/paradox-arab-member-israel-knesset-160216055021671.html

Https://en.idi.org.il/articles/11889

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7825032

In terms of discrimination, it is more complex.  For example, this article is good ( The paradox of being an Arab member of Israel's Knesset ) if you can get past the paywall, it asks why Arabs, despite having good grades, aren’t able to get jobs in the high tech sector.  The reasons are any, including lack of connections to open doors, waiting too long to start looking (their Jewish counterparts are already looking by their second year of school while Arab students are focusing on their studies and grades). A lot of emphasis is on connections, which begin during IDF service and a lot of the high tech development are in the military, which won’t hire Arabs.

Pew looked at perception of discrimination in Israel. 
Israeli Jews, Arabs have different perspectives on discrimination in their society

And actual examples in Israeli society...

Court orders Jews-only job site to be taken down

Disparities in education...https://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2016/10/28/499710857/in-israel-a-push-to-get-more-ara

Fedila argues the Arab-Israeli education system has been neglected, leading to sobering statistics: only 12 percent of Arab high school students matriculate to Israeli universities, and only 9 percent of them get bachelor's degrees, which are often required for management jobs.

"The budgeting is much lower in Arab schools than in Jewish schools... The quality of people working in the system, the books: it's all connected to the same thing," she said. "Separate, and it's not equal at all."

There are numerous articles on educational funding...
Arab students in Jerusalem get less than half the funding of Jewish counterparts

Municipality transfers less to East Jerusalem schools than the budget provided by the Education Ministry.

A pupil in a municipal high school in East Jerusalem gets less than half the funding of his counterpart in the western part of the capital, according to the Jerusalem municipality’s budget.

In fact, there are East Jerusalem schools that don’t even get the funds that the Education Ministry gives the city for them, as is shown by an analysis of the budget. The municipality claims that the analysis is incorrect and ignores the differences between the educational systems.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> Well, I have on other threads posted articles on how the absentee landlord laws target Arabs.  That was one issue brought up before.  And I provided one article on the very unequal government funding.



Re:  Housing

Israeli Arabs?  Clearly, they failed to make an impression.  Look, I would own up if I saw an good article which showed that Israeli Arabs are being systematically and institutionally discriminated against.  And its been a while since we discussed this, a year? so bare with my old brain for not recalling every article you posted.  

Remember, we are not discussing whether or not there is discrimination (we both agree there clearly is) - - we are discussing whether or not there is an institutionalized and systematic deliberate oppression of Arab citizens of Israel.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> Disparities in education...https://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2016/10/28/499710857/in-israel-a-push-to-get-more-ara
> 
> Fedila argues the Arab-Israeli education system has been neglected, leading to sobering statistics: only 12 percent of Arab high school students matriculate to Israeli universities, and only 9 percent of them get bachelor's degrees, which are often required for management jobs.
> 
> "The budgeting is much lower in Arab schools than in Jewish schools... The quality of people working in the system, the books: it's all connected to the same thing," she said. "Separate, and it's not equal at all."
> 
> There are numerous articles on educational funding...
> Arab students in Jerusalem get less than half the funding of Jewish counterparts
> 
> Municipality transfers less to East Jerusalem schools than the budget provided by the Education Ministry.
> 
> A pupil in a municipal high school in East Jerusalem gets less than half the funding of his counterpart in the western part of the capital, according to the Jerusalem municipality’s budget.
> 
> In fact, there are East Jerusalem schools that don’t even get the funds that the Education Ministry gives the city for them, as is shown by an analysis of the budget. The municipality claims that the analysis is incorrect and ignores the differences between the educational systems.



Re:  Education

Yes, yes, I read many of those articles in my research in the past few days.  They give alot of opinions and perceptions of problems and the reasons behind them, but not much in the way of research or facts.  So it seems imprudent to claim that just because someone says, for example, and I quote:  _"The budgeting is much lower in Arab schools than in Jewish schools... The quality of people working in the system, the books: it's all connected to the same thing," she said. "Separate, and it's not equal at all." _that this represents some sort of objective truth.  One of the research articles I read pointed out that there is a wide-spread perception of Arab/Jewish wage disparity, but when examined, it proves not to be the case.  And even if it does prove to be the case, the cause is not necessarily an institutionalized discrimination but a wide variety of cultural and integrated factors.  

With respect to budgets and broad claims like "Arab schools get half the funding of Jewish schools", there are myriad factors at play.  The government funding for all public schools is exactly the same, with the same criteria by every article I read that was not an opinion article.  There are numerous conflating issues, like building rental vs. building ownership, which is accounted separately.  There are also issues with private funding.  For example, I understand that Jewish parents and Jewish philanthropists tend to provide additional funding to make up shortfalls in the Jewish schools.  So the discrepancy may be the willingness of Jewish parents to fund the children's education.  Why does this happen?  There can be all sorts of reasons.  Is it an institutionalized discrimination against Arabs?  No.  

What I am asking for is to go beyond the easy answer opinion articles and dig deeper.  I'm asking you to recognize the complexity of the problem and the myriad reasons for it.  Just as you would when exploring the discrimination against POC in the US.  These are complex problems.  They should be addressed as such and not as an assumption that Israel's government has a policy of only giving Arab students $10 a year while giving Jewish students $20.  Because that just isn't true.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote 

Another example of the complexity of the problem.  In Israel, each ethnic group is taught in their own native language.  This is good, right?  This is respect and preservation and protection of each group's culture, right?  Not so different than the Canadian system where English-speakers and French-speakers are each taught, in school, in their native language.  Each is also provided with education of the other language.  For French speakers this is largely culturally necessary to function well in Canada.  (Being monolingual French in Canada would be very difficult except possibly in some rural areas, imo).  For English-speakers this is largely voluntary, though many of us make that choice.

Like Canada, Israel has one dominant language.  It is largely culturally necessary for native Arabic speakers to also learn Hebrew.  In addition, though, English is also a dominant language in Israel and this applies particularly to certain job markets.  The bottom line looks something like this:

Mother tongue Hebrew speakers receive all their instruction in Hebrew and also take classes in English.

Mother tongue Arabic speakers receive all their instruction in Arabic and also take classes in Hebrew (necessary to function in society) and in English (necessary for certain career paths).  

So the time spent in school by Hebrew speakers is divided between two languages and by Arabic speakers between three languages.  Clearly, it is harder and takes more time to learn three languages rather than just two, putting Arabic speakers at a disadvantage.

Is this institutionalized discrimination?  

If it is, what is the solution to this problem?  We could eliminate Arabic in school, evening the playing field, but that seems to push the culturally dominant languages to the fore and reject the value of Arabic as a language (cue uproar).  We could eliminate the Hebrew for Arabic speakers, but that would create a problem with respect to accessing the dominant culture, including creating impediments to jobs in certain sectors (cue uproar).  We could eliminate the English for Arabic speakers, but that would create disparities in accessing certain higher paying jobs (cue uproar).  We could require all students to learn all three languages, but that would be a tough sell (sure was in Canada).


----------



## Shusha

Humanity said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Olde Europe said:
> 
> 
> 
> The point was different laws governing different sects / ethnic groups.  No doubt, nations do religious / ethnic bigotry.  If I had a choice, I'd opt for less thereof.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That is the BASIS for our current global system of nations -- the idea that ethnic groups can self-determine and create a nationality and have sovereignty.  That is the basis for the formation of probably every new country in the past 100 years.  And yet it doesn't cause a stir in the world until the Jewish people do it.  Why is that, do you think?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I wonder how many of those "new" countries created in the last 100 years illegally occupy territory and suppress and blockade their neighbours?
Click to expand...



Oh. And btw, Israel does not illegally occupy territory. The other three mentioned (Turkey, Morocco and Indonesia do).


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Disparities in education...https://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2016/10/28/499710857/in-israel-a-push-to-get-more-ara
> 
> Fedila argues the Arab-Israeli education system has been neglected, leading to sobering statistics: only 12 percent of Arab high school students matriculate to Israeli universities, and only 9 percent of them get bachelor's degrees, which are often required for management jobs.
> 
> "The budgeting is much lower in Arab schools than in Jewish schools... The quality of people working in the system, the books: it's all connected to the same thing," she said. "Separate, and it's not equal at all."
> 
> There are numerous articles on educational funding...
> Arab students in Jerusalem get less than half the funding of Jewish counterparts
> 
> Municipality transfers less to East Jerusalem schools than the budget provided by the Education Ministry.
> 
> A pupil in a municipal high school in East Jerusalem gets less than half the funding of his counterpart in the western part of the capital, according to the Jerusalem municipality’s budget.
> 
> In fact, there are East Jerusalem schools that don’t even get the funds that the Education Ministry gives the city for them, as is shown by an analysis of the budget. The municipality claims that the analysis is incorrect and ignores the differences between the educational systems.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Re:  Education
> 
> Yes, yes, I read many of those articles in my research in the past few days.  They give alot of opinions and perceptions of problems and the reasons behind them, but not much in the way of research or facts.  So it seems imprudent to claim that just because someone says, for example, and I quote:  _"The budgeting is much lower in Arab schools than in Jewish schools... The quality of people working in the system, the books: it's all connected to the same thing," she said. "Separate, and it's not equal at all." _that this represents some sort of objective truth.  One of the research articles I read pointed out that there is a wide-spread perception of Arab/Jewish wage disparity, but when examined, it proves not to be the case.  And even if it does prove to be the case, the cause is not necessarily an institutionalized discrimination but a wide variety of cultural and integrated factors.
> 
> With respect to budgets and broad claims like "Arab schools get half the funding of Jewish schools", there are myriad factors at play.  The government funding for all public schools is exactly the same, with the same criteria by every article I read that was not an opinion article.  There are numerous conflating issues, like building rental vs. building ownership, which is accounted separately.  There are also issues with private funding.  For example, I understand that Jewish parents and Jewish philanthropists tend to provide additional funding to make up shortfalls in the Jewish schools.  So the discrepancy may be the willingness of Jewish parents to fund the children's education.  Why does this happen?  There can be all sorts of reasons.  Is it an institutionalized discrimination against Arabs?  No.
> 
> What I am asking for is to go beyond the easy answer opinion articles and dig deeper.  I'm asking you to recognize the complexity of the problem and the myriad reasons for it.  Just as you would when exploring the discrimination against POC in the US.  These are complex problems.  They should be addressed as such and not as an assumption that Israel's government has a policy of only giving Arab students $10 a year while giving Jewish students $20.  Because that just isn't true.
Click to expand...

I understand the complexities, because they exist in our schools, but our schools are funded heavily through local taxes, so it is easy to see why funding is so variable.

But let’s look at the one example in Jerusalem.  That did not look good imo.  What are your thoughts there?


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well, I have on other threads posted articles on how the absentee landlord laws target Arabs.  That was one issue brought up before.  And I provided one article on the very unequal government funding.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Re:  Housing
> 
> Israeli Arabs?  Clearly, they failed to make an impression.  Look, I would own up if I saw an good article which showed that Israeli Arabs are being systematically and institutionally discriminated against.  And its been a while since we discussed this, a year? so bare with my old brain for not recalling every article you posted.
> 
> Remember, we are not discussing whether or not there is discrimination (we both agree there clearly is) - - we are discussing whether or not there is an institutionalized and systematic deliberate oppression of Arab citizens of Israel.
Click to expand...




Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well, I have on other threads posted articles on how the absentee landlord laws target Arabs.  That was one issue brought up before.  And I provided one article on the very unequal government funding.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Re:  Housing
> 
> Israeli Arabs?  Clearly, they failed to make an impression.  Look, I would own up if I saw an good article which showed that Israeli Arabs are being systematically and institutionally discriminated against.  And its been a while since we discussed this, a year? so bare with my old brain for not recalling every article you posted.
> 
> Remember, we are not discussing whether or not there is discrimination (we both agree there clearly is) - - we are discussing whether or not there is an institutionalized and systematic deliberate oppression of Arab citizens of Israel.
Click to expand...

I just realized I am probably conflating discrimination via government and law vs Israeli society in some of these cases.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Shusha said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Olde Europe said:
> 
> 
> 
> The point was different laws governing different sects / ethnic groups.  No doubt, nations do religious / ethnic bigotry.  If I had a choice, I'd opt for less thereof.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That is the BASIS for our current global system of nations -- the idea that ethnic groups can self-determine and create a nationality and have sovereignty.  That is the basis for the formation of probably every new country in the past 100 years.  And yet it doesn't cause a stir in the world until the Jewish people do it.  Why is that, do you think?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Is modern Greece an artificial creation? Not much of a stir about that.
> 
> But if it's Israel...... Need I say more?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> There are DOZENS of countries which give preferential citizenship to immigrants with an ethnic background from that country.  Yet somehow when Israel does it....Makes you go hmmmmmm, doesn't it?
Click to expand...

Refugees are not immigrants.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> I understand the complexities, because they exist in our schools, but our schools are funded heavily through local taxes, so it is easy to see why funding is so variable.
> 
> But let’s look at the one example in Jerusalem.  That did not look good imo.  What are your thoughts there?



My thoughts thus far are that the claim "Arab schools receive half the funding of Jewish schools" has not been demonstrated, let alone the claim that the cause of the funding discrepancy is an institutionalized, systematic, deliberate discrimination against Arab Israelis.


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> Refugees are not immigrants.



Agreed.  The 20,00 or so actual remaining refugees should be permitted re-entry to Israel or Palestine with haste.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> No they are not...not in terms of absentee landowner laws and in areas available to them to build communities.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You will have to provide me with a representative example case study to discuss, then, as I am unaware of laws in place in Israel which prohibit Arab Israelis from building communities.
Click to expand...

How about rebuilding a destroyed community?


----------



## P F Tinmore

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Refugees are not immigrants.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Agreed.  The 20,00 or so actual remaining refugees should be permitted re-entry to Israel or Palestine with haste.
Click to expand...

Refugees are more than who left. It involves nationality and citizenship that are not erased from successive generations.


----------



## Shusha

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I understand the complexities, because they exist in our schools, but our schools are funded heavily through local taxes, so it is easy to see why funding is so variable.
> 
> But let’s look at the one example in Jerusalem.  That did not look good imo.  What are your thoughts there?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My thoughts thus far are that the claim "Arab schools receive half the funding of Jewish schools" has not been demonstrated, let alone the claim that the cause of the funding discrepancy is an institutionalized, systematic, deliberate discrimination against Arab Israelis.
Click to expand...


And if the discussion is concerning "East Jerusalem" there are all sorts of confounding factors to consider, not the least of which is jurisdiction.  Public schools, private schools, religious schools, secular schools, Israeli funding, Palestinian funding, Israeli curriculum, Palestinian curriculum.  

And are we accepting the annexation of "East Jerusalem" by Israel?  Or are we denying it?  Is Israel responsible for the education of non-Israeli citizens in "East Jerusalem" because they annexed it and it is now part of Israel?  Or are we claiming that Israel has no responsibility for education of non-Israeli citizens in "East Jerusalem" because its not Israel's territory.  Can't have it both ways.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Coyote said:


> Olde Europe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I thought the article  interesting, though the paragraph at the end tainted it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No it did not.  It merely found the appropriate expressions for the situation and for the ways in which this (ultra-) right government and its shills defend, or distract from, the sordid state of affairs.
> 
> Jews have the right of "return", even if they didn't set foot anywhere near what is now Israel, and neither did 50 generations of their forebears.  Arabs do not have that right, not even those still carrying around the keys to their house, which the Jews blew up or bulldozed 70 years ago.  Everyone with the most superficial knowledge about Israel knows this, and none posting on this thread belongs into that category.
> 
> In that light:
> 
> "There are absolutely no 'rights' in Israel arising from being Jewish as opposed to being Arab."​
> Followed by:
> 
> "Another useful idiot."​
> 
> Quite.
> 
> As much as I admire your posting style - I am not sure treating hasbara peddlers as serious interlocutors isn't a disservice to debate.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I have a lot of respect for the postings of Rocco and Shusha...I don’t consider them hasbara peddlers by any means.
> 
> The right of return is problematic.  Shusha supports it for both sides and has consistently argued this.  I don’t believe in any right of return beyond the generation directly affected, for both sides.
> 
> The other thing is...a nation can determine for itself who has a right to come, whether right or wrong, every nation does this.
Click to expand...




Coyote said:


> I have a lot of respect for the postings of Rocco and Shusha...I don’t consider them hasbara peddlers by any means.


 I do. Have you ever seen a Rocco post where he did no slime the Palestinians. Constant name calling.


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> Refugees are more than who left. It involves nationality and citizenship that are not erased from successive generations.



Well no.  The legal definition of "refugees" excludes all but a small number.  But if you want to play the "successive generations" game -- the Jews are in.  As are DOZENS of other nations.


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> RE:  Now it's a basic law: The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people
> SUB:REF:  The reality is that NEITHER Israel nor Palestine has held sovereignty over the entire territory
> ※→  P F Tinmore, Shusha, et al,
> 
> I agree with our friend  "Shusha" on the matter of "sovereignty over the entire territory."
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Also, with respect to "land loss" -- please no one post that tired old land loss canard map.  The reality is that NEITHER Israel nor Palestine has held sovereignty over the entire territory so starting with that is just silly.  Second, until the dispute is solved -- no one has lost any land, we simply do not know how much will eventually fall to Israel and how much will fall to Palestine.
> 
> (this wasn't directed at you, Coyote)
> 
> 
> 
> Good point. Until there is an agreement, Israel has won nothing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> BUT, make no mistake...  While there is always the possibility that some future negotiation may alter the current status quo, Israel does exercise sovereignty over selected territory that they recognized as theirs and maintain the full right and power of a governing body over itself, to the exclusion of ALL other external powers.  However, any of the factions, representing some aspect of authority over what either the Ramallah or Gaza Governments, would be hard-pressed to outline any segment of the territory they individually purport to control _(either now or in the past)_.  No one single faction of Arab Palestinian Government has exercised sovereignty over the entirety of all they territory they currently claim.
> 
> *(SIDEBAR)*
> 
> The term "win" is really a word without meaning in the perspective of the conflict as seen from 1948 to present.  The greatest accomplishments _(really worthy of Nobel attention)_ were the 1949 Armistice Agreements and the two Peace Treaties  _(1979 and 1994 respectively)_.  History, written a century from now, will record that the leaders of the great nations of the world were not up to the task of creating the peace.
> 
> *(EPILOG)*
> 
> Of the Arab League nations that participated in the 1948 conflict, they are today:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Egypt:  Egyptian Movement for Change (2003 → AKA: Kefaya) attempted to secure a return to democracy and promote an atmosphere of greater civil liberties. It is now a relatively quite county.  1979 Peace Treaty with Israeli.  Ranks 111th on the Human Development Index.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jordan:  1994 Peace Treaty with Israel.  Ranks 86th on the Human Development Index.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iraq:  The country is fragmented.  It remains confused as to what form it should take.  The population is still in fear of Jihadist activities, Hostile Insurgents, and Asymmetric Fighters.  Ranks 111 on the Human Development Index.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syria:  Now in the 8th year of a Civil War with the added complication of incursions from the Islamic State.  Broken up into six areas of influence.  Ranks 149th on the Human Development Index.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lebanon:  Just emerging from a near 16 year Civil War,  While considered sovereignty, nearly the entire al-Bekka Valley is controlled by Hezbollah.  Ranks 76th on the Human Development Index.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Saudi Arabia:  A fairly stable monarchy ruled by the hereditary males heirs of the first king.  Ranks 39th on the Human Development Index.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yemen:  Fragmented Failed State.
> Whereas:
> *
> 
> 
> 
> Israel:  *Is a very stable Republic.  Ranks 19th on the Human Development Index; above all other Middle Eastern, Persian Gulf Coast State, North African and all European Mediterranean States.​
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...




RoccoR said:


> The term "win" is really a word without meaning in the perspective of the conflict as seen from 1948 to present.


First, it is illegal to acquire territory by war, but let's set that aside for a moment.

You confuse military control, i.e. occupation, with rights and sovereignty. We agree that military occupations do not acquire sovereignty.

The question that inspires a lot of song and dance by the Israeli side is: Is Israel a state or is it an occupation? There is no unanimous answer to this question.

The Palestinians, many or most, call Israel 48 or 48 land as in 1948 occupied Palestine. And no, this is not just Hamas. "Israeli Arabs" are called 1948 Palestinians. "Eastern" maps show Palestine without Israel. "Western" maps show Israel without Palestine even though they have to use fake armistice line borders to do it.

You have been dancing around this question for years.

If this is considered off topic for this thread, perhaps we should start a new one.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Refugees are more than who left. It involves nationality and citizenship that are not erased from successive generations.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well no.  The legal definition of "refugees" excludes all but a small number.  But if you want to play the "successive generations" game -- the Jews are in.  As are DOZENS of other nations.
Click to expand...

Possibly, but the right to return does not apply only to refugees.


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> The question that inspires a lot of song and dance by the Israeli side is: Is Israel a state or is it an occupation? There is no unanimous answer to this question



Dude. What planet do you live on?  Israel is a state. Without question. There is no song and dance loud enough to make any sane denial of the simple fact.


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Refugees are more than who left. It involves nationality and citizenship that are not erased from successive generations.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well no.  The legal definition of "refugees" excludes all but a small number.  But if you want to play the "successive generations" game -- the Jews are in.  As are DOZENS of other nations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Possibly, but the right to return does not apply only to refugees.
Click to expand...


I quite wholeheartedly agree. Again, the Jewish people are quite happy to play the successive generations game. In fact, the Jewish people are winning the fuck out of that game.


----------



## Mindful

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  Now it's a basic law: The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people
> SUB:REF:  The reality is that NEITHER Israel nor Palestine has held sovereignty over the entire territory
> ※→  P F Tinmore, Shusha, et al,
> 
> I agree with our friend  "Shusha" on the matter of "sovereignty over the entire territory."
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Also, with respect to "land loss" -- please no one post that tired old land loss canard map.  The reality is that NEITHER Israel nor Palestine has held sovereignty over the entire territory so starting with that is just silly.  Second, until the dispute is solved -- no one has lost any land, we simply do not know how much will eventually fall to Israel and how much will fall to Palestine.
> 
> (this wasn't directed at you, Coyote)
> 
> 
> 
> Good point. Until there is an agreement, Israel has won nothing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> BUT, make no mistake...  While there is always the possibility that some future negotiation may alter the current status quo, Israel does exercise sovereignty over selected territory that they recognized as theirs and maintain the full right and power of a governing body over itself, to the exclusion of ALL other external powers.  However, any of the factions, representing some aspect of authority over what either the Ramallah or Gaza Governments, would be hard-pressed to outline any segment of the territory they individually purport to control _(either now or in the past)_.  No one single faction of Arab Palestinian Government has exercised sovereignty over the entirety of all they territory they currently claim.
> 
> *(SIDEBAR)*
> 
> The term "win" is really a word without meaning in the perspective of the conflict as seen from 1948 to present.  The greatest accomplishments _(really worthy of Nobel attention)_ were the 1949 Armistice Agreements and the two Peace Treaties  _(1979 and 1994 respectively)_.  History, written a century from now, will record that the leaders of the great nations of the world were not up to the task of creating the peace.
> 
> *(EPILOG)*
> 
> Of the Arab League nations that participated in the 1948 conflict, they are today:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Egypt:  Egyptian Movement for Change (2003 → AKA: Kefaya) attempted to secure a return to democracy and promote an atmosphere of greater civil liberties. It is now a relatively quite county.  1979 Peace Treaty with Israeli.  Ranks 111th on the Human Development Index.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jordan:  1994 Peace Treaty with Israel.  Ranks 86th on the Human Development Index.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iraq:  The country is fragmented.  It remains confused as to what form it should take.  The population is still in fear of Jihadist activities, Hostile Insurgents, and Asymmetric Fighters.  Ranks 111 on the Human Development Index.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Syria:  Now in the 8th year of a Civil War with the added complication of incursions from the Islamic State.  Broken up into six areas of influence.  Ranks 149th on the Human Development Index.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lebanon:  Just emerging from a near 16 year Civil War,  While considered sovereignty, nearly the entire al-Bekka Valley is controlled by Hezbollah.  Ranks 76th on the Human Development Index.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Saudi Arabia:  A fairly stable monarchy ruled by the hereditary males heirs of the first king.  Ranks 39th on the Human Development Index.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yemen:  Fragmented Failed State.
> Whereas:
> *
> 
> 
> 
> Israel:  *Is a very stable Republic.  Ranks 19th on the Human Development Index; above all other Middle Eastern, Persian Gulf Coast State, North African and all European Mediterranean States.​
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> The term "win" is really a word without meaning in the perspective of the conflict as seen from 1948 to present.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> First, it is illegal to acquire territory by war, but let's set that aside for a moment.
> 
> You confuse military control, i.e. occupation, with rights and sovereignty. We agree that military occupations do not acquire sovereignty.
> 
> The question that inspires a lot of song and dance by the Israeli side is: Is Israel a state or is it an occupation? There is no unanimous answer to this question.
> 
> The Palestinians, many or most, call Israel 48 or 48 land as in 1948 occupied Palestine. And no, this is not just Hamas. "Israeli Arabs" are called 1948 Palestinians. "Eastern" maps show Palestine without Israel. "Western" maps show Israel without Palestine even though they have to use fake armistice line borders to do it.
> 
> You have been dancing around this question for years.
> 
> If this is considered off topic for this thread, perhaps we should start a new one.
Click to expand...


No. The question is: YOU  _want _it to be an occupation. It's your own personal hobby horse, you've been dancing with for years. (For whatever reason)


----------



## Humanity

Hollie said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Olde Europe said:
> 
> 
> 
> The point was different laws governing different sects / ethnic groups.  No doubt, nations do religious / ethnic bigotry.  If I had a choice, I'd opt for less thereof.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That is the BASIS for our current global system of nations -- the idea that ethnic groups can self-determine and create a nationality and have sovereignty.  That is the basis for the formation of probably every new country in the past 100 years.  And yet it doesn't cause a stir in the world until the Jewish people do it.  Why is that, do you think?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I wonder how many of those "new" countries created in the last 100 years illegally occupy territory and suppress and blockade their neighbours?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How many of those "new" countries are surrounded politically, geographically and ideologically by angry retrogrades who believe that their fascist, 7th century worldview must be imposed on all?
Click to expand...


There is a very simple answer to that...

If you don't get on with your neighbours.... MOVE!


----------



## P F Tinmore

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> The question that inspires a lot of song and dance by the Israeli side is: Is Israel a state or is it an occupation? There is no unanimous answer to this question
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dude. What planet do you live on?  Israel is a state. Without question. There is no song and dance loud enough to make any sane denial of the simple fact.
Click to expand...

Let the music begin.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Refugees are more than who left. It involves nationality and citizenship that are not erased from successive generations.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well no.  The legal definition of "refugees" excludes all but a small number.  But if you want to play the "successive generations" game -- the Jews are in.  As are DOZENS of other nations.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Possibly, but the right to return does not apply only to refugees.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I quite wholeheartedly agree. Again, the Jewish people are quite happy to play the successive generations game. In fact, the Jewish people are winning the fuck out of that game.
Click to expand...

It is true that all Israelis born in that territory (most of them) have rights in that territory, as do all Palestinians. That is the problem that has to be resolved.


----------



## RoccoR

RE:  >  Now it's a basic law: The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people
※→ P F Tinmore, Shusha, Olde Europe, et al,

Our friend P F Tinmore is partially correct.  The terms "refugee" and "immigrant" are distinctly different.  But it is possible for an immigrant to be a refugee; because a person who comes to live permanently in a foreign country is an immigrant.



P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Olde Europe said:
> 
> 
> 
> The point was different laws governing different sects / ethnic groups.  No doubt, nations do religious / ethnic bigotry.  If I had a choice, I'd opt for less thereof.
> 
> 
> 
> That is the BASIS for our current global system of nations -- the idea that ethnic groups can self-determine and create a nationality and have sovereignty.  That is the basis for the formation of probably every new country in the past 100 years.  And yet it doesn't cause a stir in the world until the Jewish people do it.  Why is that, do you think?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Is modern Greece an artificial creation? Not much of a stir about that.  But if it's Israel...... Need I say more?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There are DOZENS of countries which give preferential citizenship to immigrants with an ethnic background from that country.  Yet somehow when Israel does it....Makes you go hmmmmmm, doesn't it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Refugees are not immigrants.
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

The term "refugee," by international convention _(UNHCR Convention Status of Refugees)_ → would not apply to most Arab Palestinians for a number of different reasons.  Some of the reasons are here, but the list is NOT all-inclusive.

•  It shall not apply to persons who are at present receiving from organs or agencies of the UN _(ie UNRWA)_. 
•  It shall not apply to a person who is recognized by the competent authorities of the country in which he has taken residence as having the rights and obligations which are attached to the possession of the nationality of that country.
•  It shall not apply to a person who committed a crime against peace, a war crime, or a crime against
humanity, as defined in the international instruments drawn up to make provision in respect of such crimes;
• It shall not apply to a person who has committed a serious non-political crime outside the country of the refugee prior to his admission to that country as a refugee;
• It shall not apply to a person who has been guilty of acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the UN.​
One more point,  By the same international convention, EVERY refugee has duties to the country in which he finds himself, which require in particular that he conform to its laws and regulations as well as to measures taken for the maintenance of public order.  This is important to notice because many (many) Arab Palestinians openly advocate violence, and pursue a policy of Armed Struggle in violation of the Hague Regulation.  Certainly, no one in the mass of people that took action against the Israeli Border Protection Barriers could be considered a refugee by the international definition.
Finally, do not confuse the Consolidated Eligibility Registration Instruction (CERI) as anything other than Instructions on the Registration for UNRWA.  While it uses the word "refugee" --- it is not the same as an internationally recognized "refugee" everywhere else in the world.  In fact, the UNRWA CERI program is the only agency program that annually grows refugees, as opposed to resolving the problem. 

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Humanity

Shusha said:


> Oh. And btw, Israel does not illegally occupy territory.



Yes yes... We get it...

Only Israel and zionuts believe it is not illegal. Yawn Yawn Yawn!


----------



## Humanity

Mindful said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Olde Europe said:
> 
> 
> 
> The point was different laws governing different sects / ethnic groups.  No doubt, nations do religious / ethnic bigotry.  If I had a choice, I'd opt for less thereof.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That is the BASIS for our current global system of nations -- the idea that ethnic groups can self-determine and create a nationality and have sovereignty.  That is the basis for the formation of probably every new country in the past 100 years.  And yet it doesn't cause a stir in the world until the Jewish people do it.  Why is that, do you think?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I wonder how many of those "new" countries created in the last 100 years illegally occupy territory and suppress and blockade their neighbours?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Like North Cyprus, you mean?
Click to expand...


Turkey! You mean Turkey.

TRNC is, for all intents and purposes, Turkey.

And, TRNC is a very interesting topic, you should read up on it. The similarities between TRNC and Gaza/Palestine are incredible.


----------



## RoccoR

RE:  Now it's a basic law: The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people
※→  Humanity, et al,

I hear people say that, but I don't see the "LAW" behind it.



Humanity said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh. And btw, Israel does not illegally occupy territory.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes yes... We get it...
> 
> Only Israel and zionuts believe it is not illegal. Yawn Yawn Yawn!
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

When the Jordanians cut all ties with the West Bank; what sovereign government had control and a claim?

And don't tell me the Arab Palestinian Government; because even the PLO had not declare Independence yet.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Humanity

Shusha said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Olde Europe said:
> 
> 
> 
> The point was different laws governing different sects / ethnic groups.  No doubt, nations do religious / ethnic bigotry.  If I had a choice, I'd opt for less thereof.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That is the BASIS for our current global system of nations -- the idea that ethnic groups can self-determine and create a nationality and have sovereignty.  That is the basis for the formation of probably every new country in the past 100 years.  And yet it doesn't cause a stir in the world until the Jewish people do it.  Why is that, do you think?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I wonder how many of those "new" countries created in the last 100 years illegally occupy territory and suppress and blockade their neighbours?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Like North Cyprus, you mean?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Or Morocco.
Click to expand...


Morocco was NOT created in the last 100 years!


----------



## Humanity

Shusha said:


> Indonesia



Ended 20 years ago!

Oh, and Indonesia is over 100 years old!


----------



## Humanity

Shusha said:


> we are not discussing whether or not there is discrimination (we both agree there clearly is)



End of argument then eh! 

Yet, you continue to defend Israels discrimination?

Hmmm


----------



## Mindful

Humanity said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> we are not discussing whether or not there is discrimination (we both agree there clearly is)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> End of argument then eh!
> 
> Yet, you continue to defend Israels discrimination?
> 
> Hmmm
Click to expand...


So, you're a zealot. Hmmm.


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> RE:  >  Now it's a basic law: The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people
> ※→ P F Tinmore, Shusha, Olde Europe, et al,
> 
> Our friend P F Tinmore is partially correct.  The terms "refugee" and "immigrant" are distinctly different.  But it is possible for an immigrant to be a refugee; because a person who comes to live permanently in a foreign country is an immigrant.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Olde Europe said:
> 
> 
> 
> The point was different laws governing different sects / ethnic groups.  No doubt, nations do religious / ethnic bigotry.  If I had a choice, I'd opt for less thereof.
> 
> 
> 
> That is the BASIS for our current global system of nations -- the idea that ethnic groups can self-determine and create a nationality and have sovereignty.  That is the basis for the formation of probably every new country in the past 100 years.  And yet it doesn't cause a stir in the world until the Jewish people do it.  Why is that, do you think?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Is modern Greece an artificial creation? Not much of a stir about that.  But if it's Israel...... Need I say more?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There are DOZENS of countries which give preferential citizenship to immigrants with an ethnic background from that country.  Yet somehow when Israel does it....Makes you go hmmmmmm, doesn't it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Refugees are not immigrants.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> The term "refugee," by international convention _(UNHCR Convention Status of Refugees)_ → would not apply to most Arab Palestinians for a number of different reasons.  Some of the reasons are here, but the list is NOT all-inclusive.
> 
> •  It shall not apply to persons who are at present receiving from organs or agencies of the UN _(ie UNRWA)_.
> •  It shall not apply to a person who is recognized by the competent authorities of the country in which he has taken residence as having the rights and obligations which are attached to the possession of the nationality of that country.
> •  It shall not apply to a person who committed a crime against peace, a war crime, or a crime against
> humanity, as defined in the international instruments drawn up to make provision in respect of such crimes;
> • It shall not apply to a person who has committed a serious non-political crime outside the country of the refugee prior to his admission to that country as a refugee;
> • It shall not apply to a person who has been guilty of acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the UN.​
> One more point,  By the same international convention, EVERY refugee has duties to the country in which he finds himself, which require in particular that he conform to its laws and regulations as well as to measures taken for the maintenance of public order.  This is important to notice because many (many) Arab Palestinians openly advocate violence, and pursue a policy of Armed Struggle in violation of the Hague Regulation.  Certainly, no one in the mass of people that took action against the Israeli Border Protection Barriers could be considered a refugee by the international definition.
> Finally, do not confuse the Consolidated Eligibility Registration Instruction (CERI) as anything other than Instructions on the Registration for UNRWA.  While it uses the word "refugee" --- it is not the same as an internationally recognized "refugee" everywhere else in the world.  In fact, the UNRWA CERI program is the only agency program that annually grows refugees, as opposed to resolving the problem.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...

Posted before but not watched or understood.


----------



## fncceo

Right of Return ... but only with a receipt.


----------



## admonit

Coyote said:


> admonit said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Olde Europe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I thought the article  interesting, though the paragraph at the end tainted it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No it did not.  It merely found the appropriate expressions for the situation and for the ways in which this (ultra-) right government and its shills defend, or distract from, the sordid state of affairs.
> 
> Jews have the right of "return", even if they didn't set foot anywhere near what is now Israel, and neither did 50 generations of their forebears.  Arabs do not have that right, not even those still carrying around the keys to their house, which the Jews blew up or bulldozed 70 years ago.  Everyone with the most superficial knowledge about Israel knows this, and none posting on this thread belongs into that category.
> 
> In that light:
> 
> "There are absolutely no 'rights' in Israel arising from being Jewish as opposed to being Arab."​
> Followed by:
> 
> "Another useful idiot."​
> 
> Quite.
> 
> As much as I admire your posting style - I am not sure treating hasbara peddlers as serious interlocutors isn't a disservice to debate.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Also mind my actual words. There are no rights IN Israel which advantage Jews over Arabs. All are equal in law.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Actually there is inequality. Arabs don't have to serve 3 years in the army and risk their lives fighting for their country.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And the price they pay for not serving is they are locked out of a lot of jobs and promotions that IDF service confers.  Jews don’t have to serve either, if they are Hasidic.
Click to expand...

So, Israeli Arabs, because they don't serve in the army, again are victims? It's ridiculous.
Yes, ultra-orthodox Jews are not obliged to serve in the army. But, yet, thouzands of them are serving, including in battle units. And the Israeli society doesn't consider the law honest and tries to change the law. The High Court declared it unconstitutional and currently it is reconsidered.
It's noteworthy though, that you recall ultra religious Jews, when you need to justify Israeli Arabs regarding military service, but you forget about them while accusing Israel in discrimination of Arab citizens.


----------



## admonit

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> The fear is there because that is not how they see events unfolding and there is some legitimacy in those fears.  Land loss and confiscations through absentee landowner laws look VERY DIFFERENT to an Arab than to a Jew.  Where as Israeli Jews are seeing a society where Arab citizens have the same “rights” as Jews, Arabs see a society where they are discriminated against, despised, do not have the same land rights.   They have seen some of their political parties banned, make a fraction of the income their Jewish counterparts do and receive a fraction of the investment in their communities but by the Israeli government.  Are the fears really irrational?  I don’t think so.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think maybe you are in some respects conflating Arab Palestinians and Arab Israelis.  We are speaking here strictly of Arab Israeli citizens.
> 
> Confiscations happened to BOTH Arabs and Jews.  Internally displaced absentee landowners should be restored where possible, and compensated where not.  For BOTH Arabs and Jews.  Sorting it out is a mess, but Israel's court system appears to me to be fair and if anything slightly discriminatory towards Israeli Jews rather than Israeli Arabs. If you have specific examples you want to discuss, I'd be glad to go into more detail.
> 
> Israeli Arabs, by definition, have not had ANY land loss in terms of sovereignty.  (And actually, Palestine has not experienced any actual "land loss" either since the territory is still disputed.)
> 
> I disagree with you that Arab Israelis see a society where they are discriminated against, despised and do not have the same rights.  Again, I'd be glad to discuss any specific cases with you, but I think you are conflating Arab Israelis with Arab Palestinian rights, especially in Area C.  Remember the Supreme Court has upheld the decision that there can be no such thing as Jew-only communities while there can be Arab-only communities.  Its affirmative action.
> 
> Yes, I don't disagree that there is discrimination (as there is everywhere in the world) but I also see Israel working to address that discrimination for all its citizens.
> 
> To my knowledge, the only political party banned in Israel was a Jewish one, but feel free to link me.
> 
> I did a LOT of research into the economic disparity between Israeli Arabs and Israeli Jews and if you correct for the very small number of working Arab women (a cultural thing and not a discrimination thing) and for the Bedouin peoples (again a cultural thing and not a discrimination thing) there is not much of a wage gap between Arab and Jewish Israelis.  And that wage gap can be largely attributed to education -- the more highly educated, the higher the wage.  Arabs tend to go to school for fewer years than Jews.  Why is that?  Is it a cultural thing or a discrimination thing?  Or something else at play?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> For example, this article is good ( The paradox of being an Arab member of Israel's Knesset )
Click to expand...

I'm not surprised that you like revelations of a well known hater of Israel and supporter of terrorists.


----------



## admonit

Shusha said:


> Remember, we are not discussing whether or not there is discrimination (we both agree there clearly is) - - we are discussing whether or not there is an institutionalized and systematic deliberate oppression of Arab citizens of Israel.


May be it would be better to move directly to discussion about apartheid in Israel?


----------



## Mindful

The sole legal distinction between Jewish and Arab citizens of Israel is that the latter are not _required_ to serve in the Israeli army. This was to spare Arab citizens the need to take up arms against their brethren. Nevertheless, many Arabs have volunteered for military duty and the Druze and Circassian communities are subject to the draft.

From JVL.


----------



## Humanity

Shusha said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I understand the complexities, because they exist in our schools, but our schools are funded heavily through local taxes, so it is easy to see why funding is so variable.
> 
> But let’s look at the one example in Jerusalem.  That did not look good imo.  What are your thoughts there?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My thoughts thus far are that the claim "Arab schools receive half the funding of Jewish schools" has not been demonstrated, let alone the claim that the cause of the funding discrepancy is an institutionalized, systematic, deliberate discrimination against Arab Israelis.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And if the discussion is concerning "East Jerusalem" there are all sorts of confounding factors to consider, not the least of which is jurisdiction.  Public schools, private schools, religious schools, secular schools, Israeli funding, Palestinian funding, Israeli curriculum, Palestinian curriculum.
> 
> And are we accepting the annexation of "East Jerusalem" by Israel?  Or are we denying it?  Is Israel responsible for the education of non-Israeli citizens in "East Jerusalem" because they annexed it and it is now part of Israel?  Or are we claiming that Israel has no responsibility for education of non-Israeli citizens in "East Jerusalem" because its not Israel's territory.  Can't have it both ways.
Click to expand...


No, you can't have it both ways!

Israel declares Jerusalem as its undivided capital so there is no "East Jerusalem" in the way you are trying to use the term!

Seems a rather lame argument from you on this one. IF Israel considers Jerusalem as its undivided capital then of course it has responsibilities in "East Jerusalem" equal to its responsibilities in "West Jerusalem".


----------



## Humanity

Mindful said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> we are not discussing whether or not there is discrimination (we both agree there clearly is)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> End of argument then eh!
> 
> Yet, you continue to defend Israels discrimination?
> 
> Hmmm
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So, you're a zealot. Hmmm.
Click to expand...


How do you work that out?


----------



## Mindful

Shusha said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Olde Europe said:
> 
> 
> 
> The point was different laws governing different sects / ethnic groups.  No doubt, nations do religious / ethnic bigotry.  If I had a choice, I'd opt for less thereof.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That is the BASIS for our current global system of nations -- the idea that ethnic groups can self-determine and create a nationality and have sovereignty.  That is the basis for the formation of probably every new country in the past 100 years.  And yet it doesn't cause a stir in the world until the Jewish people do it.  Why is that, do you think?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I wonder how many of those "new" countries created in the last 100 years illegally occupy territory and suppress and blockade their neighbours?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Oh. And btw, Israel does not illegally occupy territory. The other three mentioned (Turkey, Morocco and Indonesia do).
Click to expand...


Northern Cyprus is not recognised by any country in the world, except Turkey.

Yet still we drive back and forth  between north and south.


----------



## Mindful

Humanity said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> we are not discussing whether or not there is discrimination (we both agree there clearly is)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> End of argument then eh!
> 
> Yet, you continue to defend Israels discrimination?
> 
> Hmmm
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So, you're a zealot. Hmmm.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How do you work that out?
Click to expand...


Don't need to work it out. It's self evident.


----------



## Mindful

Humanity said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I understand the complexities, because they exist in our schools, but our schools are funded heavily through local taxes, so it is easy to see why funding is so variable.
> 
> But let’s look at the one example in Jerusalem.  That did not look good imo.  What are your thoughts there?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My thoughts thus far are that the claim "Arab schools receive half the funding of Jewish schools" has not been demonstrated, let alone the claim that the cause of the funding discrepancy is an institutionalized, systematic, deliberate discrimination against Arab Israelis.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And if the discussion is concerning "East Jerusalem" there are all sorts of confounding factors to consider, not the least of which is jurisdiction.  Public schools, private schools, religious schools, secular schools, Israeli funding, Palestinian funding, Israeli curriculum, Palestinian curriculum.
> 
> And are we accepting the annexation of "East Jerusalem" by Israel?  Or are we denying it?  Is Israel responsible for the education of non-Israeli citizens in "East Jerusalem" because they annexed it and it is now part of Israel?  Or are we claiming that Israel has no responsibility for education of non-Israeli citizens in "East Jerusalem" because its not Israel's territory.  Can't have it both ways.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No, you can't have it both ways!
> 
> Israel declares Jerusalem as its undivided capital so there is no "East Jerusalem" in the way you are trying to use the term!
> 
> Seems a rather lame argument from you on this one. IF Israel considers Jerusalem as its undivided capital then of course it has responsibilities in "East Jerusalem" equal to its responsibilities in "West Jerusalem".
Click to expand...


East and West London also  have municipal problems.

Ever driven through Peckham?


----------



## fncceo

East and West LA have their issues as well...


----------



## Mindful

fncceo said:


> East and West LA have their issues as well...




Ah but.....Jerusalem is different, you see.


----------



## fncceo

Mindful said:


> fncceo said:
> 
> 
> 
> East and West LA have their issues as well...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ah but.....Jerusalem is different, you see.
Click to expand...


Yea, no decent Mexican food in Jerusalem.


----------



## Mindful

fncceo said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> fncceo said:
> 
> 
> 
> East and West LA have their issues as well...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ah but.....Jerusalem is different, you see.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yea, no decent Mexican food in Jerusalem.
Click to expand...


lol.

Nor in some parts of USA either.


----------



## Humanity

Mindful said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> we are not discussing whether or not there is discrimination (we both agree there clearly is)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> End of argument then eh!
> 
> Yet, you continue to defend Israels discrimination?
> 
> Hmmm
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So, you're a zealot. Hmmm.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How do you work that out?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Don't need to work it out. It's self evident.
Click to expand...


So I am a member of an ancient Jewish sect aiming at a world Jewish theocracy?


----------



## Humanity

Mindful said:


> Northern Cyprus is not recognised by any country in the world, except Turkey.



Correct. And...?

Is that like Israel is the only country that thinks illegal occupation by Israel is acceptable?


----------



## Mindful

Humanity said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> we are not discussing whether or not there is discrimination (we both agree there clearly is)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> End of argument then eh!
> 
> Yet, you continue to defend Israels discrimination?
> 
> Hmmm
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So, you're a zealot. Hmmm.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How do you work that out?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Don't need to work it out. It's self evident.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So I am a member of an ancient Jewish sect aiming at a world Jewish theocracy?
Click to expand...


How should I know?


----------



## Mindful

Humanity said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> Northern Cyprus is not recognised by any country in the world, except Turkey.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Correct. And...?
> 
> Is that like Israel is the only country that thinks illegal occupation by Israel is acceptable?
Click to expand...


I'm not interested in false attribution.


----------



## Humanity

Mindful said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> End of argument then eh!
> 
> Yet, you continue to defend Israels discrimination?
> 
> Hmmm
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So, you're a zealot. Hmmm.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How do you work that out?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Don't need to work it out. It's self evident.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So I am a member of an ancient Jewish sect aiming at a world Jewish theocracy?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How should I know?
Click to expand...


Thought you said it was "self evident"? 

Do you know your own name? Just asking!


----------



## Humanity

Mindful said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> Northern Cyprus is not recognised by any country in the world, except Turkey.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Correct. And...?
> 
> Is that like Israel is the only country that thinks illegal occupation by Israel is acceptable?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm not interested in false attribution.
Click to expand...


Mug


----------



## Mindful

Humanity said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> So, you're a zealot. Hmmm.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How do you work that out?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Don't need to work it out. It's self evident.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So I am a member of an ancient Jewish sect aiming at a world Jewish theocracy?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How should I know?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Thought you said it was "self evident"?
> 
> Do you know your own name? Just asking!
Click to expand...


No you're not. You're being a jerk.


----------



## Mindful

Just who the modern Palestinians are is a matter of conjecture.

Palestinian Arabs claim various lines of descent some of which seem more legend than fact. The Nusseibeh family claim to have descened from the Arab invaders under Omar (about 640). The Dajani claim descent from an Arabian knight, The Husseini family seem to be associated with with Ottoman invaders (1510s). The Nashashibi family are apparently descended from Bowmen of Salah Eddin. Izzedin Al Qassam, the Palestinian national hero, was born in Syria.


Histclo.com


----------



## Humanity

Mindful said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> How do you work that out?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Don't need to work it out. It's self evident.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So I am a member of an ancient Jewish sect aiming at a world Jewish theocracy?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How should I know?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Thought you said it was "self evident"?
> 
> Do you know your own name? Just asking!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No you're not. You're being a jerk.
Click to expand...


And you are being a moron!


----------



## Humanity

Mindful said:


> Just who the modern Palestinians are is a matter of conjecture.



Rather like modern Jews.


----------



## Mindful

Humanity said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> Just who the modern Palestinians are is a matter of conjecture.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rather like Jews.
Click to expand...


Rather not.


----------



## Humanity

Mindful said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> Just who the modern Palestinians are is a matter of conjecture.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rather like Jews.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Rather not.
Click to expand...


Oh? How so "not"?


----------



## RoccoR

RE:  Now it's a basic law: The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people
※→  Humanity,  et al,

Just so I understand the true nature of your allegation.  Teach me!

Article 22(2)  Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court
PART 3.  GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF CRIMINAL LAW
*Nullum crimen sine lege
*
The definition of a crime shall be strictly construed and shall not be extended by
analogy. In case of ambiguity, the definition shall be interpreted in favour of the
person being investigated, prosecuted or convicted.​


Humanity said:


> Is that like Israel is the only country that thinks illegal occupation by Israel is acceptable?


*(QUESTION)*

Just so I am clear.  

•  Exactly what international law specifically covers the distinction between an "Illegal Occupation" and a "Legal Occupation?"  
■  What are the characteristics of a "Legal Occupation?"
■  What are the characteristics of a "Illegal Occupation?"​
*(COMMENT)*

There is either an "Occupation" or there is "No Occupation" under Article 43 of the Hague Regulation.

What we should be looking at is the way in which the Hostile Arab Palestinians fit Article 19 - 
*Prohibiting Incitement to Discrimination, Hostility or Violence*:

The recommendations to be used for interpreting and implementing those international obligations which prohibit all advocacy that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence (“incitement” or “incitement to hatred”), as mandated by Article 20(2) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (“ICCPR”).  _(Any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence shall be prohibited by law. )_

Since I've already raised the issues in the Artilce20(2) in the last several months _(more than just several times)_, will I will dispense by saying that the Arab Palestinian people cannot provoke a confrontation and then claim that the Article 43 response is excessive.  

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> RE:  Now it's a basic law: The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people
> ※→  Humanity,  et al,
> 
> Just so I understand the true nature of your allegation.  Teach me!
> 
> Article 22(2)  Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court
> PART 3.  GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF CRIMINAL LAW
> *Nullum crimen sine lege
> *
> The definition of a crime shall be strictly construed and shall not be extended by
> analogy. In case of ambiguity, the definition shall be interpreted in favour of the
> person being investigated, prosecuted or convicted.​
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> Is that like Israel is the only country that thinks illegal occupation by Israel is acceptable?
> 
> 
> 
> *(QUESTION)*
> 
> Just so I am clear.
> 
> •  Exactly what international law specifically covers the distinction between an "Illegal Occupation" and a "Legal Occupation?"
> ■  What are the characteristics of a "Legal Occupation?"
> ■  What are the characteristics of a "Illegal Occupation?"​
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> There is either an "Occupation" or there is "No Occupation" under Article 43 of the Hague Regulation.
> 
> What we should be looking at is the way in which the Hostile Arab Palestinians fit Article 19 -
> *Prohibiting Incitement to Discrimination, Hostility or Violence*:
> 
> The recommendations to be used for interpreting and implementing those international obligations which prohibit all advocacy that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence (“incitement” or “incitement to hatred”), as mandated by Article 20(2) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (“ICCPR”).  _(Any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence shall be prohibited by law. )_
> 
> Since I've already raised the issues in the Artilce20(2) in the last several months _(more than just several times)_, will I will dispense by saying that the Arab Palestinian people cannot provoke a confrontation and then claim that the Article 43 response is excessive.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...

What Palestinian response to Israel's illegal activity is acceptable to you?


----------



## Shusha

Humanity said:


> No, you can't have it both ways!
> 
> Israel declares Jerusalem as its undivided capital so there is no "East Jerusalem" in the way you are trying to use the term!
> 
> Seems a rather lame argument from you on this one. IF Israel considers Jerusalem as its undivided capital then of course it has responsibilities in "East Jerusalem" equal to its responsibilities in "West Jerusalem".



I'm no hypocrite.  I agree that Israel should annex all of Jerusalem.  And yes, that means it has equal responsibilities to all its citizens and residents.  That absolutely means Israeli funding, and also Israeli curriculum and Israeli teachers and Israeli buildings.  Actually, I think it should go one step further -- all the resident non-citizens of Jerusalem should be required to declare citizenship.  If they declare loyalty to Israel, they get citizenship and they stay.  If they declare Palestinian citizenship they are given some NIS in compensation and deported to Palestine.  If they turn terrorist they are deported immediately with no compensation.  

Now, here's problem.  You, and others, will declare that is stealing land, destroying Palestinian culture, discrimination, etc.


----------



## admonit

Mindful said:


> The sole legal distinction between Jewish and Arab citizens of Israel is that the latter are not _required_ to serve in the Israeli army. *This was to spare Arab citizens the need to take up arms against their brethren*. Nevertheless, many Arabs have volunteered for military duty and the Druze and Circassian communities are subject to the draft.
> 
> From JVL.


There are a lot of non combat positions in IDF. There is also alternative national service, which  Arabs ignore too.


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> It is true that all Israelis born in that territory (most of them) have rights in that territory, as do all Palestinians. That is the problem that has to be resolved.



The resolution is simple.  It is the same resolution applied to Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia and USSR and Korea and Sudan and the Ottoman Empire.  It is the same resolution which has already been applied to Palestine.


----------



## Shusha

Humanity said:


> End of argument then eh!
> 
> Yet, you continue to defend Israels discrimination?
> 
> Hmmm



There is social discrimination in Israel, just as there is in nearly every place in the world.  I have NEVER denied that.  

This is not at all the same thing as institutionalized, government-endorsed discrimination.  In fact, the opposite is true in Israel.  Israel's court system works very hard to draw a balanced, even approach to all its citizens -- even to the point of discriminating against Jews.


----------



## RoccoR

RE:  Now it's a basic law: The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people
※→  Humanity,  et al,

Oh, this is something you need to rethink.  This improper question that has no answer.



P F Tinmore said:


> What Palestinian response to Israel's illegal activity is acceptable to you?


*(COMMENT)*

Illegal Activity is assessed in terms of its impact and its magnitude.  All codified true violations have penalties across the legal range of prosecution that vary on the severity of the crime.

There is no absolute law and the is no one system of law.  Clearly, it is legal in the mind of many Arab Palestinians kill with the direct intent to target innocent civilians.  Whereas that is totally illegal in the eyes of the Israeli.

*(ANSWER)*

The acceptable response encourages the development of international law and of relations among States, in promoting the rule of law among nations and particularly the universal application of the principles embodied in the Charter.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Coyote

admonit said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> The fear is there because that is not how they see events unfolding and there is some legitimacy in those fears.  Land loss and confiscations through absentee landowner laws look VERY DIFFERENT to an Arab than to a Jew.  Where as Israeli Jews are seeing a society where Arab citizens have the same “rights” as Jews, Arabs see a society where they are discriminated against, despised, do not have the same land rights.   They have seen some of their political parties banned, make a fraction of the income their Jewish counterparts do and receive a fraction of the investment in their communities but by the Israeli government.  Are the fears really irrational?  I don’t think so.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think maybe you are in some respects conflating Arab Palestinians and Arab Israelis.  We are speaking here strictly of Arab Israeli citizens.
> 
> Confiscations happened to BOTH Arabs and Jews.  Internally displaced absentee landowners should be restored where possible, and compensated where not.  For BOTH Arabs and Jews.  Sorting it out is a mess, but Israel's court system appears to me to be fair and if anything slightly discriminatory towards Israeli Jews rather than Israeli Arabs. If you have specific examples you want to discuss, I'd be glad to go into more detail.
> 
> Israeli Arabs, by definition, have not had ANY land loss in terms of sovereignty.  (And actually, Palestine has not experienced any actual "land loss" either since the territory is still disputed.)
> 
> I disagree with you that Arab Israelis see a society where they are discriminated against, despised and do not have the same rights.  Again, I'd be glad to discuss any specific cases with you, but I think you are conflating Arab Israelis with Arab Palestinian rights, especially in Area C.  Remember the Supreme Court has upheld the decision that there can be no such thing as Jew-only communities while there can be Arab-only communities.  Its affirmative action.
> 
> Yes, I don't disagree that there is discrimination (as there is everywhere in the world) but I also see Israel working to address that discrimination for all its citizens.
> 
> To my knowledge, the only political party banned in Israel was a Jewish one, but feel free to link me.
> 
> I did a LOT of research into the economic disparity between Israeli Arabs and Israeli Jews and if you correct for the very small number of working Arab women (a cultural thing and not a discrimination thing) and for the Bedouin peoples (again a cultural thing and not a discrimination thing) there is not much of a wage gap between Arab and Jewish Israelis.  And that wage gap can be largely attributed to education -- the more highly educated, the higher the wage.  Arabs tend to go to school for fewer years than Jews.  Why is that?  Is it a cultural thing or a discrimination thing?  Or something else at play?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> For example, this article is good ( The paradox of being an Arab member of Israel's Knesset )
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I'm not surprised that you like revelations of a well known hater of Israel and supporter of terrorists.
Click to expand...

I am not surprised you resort to personal attacks. Fortunately there are others here far more capable of quality discussion.


----------



## Dogmaphobe

Coyote said:


> admonit said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> The fear is there because that is not how they see events unfolding and there is some legitimacy in those fears.  Land loss and confiscations through absentee landowner laws look VERY DIFFERENT to an Arab than to a Jew.  Where as Israeli Jews are seeing a society where Arab citizens have the same “rights” as Jews, Arabs see a society where they are discriminated against, despised, do not have the same land rights.   They have seen some of their political parties banned, make a fraction of the income their Jewish counterparts do and receive a fraction of the investment in their communities but by the Israeli government.  Are the fears really irrational?  I don’t think so.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think maybe you are in some respects conflating Arab Palestinians and Arab Israelis.  We are speaking here strictly of Arab Israeli citizens.
> 
> Confiscations happened to BOTH Arabs and Jews.  Internally displaced absentee landowners should be restored where possible, and compensated where not.  For BOTH Arabs and Jews.  Sorting it out is a mess, but Israel's court system appears to me to be fair and if anything slightly discriminatory towards Israeli Jews rather than Israeli Arabs. If you have specific examples you want to discuss, I'd be glad to go into more detail.
> 
> Israeli Arabs, by definition, have not had ANY land loss in terms of sovereignty.  (And actually, Palestine has not experienced any actual "land loss" either since the territory is still disputed.)
> 
> I disagree with you that Arab Israelis see a society where they are discriminated against, despised and do not have the same rights.  Again, I'd be glad to discuss any specific cases with you, but I think you are conflating Arab Israelis with Arab Palestinian rights, especially in Area C.  Remember the Supreme Court has upheld the decision that there can be no such thing as Jew-only communities while there can be Arab-only communities.  Its affirmative action.
> 
> Yes, I don't disagree that there is discrimination (as there is everywhere in the world) but I also see Israel working to address that discrimination for all its citizens.
> 
> To my knowledge, the only political party banned in Israel was a Jewish one, but feel free to link me.
> 
> I did a LOT of research into the economic disparity between Israeli Arabs and Israeli Jews and if you correct for the very small number of working Arab women (a cultural thing and not a discrimination thing) and for the Bedouin peoples (again a cultural thing and not a discrimination thing) there is not much of a wage gap between Arab and Jewish Israelis.  And that wage gap can be largely attributed to education -- the more highly educated, the higher the wage.  Arabs tend to go to school for fewer years than Jews.  Why is that?  Is it a cultural thing or a discrimination thing?  Or something else at play?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> For example, this article is good ( The paradox of being an Arab member of Israel's Knesset )
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I'm not surprised that you like revelations of a well known hater of Israel and supporter of terrorists.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I am not surprised you resort to personal attacks. Fortunately there are others here far more capable of quality discussion.
Click to expand...

Telling the truth is not an attack.


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I understand the complexities, because they exist in our schools, but our schools are funded heavily through local taxes, so it is easy to see why funding is so variable.
> 
> But let’s look at the one example in Jerusalem.  That did not look good imo.  What are your thoughts there?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My thoughts thus far are that the claim "Arab schools receive half the funding of Jewish schools" has not been demonstrated, let alone the claim that the cause of the funding discrepancy is an institutionalized, systematic, deliberate discrimination against Arab Israelis.
Click to expand...


Here is another article about Jerusalem: Jerusalem's Arab students 'receive less funding than Jewish counterparts'

An analysis of the budget reveals that some schools in East Jerusalem, which is occupied by* Israel, are not even receiving the funds allocated by the municipality.*

An instance of the inequality that exists between eastern and western Jerusalem schools may be seen in a comparison of the Beith Hinuch High School and the Ras al-Amud high school.

As municipal schools, *both instutions receive their budgets from the municipality and Israel's Education Ministry. Despite this, West Jerusalem's Beith Hinuch school received an allocation of 16.3 million shekels ($4.3 million) for 2016, while the Arab Ras al-Amud school will get only 2.9 million shekels ($766,993) for the same year. Both schools have roughly the same number of students in attendance.*

Adding to the unbalanced scales is the fact that 70.8 percent of teaching positions in Beit Hinuch are approved, comparing to only 21.7 percent from Ras al-Amud.

According to Israeli daily _Haaretz, _"*a comparison of every clause in the budget indicates that the funding for the western Jerusalem school is immeasurably higher than that of its East Jerusalem counterpart".*

These findings have been rejected by the municipality, who said that schools cannot be compared.

These findings have been rejected by the municipality, who said that schools cannot be compared.

Just like you can't compare _Haaretz_ to _Israel Hayom_, you can't compare different schools of different sizes and different characteristics, with different numbers of teachers and sources of funding found in other clauses," the municipality said, drawing a parallel between a comparison of two Israeli newspapers.

*It was also claimed by the city that extra money is being spent on renovations in East Jerusalem. The budget, however, shows that the Arab sector receives less funding for renovations than any of the three sectors, which are identified as 'General', 'ultra-Orthodox' and 'Arab'. *

For 2016, Arab schools received eight million shekels [$2.1 million] for renovations, paling in comparison to the 42 million shekels [$11.1 million] allocated.  for secular and national religious schools.

Furthermore, an analysis of funds transferred by the Education Ministry to Arab schools shows that amounts allocated are not received in full. To contrast, schools in West Jerusalem were found to have spent their ministry budgets and received additional funding from the municipality.

According to a study conducted by Jerusalem councillor Laura Wharton, the discrimination mentioned above is not isolated. Wharton's study revealed that 11 of 17 high schools in East Jerusalem received less funds, often by millions, than had been allocated to them. The opposite was true for West Jerusalem, where all but one school received additional support.


----------



## Coyote

admonit said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> admonit said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Olde Europe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I thought the article  interesting, though the paragraph at the end tainted it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No it did not.  It merely found the appropriate expressions for the situation and for the ways in which this (ultra-) right government and its shills defend, or distract from, the sordid state of affairs.
> 
> Jews have the right of "return", even if they didn't set foot anywhere near what is now Israel, and neither did 50 generations of their forebears.  Arabs do not have that right, not even those still carrying around the keys to their house, which the Jews blew up or bulldozed 70 years ago.  Everyone with the most superficial knowledge about Israel knows this, and none posting on this thread belongs into that category.
> 
> In that light:
> 
> "There are absolutely no 'rights' in Israel arising from being Jewish as opposed to being Arab."​
> Followed by:
> 
> "Another useful idiot."​
> 
> Quite.
> 
> As much as I admire your posting style - I am not sure treating hasbara peddlers as serious interlocutors isn't a disservice to debate.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Also mind my actual words. There are no rights IN Israel which advantage Jews over Arabs. All are equal in law.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Actually there is inequality. Arabs don't have to serve 3 years in the army and risk their lives fighting for their country.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And the price they pay for not serving is they are locked out of a lot of jobs and promotions that IDF service confers.  Jews don’t have to serve either, if they are Hasidic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So, Israeli Arabs, because they don't serve in the army, again are victims? It's ridiculous.
> Yes, ultra-orthodox Jews are not obliged to serve in the army. But, yet, thouzands of them are serving, including in battle units. And the Israeli society doesn't consider the law honest and tries to change the law. The High Court declared it unconstitutional and currently it is reconsidered.
> It's noteworthy though, that you recall ultra religious Jews, when you need to justify Israeli Arabs regarding military service, but you forget about them while accusing Israel in discrimination of Arab citizens.
Click to expand...

I am not exactly sure what you are going on about.


----------



## Coyote

Mindful said:


> fncceo said:
> 
> 
> 
> East and West LA have their issues as well...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ah but.....Jerusalem is different, you see.
Click to expand...

It is.  Pretending it isn’t is just silly.


----------



## Coyote

Mindful said:


> The sole legal distinction between Jewish and Arab citizens of Israel is that the latter are not _required_ to serve in the Israeli army. This was to spare Arab citizens the need to take up arms against their brethren. Nevertheless, many Arabs have volunteered for military duty and the Druze and Circassian communities are subject to the draft.
> 
> From JVL.


That is good to know...that sole distinction.  Can Arab Israeli’s live and in build in all the same places accessible to Jews?


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> RE:  Now it's a basic law: The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people
> ※→  Humanity,  et al,
> 
> Oh, this is something you need to rethink.  This improper question that has no answer.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> What Palestinian response to Israel's illegal activity is acceptable to you?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Illegal Activity is assessed in terms of its impact and its magnitude.  All codified true violations have penalties across the legal range of prosecution that vary on the severity of the crime.
> 
> There is no absolute law and the is no one system of law.  Clearly, it is legal in the mind of many Arab Palestinians kill with the direct intent to target innocent civilians.  Whereas that is totally illegal in the eyes of the Israeli.
> 
> *(ANSWER)*
> 
> The acceptable response encourages the development of international law and of relations among States, in promoting the rule of law among nations and particularly the universal application of the principles embodied in the Charter.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...

WTF.


----------



## member

RoccoR said:


> RE:  Now it's a basic law: The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people
> ※→  Humanity,  et al,
> 
> Oh, this is something you need to rethink.  This improper question that has no answer.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> What Palestinian response to Israel's illegal activity is acceptable to you?
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Illegal Activity is assessed in terms of its impact and its magnitude.  All codified true violations have penalties across the legal range of prosecution that vary on the severity of the crime.
> 
> There is no absolute law and the is no one system of law.  Clearly, it is legal in the mind of many Arab Palestinians kill with the direct intent to target innocent civilians.  Whereas that is totally illegal in the eyes of the Israeli.
> 
> *(ANSWER)*
> 
> The acceptable response encourages the development of international law and of relations among States, in promoting the rule of law among nations and particularly the universal application of the principles embodied in the Charter.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...




 *"Clearly, it is legal in the mind of many Arab Palestinians kill with the direct intent to target innocent civilians. Whereas that is totally illegal in the eyes of the Israeli."*


_"it is legal in the mind of many Arab Palestinians kill with the direct intent to target innocent civilians"_

........... those pesky 

  terrorists!


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I understand the complexities, because they exist in our schools, but our schools are funded heavily through local taxes, so it is easy to see why funding is so variable.
> 
> But let’s look at the one example in Jerusalem.  That did not look good imo.  What are your thoughts there?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My thoughts thus far are that the claim "Arab schools receive half the funding of Jewish schools" has not been demonstrated, let alone the claim that the cause of the funding discrepancy is an institutionalized, systematic, deliberate discrimination against Arab Israelis.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Here is another article about Jerusalem: Jerusalem's Arab students 'receive less funding than Jewish counterparts'
> 
> An analysis of the budget reveals that some schools in East Jerusalem, which is occupied by* Israel, are not even receiving the funds allocated by the municipality.*
> 
> An instance of the inequality that exists between eastern and western Jerusalem schools may be seen in a comparison of the Beith Hinuch High School and the Ras al-Amud high school.
> 
> As municipal schools, *both instutions receive their budgets from the municipality and Israel's Education Ministry. Despite this, West Jerusalem's Beith Hinuch school received an allocation of 16.3 million shekels ($4.3 million) for 2016, while the Arab Ras al-Amud school will get only 2.9 million shekels ($766,993) for the same year. Both schools have roughly the same number of students in attendance.*
> 
> Adding to the unbalanced scales is the fact that 70.8 percent of teaching positions in Beit Hinuch are approved, comparing to only 21.7 percent from Ras al-Amud.
> 
> According to Israeli daily _Haaretz, _"*a comparison of every clause in the budget indicates that the funding for the western Jerusalem school is immeasurably higher than that of its East Jerusalem counterpart".*
> 
> These findings have been rejected by the municipality, who said that schools cannot be compared.
> 
> These findings have been rejected by the municipality, who said that schools cannot be compared.
> 
> Just like you can't compare _Haaretz_ to _Israel Hayom_, you can't compare different schools of different sizes and different characteristics, with different numbers of teachers and sources of funding found in other clauses," the municipality said, drawing a parallel between a comparison of two Israeli newspapers.
> 
> *It was also claimed by the city that extra money is being spent on renovations in East Jerusalem. The budget, however, shows that the Arab sector receives less funding for renovations than any of the three sectors, which are identified as 'General', 'ultra-Orthodox' and 'Arab'. *
> 
> For 2016, Arab schools received eight million shekels [$2.1 million] for renovations, paling in comparison to the 42 million shekels [$11.1 million] allocated.  for secular and national religious schools.
> 
> Furthermore, an analysis of funds transferred by the Education Ministry to Arab schools shows that amounts allocated are not received in full. To contrast, schools in West Jerusalem were found to have spent their ministry budgets and received additional funding from the municipality.
> 
> According to a study conducted by Jerusalem councillor Laura Wharton, the discrimination mentioned above is not isolated. Wharton's study revealed that 11 of 17 high schools in East Jerusalem received less funds, often by millions, than had been allocated to them. The opposite was true for West Jerusalem, where all but one school received additional support.
Click to expand...



Those articles all have the same source article. I'm trying to find the basis for that article. The actual study and the comments from the municipality. There is more here than meets the eye. I just haven't found it yet. But I'm always suspicious of a widely circulated article all from the same source where the data isn't available. It just sounds like Israel-bashing.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote

Found an article which says that 41% of the schools in East Jerusalem are "unofficial schools" and thus only partly funded by the Municipality of Jerusalem.  It is my understanding also that the PA provides funding for Arab schools in East Jerusalem.  I'm off to teach TKD.  I'll do some more digging and be back later.

Edited to add:  Oh, and btw, these are not Arab Israelis, are they?


----------



## Mindful

Coyote said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> The sole legal distinction between Jewish and Arab citizens of Israel is that the latter are not _required_ to serve in the Israeli army. This was to spare Arab citizens the need to take up arms against their brethren. Nevertheless, many Arabs have volunteered for military duty and the Druze and Circassian communities are subject to the draft.
> 
> From JVL.
> 
> 
> 
> That is good to know...that sole distinction.  Can Arab Israeli’s live and in build in all the same places accessible to Jews?
Click to expand...


When my daughter lived in Ramat Gan, the next door neighbours were Arabs.


----------



## Olde Europe

Shusha said:


> That is the BASIS for our current global system of nations -- the idea that ethnic groups can self-determine and create a nationality and have sovereignty.  That is the basis for the formation of probably every new country in the past 100 years.  And yet it doesn't cause a stir in the world until the Jewish people do it.  Why is that, do you think?



Looking back, I just saw you agreed with that disingenuous nonsense above, *Coyote*.

Let's have a look, shall we?  How is the above a genuine reply to what I said?  Here:



Olde Europe said:


> The point was different laws governing different sects / ethnic groups.  No doubt, nations do religious / ethnic bigotry.  If I had a choice, I'd opt for less thereof.



For, it is not.  Shusha is willfully confusing quite different things, namely, national self-determination and segregation / apartheid.

Second, no, racial / ethnic self-determination is not the "BASIS for our current global system of nations", much as racists and nationalists try to make it so.

Third, in order to demonstrate the above, consider: 

"The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of South Africa is unique to White South Africans."

Acceptable?  How about this:

"The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Germany is unique to Aryan Germans."

Acceptable?  Obviously neither is.  Therefore, neither is this: "1. C. The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Israel is unique to the Jewish people."

So, "it doesn't cause a stir in the world until the Jewish people do it" is an obvious falsehood, and quite likely a lie with the purpose of deceiving about the Basic Law officially declaring Israel an apartheid state.  Obviously, it caused quite a stir when others did it.  There is no direct line between national self-determination and creating a privileged ethnic group within a nation with the objective of discriminating against all others.  Confusing the two, and trying to make it appear as if everybody did it, is hasbara, plain and simple.

Shusha's posting didn't surprise me at all, given his/her propensities.  It'd be disappointing if you actually, after thorough consideration, agreed with that.


----------



## Mindful

Olde Europe said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> That is the BASIS for our current global system of nations -- the idea that ethnic groups can self-determine and create a nationality and have sovereignty.  That is the basis for the formation of probably every new country in the past 100 years.  And yet it doesn't cause a stir in the world until the Jewish people do it.  Why is that, do you think?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Looking back, I just saw you agreed with that disingenuous nonsense above, *Coyote*.
> 
> Let's have a look, shall we?  How is the above a genuine reply to what I said?  Here:
> 
> 
> 
> Olde Europe said:
> 
> 
> 
> The point was different laws governing different sects / ethnic groups.  No doubt, nations do religious / ethnic bigotry.  If I had a choice, I'd opt for less thereof.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> For, it is not.  Shusha is willfully confusing quite different things, namely, national self-determination and segregation / apartheid.
> 
> Second, no, racial / ethnic self-determination is not the "BASIS for our current global system of nations", much as racists and nationalists try to make it so.
> 
> Third, in order to demonstrate the above, consider:
> 
> "The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of South Africa is unique to White South Africans."
> 
> Acceptable?  How about this:
> 
> "The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Germany is unique to Aryan Germans."
> 
> Acceptable?  Obviously neither is.  Therefore, neither is this: "1. C. The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Israel is unique to the Jewish people."
> 
> So, "it doesn't cause a stir in the world until the Jewish people do it" is an obvious falsehood, and quite likely a lie with the purpose of deceiving about the Basic Law officially declaring Israel an apartheid state.  Obviously, it caused quite a stir when others did it.  There is no direct line between national self-determination and creating a privileged ethnic group within a nation with the objective of discriminating against all others.  Confusing the two, and trying to make it appear as if everybody did it, is hasbara, plain and simple.
> 
> Shusha's posting didn't surprise me at all, given his/her propensities.  It'd be disappointing if you actually, after thorough consideration, agreed with that.
Click to expand...


Who do you think you are?

All this froth is superficial and mendacious.

Cut to the chase, we all know what the 'real reason' is.


----------



## Humanity

Shusha said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, you can't have it both ways!
> 
> Israel declares Jerusalem as its undivided capital so there is no "East Jerusalem" in the way you are trying to use the term!
> 
> Seems a rather lame argument from you on this one. IF Israel considers Jerusalem as its undivided capital then of course it has responsibilities in "East Jerusalem" equal to its responsibilities in "West Jerusalem".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm no hypocrite.  I agree that Israel should annex all of Jerusalem.  And yes, that means it has equal responsibilities to all its citizens and residents.  That absolutely means Israeli funding, and also Israeli curriculum and Israeli teachers and Israeli buildings.  Actually, I think it should go one step further -- all the resident non-citizens of Jerusalem should be required to declare citizenship.  If they declare loyalty to Israel, they get citizenship and they stay.  If they declare Palestinian citizenship they are given some NIS in compensation and deported to Palestine.  If they turn terrorist they are deported immediately with no compensation.
> 
> Now, here's problem.  You, and others, will declare that is stealing land, destroying Palestinian culture, discrimination, etc.
Click to expand...


Well, I don't agree that Israel should annex all of Jerusalem.

"declare loyalty to Israel" or get deported?

Well, that would be an interesting move. How many countries have a law like that?


----------



## Mindful

Humanity said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, you can't have it both ways!
> 
> Israel declares Jerusalem as its undivided capital so there is no "East Jerusalem" in the way you are trying to use the term!
> 
> Seems a rather lame argument from you on this one. IF Israel considers Jerusalem as its undivided capital then of course it has responsibilities in "East Jerusalem" equal to its responsibilities in "West Jerusalem".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm no hypocrite.  I agree that Israel should annex all of Jerusalem.  And yes, that means it has equal responsibilities to all its citizens and residents.  That absolutely means Israeli funding, and also Israeli curriculum and Israeli teachers and Israeli buildings.  Actually, I think it should go one step further -- all the resident non-citizens of Jerusalem should be required to declare citizenship.  If they declare loyalty to Israel, they get citizenship and they stay.  If they declare Palestinian citizenship they are given some NIS in compensation and deported to Palestine.  If they turn terrorist they are deported immediately with no compensation.
> 
> Now, here's problem.  You, and others, will declare that is stealing land, destroying Palestinian culture, discrimination, etc.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well, I don't agree that Israel should annex all of Jerusalem.
> 
> "declare loyalty to Israel" or get deported?
> 
> Well, that would be an interesting move. How many countries have a law like that?
Click to expand...


Who are you to tell Israel what it should do?


----------



## Humanity

Shusha said:


> Israel's court system works very hard to draw a balanced, even approach to all its citizens -- even to the point of discriminating against Jews.



Does it?

Israeli Court Promotes Discrimination against Arabs, Deprives them of Public Lands


----------



## Humanity

Mindful said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, you can't have it both ways!
> 
> Israel declares Jerusalem as its undivided capital so there is no "East Jerusalem" in the way you are trying to use the term!
> 
> Seems a rather lame argument from you on this one. IF Israel considers Jerusalem as its undivided capital then of course it has responsibilities in "East Jerusalem" equal to its responsibilities in "West Jerusalem".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm no hypocrite.  I agree that Israel should annex all of Jerusalem.  And yes, that means it has equal responsibilities to all its citizens and residents.  That absolutely means Israeli funding, and also Israeli curriculum and Israeli teachers and Israeli buildings.  Actually, I think it should go one step further -- all the resident non-citizens of Jerusalem should be required to declare citizenship.  If they declare loyalty to Israel, they get citizenship and they stay.  If they declare Palestinian citizenship they are given some NIS in compensation and deported to Palestine.  If they turn terrorist they are deported immediately with no compensation.
> 
> Now, here's problem.  You, and others, will declare that is stealing land, destroying Palestinian culture, discrimination, etc.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well, I don't agree that Israel should annex all of Jerusalem.
> 
> "declare loyalty to Israel" or get deported?
> 
> Well, that would be an interesting move. How many countries have a law like that?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Who are you to tell Israel what it should do?
Click to expand...


Oh? Where did I tell Israel to do anything?

And who are you to question me?


----------



## Mindful

Humanity said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, you can't have it both ways!
> 
> Israel declares Jerusalem as its undivided capital so there is no "East Jerusalem" in the way you are trying to use the term!
> 
> Seems a rather lame argument from you on this one. IF Israel considers Jerusalem as its undivided capital then of course it has responsibilities in "East Jerusalem" equal to its responsibilities in "West Jerusalem".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm no hypocrite.  I agree that Israel should annex all of Jerusalem.  And yes, that means it has equal responsibilities to all its citizens and residents.  That absolutely means Israeli funding, and also Israeli curriculum and Israeli teachers and Israeli buildings.  Actually, I think it should go one step further -- all the resident non-citizens of Jerusalem should be required to declare citizenship.  If they declare loyalty to Israel, they get citizenship and they stay.  If they declare Palestinian citizenship they are given some NIS in compensation and deported to Palestine.  If they turn terrorist they are deported immediately with no compensation.
> 
> Now, here's problem.  You, and others, will declare that is stealing land, destroying Palestinian culture, discrimination, etc.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well, I don't agree that Israel should annex all of Jerusalem.
> 
> "declare loyalty to Israel" or get deported?
> 
> Well, that would be an interesting move. How many countries have a law like that?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Who are you to tell Israel what it should do?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh? Where did I tell Israel to do anything?
> 
> And who are you to question me?
Click to expand...


It's your passion.

I'm no one in particular.


----------



## ptbw forever

And yet the same people who embrace this are against white nationalism....in Europe.


----------



## ptbw forever

fncceo said:


> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> 
> Our German country is too small nowadays.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I would say not nearly small enough.
Click to expand...

Whatever evil you wish on Germans and Europeans will be inflicted on you.


----------



## Mindful

ptbw forever said:


> fncceo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> 
> Our German country is too small nowadays.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I would say not nearly small enough.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Whatever evil you wish on Germans and Europeans will be inflicted on you.
Click to expand...


What evil had you in mind?


----------



## ptbw forever

fncceo said:


> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> 
> Germany was a good home for Jews for centuries,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Except between 1096 and 1349 when wholesale slaughter of Jewish communities by German Crusaders was commonplace, Jews were blamed for spreading the Black Death, and Jews had their property confiscated.
> 
> Except for the fact that Jews couldn't be German citizens until 1805.
> 
> Except for the rampant Antisemitism that peaked in the Weimar Republic.
> 
> Except for the years 1933 to 1945.
> 
> Except for the fact that today, attacks on Jews in German are at an all time high since 1945.
> 
> Except for all that, it's been a great home for Jews.
Click to expand...

I wonder why they hated Jews so much.....

Maybe we should ask the Swedes after they have been terrorized by Spectre.

Maybe we should ask the Ukrainians who were told that the Holodomor is nothing compared to the Holocaust.

Every fucking leftist party that is destroying the West is run by Jews.


----------



## ptbw forever

Mindful said:


> ptbw forever said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> fncceo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> 
> Our German country is too small nowadays.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I would say not nearly small enough.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Whatever evil you wish on Germans and Europeans will be inflicted on you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What evil had you in mind?
Click to expand...

Ask fncceo.


----------



## Humanity

Mindful said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, you can't have it both ways!
> 
> Israel declares Jerusalem as its undivided capital so there is no "East Jerusalem" in the way you are trying to use the term!
> 
> Seems a rather lame argument from you on this one. IF Israel considers Jerusalem as its undivided capital then of course it has responsibilities in "East Jerusalem" equal to its responsibilities in "West Jerusalem".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm no hypocrite.  I agree that Israel should annex all of Jerusalem.  And yes, that means it has equal responsibilities to all its citizens and residents.  That absolutely means Israeli funding, and also Israeli curriculum and Israeli teachers and Israeli buildings.  Actually, I think it should go one step further -- all the resident non-citizens of Jerusalem should be required to declare citizenship.  If they declare loyalty to Israel, they get citizenship and they stay.  If they declare Palestinian citizenship they are given some NIS in compensation and deported to Palestine.  If they turn terrorist they are deported immediately with no compensation.
> 
> Now, here's problem.  You, and others, will declare that is stealing land, destroying Palestinian culture, discrimination, etc.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well, I don't agree that Israel should annex all of Jerusalem.
> 
> "declare loyalty to Israel" or get deported?
> 
> Well, that would be an interesting move. How many countries have a law like that?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Who are you to tell Israel what it should do?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh? Where did I tell Israel to do anything?
> 
> And who are you to question me?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's your passion.
> 
> I'm no one in particular.
Click to expand...


Yep, you got that right... You are no one in particular... Oh, other than a proven liar....


----------



## ptbw forever

fncceo said:


> Penelope said:
> 
> 
> 
> And the pop of which is now Israel changed into the opposite as it was 80% Palestinians in 1900.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Demographics shift over time in all countries ... it's called change.
Click to expand...

Wrong.


----------



## Mindful

ptbw forever said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ptbw forever said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> fncceo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> 
> Our German country is too small nowadays.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I would say not nearly small enough.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Whatever evil you wish on Germans and Europeans will be inflicted on you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What evil had you in mind?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Ask fncceo.
Click to expand...


I asked you.


----------



## Mindful

Humanity said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm no hypocrite.  I agree that Israel should annex all of Jerusalem.  And yes, that means it has equal responsibilities to all its citizens and residents.  That absolutely means Israeli funding, and also Israeli curriculum and Israeli teachers and Israeli buildings.  Actually, I think it should go one step further -- all the resident non-citizens of Jerusalem should be required to declare citizenship.  If they declare loyalty to Israel, they get citizenship and they stay.  If they declare Palestinian citizenship they are given some NIS in compensation and deported to Palestine.  If they turn terrorist they are deported immediately with no compensation.
> 
> Now, here's problem.  You, and others, will declare that is stealing land, destroying Palestinian culture, discrimination, etc.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well, I don't agree that Israel should annex all of Jerusalem.
> 
> "declare loyalty to Israel" or get deported?
> 
> Well, that would be an interesting move. How many countries have a law like that?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Who are you to tell Israel what it should do?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh? Where did I tell Israel to do anything?
> 
> And who are you to question me?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's your passion.
> 
> I'm no one in particular.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yep, you got that right... You are no one in particular... Oh, other than a proven liar....
Click to expand...


Did you take my fingerprints?


----------



## ptbw forever

Sixties Fan said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> No France doesn’t have any law declaring citizens of German heritage do not have a right to self determination.  That’s probably why the world isn’t coming after them and why they’ve been at peace for so long.
> 
> 
> 
> Do I have the feeling that you did not understand the France-Germany connection?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I doubt you have any understanding of much at all.  It was irrelevant to the conversation, anyways.  France does not have laws against citizens of German background.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Does France have any laws against any other people wanting to declare self-determination on its own soil?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Make your point, because France has no law targeting citizens to make them a secondary class.  Stop pussyfooting around.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Muslims conquered the land of Israel, as well as other lands.  They demand self-determantion on any and all lands they have conquered.
> They lost some of the land. They want it back, with no respect for the indigenous inhabitants.
> 
> Germany conquered France in WWII.
> It lost that war, it lost the lands.
> We do not see Germany, nor German citizens moving to France, with the idea that they can have France (or any other conquered land) back in their hands and declare self-determination over it.
> 
> In today's world, we have the Muslims wanting to take back any land they conquered.
> 
> And let us not forget Russia which seems to be showing how upset it got that the USSR got dissolved and all that land taken from under its hands.
> 
> Now, the Jews have sovereignty over ONLY less than 20% of their original ancient homeland.  The rest, is being held by invading Arab Muslims (78% of it by the Hashemite Clan which only moved into TranJordan after being booted out around 1915 by the Saud Clan from Arabia)
> 
> You and others make no qualms at being upset that Jews are sovereign over any part of their ancient land, much less that they "dare" to call it a (gosh forbid)  A Jewish State.
> 
> Europe is full of Christian States.
> Asia and North Africa is full of Muslim States.
> 
> Accept it.
> 
> Israel has always been a Jewish State, by the Jews, for the Jews, with non Jews free to live in it, and have freedom of their religion.
> 
> The Jews can accept the Arab Muslims having self determination over 80% of their ancient homeland, the Muslims and Christians need to learn to accept Israel for what it is and always has been .
> 
> 
> Israel =  The ancient homeland of the Jews who have the right to self-determination regardless of the endless attempts by Muslims and Christians to try to destroy it.
Click to expand...

Europe is not “full” of Christian states.

Europe is more Islamic than Christian when it comes to state religion.


----------



## ptbw forever

Mindful said:


> ptbw forever said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ptbw forever said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> fncceo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> 
> Our German country is too small nowadays.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I would say not nearly small enough.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Whatever evil you wish on Germans and Europeans will be inflicted on you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What evil had you in mind?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Ask fncceo.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I asked you.
Click to expand...

You asked me because you are attempting to deflect my spotlight on fncceo’s demonic attitude towards Germans and Europeans.


----------



## Mindful

ptbw forever said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Do I have the feeling that you did not understand the France-Germany connection?
> 
> 
> 
> I doubt you have any understanding of much at all.  It was irrelevant to the conversation, anyways.  France does not have laws against citizens of German background.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Does France have any laws against any other people wanting to declare self-determination on its own soil?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Make your point, because France has no law targeting citizens to make them a secondary class.  Stop pussyfooting around.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Muslims conquered the land of Israel, as well as other lands.  They demand self-determantion on any and all lands they have conquered.
> They lost some of the land. They want it back, with no respect for the indigenous inhabitants.
> 
> Germany conquered France in WWII.
> It lost that war, it lost the lands.
> We do not see Germany, nor German citizens moving to France, with the idea that they can have France (or any other conquered land) back in their hands and declare self-determination over it.
> 
> In today's world, we have the Muslims wanting to take back any land they conquered.
> 
> And let us not forget Russia which seems to be showing how upset it got that the USSR got dissolved and all that land taken from under its hands.
> 
> Now, the Jews have sovereignty over ONLY less than 20% of their original ancient homeland.  The rest, is being held by invading Arab Muslims (78% of it by the Hashemite Clan which only moved into TranJordan after being booted out around 1915 by the Saud Clan from Arabia)
> 
> You and others make no qualms at being upset that Jews are sovereign over any part of their ancient land, much less that they "dare" to call it a (gosh forbid)  A Jewish State.
> 
> Europe is full of Christian States.
> Asia and North Africa is full of Muslim States.
> 
> Accept it.
> 
> Israel has always been a Jewish State, by the Jews, for the Jews, with non Jews free to live in it, and have freedom of their religion.
> 
> The Jews can accept the Arab Muslims having self determination over 80% of their ancient homeland, the Muslims and Christians need to learn to accept Israel for what it is and always has been .
> 
> 
> Israel =  The ancient homeland of the Jews who have the right to self-determination regardless of the endless attempts by Muslims and Christians to try to destroy it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Europe is not “full” of Christian states.
> 
> Europe is more Islamic than Christian when it comes to state religion.
Click to expand...


Where?


----------



## Mindful

ptbw forever said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ptbw forever said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ptbw forever said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> fncceo said:
> 
> 
> 
> I would say not nearly small enough.
> 
> 
> 
> Whatever evil you wish on Germans and Europeans will be inflicted on you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What evil had you in mind?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Ask fncceo.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I asked you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You asked me because you are attempting to deflect my spotlight on fncceo’s demonic attitude towards Germans and Europeans.
Click to expand...


I'm really not too keen on emotive adjectives.


----------



## ptbw forever

Mindful said:


> ptbw forever said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> I doubt you have any understanding of much at all.  It was irrelevant to the conversation, anyways.  France does not have laws against citizens of German background.
> 
> 
> 
> Does France have any laws against any other people wanting to declare self-determination on its own soil?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Make your point, because France has no law targeting citizens to make them a secondary class.  Stop pussyfooting around.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Muslims conquered the land of Israel, as well as other lands.  They demand self-determantion on any and all lands they have conquered.
> They lost some of the land. They want it back, with no respect for the indigenous inhabitants.
> 
> Germany conquered France in WWII.
> It lost that war, it lost the lands.
> We do not see Germany, nor German citizens moving to France, with the idea that they can have France (or any other conquered land) back in their hands and declare self-determination over it.
> 
> In today's world, we have the Muslims wanting to take back any land they conquered.
> 
> And let us not forget Russia which seems to be showing how upset it got that the USSR got dissolved and all that land taken from under its hands.
> 
> Now, the Jews have sovereignty over ONLY less than 20% of their original ancient homeland.  The rest, is being held by invading Arab Muslims (78% of it by the Hashemite Clan which only moved into TranJordan after being booted out around 1915 by the Saud Clan from Arabia)
> 
> You and others make no qualms at being upset that Jews are sovereign over any part of their ancient land, much less that they "dare" to call it a (gosh forbid)  A Jewish State.
> 
> Europe is full of Christian States.
> Asia and North Africa is full of Muslim States.
> 
> Accept it.
> 
> Israel has always been a Jewish State, by the Jews, for the Jews, with non Jews free to live in it, and have freedom of their religion.
> 
> The Jews can accept the Arab Muslims having self determination over 80% of their ancient homeland, the Muslims and Christians need to learn to accept Israel for what it is and always has been .
> 
> 
> Israel =  The ancient homeland of the Jews who have the right to self-determination regardless of the endless attempts by Muslims and Christians to try to destroy it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Europe is not “full” of Christian states.
> 
> Europe is more Islamic than Christian when it comes to state religion.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Where?
Click to expand...

Britain, Sweden, Belgium, France, Germany.

All of these countries have allowed Islam into the public square while insisting that Christians keep it in the church.

No one in these countries is going to jail or being kept out of the country for Christianophobia, but Islamophobia is officially in the national hate crime statutes, which is state endorsement of Islam.


----------



## ptbw forever

Mindful said:


> ptbw forever said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ptbw forever said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ptbw forever said:
> 
> 
> 
> Whatever evil you wish on Germans and Europeans will be inflicted on you.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What evil had you in mind?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Ask fncceo.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I asked you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You asked me because you are attempting to deflect my spotlight on fncceo’s demonic attitude towards Germans and Europeans.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm really not too keen on emotive adjectives.
Click to expand...

You aren’t too keen on much of anything.

Fncceo said that he wished German countries were smaller despite their suffering from Jewish influenced immigration policies and you had the fucking nerve to attempt to deflect my spotlight on him. 

Fuck you.


----------



## Humanity

Mindful said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well, I don't agree that Israel should annex all of Jerusalem.
> 
> "declare loyalty to Israel" or get deported?
> 
> Well, that would be an interesting move. How many countries have a law like that?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Who are you to tell Israel what it should do?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh? Where did I tell Israel to do anything?
> 
> And who are you to question me?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's your passion.
> 
> I'm no one in particular.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yep, you got that right... You are no one in particular... Oh, other than a proven liar....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Did you take my fingerprints?
Click to expand...


No need... Your clear lies are sufficient.


----------



## ptbw forever

Mindful said:


> Olde Europe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> That is the BASIS for our current global system of nations -- the idea that ethnic groups can self-determine and create a nationality and have sovereignty.  That is the basis for the formation of probably every new country in the past 100 years.  And yet it doesn't cause a stir in the world until the Jewish people do it.  Why is that, do you think?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Looking back, I just saw you agreed with that disingenuous nonsense above, *Coyote*.
> 
> Let's have a look, shall we?  How is the above a genuine reply to what I said?  Here:
> 
> 
> 
> Olde Europe said:
> 
> 
> 
> The point was different laws governing different sects / ethnic groups.  No doubt, nations do religious / ethnic bigotry.  If I had a choice, I'd opt for less thereof.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> For, it is not.  Shusha is willfully confusing quite different things, namely, national self-determination and segregation / apartheid.
> 
> Second, no, racial / ethnic self-determination is not the "BASIS for our current global system of nations", much as racists and nationalists try to make it so.
> 
> Third, in order to demonstrate the above, consider:
> 
> "The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of South Africa is unique to White South Africans."
> 
> Acceptable?  How about this:
> 
> "The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Germany is unique to Aryan Germans."
> 
> Acceptable?  Obviously neither is.  Therefore, neither is this: "1. C. The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Israel is unique to the Jewish people."
> 
> So, "it doesn't cause a stir in the world until the Jewish people do it" is an obvious falsehood, and quite likely a lie with the purpose of deceiving about the Basic Law officially declaring Israel an apartheid state.  Obviously, it caused quite a stir when others did it.  There is no direct line between national self-determination and creating a privileged ethnic group within a nation with the objective of discriminating against all others.  Confusing the two, and trying to make it appear as if everybody did it, is hasbara, plain and simple.
> 
> Shusha's posting didn't surprise me at all, given his/her propensities.  It'd be disappointing if you actually, after thorough consideration, agreed with that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Who do you think you are?
> 
> All this froth is superficial and mendacious.
> 
> Cut to the chase, we all know what the 'real reason' is.
Click to expand...

Who do YOU think you are?

We all know why you are desperately trying to deflect this devastatingly accurate comparison between Israel and Apartheid South Africa and Nazi Germany.


----------



## Indeependent

ptbw forever said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Olde Europe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> That is the BASIS for our current global system of nations -- the idea that ethnic groups can self-determine and create a nationality and have sovereignty.  That is the basis for the formation of probably every new country in the past 100 years.  And yet it doesn't cause a stir in the world until the Jewish people do it.  Why is that, do you think?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Looking back, I just saw you agreed with that disingenuous nonsense above, *Coyote*.
> 
> Let's have a look, shall we?  How is the above a genuine reply to what I said?  Here:
> 
> 
> 
> Olde Europe said:
> 
> 
> 
> The point was different laws governing different sects / ethnic groups.  No doubt, nations do religious / ethnic bigotry.  If I had a choice, I'd opt for less thereof.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> For, it is not.  Shusha is willfully confusing quite different things, namely, national self-determination and segregation / apartheid.
> 
> Second, no, racial / ethnic self-determination is not the "BASIS for our current global system of nations", much as racists and nationalists try to make it so.
> 
> Third, in order to demonstrate the above, consider:
> 
> "The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of South Africa is unique to White South Africans."
> 
> Acceptable?  How about this:
> 
> "The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Germany is unique to Aryan Germans."
> 
> Acceptable?  Obviously neither is.  Therefore, neither is this: "1. C. The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Israel is unique to the Jewish people."
> 
> So, "it doesn't cause a stir in the world until the Jewish people do it" is an obvious falsehood, and quite likely a lie with the purpose of deceiving about the Basic Law officially declaring Israel an apartheid state.  Obviously, it caused quite a stir when others did it.  There is no direct line between national self-determination and creating a privileged ethnic group within a nation with the objective of discriminating against all others.  Confusing the two, and trying to make it appear as if everybody did it, is hasbara, plain and simple.
> 
> Shusha's posting didn't surprise me at all, given his/her propensities.  It'd be disappointing if you actually, after thorough consideration, agreed with that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Who do you think you are?
> 
> All this froth is superficial and mendacious.
> 
> Cut to the chase, we all know what the 'real reason' is.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Who do YOU think you are?
> 
> We all know why you are desperately trying to deflect this devastatingly accurate comparison between Israel and Apartheid South Africa and Nazi Germany.
Click to expand...

When’s the last time you were in Israel?


----------



## ptbw forever

Indeependent said:


> ptbw forever said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Olde Europe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> That is the BASIS for our current global system of nations -- the idea that ethnic groups can self-determine and create a nationality and have sovereignty.  That is the basis for the formation of probably every new country in the past 100 years.  And yet it doesn't cause a stir in the world until the Jewish people do it.  Why is that, do you think?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Looking back, I just saw you agreed with that disingenuous nonsense above, *Coyote*.
> 
> Let's have a look, shall we?  How is the above a genuine reply to what I said?  Here:
> 
> 
> 
> Olde Europe said:
> 
> 
> 
> The point was different laws governing different sects / ethnic groups.  No doubt, nations do religious / ethnic bigotry.  If I had a choice, I'd opt for less thereof.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> For, it is not.  Shusha is willfully confusing quite different things, namely, national self-determination and segregation / apartheid.
> 
> Second, no, racial / ethnic self-determination is not the "BASIS for our current global system of nations", much as racists and nationalists try to make it so.
> 
> Third, in order to demonstrate the above, consider:
> 
> "The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of South Africa is unique to White South Africans."
> 
> Acceptable?  How about this:
> 
> "The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Germany is unique to Aryan Germans."
> 
> Acceptable?  Obviously neither is.  Therefore, neither is this: "1. C. The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Israel is unique to the Jewish people."
> 
> So, "it doesn't cause a stir in the world until the Jewish people do it" is an obvious falsehood, and quite likely a lie with the purpose of deceiving about the Basic Law officially declaring Israel an apartheid state.  Obviously, it caused quite a stir when others did it.  There is no direct line between national self-determination and creating a privileged ethnic group within a nation with the objective of discriminating against all others.  Confusing the two, and trying to make it appear as if everybody did it, is hasbara, plain and simple.
> 
> Shusha's posting didn't surprise me at all, given his/her propensities.  It'd be disappointing if you actually, after thorough consideration, agreed with that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Who do you think you are?
> 
> All this froth is superficial and mendacious.
> 
> Cut to the chase, we all know what the 'real reason' is.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Who do YOU think you are?
> 
> We all know why you are desperately trying to deflect this devastatingly accurate comparison between Israel and Apartheid South Africa and Nazi Germany.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> When’s the last time you were in Israel?
Click to expand...

Why are you attempting to deflect?

If Europeans who simply seek to reduce the ludicrously high immigration are called “far right Nazis”, then this means that Israel is, at the very least an apartheid state.


----------



## Mindful

ptbw forever said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Olde Europe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> That is the BASIS for our current global system of nations -- the idea that ethnic groups can self-determine and create a nationality and have sovereignty.  That is the basis for the formation of probably every new country in the past 100 years.  And yet it doesn't cause a stir in the world until the Jewish people do it.  Why is that, do you think?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Looking back, I just saw you agreed with that disingenuous nonsense above, *Coyote*.
> 
> Let's have a look, shall we?  How is the above a genuine reply to what I said?  Here:
> 
> 
> 
> Olde Europe said:
> 
> 
> 
> The point was different laws governing different sects / ethnic groups.  No doubt, nations do religious / ethnic bigotry.  If I had a choice, I'd opt for less thereof.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> For, it is not.  Shusha is willfully confusing quite different things, namely, national self-determination and segregation / apartheid.
> 
> Second, no, racial / ethnic self-determination is not the "BASIS for our current global system of nations", much as racists and nationalists try to make it so.
> 
> Third, in order to demonstrate the above, consider:
> 
> "The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of South Africa is unique to White South Africans."
> 
> Acceptable?  How about this:
> 
> "The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Germany is unique to Aryan Germans."
> 
> Acceptable?  Obviously neither is.  Therefore, neither is this: "1. C. The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Israel is unique to the Jewish people."
> 
> So, "it doesn't cause a stir in the world until the Jewish people do it" is an obvious falsehood, and quite likely a lie with the purpose of deceiving about the Basic Law officially declaring Israel an apartheid state.  Obviously, it caused quite a stir when others did it.  There is no direct line between national self-determination and creating a privileged ethnic group within a nation with the objective of discriminating against all others.  Confusing the two, and trying to make it appear as if everybody did it, is hasbara, plain and simple.
> 
> Shusha's posting didn't surprise me at all, given his/her propensities.  It'd be disappointing if you actually, after thorough consideration, agreed with that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Who do you think you are?
> 
> All this froth is superficial and mendacious.
> 
> Cut to the chase, we all know what the 'real reason' is.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Who do YOU think you are?
> 
> We all know why you are desperately trying to deflect this devastatingly accurate comparison between Israel and Apartheid South Africa and Nazi Germany.
Click to expand...


You think so ?

Like Arabs riding buses with Jews? Using the same rest rooms in restaurants? That kind of comparison?

Oh and the call to prayer from a mosque, just across the street from a restaurant (Jewish) I was dining in, in Jaffa?


----------



## Indeependent

ptbw forever said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ptbw forever said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Olde Europe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> That is the BASIS for our current global system of nations -- the idea that ethnic groups can self-determine and create a nationality and have sovereignty.  That is the basis for the formation of probably every new country in the past 100 years.  And yet it doesn't cause a stir in the world until the Jewish people do it.  Why is that, do you think?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Looking back, I just saw you agreed with that disingenuous nonsense above, *Coyote*.
> 
> Let's have a look, shall we?  How is the above a genuine reply to what I said?  Here:
> 
> 
> 
> Olde Europe said:
> 
> 
> 
> The point was different laws governing different sects / ethnic groups.  No doubt, nations do religious / ethnic bigotry.  If I had a choice, I'd opt for less thereof.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> For, it is not.  Shusha is willfully confusing quite different things, namely, national self-determination and segregation / apartheid.
> 
> Second, no, racial / ethnic self-determination is not the "BASIS for our current global system of nations", much as racists and nationalists try to make it so.
> 
> Third, in order to demonstrate the above, consider:
> 
> "The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of South Africa is unique to White South Africans."
> 
> Acceptable?  How about this:
> 
> "The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Germany is unique to Aryan Germans."
> 
> Acceptable?  Obviously neither is.  Therefore, neither is this: "1. C. The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Israel is unique to the Jewish people."
> 
> So, "it doesn't cause a stir in the world until the Jewish people do it" is an obvious falsehood, and quite likely a lie with the purpose of deceiving about the Basic Law officially declaring Israel an apartheid state.  Obviously, it caused quite a stir when others did it.  There is no direct line between national self-determination and creating a privileged ethnic group within a nation with the objective of discriminating against all others.  Confusing the two, and trying to make it appear as if everybody did it, is hasbara, plain and simple.
> 
> Shusha's posting didn't surprise me at all, given his/her propensities.  It'd be disappointing if you actually, after thorough consideration, agreed with that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Who do you think you are?
> 
> All this froth is superficial and mendacious.
> 
> Cut to the chase, we all know what the 'real reason' is.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Who do YOU think you are?
> 
> We all know why you are desperately trying to deflect this devastatingly accurate comparison between Israel and Apartheid South Africa and Nazi Germany.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> When’s the last time you were in Israel?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why are you attempting to deflect?
> 
> If Europeans who simply seek to reduce the ludicrously high immigration are called “far right Nazis”, then this means that Israel is, at the very least an apartheid state.
Click to expand...

Which is why Arabs are in the Knesset.
To be truthful, within 10 years Israel will be a theocratic state just like the rest of the Middle East and Vatican City.


----------



## Mindful

Humanity said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> Who are you to tell Israel what it should do?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh? Where did I tell Israel to do anything?
> 
> And who are you to question me?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's your passion.
> 
> I'm no one in particular.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yep, you got that right... You are no one in particular... Oh, other than a proven liar....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Did you take my fingerprints?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No need... Your clear lies are sufficient.
Click to expand...


When you resort to gratuitous abuse, then you have no argument.


The same goes for the 'forever' dude.


----------



## ptbw forever

Indeependent said:


> ptbw forever said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ptbw forever said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Olde Europe said:
> 
> 
> 
> Looking back, I just saw you agreed with that disingenuous nonsense above, *Coyote*.
> 
> Let's have a look, shall we?  How is the above a genuine reply to what I said?  Here:
> 
> For, it is not.  Shusha is willfully confusing quite different things, namely, national self-determination and segregation / apartheid.
> 
> Second, no, racial / ethnic self-determination is not the "BASIS for our current global system of nations", much as racists and nationalists try to make it so.
> 
> Third, in order to demonstrate the above, consider:
> 
> "The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of South Africa is unique to White South Africans."
> 
> Acceptable?  How about this:
> 
> "The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Germany is unique to Aryan Germans."
> 
> Acceptable?  Obviously neither is.  Therefore, neither is this: "1. C. The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Israel is unique to the Jewish people."
> 
> So, "it doesn't cause a stir in the world until the Jewish people do it" is an obvious falsehood, and quite likely a lie with the purpose of deceiving about the Basic Law officially declaring Israel an apartheid state.  Obviously, it caused quite a stir when others did it.  There is no direct line between national self-determination and creating a privileged ethnic group within a nation with the objective of discriminating against all others.  Confusing the two, and trying to make it appear as if everybody did it, is hasbara, plain and simple.
> 
> Shusha's posting didn't surprise me at all, given his/her propensities.  It'd be disappointing if you actually, after thorough consideration, agreed with that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Who do you think you are?
> 
> All this froth is superficial and mendacious.
> 
> Cut to the chase, we all know what the 'real reason' is.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Who do YOU think you are?
> 
> We all know why you are desperately trying to deflect this devastatingly accurate comparison between Israel and Apartheid South Africa and Nazi Germany.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> When’s the last time you were in Israel?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why are you attempting to deflect?
> 
> If Europeans who simply seek to reduce the ludicrously high immigration are called “far right Nazis”, then this means that Israel is, at the very least an apartheid state.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Which is why Arabs are in the Knesset.
> To be truthful, within 10 years Israel will be a theocratic state just like the rest of the Middle East and Vatican City.
Click to expand...

White people are in the South African government, but it is still very much an anti-white Apartheid state that doesn’t ever listen to them.


----------



## Indeependent

ptbw forever said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ptbw forever said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ptbw forever said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> Who do you think you are?
> 
> All this froth is superficial and mendacious.
> 
> Cut to the chase, we all know what the 'real reason' is.
> 
> 
> 
> Who do YOU think you are?
> 
> We all know why you are desperately trying to deflect this devastatingly accurate comparison between Israel and Apartheid South Africa and Nazi Germany.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> When’s the last time you were in Israel?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why are you attempting to deflect?
> 
> If Europeans who simply seek to reduce the ludicrously high immigration are called “far right Nazis”, then this means that Israel is, at the very least an apartheid state.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Which is why Arabs are in the Knesset.
> To be truthful, within 10 years Israel will be a theocratic state just like the rest of the Middle East and Vatican City.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> White people are in the South African government, but it is still very much an anti-white Apartheid state that doesn’t ever listen to them.
Click to expand...

Africa was a somewhat established series of nations with infrastructure that was, like every single other inch of land on earth, invaded.
Time to get over it and rebuild.
Most African nations are begging for White money.
I guess you don’t watch TV.


----------



## ptbw forever

Indeependent said:


> ptbw forever said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ptbw forever said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ptbw forever said:
> 
> 
> 
> Who do YOU think you are?
> 
> We all know why you are desperately trying to deflect this devastatingly accurate comparison between Israel and Apartheid South Africa and Nazi Germany.
> 
> 
> 
> When’s the last time you were in Israel?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why are you attempting to deflect?
> 
> If Europeans who simply seek to reduce the ludicrously high immigration are called “far right Nazis”, then this means that Israel is, at the very least an apartheid state.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Which is why Arabs are in the Knesset.
> To be truthful, within 10 years Israel will be a theocratic state just like the rest of the Middle East and Vatican City.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> White people are in the South African government, but it is still very much an anti-white Apartheid state that doesn’t ever listen to them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Africa was a somewhat established series of nations with infrastructure that was, like every single other inch of land on earth, invaded.
> Time to get over it and rebuild.
> Most African nations are begging for White money.
> I guess you don’t watch TV.
Click to expand...

Again the deflection.

I wasn’t talking about “Africa”. I was talking about South Africa, the country.

South Africa has white politicians, but that doesn’t mean that the ANC and EFF don’t dominate the country with their racist policies.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Guardian op-ed by Daniel Barenboim distorts nation-state law and Israel’s founding principles


----------



## Sixties Fan

...What is the lesson to be learned from Lebanese history with respect to the National Law in Israel? As an Israeli Maronite Aramaic Christian, belonging to the minority and enjoying freedom in Israel, I actually understand the importance of this Law. Yes, our forefathers supported, for ideological reasons, the realization of the Jewish nation in the Land of Israel. But my support of the National Law arises as well from the bitter Lebanese experience.

(full article online)

National Law: Lessons Learned From Christian Lebanon (Shadi Khalloul) | Israel Diaries


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote
> 
> Found an article which says that 41% of the schools in East Jerusalem are "unofficial schools" and thus only partly funded by the Municipality of Jerusalem.  It is my understanding also that the PA provides funding for Arab schools in East Jerusalem.  I'm off to teach TKD.  I'll do some more digging and be back later.
> 
> Edited to add:  Oh, and btw, these are not Arab Israelis, are they?


Aren’t some of them?


----------



## Mindful

Sixties Fan said:


> ...What is the lesson to be learned from Lebanese history with respect to the National Law in Israel? As an Israeli Maronite Aramaic Christian, belonging to the minority and enjoying freedom in Israel, I actually understand the importance of this Law. Yes, our forefathers supported, for ideological reasons, the realization of the Jewish nation in the Land of Israel. But my support of the National Law arises as well from the bitter Lebanese experience.
> 
> (full article online)
> 
> National Law: Lessons Learned From Christian Lebanon (Shadi Khalloul) | Israel Diaries



I take Israel for granted; don't you?

I don't understand all the pedantic nitpicking about it.


----------



## Coyote

Olde Europe said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> That is the BASIS for our current global system of nations -- the idea that ethnic groups can self-determine and create a nationality and have sovereignty.  That is the basis for the formation of probably every new country in the past 100 years.  And yet it doesn't cause a stir in the world until the Jewish people do it.  Why is that, do you think?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Looking back, I just saw you agreed with that disingenuous nonsense above, *Coyote*.
> 
> Let's have a look, shall we?  How is the above a genuine reply to what I said?  Here:
> 
> 
> 
> Olde Europe said:
> 
> 
> 
> The point was different laws governing different sects / ethnic groups.  No doubt, nations do religious / ethnic bigotry.  If I had a choice, I'd opt for less thereof.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> For, it is not.  Shusha is willfully confusing quite different things, namely, national self-determination and segregation / apartheid.
> 
> Second, no, racial / ethnic self-determination is not the "BASIS for our current global system of nations", much as racists and nationalists try to make it so.
> 
> Third, in order to demonstrate the above, consider:
> 
> "The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of South Africa is unique to White South Africans."
> 
> Acceptable?  How about this:
> 
> "The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Germany is unique to Aryan Germans."
> 
> Acceptable?  Obviously neither is.  Therefore, neither is this: "1. C. The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Israel is unique to the Jewish people."
> 
> So, "it doesn't cause a stir in the world until the Jewish people do it" is an obvious falsehood, and quite likely a lie with the purpose of deceiving about the Basic Law officially declaring Israel an apartheid state.  Obviously, it caused quite a stir when others did it.  There is no direct line between national self-determination and creating a privileged ethnic group within a nation with the objective of discriminating against all others.  Confusing the two, and trying to make it appear as if everybody did it, is hasbara, plain and simple.
> 
> Shusha's posting didn't surprise me at all, given his/her propensities.  It'd be disappointing if you actually, after thorough consideration, agreed with that.
Click to expand...

You are forcing me to argue the other side here by your application of false equivalence, namely apartheid comparisons.  Let’s consider that...

We have three areas under consideration, 4 actually...and we have multiple systems of law in play: PA, Israeli civil law, Israeli military law.  PA law is in effect in areas controlled by Palestinians, Military law is used on Palestinians in Israeli controlled areas while Israeli civil is in effect on Israelis in those same territories (which in itself creates serious injustices) and Israel itself where Israeli civil law is in effect.  There is also a difference in the law itself and then the actions of civil authorities and society in how they choose to apply it.  To claim apartheid you need to show the laws that support it.

Apartheid created, by law, a completely segregated society in which blacks had legally imposed redirected rights, could only live in deceptively named and resource poor “homelands” and were subject to laws that enforced seperation and inferior status.  In Israel itself what laws do that?

The law in this topic only states that Jews can expertise the right of self determination IN Israel.  That means others can’t create a seperate state within Israel as part of self determination, if iI understand it correctly.  It doesn’t seem like it would effect non Jews much, especially since they removed the settlement part.  But I am a little uneasy...I think we will have to see how this plays out in civil society.  It is not apartheid however.  Arab Israelis are not being moved to Bantustans.


----------



## Coyote

ptbw forever said:


> fncceo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> 
> Germany was a good home for Jews for centuries,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Except between 1096 and 1349 when wholesale slaughter of Jewish communities by German Crusaders was commonplace, Jews were blamed for spreading the Black Death, and Jews had their property confiscated.
> 
> Except for the fact that Jews couldn't be German citizens until 1805.
> 
> Except for the rampant Antisemitism that peaked in the Weimar Republic.
> 
> Except for the years 1933 to 1945.
> 
> Except for the fact that today, attacks on Jews in German are at an all time high since 1945.
> 
> Except for all that, it's been a great home for Jews.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I wonder why they hated Jews so much.....
> 
> Maybe we should ask the Swedes after they have been terrorized by Spectre.
> 
> Maybe we should ask the Ukrainians who were told that the Holodomor is nothing compared to the Holocaust.
> 
> Every fucking leftist party that is destroying the West is run by Jews.
Click to expand...

Good grief.


----------



## Coyote

..


ptbw forever said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Do I have the feeling that you did not understand the France-Germany connection?
> 
> 
> 
> I doubt you have any understanding of much at all.  It was irrelevant to the conversation, anyways.  France does not have laws against citizens of German background.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Does France have any laws against any other people wanting to declare self-determination on its own soil?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Make your point, because France has no law targeting citizens to make them a secondary class.  Stop pussyfooting around.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Muslims conquered the land of Israel, as well as other lands.  They demand self-determantion on any and all lands they have conquered.
> They lost some of the land. They want it back, with no respect for the indigenous inhabitants.
> 
> Germany conquered France in WWII.
> It lost that war, it lost the lands.
> We do not see Germany, nor German citizens moving to France, with the idea that they can have France (or any other conquered land) back in their hands and declare self-determination over it.
> 
> In today's world, we have the Muslims wanting to take back any land they conquered.
> 
> And let us not forget Russia which seems to be showing how upset it got that the USSR got dissolved and all that land taken from under its hands.
> 
> Now, the Jews have sovereignty over ONLY less than 20% of their original ancient homeland.  The rest, is being held by invading Arab Muslims (78% of it by the Hashemite Clan which only moved into TranJordan after being booted out around 1915 by the Saud Clan from Arabia)
> 
> You and others make no qualms at being upset that Jews are sovereign over any part of their ancient land, much less that they "dare" to call it a (gosh forbid)  A Jewish State.
> 
> Europe is full of Christian States.
> Asia and North Africa is full of Muslim States.
> 
> Accept it.
> 
> Israel has always been a Jewish State, by the Jews, for the Jews, with non Jews free to live in it, and have freedom of their religion.
> 
> The Jews can accept the Arab Muslims having self determination over 80% of their ancient homeland, the Muslims and Christians need to learn to accept Israel for what it is and always has been .
> 
> 
> Israel =  The ancient homeland of the Jews who have the right to self-determination regardless of the endless attempts by Muslims and Christians to try to destroy it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Europe is not “full” of Christian states.
> 
> Europe is more Islamic than Christian when it comes to state religion.
Click to expand...

if you looked at actual demographics instead of relying on hate mongers you would realize Muslims are a tiny fraction of the European populace.


----------



## Indeependent

ptbw forever said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ptbw forever said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ptbw forever said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> When’s the last time you were in Israel?
> 
> 
> 
> Why are you attempting to deflect?
> 
> If Europeans who simply seek to reduce the ludicrously high immigration are called “far right Nazis”, then this means that Israel is, at the very least an apartheid state.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Which is why Arabs are in the Knesset.
> To be truthful, within 10 years Israel will be a theocratic state just like the rest of the Middle East and Vatican City.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> White people are in the South African government, but it is still very much an anti-white Apartheid state that doesn’t ever listen to them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Africa was a somewhat established series of nations with infrastructure that was, like every single other inch of land on earth, invaded.
> Time to get over it and rebuild.
> Most African nations are begging for White money.
> I guess you don’t watch TV.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Again the deflection.
> 
> I wasn’t talking about “Africa”. I was talking about South Africa, the country.
> 
> South Africa has white politicians, but that doesn’t mean that the ANC and EFF don’t dominate the country with their racist policies.
Click to expand...

Have you ever been to Israel?


----------



## Dogmaphobe

Mindful said:


> Olde Europe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> That is the BASIS for our current global system of nations -- the idea that ethnic groups can self-determine and create a nationality and have sovereignty.  That is the basis for the formation of probably every new country in the past 100 years.  And yet it doesn't cause a stir in the world until the Jewish people do it.  Why is that, do you think?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Looking back, I just saw you agreed with that disingenuous nonsense above, *Coyote*.
> 
> Let's have a look, shall we?  How is the above a genuine reply to what I said?  Here:
> 
> 
> 
> Olde Europe said:
> 
> 
> 
> The point was different laws governing different sects / ethnic groups.  No doubt, nations do religious / ethnic bigotry.  If I had a choice, I'd opt for less thereof.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> For, it is not.  Shusha is willfully confusing quite different things, namely, national self-determination and segregation / apartheid.
> 
> Second, no, racial / ethnic self-determination is not the "BASIS for our current global system of nations", much as racists and nationalists try to make it so.
> 
> Third, in order to demonstrate the above, consider:
> 
> "The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of South Africa is unique to White South Africans."
> 
> Acceptable?  How about this:
> 
> "The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Germany is unique to Aryan Germans."
> 
> Acceptable?  Obviously neither is.  Therefore, neither is this: "1. C. The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Israel is unique to the Jewish people."
> 
> So, "it doesn't cause a stir in the world until the Jewish people do it" is an obvious falsehood, and quite likely a lie with the purpose of deceiving about the Basic Law officially declaring Israel an apartheid state.  Obviously, it caused quite a stir when others did it.  There is no direct line between national self-determination and creating a privileged ethnic group within a nation with the objective of discriminating against all others.  Confusing the two, and trying to make it appear as if everybody did it, is hasbara, plain and simple.
> 
> Shusha's posting didn't surprise me at all, given his/her propensities.  It'd be disappointing if you actually, after thorough consideration, agreed with that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Who do you think you are?
> 
> All this froth is superficial and mendacious.
> 
> Cut to the chase, we all know what the 'real reason' is.
Click to expand...

During the oil embargo in the 70s, Europeans created what was called the Europe Arab dialogue, which was a broad based plan of action to draw Europe closer to their source of oil. Essentially, it was a case of whirring for oil by Europe adopting a world view sympathetic to the Arab street view.

40+ years later and thanks to a press that operates from such a position, pretty much all of Western Europe has been conditioned to take a very hostile attitude towards the same target arabs hate. 

The anti Zionism has become ingrained, and the antisemitism follows suit.


----------



## Dogmaphobe

Isn't it odd how none of the antisemites use the term apartheid to describe all those many countries that define themselves as Islamic in their very constitutions?


----------



## Shusha

Olde Europe said:


> For, it is not.  Shusha is willfully confusing quite different things, namely, national self-determination and segregation / apartheid.
> 
> Second, no, racial / ethnic self-determination is not the "BASIS for our current global system of nations", much as racists and nationalists try to make it so.
> 
> Third, in order to demonstrate the above, consider:
> 
> "The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of South Africa is unique to White South Africans."
> 
> Acceptable?  How about this:
> 
> "The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Germany is unique to Aryan Germans."
> 
> Acceptable?  Obviously neither is.  Therefore, neither is this: "1. C. The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Israel is unique to the Jewish people."
> 
> So, "it doesn't cause a stir in the world until the Jewish people do it" is an obvious falsehood, and quite likely a lie with the purpose of deceiving about the Basic Law officially declaring Israel an apartheid state.  Obviously, it caused quite a stir when others did it.  There is no direct line between national self-determination and creating a privileged ethnic group within a nation with the objective of discriminating against all others.  Confusing the two, and trying to make it appear as if everybody did it, is hasbara, plain and simple.
> 
> Shusha's posting didn't surprise me at all, given his/her propensities.  It'd be disappointing if you actually, after thorough consideration, agreed with that.



You're forced to set up a false equivalence in order to dismiss my point and falsely demonize Israel.  You've introduced apartheid South Africa and Nazi Germany as though they were equivalent to national self-determination.  They are not.  If you wanted to bring up national self-determination you could have brought up Croatia, Serbia, Montenegro, Kosovo, Slovenia, Bosnia and Herzevogina, Macedonia, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Moldova, Estonia, Armenia, Lithuania, Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, Russia, Georgia, Ukraine, Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, Turkey and Jordan.  Maybe you would have brought up peoples who seek, but not yet have achieved self-determination:  First Nations peoples of US and Canada, Tibet, Catalonia, Western Sahara, Palestine.  

The UN Charter, Article 1.2 states definitively that its purpose is, in part:  _2. To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and *self-determination of peoples*, and to take other appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace_; (emphasis mine)

The Constitution of Slovenia, as an example, states:  _the fundamental and permanent *right of the Slovene nation to self-determination*; and from the historical fact that in a centuries-long struggle for national liberation we Slovenes have established our national identity and asserted our statehood, the Assembly of the Republic of Slovenia hereby adopts.. (emphasis mine)

Slovenia is a state of all its citizens and is founded on the _*permanent and inalienable right of the Slovene nation to self-determination.  *(emphasis mine)

Instead of bringing up those examples you introduced two times and places in history which were conditioned, not on the self-determination of a peoples, but on the discrimination, pogroms, persecution and genocides of another peoples.  There is no equivalence here.  A declaration of self-determination, of itself, is not the persecution of another peoples, nor does it create conditions of persecution of another people.  I am relatively certain there is no uproar about Slovenia's declaration of self-determination, nor of any other peoples'.  And I am certain you will not declare Slovenia an apartheid state.  There is a double standard here operating because its Israel.  

And, let's be clear.  The REASON why Israel feels the need to include a statement like this in their Basic Law is because their absolute, inherent right to self-determination is continually being denied by Arabs, Arab Palestinians and globally by useful idiots like you.  The need to entrench this statement in law is RESULT of discrimination, persecution and pogroms directed against the Jewish people who are being actively prevented from having the same rights of other peoples, and whose desire to have the same rights as other peoples is being deliberately and falsely conflated with apartheid and with Nazism.


----------



## Dogmaphobe

Shusha said:


> Olde Europe said:
> 
> 
> 
> For, it is not.  Shusha is willfully confusing quite different things, namely, national self-determination and segregation / apartheid.
> 
> Second, no, racial / ethnic self-determination is not the "BASIS for our current global system of nations", much as racists and nationalists try to make it so.
> 
> Third, in order to demonstrate the above, consider:
> 
> "The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of South Africa is unique to White South Africans."
> 
> Acceptable?  How about this:
> 
> "The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Germany is unique to Aryan Germans."
> 
> Acceptable?  Obviously neither is.  Therefore, neither is this: "1. C. The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Israel is unique to the Jewish people."
> 
> So, "it doesn't cause a stir in the world until the Jewish people do it" is an obvious falsehood, and quite likely a lie with the purpose of deceiving about the Basic Law officially declaring Israel an apartheid state.  Obviously, it caused quite a stir when others did it.  There is no direct line between national self-determination and creating a privileged ethnic group within a nation with the objective of discriminating against all others.  Confusing the two, and trying to make it appear as if everybody did it, is hasbara, plain and simple.
> 
> Shusha's posting didn't surprise me at all, given his/her propensities.  It'd be disappointing if you actually, after thorough consideration, agreed with that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You're forced to set up a false equivalence in order to dismiss my point and falsely demonize Israel.  You've introduced apartheid South Africa and Nazi Germany as though they were equivalent to national self-determination.  They are not.  If you wanted to bring up national self-determination you could have brought up Croatia, Serbia, Montenegro, Kosovo, Slovenia, Bosnia and Herzevogina, Macedonia, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Moldova, Estonia, Armenia, Lithuania, Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, Russia, Georgia, Ukraine, Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, Turkey and Jordan.  Maybe you would have brought up peoples who seek, but not yet have achieved self-determination:  First Nations peoples of US and Canada, Tibet, Catalonia, Western Sahara, Palestine.
> 
> The UN Charter, Article 1.2 states definitively that its purpose is, in part:  _2. To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and *self-determination of peoples*, and to take other appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace_; (emphasis mine)
> 
> The Constitution of Slovenia, as an example, states:  _the fundamental and permanent *right of the Slovene nation to self-determination*; and from the historical fact that in a centuries-long struggle for national liberation we Slovenes have established our national identity and asserted our statehood, the Assembly of the Republic of Slovenia hereby adopts.. (emphasis mine)
> 
> Slovenia is a state of all its citizens and is founded on the _*permanent and inalienable right of the Slovene nation to self-determination.  *(emphasis mine)
> 
> Instead of bringing up those examples you introduced two times and places in history which were conditioned, not on the self-determination of a peoples, but on the discrimination, pogroms, persecution and genocides of another peoples.  There is no equivalence here.  A declaration of self-determination, of itself, is not the persecution of another peoples, nor does it create conditions of persecution of another people.  I am relatively certain there is no uproar about Slovenia's declaration of self-determination, nor of any other peoples'.  And I am certain you will not declare Slovenia an apartheid state.  There is a double standard here operating because its Israel.
> 
> And, let's be clear.  The REASON why Israel feels the need to include a statement like this in their Basic Law is because their absolute, inherent right to self-determination is continually being denied by Arabs, Arab Palestinians and globally by useful idiots like you.  The need to entrench this statement in law is RESULT of discrimination, persecution and pogroms directed against the Jewish people who are being actively prevented from having the same rights of other peoples, and whose desire to have the same rights as other peoples is being deliberately and falsely conflated with apartheid and with Nazism.
Click to expand...

...and of course, as we both know, the term apartheid is not original to the user, as it is just a very cynical ruse crafted by Arab propagandists to create a false impression.


----------



## Humanity

Coyote said:


> Arab Israelis are not being moved to Bantustans.



Yet!


----------



## Shusha

Humanity said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Arab Israelis are not being moved to Bantustans.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yet!
Click to expand...


Sure.  Let's demonize an entire peoples because of what you imagine they might do in the future.  Seems fair.  /sarcasm


----------



## Humanity

Shusha said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Arab Israelis are not being moved to Bantustans.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yet!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Sure.  Let's demonize an entire peoples because of what you imagine they might do in the future.  Seems fair.  /sarcasm
Click to expand...


I'm not demonizing anyone... Certainly not "an entire peoples"!

There in lies a common issue with Team Israel...

The distinction between people and politics!

My critisizing Israeli politics and policies does not, as you might claim, make me antisemetic!


----------



## Shusha

Humanity said:


> Well, I don't agree that Israel should annex all of Jerusalem.
> 
> "declare loyalty to Israel" or get deported?
> 
> Well, that would be an interesting move. How many countries have a law like that?



No country should be forced to live with a hostile population actively trying to destroy the State.  In civil conflicts like this one, the solution is to divide the territory and form nations around a specific ethnic population, almost always with a minority of other ethnicities.  This is all I am proposing and I'm proposing it equally for both Israel and Palestine.  Each citizen, currently living in the territory, is given the choice of declaring citizenship -- Israeli or Palestinian -- and residing in their State of citizenship as safe, loyal citizens.  Should they choose to relocate, they are given compensation to assist them with doing so.  Seems fair and reasonable, and allows each citizen to choose what is best for them and their family.


----------



## Shusha

Humanity said:


> Show me one post where I demonize Jews





> Jew traits


----------



## Humanity

Shusha said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well, I don't agree that Israel should annex all of Jerusalem.
> 
> "declare loyalty to Israel" or get deported?
> 
> Well, that would be an interesting move. How many countries have a law like that?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No country should be forced to live with a hostile population actively trying to destroy the State.  In civil conflicts like this one, the solution is to divide the territory and form nations around a specific ethnic population, almost always with a minority of other ethnicities.  This is all I am proposing and I'm proposing it equally for both Israel and Palestine.  Each citizen, currently living in the territory, is given the choice of declaring citizenship -- Israeli or Palestinian -- and residing in their State of citizenship as safe, loyal citizens.  Should they choose to relocate, they are given compensation to assist them with doing so.  Seems fair and reasonable, and allows each citizen to choose what is best for them and their family.
Click to expand...


Except there is a slight issue over land. 

Who will decide that? Israel?


----------



## Humanity

Shusha said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> Show me one post where I demonize Jews
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jew traits
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


If that is "demonization" you need to get a slightly thicker skin!


----------



## Indeependent

Humanity said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well, I don't agree that Israel should annex all of Jerusalem.
> 
> "declare loyalty to Israel" or get deported?
> 
> Well, that would be an interesting move. How many countries have a law like that?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No country should be forced to live with a hostile population actively trying to destroy the State.  In civil conflicts like this one, the solution is to divide the territory and form nations around a specific ethnic population, almost always with a minority of other ethnicities.  This is all I am proposing and I'm proposing it equally for both Israel and Palestine.  Each citizen, currently living in the territory, is given the choice of declaring citizenship -- Israeli or Palestinian -- and residing in their State of citizenship as safe, loyal citizens.  Should they choose to relocate, they are given compensation to assist them with doing so.  Seems fair and reasonable, and allows each citizen to choose what is best for them and their family.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Except there is a slight issue over land.
> 
> Who will decide that? Israel?
Click to expand...

God.
And thus far the Jews seems to be the winners.


----------



## Indeependent

Humanity said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> Show me one post where I demonize Jews
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jew traits
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If that is "demonization" you need to get a slightly thicker skin!
Click to expand...

I’d rather have Jew traits than sacrifice my children as bullet proof vests.


----------



## Shusha

Humanity said:


> I'm not demonizing anyone... Certainly not "an entire peoples"!
> 
> There in lies a common issue with Team Israel...
> 
> The distinction between people and politics!
> 
> My critisizing Israeli politics and policies does not, as you might claim, make me antisemetic!



Making negative assumptions about the future behaviour of Israel and accusing Israel of an apartheid condition which they have not actually created is most certainly not fair criticism of Israeli politics and policies.  It can only be demonization.


----------



## Shusha

Humanity said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well, I don't agree that Israel should annex all of Jerusalem.
> 
> "declare loyalty to Israel" or get deported?
> 
> Well, that would be an interesting move. How many countries have a law like that?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No country should be forced to live with a hostile population actively trying to destroy the State.  In civil conflicts like this one, the solution is to divide the territory and form nations around a specific ethnic population, almost always with a minority of other ethnicities.  This is all I am proposing and I'm proposing it equally for both Israel and Palestine.  Each citizen, currently living in the territory, is given the choice of declaring citizenship -- Israeli or Palestinian -- and residing in their State of citizenship as safe, loyal citizens.  Should they choose to relocate, they are given compensation to assist them with doing so.  Seems fair and reasonable, and allows each citizen to choose what is best for them and their family.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Except there is a slight issue over land.
> 
> Who will decide that? Israel?
Click to expand...


Borders between States can only be set by treaty between the Parties involved.  The only exception I can think of is a unilateral ceding of territory.  Israel could do that.


----------



## Dogmaphobe

Indeependent said:


> I’d rather have Jew traits than sacrifice my children as bullet proof vests.



I can't be the only one here who finds the thought that subhumanity could have bred offspring to be extremely disturbing, can I?


----------



## Mindful

Shusha said:


> Olde Europe said:
> 
> 
> 
> For, it is not.  Shusha is willfully confusing quite different things, namely, national self-determination and segregation / apartheid.
> 
> Second, no, racial / ethnic self-determination is not the "BASIS for our current global system of nations", much as racists and nationalists try to make it so.
> 
> Third, in order to demonstrate the above, consider:
> 
> "The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of South Africa is unique to White South Africans."
> 
> Acceptable?  How about this:
> 
> "The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Germany is unique to Aryan Germans."
> 
> Acceptable?  Obviously neither is.  Therefore, neither is this: "1. C. The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Israel is unique to the Jewish people."
> 
> So, "it doesn't cause a stir in the world until the Jewish people do it" is an obvious falsehood, and quite likely a lie with the purpose of deceiving about the Basic Law officially declaring Israel an apartheid state.  Obviously, it caused quite a stir when others did it.  There is no direct line between national self-determination and creating a privileged ethnic group within a nation with the objective of discriminating against all others.  Confusing the two, and trying to make it appear as if everybody did it, is hasbara, plain and simple.
> 
> Shusha's posting didn't surprise me at all, given his/her propensities.  It'd be disappointing if you actually, after thorough consideration, agreed with that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You're forced to set up a false equivalence in order to dismiss my point and falsely demonize Israel.  You've introduced apartheid South Africa and Nazi Germany as though they were equivalent to national self-determination.  They are not.  If you wanted to bring up national self-determination you could have brought up Croatia, Serbia, Montenegro, Kosovo, Slovenia, Bosnia and Herzevogina, Macedonia, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Moldova, Estonia, Armenia, Lithuania, Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, Russia, Georgia, Ukraine, Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, Turkey and Jordan.  Maybe you would have brought up peoples who seek, but not yet have achieved self-determination:  First Nations peoples of US and Canada, Tibet, Catalonia, Western Sahara, Palestine.
> 
> The UN Charter, Article 1.2 states definitively that its purpose is, in part:  _2. To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and *self-determination of peoples*, and to take other appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace_; (emphasis mine)
> 
> The Constitution of Slovenia, as an example, states:  _the fundamental and permanent *right of the Slovene nation to self-determination*; and from the historical fact that in a centuries-long struggle for national liberation we Slovenes have established our national identity and asserted our statehood, the Assembly of the Republic of Slovenia hereby adopts.. (emphasis mine)
> 
> Slovenia is a state of all its citizens and is founded on the _*permanent and inalienable right of the Slovene nation to self-determination.  *(emphasis mine)
> 
> Instead of bringing up those examples you introduced two times and places in history which were conditioned, not on the self-determination of a peoples, but on the discrimination, pogroms, persecution and genocides of another peoples.  There is no equivalence here.  A declaration of self-determination, of itself, is not the persecution of another peoples, nor does it create conditions of persecution of another people.  I am relatively certain there is no uproar about Slovenia's declaration of self-determination, nor of any other peoples'.  And I am certain you will not declare Slovenia an apartheid state.  There is a double standard here operating because its Israel.
> 
> And, let's be clear.  The REASON why Israel feels the need to include a statement like this in their Basic Law is because their absolute, inherent right to self-determination is continually being denied by Arabs, Arab Palestinians and globally by useful idiots like you.  The need to entrench this statement in law is RESULT of discrimination, persecution and pogroms directed against the Jewish people who are being actively prevented from having the same rights of other peoples, and whose desire to have the same rights as other peoples is being deliberately and falsely conflated with apartheid and with Nazism.
Click to expand...


The moral equivalence is sickening, and mendacious.

And worst of all, not even intelligent.


----------



## Shusha

Humanity said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> Show me one post where I demonize Jews
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jew traits
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If that is "demonization" you need to get a slightly thicker skin!
Click to expand...


That is not demonization.  That is just plain and simple antisemitism.  Claiming that an entire peoples collectively hold certain "traits" which can be identified with those peoples is standard, old school antisemitism.

Demonization is where you wrongly condemn a peoples for something they have not done.  Like build Bantustans.


----------



## Humanity

Indeependent said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well, I don't agree that Israel should annex all of Jerusalem.
> 
> "declare loyalty to Israel" or get deported?
> 
> Well, that would be an interesting move. How many countries have a law like that?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No country should be forced to live with a hostile population actively trying to destroy the State.  In civil conflicts like this one, the solution is to divide the territory and form nations around a specific ethnic population, almost always with a minority of other ethnicities.  This is all I am proposing and I'm proposing it equally for both Israel and Palestine.  Each citizen, currently living in the territory, is given the choice of declaring citizenship -- Israeli or Palestinian -- and residing in their State of citizenship as safe, loyal citizens.  Should they choose to relocate, they are given compensation to assist them with doing so.  Seems fair and reasonable, and allows each citizen to choose what is best for them and their family.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Except there is a slight issue over land.
> 
> Who will decide that? Israel?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> God.
> And thus far the Jews seems to be the winners.
Click to expand...


If only she existed!


----------



## Coyote

Humanity said:


> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Arab Israelis are not being moved to Bantustans.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yet!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Sure.  Let's demonize an entire peoples because of what you imagine they might do in the future.  Seems fair.  /sarcasm
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm not demonizing anyone... Certainly not "an entire peoples"!
> 
> There in lies a common issue with Team Israel...
> 
> The distinction between people and politics!
> 
> My critisizing Israeli politics and policies does not, as you might claim, make me antisemetic!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> What makes you antisemitic is that demonizing is all you do.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh dear, another retarded liar zionut!
> 
> Show me one post where I demonize Jews
Click to expand...

You don’t, it is just another attempt to derail the thread into personal attacks. Ignore it.

Criticizing Israeli policy is not anti Semitic, I think some tend to use it as a means of stifling opposition.  When it becomes potentially anti Semitic, imo, is when Israel is held to a different standard than other comparable countries or it turns in to a conversation on “the Jews”.  Recognizing the rights and grievances of minorities or the Palestinians is not anti Semitic.

Israel is different in some ways in that it is in the midst of an unresolved territorial conflict, a capital claimed two peoples, mixed indiginous populations, territory populated by a stateless population with diminished rights, a it is the only nation I am aware of who’s right to even exist is still being argued generations later.


----------



## Humanity

Shusha said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not demonizing anyone... Certainly not "an entire peoples"!
> 
> There in lies a common issue with Team Israel...
> 
> The distinction between people and politics!
> 
> My critisizing Israeli politics and policies does not, as you might claim, make me antisemetic!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Making negative assumptions about the future behaviour of Israel and accusing Israel of an apartheid condition which they have not actually created is most certainly not fair criticism of Israeli politics and policies.  It can only be demonization.
Click to expand...


STOP MAKING SHIT UP!

Jesus! Team Israel are on good liar form today! 

Can you please show me where I accused Israel of apartheid?

Consummate liars!!


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not demonizing anyone... Certainly not "an entire peoples"!
> 
> There in lies a common issue with Team Israel...
> 
> The distinction between people and politics!
> 
> My critisizing Israeli politics and policies does not, as you might claim, make me antisemetic!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Making negative assumptions about the future behaviour of Israel and accusing Israel of an apartheid condition which they have not actually created is most certainly not fair criticism of Israeli politics and policies.  It can only be demonization.
Click to expand...

We do that often with the Palestinians as well as to how their future state would be Jew free or governed.


----------



## Humanity

Coyote said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yet!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sure.  Let's demonize an entire peoples because of what you imagine they might do in the future.  Seems fair.  /sarcasm
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm not demonizing anyone... Certainly not "an entire peoples"!
> 
> There in lies a common issue with Team Israel...
> 
> The distinction between people and politics!
> 
> My critisizing Israeli politics and policies does not, as you might claim, make me antisemetic!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> What makes you antisemitic is that demonizing is all you do.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh dear, another retarded liar zionut!
> 
> Show me one post where I demonize Jews
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You don’t, it is just another attempt to derail the thread into personal attacks. Ignore it.
> 
> Criticizing Israeli policy is not anti Semitic, I think some tend to use it as a means of stifling opposition.  When it becomes potentially anti Semitic, imo, is when Israel is held to a different standard than other comparable countries or it turns in to a conversation on “the Jews”.  Recognizing the rights and grievances of minorities or the Palestinians is not anti Semitic.
> 
> Israel is different in some ways in that it is in the midst of an unresolved territorial conflict, a capital claimed two peoples, mixed indiginous populations, territory populated by a stateless population with diminished rights, a it is the only nation I am aware of who’s right to even exist is still being argued generations later.
Click to expand...


Interesting comment...

"when Israel is held to a different standard than other comparable countries" - When Team Israel holds Israel to a different standard it seems to be acceptable and, when you read through the multitude of comments here that is EXACTLY what Team Israel does...

I mean, seriously, how many other countries/peoples were chosen by 'god'? How many other people consider themselves the 'chosen ones'?

It is this arrogance, this blind faith (faith being another word for ignorance) that is used time and again by Team Israel to try and differentiate themselves from the rest of humanity!

The arrogance and the hypocrisy is astonishing!


----------



## Humanity

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not demonizing anyone... Certainly not "an entire peoples"!
> 
> There in lies a common issue with Team Israel...
> 
> The distinction between people and politics!
> 
> My critisizing Israeli politics and policies does not, as you might claim, make me antisemetic!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Making negative assumptions about the future behaviour of Israel and accusing Israel of an apartheid condition which they have not actually created is most certainly not fair criticism of Israeli politics and policies.  It can only be demonization.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> We do that often with the Palestinians as well as to how their future state would be Jew free or governed.
Click to expand...


Spot on!


----------



## Shusha

Humanity said:


> STOP MAKING SHIT UP!
> 
> Jesus! Team Israel are on good liar form today!
> 
> *Can you please show me where I accused Israel of apartheid?*
> 
> Consummate liars!!



Post #698



Humanity said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Arab Israelis are not being moved to Bantustans.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yet!
Click to expand...


The obvious implication is apartheid.  And you are demonizing Israel for something they have not, in fact, done based on a belief you have that they will do such a thing at some point in the future.  That is NOT fair criticism of Israel's policies.  That is demonization.


----------



## Coyote

Humanity said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sure.  Let's demonize an entire peoples because of what you imagine they might do in the future.  Seems fair.  /sarcasm
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not demonizing anyone... Certainly not "an entire peoples"!
> 
> There in lies a common issue with Team Israel...
> 
> The distinction between people and politics!
> 
> My critisizing Israeli politics and policies does not, as you might claim, make me antisemetic!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> What makes you antisemitic is that demonizing is all you do.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh dear, another retarded liar zionut!
> 
> Show me one post where I demonize Jews
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You don’t, it is just another attempt to derail the thread into personal attacks. Ignore it.
> 
> Criticizing Israeli policy is not anti Semitic, I think some tend to use it as a means of stifling opposition.  When it becomes potentially anti Semitic, imo, is when Israel is held to a different standard than other comparable countries or it turns in to a conversation on “the Jews”.  Recognizing the rights and grievances of minorities or the Palestinians is not anti Semitic.
> 
> Israel is different in some ways in that it is in the midst of an unresolved territorial conflict, a capital claimed two peoples, mixed indiginous populations, territory populated by a stateless population with diminished rights, a it is the only nation I am aware of who’s right to even exist is still being argued generations later.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Interesting comment...
> 
> "when Israel is held to a different standard than other comparable countries" - When Team Israel holds Israel to a different standard it seems to be acceptable and, when you read through the multitude of comments here that is EXACTLY what Team Israel does...
Click to expand...


It depends on who in Team Israel you mean...and in what particulars.  



> I mean, seriously, how many other countries/peoples were chosen by 'god'? How many other people consider themselves the 'chosen ones'?



Islam, Christianity...



> It is this arrogance, this blind faith (faith being another word for ignorance) that is used time and again by Team Israel to try and differentiate themselves from the rest of humanity!
> 
> The arrogance and the hypocrisy is astonishing!



Ugh...Christians and Muslims act the same...they believe God made them special through special prophets who spoke for Her.

Humanity, don’t you see that in these words you are demonizing?  You are making generalizations about Jews as a group, not Israeli policies or culture


----------



## Indeependent

Humanity said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well, I don't agree that Israel should annex all of Jerusalem.
> 
> "declare loyalty to Israel" or get deported?
> 
> Well, that would be an interesting move. How many countries have a law like that?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No country should be forced to live with a hostile population actively trying to destroy the State.  In civil conflicts like this one, the solution is to divide the territory and form nations around a specific ethnic population, almost always with a minority of other ethnicities.  This is all I am proposing and I'm proposing it equally for both Israel and Palestine.  Each citizen, currently living in the territory, is given the choice of declaring citizenship -- Israeli or Palestinian -- and residing in their State of citizenship as safe, loyal citizens.  Should they choose to relocate, they are given compensation to assist them with doing so.  Seems fair and reasonable, and allows each citizen to choose what is best for them and their family.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Except there is a slight issue over land.
> 
> Who will decide that? Israel?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> God.
> And thus far the Jews seems to be the winners.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If only she existed!
Click to expand...

God *created* the genders, God is not a *gendet*.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> We do that often with the Palestinians as well as to how their future state would be Jew free or governed.



No we don't.  For starters, their future state is ALREADY Jew-free.


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> We do that often with the Palestinians as well as to how their future state would be Jew free or governed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No we don't.  For starters, their future state is ALREADY Jew-free.
Click to expand...

I have seen multiple claims by those claiming no Jews would be allowed in a Palestinian State.  That is as much speculation and demonizing as speculating Israel’s new law will lead to greater discrimination.  We don’t know what a Palestinian State will bring or what eventual constitution will be decided upon.


----------



## Olde Europe

Coyote said:


> You are forcing me to argue the other side here by your application of false equivalence, namely apartheid comparisons.  Let’s consider that...
> 
> We have three areas under consideration, 4 actually...and we have multiple systems of law in play: PA, Israeli civil law, Israeli military law.  PA law is in effect in areas controlled by Palestinians, Military law is used on Palestinians in Israeli controlled areas while Israeli civil is in effect on Israelis in those same territories (which in itself creates serious injustices) and Israel itself where Israeli civil law is in effect.  There is also a difference in the law itself and then the actions of civil authorities and society in how they choose to apply it.  To claim apartheid you need to show the laws that support it.
> 
> Apartheid created, by law, a completely segregated society in which blacks had legally imposed redirected rights, could only live in deceptively named and resource poor “homelands” and were subject to laws that enforced seperation and inferior status.  In Israel itself what laws do that?
> 
> The law in this topic only states that Jews can expertise the right of self determination IN Israel.  That means others can’t create a seperate state within Israel as part of self determination, if iI understand it correctly.  It doesn’t seem like it would effect non Jews much, especially since they removed the settlement part.  But I am a little uneasy...I think we will have to see how this plays out in civil society.  It is not apartheid however.  Arab Israelis are not being moved to Bantustans.



That's pretty amazing.  No, I do not "force" you to do anything other than to defend your "Agree", or drop it, as I think you should.  And no, we do not have to consider four areas, as in the context of the basic law we have just one area, that is, the region within which that basic law is in force.  Moreover, apartheid at the core is a state that creates two different sets of laws to privilege one group over another.  How that plays out in detail is subject to national differences and flavors.  You do an admirable job of digging up evidence of the Israeli state systematically depriving Arabs of educational opportunity by systematic underfunding of their schools.  That's the bantustan right there.

Finally, there is no "false equivalence", and, once again, I ask:

"The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of South Africa is unique to White South Africans."

Acceptable?  How about this:

"The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Germany is unique to Aryan Germans."

This is not equating Israel to Nazi Germany - that would be preposterous.  It's just to point out what an atrocity this basic law actually is.

National self-determination either includes *all* citizens, or it creates an apartheid state.  There is no third.  The exclusion of Arabs from national self-determination - which should be the right of all citizens (as it is the right of all citizens of EU member states) - may well be a frontal assault on Arab voting rights, for that is how national self-determination usually, mainly plays out.  It is also, in conjunction with "the development of *Jewish* settlement", a recipe for more rigorously discriminatory housing and land use, and more and more rigorous discrimination against Arab settlements.  It is, most notably an assault on the 2000 Ka'adan ruling, which struck down long-standing discriminatory housing and land use policies.  Under the current basic law, that ruling is obsolete, and with that, the creation of segregated communities became much easier and it would no longer be subject to successful challenges.  See this for a primer:

The purpose of the Admissions Committees Law is no secret in Israel. Fifteen years earlier, on March 8th, 2000, the Supreme Court issued a major ruling that the town of Katzir, built on state land by the Jewish Agency, could not deny the right of the Arab Ka'adan family to live in the town simply on the basis that they were not Jewish. This was the first time that Palestinian citizens of Israel, a fifth of the state's population, successfully challenged the legality of "Jewish-only" communities, many of which, though small, were strategically located to prevent the expansion of Palestinian towns and had bylaws that forbade the leasing of property to non-Jews, though built on confiscated Palestinian lands.​
The monumental outrage over this ruling was a harbinger of things to come.

This basic law has nothing to do with forbidding the creation of a separate state within Israel, it just excludes Arabs (non-Jews) from the right of self-determination.  They shall have no influence on the government that serves them, and, in that light, Arab Israelis aren't even citizens in the definition usually applied in Western democracies.

It's sure to get worse.  Once the discrimination increases, and legal challenges to it are sure to become ever more pointless as that basic law filters through the court system and the re-interpretation of law, what's left to counter it?


----------



## Sixties Fan

Olde Europe said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> You are forcing me to argue the other side here by your application of false equivalence, namely apartheid comparisons.  Let’s consider that...
> 
> We have three areas under consideration, 4 actually...and we have multiple systems of law in play: PA, Israeli civil law, Israeli military law.  PA law is in effect in areas controlled by Palestinians, Military law is used on Palestinians in Israeli controlled areas while Israeli civil is in effect on Israelis in those same territories (which in itself creates serious injustices) and Israel itself where Israeli civil law is in effect.  There is also a difference in the law itself and then the actions of civil authorities and society in how they choose to apply it.  To claim apartheid you need to show the laws that support it.
> 
> Apartheid created, by law, a completely segregated society in which blacks had legally imposed redirected rights, could only live in deceptively named and resource poor “homelands” and were subject to laws that enforced seperation and inferior status.  In Israel itself what laws do that?
> 
> The law in this topic only states that Jews can expertise the right of self determination IN Israel.  That means others can’t create a seperate state within Israel as part of self determination, if iI understand it correctly.  It doesn’t seem like it would effect non Jews much, especially since they removed the settlement part.  But I am a little uneasy...I think we will have to see how this plays out in civil society.  It is not apartheid however.  Arab Israelis are not being moved to Bantustans.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's pretty amazing.  No, I do not "force" you to do anything other than to defend your "Agree", or drop it, as I think you should.  And no, we do not have to consider four areas, as in the context of the basic law we have just one area, that is, the region within which that basic law is in force.  Moreover, apartheid at the core is a state that creates two different sets of laws to privilege one group over another.  How that plays out in detail is subject to national differences and flavors.  You do an admirable job of digging up evidence of the Israeli state systematically depriving Arabs of educational opportunity by systematic underfunding of their schools.  That's the bantustan right there.
> 
> Finally, there is no "false equivalence", and, once again, I ask:
> 
> "The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of South Africa is unique to White South Africans."
> 
> Acceptable?  How about this:
> 
> "The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Germany is unique to Aryan Germans."
> 
> This is not equating Israel to Nazi Germany - that would be preposterous.  It's just to point out what an atrocity this basic law actually is.
> 
> National self-determination either includes *all* citizens, or it creates an apartheid state.  There is no third.  The exclusion of Arabs from national self-determination - which should be the right of all citizens (as it is the right of all citizens of EU member states) - may well be a frontal assault on Arab voting rights, for that is how national self-determination usually, mainly plays out.  It is also, in conjunction with "the development of *Jewish* settlement", a recipe for more rigorously discriminatory housing and land use, and more and more rigorous discrimination against Arab settlements.  It is, most notably an assault on the 2000 Ka'adan ruling, which struck down long-standing discriminatory housing and land use policies.  Under the current basic law, that ruling is obsolete, and with that, the creation of segregated communities became much easier and it would no longer be subject to successful challenges.  See this for a primer:
> 
> The purpose of the Admissions Committees Law is no secret in Israel. Fifteen years earlier, on March 8th, 2000, the Supreme Court issued a major ruling that the town of Katzir, built on state land by the Jewish Agency, could not deny the right of the Arab Ka'adan family to live in the town simply on the basis that they were not Jewish. This was the first time that Palestinian citizens of Israel, a fifth of the state's population, successfully challenged the legality of "Jewish-only" communities, many of which, though small, were strategically located to prevent the expansion of Palestinian towns and had bylaws that forbade the leasing of property to non-Jews, though built on confiscated Palestinian lands.​
> The monumental outrage over this ruling was a harbinger of things to come.
> 
> This basic law has nothing to do with forbidding the creation of a separate state within Israel, it just excludes Arabs (non-Jews) from the right of self-determination.  They shall have no influence on the government that serves them, and, in that light, Arab Israelis aren't even citizens in the definition usually applied in Western democracies.
> 
> It's sure to get worse.  Once the discrimination increases, and legal challenges to it are sure to become ever more pointless as that basic law filters through the court system and the re-interpretation of law, what's left to counter it?
Click to expand...

Total Ooee

Arab Muslims have control of 80 % of the Mandate for Palestine.
78% are in the hands of the Hashemite Arabs.
Gaza is in the hands of Muslim Arabs

Within Israel, of course there will be no Second State which will become independent of what is left for the Jews.  ISRAEL.

Arab Muslims and Christians who have chosen to become citizens of Israel ARE citizens of Israel.  They do have political representation in the Knesset. 

 The issue would be with those politicians and not with Israel, as those Muslim politicians can only think of undermining the State of Israel in order to some day the State of Israel would cease to exist.

It is called having a fifth column in one's country, where they work very hard, not for the country, but its enemies.

NO.  There will not ever be a "second State, an Arab Muslim one"  INSIDE  ISRAEL, anymore than there will ever be a Confederate States of America within America.

This information gets in the way of you and others cheering for the day Israel will be destroyed?

Too bad.


----------



## Shusha

Humanity said:


> Interesting comment...
> 
> "when Israel is held to a different standard than other comparable countries" - When Team Israel holds Israel to a different standard it seems to be acceptable and, when you read through the multitude of comments here that is EXACTLY what Team Israel does...
> 
> I mean, seriously, how many other countries/peoples were chosen by 'god'? How many other people consider themselves the 'chosen ones'?
> 
> It is this arrogance, this blind faith (faith being another word for ignorance) that is used time and again by Team Israel to try and differentiate themselves from the rest of humanity!
> 
> The arrogance and the hypocrisy is astonishing!



The basis for Israel's self-determination is historical and cultural, like any other national group.  While religious ideas form a part of culture, they are not the primary basis for Israel's self-determination or sovereignty. 

Furthermore, no outsider has any right to judge the cultural or religious foundation for anyone's national self-determination and sovereignty.  It is SELF-determined.  That is the whole point.  

And, in fact, regular posters on Team Israel do not use "choseness" as a primary argument for Israel's existence or right to exist.  The most prominent posters on TI (myself, Rocco, Sixties, rylah) to my recollection have never brought it up.  I have occasionally seen religious foundation arguments from some of TI's secondary posters, but not often, and not usually in the context of choseness.  

The idea of" choseness is not originating with us -- it is PUT ON US by others.   (This thread is an example.  Who brought up choseness?  Not any one of us.)  It is used as a tool to demonize the Jewish people, reject the self-determination of the Jewish people, make the self-actualization of the Jewish people a separation from humanity.  

The NORM in the world at this time is the inherent, inviolable right to self-determination for cultural groups.  Anything which tries to undermine that in the Jewish people is a double standard.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> We do that often with the Palestinians as well as to how their future state would be Jew free or governed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No we don't.  For starters, their future state is ALREADY Jew-free.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I have seen multiple claims by those claiming no Jews would be allowed in a Palestinian State.  That is as much speculation and demonizing as speculating Israel’s new law will lead to greater discrimination.  We don’t know what a Palestinian State will bring or what eventual constitution will be decided upon.
Click to expand...


But we do know what exists now. The future state is ALREADY Jew-free and the intent to keep it that way is well-vocalized by the current governments of Palestine.  And both governments have constitutions which articulate these concepts -- such as death or hard labor for those who sell property to "enemies".  

The double standard is operating here.  There is no uproar when Palestine and Gaza announce their self-determination for the ARAB people within the greater ARAB nation, with ARABIC language and ARABIC (Muslim) religion and the Temple Mount and Cave of the Patriarchs being (solely) ARAB (Muslim) holy sites.  But when the Jewish people do it...suddenly its discrimination and apartheid and Nazism.


----------



## Shusha

Olde Europe said:


> Arab Israelis aren't even citizens in the definition usually applied in Western democracies.



THAT is a wild statement.  Defend with facts.


----------



## Shusha

Olde Europe said:


> National self-determination either includes *all* citizens, or it creates an apartheid state.



So, any State which names a specific ethnic or cultural group in its constitution is an apartheid state?  Slovenia is an apartheid State because it mentions that its purpose is the self-determination of the Slovene people?

(Slovenia is, btw, about 15% non-Slovene)


----------



## flacaltenn

Shusha said:


> Olde Europe said:
> 
> 
> 
> National self-determination either includes *all* citizens, or it creates an apartheid state.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So, any State which names a specific ethnic or cultural group in its constitution is an apartheid state?  Slovenia is an apartheid State because it mentions that its purpose is the self-determination of the Slovene people?
> 
> (Slovenia is, btw, about 15% non-Slovene)
Click to expand...


I can understand the statement from THIS POV -- which I have not seen skimming this thread. 

But first, let's get RID of this apartheid herring. The VAST majority of Palestinians do NOT want be citizens. Do not WANT to live under Israeli law. That's not apartheid. It's resistance. And they're welcome to the struggle. And in most ways I SUPPORT any amount of autonomy that Palis can organize. Truth is -- They suck at organizing a central govt. And that's why they are where they are.

Also --- Arab political parties candidates got nearly 450,000 votes in the 2015 national elections. THESE folks WANT to be Israeli citizens. They have 18 current seats in the Knesset and the 3rd largest caucus or faction in Israeli politics. Again --- that is NOT an Apartheid state.


--->
So -- why the declaration? It's not a notice of imminent cleansing. NOT a declaration of superiority in numbers. The way I see it -- they are simply stating that Israel will be a sanctuary for world Jewry under persecution. *It's more of a IMMIGRATION statement and DEMOGRAPHICS statement then anything sinister or exclusive.*

Because there are assimilation and immigration issues THERE as well as most of the rest of world. Look at the 2 links below. Arab participation in the govt of Israel is increasing over the years. I don't think that's seen a threat. Because A LOT of Arab Bedouins, Druze, Christians even Sunni Muslims are HEROES to Israelis. The Bedouins in particular. They serve in the IDF and are irreplaceable for the missions and posts that they staff.

List of Arab members of the Knesset - Wikipedia   AND

Joint List - Wikipedia

2015 elections
Main article: Israeli legislative election, 2015
The Joint List won 13 seats in the 2015 Knesset elections with 10.6% of the total vote, becoming the third-largest party in the 20th Knesset.[22] Odeh stated that he intended for the alliance to work on shared issues with center-left Jewish opposition parties and seek membership of key parliamentary committees.[23]

One of the party's first actions after the elections was to trade the two seats that, as the third-largest faction, it was entitled to on the Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee for two more seats on the Finance Committee, primarily to better address its constituents' financial and housing concerns.[24]


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL

Humanity said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sure.  Let's demonize an entire peoples because of what you imagine they might do in the future.  Seems fair.  /sarcasm
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not demonizing anyone... Certainly not "an entire peoples"!
> 
> There in lies a common issue with Team Israel...
> 
> The distinction between people and politics!
> 
> My critisizing Israeli politics and policies does not, as you might claim, make me antisemetic!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> What makes you antisemitic is that demonizing is all you do.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh dear, another retarded liar zionut!
> 
> Show me one post where I demonize Jews
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You don’t, it is just another attempt to derail the thread into personal attacks. Ignore it.
> 
> Criticizing Israeli policy is not anti Semitic, I think some tend to use it as a means of stifling opposition.  When it becomes potentially anti Semitic, imo, is when Israel is held to a different standard than other comparable countries or it turns in to a conversation on “the Jews”.  Recognizing the rights and grievances of minorities or the Palestinians is not anti Semitic.
> 
> Israel is different in some ways in that it is in the midst of an unresolved territorial conflict, a capital claimed two peoples, mixed indiginous populations, territory populated by a stateless population with diminished rights, a it is the only nation I am aware of who’s right to even exist is still being argued generations later.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Interesting comment...
> 
> "when Israel is held to a different standard than other comparable countries" - When Team Israel holds Israel to a different standard it seems to be acceptable and, when you read through the multitude of comments here that is EXACTLY what Team Israel does...
> 
> I mean, seriously, how many other countries/peoples were chosen by 'god'? How many other people consider themselves the 'chosen ones'?
> 
> It is this arrogance, this blind faith (faith being another word for ignorance) that is used time and again by Team Israel to try and differentiate themselves from the rest of humanity!
> 
> The arrogance and the hypocrisy is astonishing!
Click to expand...


How many Jewish people do you know who  walks around saying they were” chosen?” Many other religions feel the same way..,,,,


----------



## Dogmaphobe

ILOVEISRAEL said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not demonizing anyone... Certainly not "an entire peoples"!
> 
> There in lies a common issue with Team Israel...
> 
> The distinction between people and politics!
> 
> My critisizing Israeli politics and policies does not, as you might claim, make me antisemetic!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What makes you antisemitic is that demonizing is all you do.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh dear, another retarded liar zionut!
> 
> Show me one post where I demonize Jews
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You don’t, it is just another attempt to derail the thread into personal attacks. Ignore it.
> 
> Criticizing Israeli policy is not anti Semitic, I think some tend to use it as a means of stifling opposition.  When it becomes potentially anti Semitic, imo, is when Israel is held to a different standard than other comparable countries or it turns in to a conversation on “the Jews”.  Recognizing the rights and grievances of minorities or the Palestinians is not anti Semitic.
> 
> Israel is different in some ways in that it is in the midst of an unresolved territorial conflict, a capital claimed two peoples, mixed indiginous populations, territory populated by a stateless population with diminished rights, a it is the only nation I am aware of who’s right to even exist is still being argued generations later.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Interesting comment...
> 
> "when Israel is held to a different standard than other comparable countries" - When Team Israel holds Israel to a different standard it seems to be acceptable and, when you read through the multitude of comments here that is EXACTLY what Team Israel does...
> 
> I mean, seriously, how many other countries/peoples were chosen by 'god'? How many other people consider themselves the 'chosen ones'?
> 
> It is this arrogance, this blind faith (faith being another word for ignorance) that is used time and again by Team Israel to try and differentiate themselves from the rest of humanity!
> 
> The arrogance and the hypocrisy is astonishing!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How many Jewish people do you know who  walks around saying they were” chosen?” Many other religions feel the same way..,,,,
Click to expand...




"So, God, why did you choose US to have to put up with all this antisemitic  bull shit?!"


----------



## Shusha

Re:  Education

The problem with some discussions on this board is how quickly most will read one article and then jump on the !Apartheid! bandwagon.  (I appreciate you, Coyote because you don't). 

The education system, and its funding, in Israel is complex.  A few points:

1.  The Ministry of Education does not make this information publicly available in usable form.  It has to be extrapolated from various different documents, which creates all sorts of issues with understanding the information and selecting data.

2.  Funding for education comes from a variety of sources.  There are government-funded official schools, government-funded, registered but unofficial schools, municipal-funded schools and privately funded schools.  In addition, there are refundable tuition payments, non-refundable tuition payments, expenses charged to parents, and contributions from various philanthropist groups.  So when we are discussing inequality in funding, which funding do we mean?

3.  There are other complex issues at play here, aside from the conflict itself -- physical issues like overcrowding in places where there are no more buildings or land to build new schools, such as the Old City; transportation issues, buildings in need of renovation, etc. 

4.  There are cultural issues like competing curricula and a resistance to the "other" curricula, the importance of employment over education, gender issues, etc.  Two examples:  1.  The Arab Druze, until recently, had a cultural leaning for its young people towards IDF careers for various cultural reasons.  Within the past five-ten years, this has shifted to a drive for higher education, resulting in a drive for improvement in education at all grade levels.  This has been remarkably successful.  The best school in Israel is a Druze school with, if I remember correctly, ~75% of its students receiving honors marks (compared to an average of ~10% in Jewish schools).  2.  There has been an historic gap in matriculation results between Arabs and Jews (its largely closed in the past five years, but has been an historic problem).  Arabs both took and passed the matriculation exams with far less frequency than their Jewish counterparts.  Matriculation certificates are necessary to attend post-secondary institutions.  !Apartheid!  Well, wait. The matriculation exams are based on a specific curriculum -- a curriculum that the Arab population in Israel rejects for cultural reasons.  Israel could force them to take the Israel curriculum but then, !Apartheid! again. 

5.  The outcomes of Arab and Jewish students education are virtually identical in 2018, if one adjusts for socioeconomic status.  Low-income Jews and low-income Arabs perform equally in all measurements regarding education.  As do middle-income and high-income groups. 

6.  Government funding is provided to all schools on a per-pupil and a per-classroom basis.  All pupils receive the same funding and all classrooms receive the same funding.  That's the base funding formula and accounts for 90% of the funding of government schools  The disparities often come up in deciding the "top-ups" for various reasons in various communities.  Israel tops-up lower income schools, for example.  Or schools in needs of new classrooms or expansions, etc.  These are complex decisions, and if like most nations, there is never enough budget money to go around.

7.  Municipal funding is determined by the municipality government.  Those governments tend to be Arab in predominately Arab communities and Jewish in predominately Jewish communities.  Arab governments tend to allocate fewer resources to education, broadly speaking, than Jewish ones do.

8.  As far as I can tell, if you look at the data in the studies many of these articles are built around, they quote only the statistics which make Israel look discriminatory.  They quote that Jewish students receive, as example, 20,000 NIS per student, while Arabs receive 16,000 NIS.  But that is only for one segment of the population.  In the other segments the budget is comparable, and in one Arabs receive MORE funding.  These data also are based on TOTAL funding and not government or municipal funding, so claims that this is deliberate institutionalized discrimination seems misleading.  And I can't find any data at all about Jewish schools in Jerusalem receiving twice the funding of Arab schools.  I can't find the source of that information.

9.  Weirdly, I also turned up an article about thousands of "missing" Arab children.  These are children who are registered at school, and therefore funded, but who never appear in an actual classroom.  Don't even know what to do with that. 


My point is not to absolve Israel from discrimination.  I have said time and again that there is clearly deeply rooted, even systemic discrimination in Israel.  I have also found articles noting the inequality of funding of schools in Canada (white vs. First Nations), in the US (white vs. POC), in Australia (white vs. Maori). In fact, I'd venture to guess that most multi-ethnic and multi-cultural nations struggle with these issues.   But the charge of apartheid, institutionalized deliberate government discrimination, second-class citizens, non-citizens is patently, demonstrably, false.


----------



## Olde Europe

*A Racist Jewish State*

There is a very thin line between a democratic Jewish state and a racist one. This week the line was crossed.
Haaretz Editorial
Jul 20, 2007 12:00 AM

Every day the Knesset has the option of passing laws that will advance Israel as a democratic Jewish state or turn it into a racist Jewish state. There is a very thin line between the two. This week, the line was crossed. If the Knesset legal counselor did not consider the bill entitled "the Jewish National Fund Law" as sufficiently racist to keep it off the agenda, it is hard to imagine what legislation she will consider racist.

In 1995 the Supreme Court rescued the state from callously discriminating against its Arab citizens through the Ka'adan case, which prohibited the Israel Lands Administration from discriminating against non-Jews by leasing land through the Jewish Agency. Since then the attorney general has stated that such discrimination is unacceptable - also when it is carried out through the Jewish National Fund. The MKs were unable to accept this egalitarian ruling, and on Wednesday a large majority of 65 voted in favor of a preliminary reading permitting such discrimination. The bill is also backed by the head of the Knesset Constitution, Law and Justice Committee, MK Menahem Ben-Sasson.

Any explanation by the supporters of the bill seeking to beautify it should be rejected immediately by anyone who cares about the country's image. This bill reflects an abasement of the Zionist enterprise to lows never imagined in the Declaration of Independence. Even though the Jewish National Fund purchased the lands for the Jewish people in the Diaspora, the State of Israel has already been established and these lands must now serve all its citizens.

For those living for tomorrow and not the past, the aim is to create in Israel a healthy, progressive state where the needs of the two peoples should concern the leaders and legislators. The Jewish National Fund's land policy counters the interests of the state and cannot discriminate by law against the minority living in Israel.

The clause in the bill stating that "the leasing of JNF lands for the purpose of settling Jews will not be seen as unacceptable discrimination," even though it involves 13 percent of state-controlled lands and allows for further expressions of discrimination. For example, the establishment of a university only for Jews on JNF land, or a hospital, or a movie theater.

It is not surprising that MK Uri Ariel, who favors the redemption of lands by Jews also beyond the Green Line, is the person who initiated the Jewish National Fund bill. But the support of Benjamin Netanyahu, Ami Ayalon, Michael Eitan, Reuven Rivlin and Shalom Simhon is a very bad omen for the future of legislation in Israel. The Ka'adan case in the Supreme Court failed to bring about change. The power to discriminate was passed on to communities' acceptance committees that reject candidates by reverting to the clause of "being ill-suited to the community." If it was not for the Supreme Court's ruling in the Ka'adan case, it would have been possible also to reject non-Jewish candidates from Russia.

The Ka'adan ruling was exceptional in setting red lines, allowing a broad range for change, establishing norms and preventing the debasement of the rule book. It turns out that the Supreme Court is not omnipotent. In an instant, a racist Knesset can overturn its rulings.​
This is the spirit out of which that latest basic law was born, reinforcing discrimination, hurrying up the creation of bantustans, and, quite possibly, restrict political participation rights.  Anyone who cares about Israel as a democratic state should be horrified.  Whoever isn't, cannot plausibly claim to be a friend of Israel.  That means, in particular, the hasbara peddlers, even in case they actually believe the nonsense they're selling.


----------



## admonit

Shusha said:


> My point is not to absolve Israel from discrimination.  I have said time and again that there is clearly deeply rooted, even systemic discrimination in Israel.


What you are saying is not enough. Prove it. Until now I didn't see even one confirmation.


----------



## Shusha

admonit said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> My point is not to absolve Israel from discrimination.  I have said time and again that there is clearly deeply rooted, even systemic discrimination in Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> What you are saying is not enough. Prove it. Until now I didn't see even one confirmation.
Click to expand...


You are arguing that Israel is discrimination-free?


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL

Shusha said:


> admonit said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> My point is not to absolve Israel from discrimination.  I have said time and again that there is clearly deeply rooted, even systemic discrimination in Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> What you are saying is not enough. Prove it. Until now I didn't see even one confirmation.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are arguing that Israel is discrimination-free?
Click to expand...


Even if they are; So what? Look at the AntiSemetic background of the Arab World long before 1948


----------



## Coyote

ILOVEISRAEL said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> admonit said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> My point is not to absolve Israel from discrimination.  I have said time and again that there is clearly deeply rooted, even systemic discrimination in Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> What you are saying is not enough. Prove it. Until now I didn't see even one confirmation.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are arguing that Israel is discrimination-free?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Even if they are; So what? Look at the AntiSemetic background of the Arab World long before 1948
Click to expand...

We can always look at other countries that are worse. Are you saying that it justifies discrimination?


----------



## flacaltenn

Olde Europe said:


> The clause in the bill stating that "the leasing of JNF lands for the purpose of settling Jews will not be seen as unacceptable discrimination," even though it involves 13 percent of state-controlled lands and allows for further expressions of discrimination. For example, the establishment of a university only for Jews on JNF land, or a hospital, or a movie theater.



Again -- the emphasis seems to be on strategic immigration policy -- not discrimination against the fully incorporated CURRENT Arab citizens. What good is the promise and priority of providing sanctuary to World Jewry if the very limited land held BY the state (not occupied territories) is not reserved in a fashion that ALLOWS them to honor that pledge.

You're kinda off in the weeds and so is Ha'Aretz with this editorial.  I encourage you to READ AGAIN the actual bill shown in OP, and point out the places YOU think turns Israel "into a racist Jewish State".  It's not there.

THere's some background on this that I don't know if has been brought up here. There was a requirement at the Founding to write a Constitution for Israel. That never happened. Because there was no way to address the "religious freedom" (or not) within the state. It's not really a Jew/Muslim issue, because religion is not the friction point between most ANYONE in Israel.
(discounting the larger fights between fairly secular and ultra-religious Jews  LOL)

They had to avoid fracturing off the ultra orthodox Jews who would either PREFER a State Religion or go 180 degrees to NOT RECOGNIZING a State because of Biblical beliefs. So -- it was avoided. Instead, there was the Harari Decision that stated that the "Principle Laws" would BE the Constitution.

This law we're discussing had the effect of "amending" the non-existent Constitution with a simple statement that "defines Israel as the Nation State of the Jewish people"..  This is not racism. It's a promise to past and future asylum seekers. It's akin to saying that Oscar Meyer is the official Hot Dog of MLBaseball. It changes NOTHING ELSE in the "Principle Laws" of Israel nor any policy regarding citizens Arab or Jewish.

As I've said -- IMO --- this is "strategic immigration policy" more than any change in the current arrangements. And they are ENTITLED to make that pledge.

Basic Laws of Israel - Wikipedia

Constitution of Israel - Wikipedia


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL

Coyote said:


> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> admonit said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> My point is not to absolve Israel from discrimination.  I have said time and again that there is clearly deeply rooted, even systemic discrimination in Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> What you are saying is not enough. Prove it. Until now I didn't see even one confirmation.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are arguing that Israel is discrimination-free?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Even if they are; So what? Look at the AntiSemetic background of the Arab World long before 1948
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> We can always look at other countries that are worse. Are you saying that it justifies discrimination?
Click to expand...


Tired of the double standard. Why doesn’t the “ International Community “”. Condemn and do something about it?


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> We do that often with the Palestinians as well as to how their future state would be Jew free or governed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No we don't.  For starters, their future state is ALREADY Jew-free.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I have seen multiple claims by those claiming no Jews would be allowed in a Palestinian State.  That is as much speculation and demonizing as speculating Israel’s new law will lead to greater discrimination.  We don’t know what a Palestinian State will bring or what eventual constitution will be decided upon.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> But we do know what exists now. The future state is ALREADY Jew-free and the intent to keep it that way is well-vocalized by the current governments of Palestine.  And both governments have constitutions which articulate these concepts -- such as death or hard labor for those who sell property to "enemies".
> 
> The double standard is operating here.  There is no uproar when Palestine and Gaza announce their self-determination for the ARAB people within the greater ARAB nation, with ARABIC language and ARABIC (Muslim) religion and the Temple Mount and Cave of the Patriarchs being (solely) ARAB (Muslim) holy sites.  But when the Jewish people do it...suddenly its discrimination and apartheid and Nazism.
Click to expand...

It is Jew free because Israel removed them. And Israel IS the enemy. You can’t make judgements on a nonexistent state.  People behave differently once they have a nation, something concrete.  Look at Israel’s transition from multiple militias and visions including some that wanted no Arabs in the future nation, to a cohesive state with a shared vision.

The double standard is that we are not giving the Palestinians the same leeway Israel had when it got its state.  Team Israel has already decided what to hat state would be like when the Palestinians can’t even agree on what it will be like.


----------



## Coyote

ILOVEISRAEL said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> admonit said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> My point is not to absolve Israel from discrimination.  I have said time and again that there is clearly deeply rooted, even systemic discrimination in Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> What you are saying is not enough. Prove it. Until now I didn't see even one confirmation.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are arguing that Israel is discrimination-free?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Even if they are; So what? Look at the AntiSemetic background of the Arab World long before 1948
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> We can always look at other countries that are worse. Are you saying that it justifies discrimination?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Tired of the double standard. Why doesn’t the “ International Community “”. Condemn and do something about it?
Click to expand...

About what exactly?  Discrimination, racism, etc is nothing to be proud of, or to justify because the other guy does it.  My own country still has problems with it, and for all the excuses I hear, I have never heard anyone complain that it shouldn’t matter on because other countries do it.


----------



## abu afak

flacaltenn said:


> Olde Europe said:
> 
> 
> 
> The clause in the bill stating that "the leasing of JNF lands for the purpose of settling Jews will not be seen as unacceptable discrimination," even though it involves 13 percent of state-controlled lands and allows for further expressions of discrimination. For example, the establishment of a university only for Jews on JNF land, or a hospital, or a movie theater.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Again -- the emphasis seems to be on strategic immigration policy -- not discrimination against the fully incorporated CURRENT Arab citizens. What good is the promise and priority of providing sanctuary to World Jewry if the very limited land held BY the state (not occupied territories) is not reserved in a fashion that ALLOWS them to honor that pledge.
> 
> You're kinda off in the weeds and so is Ha'Aretz with this editorial.  I encourage you to READ AGAIN the actual bill shown in OP, and point out the places YOU think turns Israel "into a racist Jewish State".  It's not there.
> 
> THere's some background on this that I don't know if has been brought up here. There was a requirement at the Founding to write a Constitution for Israel. That never happened. Because there was no way to address the "religious freedom" (or not) within the state. It's not really a Jew/Muslim issue, because religion is not the friction point between most ANYONE in Israel.
> (discounting the larger fights between fairly secular and ultra-religious Jews  LOL)
> 
> They had to avoid fracturing off the ultra orthodox Jews who would either PREFER a State Religion or go 180 degrees to NOT RECOGNIZING a State because of Biblical beliefs. So -- it was avoided. Instead, there was the Harari Decision that stated that the "Principle Laws" would BE the Constitution.
> 
> This law we're discussing had the effect of "amending" the non-existent Constitution with a simple statement that "defines Israel as the Nation State of the Jewish people"..  This is not racism. It's a promise to past and future asylum seekers. It's akin to saying that Oscar Meyer is the official Hot Dog of MLBaseball. It changes NOTHING ELSE in the "Principle Laws" of Israel nor any policy regarding citizens Arab or Jewish.
> 
> As I've said -- IMO --- this is "strategic immigration policy" more than any change in the current arrangements. And they are ENTITLED to make that pledge.
> 
> Basic Laws of Israel - Wikipedia
> 
> Constitution of Israel - Wikipedia
Click to expand...

The stated purpose of the British Mandate was to create a "National Home for the Jewish people in Palestine."
This was just a tiny part of the conquered Ottoman lands, 99% of which went to Arabs of various sub-names who now lorded over many TRUE people's like Kurds.

The riot is simply about the 1% arabs didn't get.
But after the War, the Arabs, in the person of Faisal, who did quite well for them due to his buddy 'Lawrence', actually agreed to a Jewish state in All of Palestine AND with a flood of Jewish Refugees to raise up the poor Arab population.. who in good part were tenant farmers, Not land owners.
If you had money in 1900, you lived in Beirut, Damascus, Cairo, not stinking malarial Palestine.
(Most owned Arab land)

This same Faisal who got the Arabs [WTF] 'Jordan' (77% of the Mandate) and gave to a Saudi/Sunni Hashmite Prince/Abdullah.
No Prob with that!
Got the Arabs [WTF is] 'Iraq' to lord over Some Kurds and Shia, as well as Sunni Arabs, and gave it to ANOTHER Hashemite Prince!
No Prob with that.

But only tiny Israel, that he agreed to cede at the time, is 'illegitimate'.

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/...aisaltext.html

*Faisal-Weizman agreement 1919*

His Royal Highness the Emir FAISAL, representing and acting on behalf of the Arab Kingdom of HEJAZ, AND Dr. Chaim Weizmann, representing and acting on behalf of the Zionist Organization, mindful of the racial kinship and ancient bonds existing between the Arabs and the Jewish people, and realising that the surest means of working out the consummation of their national aspirations, is *through the closest possible collaboration in the development of the Arab State and Palestine,* and being desirous further of confirming the good understanding which exists between them, have agreed upon the following articles:

Article I
*The Arab State and Palestine in all their relations* and undertakings shall be controlled by the most cordial goodwill and understanding and to this end Arab and Jewish duly accredited agents shall be established and maintained in their respective territories.

Article II
Immediately following the completion of deliberations of the Peace Conference, *the definite boundaries BETWEEN the Arab State and Palestine shall be determined by a commission to be agreed upon by the parties hereto. *

Article III
In the establishment of the Constitution and Administration of Palestine all such measures shall be adopted as will afford the fullest guarantees for carrying into effect the British Government’s Declaration of the 2nd of November, 1917 (Balfour Declaration-SEH).

Article IV
*All necessary measures will be taken to encourage and stimulate immigration of Jews into Palestine on a large scale, and as quickly as possible* to settle Jewish immigrants upon the land through closer settlement and intensive cultivation of the soil. In taking such measures the Arab peasants and tenant farmers shall be protected in their rights, and shall be assisted in forwarding their economic development.
[.......]​
But it was the Arabs who benefited from British gratefulness/Spoils between the Wars, not the Jews. Brits restricted immigration of Jews into Palestine among other measures.

Palestine, the 23% left after the local Arabs got 'Jordan'/Bulk of the Mandate, was instead divided near in HALF yet again, with both peoples being offered a state: arguably Another state for the Arabs.
Jews accepted, Palestinians didn't despite knowing well for at least 30 Years (Balfour 1917) the Jews were getting one.
`


----------



## flacaltenn

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> We do that often with the Palestinians as well as to how their future state would be Jew free or governed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No we don't.  For starters, their future state is ALREADY Jew-free.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I have seen multiple claims by those claiming no Jews would be allowed in a Palestinian State.  That is as much speculation and demonizing as speculating Israel’s new law will lead to greater discrimination.  We don’t know what a Palestinian State will bring or what eventual constitution will be decided upon.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> But we do know what exists now. The future state is ALREADY Jew-free and the intent to keep it that way is well-vocalized by the current governments of Palestine.  And both governments have constitutions which articulate these concepts -- such as death or hard labor for those who sell property to "enemies".
> 
> The double standard is operating here.  There is no uproar when Palestine and Gaza announce their self-determination for the ARAB people within the greater ARAB nation, with ARABIC language and ARABIC (Muslim) religion and the Temple Mount and Cave of the Patriarchs being (solely) ARAB (Muslim) holy sites.  But when the Jewish people do it...suddenly its discrimination and apartheid and Nazism.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It is Jew free because Israel removed them. And Israel IS the enemy. You can’t make judgements on a nonexistent state.  People behave differently once they have a nation, something concrete.  Look at Israel’s transition from multiple militias and visions including some that wanted no Arabs in the future nation, to a cohesive state with a shared vision.
> 
> The double standard is that we are not giving the Palestinians the same leeway Israel had when it got its state.  Team Israel has already decided what to hat state would be like when the Palestinians can’t even agree on what it will be like.
Click to expand...


Well almost. Depends on what Pali lands you're talking about being Jew free. Because there is more "mixing" of the 2 factions than most people know or appreciate. And if the ENTIRETY was actually jew-free now, there wouldn't be new settlements springing up all over the map. MAYBE some of this is good. Because a moderate, "liberal" Palestine would benefit from a bit of cultural diversity. I know there are several "mixed" private schools and daycares in the West Bank. And that's a GOOD thing right now. Heck the Palestinians seem to have editorial control of Ha'Aretz...   So even the media in Israel ain't even safely "racist Jewish"..   LOL...


----------



## Shusha

flacaltenn said:


> I know there are several "mixed" private schools and daycares in the West Bank.



In Jerusalem?  In Area C?  In Palestine government-controlled areas?


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> It is Jew free because Israel removed them.


 Well, yes and no.  From Gaza, yes.  Because Israel feared for their safety.  From Jerusalem and the "West Bank" no -- they were forcibly removed during the war.  You are veering awfully close to justifying ethnic cleansing here.  



> And Israel IS the enemy.


Sure.  But the CONTEXT is a punishment of death or a lifetime of hard labor for selling property to the "enemy".  Surely, you can not be saying that it is legally and morally permissible for Israel to imprison or execute those who sell land to non-Israelis, are you?  Surely you are not saying that it is legally and morally permissible for Israel to block all sale of land to Arabs as "enemy", are you?  Your double standards are showing.  



> You can’t make judgements on a nonexistent state.


What?  You most certainly can. The governments of Palestine and Gaza can most certainly be held responsible for their actions.  They must be.  They don't get a pass on bad behavior ("break down the border fence and rip the hearts out of Jews") because they are not a "real" country.  Please.  Your double standards are showing.  



> The double standard is that we are not giving the Palestinians the same leeway Israel had when it got its state.


Not giving Palestinians the same leeway?  I'm sorry, but where was the uproar about Palestine's constitution again?  



> Team Israel has already decided what to hat state would be like when the Palestinians can’t even agree on what it will be like.


When people tell you who they are -- believe them.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Coyote said:


> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> admonit said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> My point is not to absolve Israel from discrimination.  I have said time and again that there is clearly deeply rooted, even systemic discrimination in Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> What you are saying is not enough. Prove it. Until now I didn't see even one confirmation.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are arguing that Israel is discrimination-free?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Even if they are; So what? Look at the AntiSemetic background of the Arab World long before 1948
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> We can always look at other countries that are worse. Are you saying that it justifies discrimination?
Click to expand...

Standard deflection tactic.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> It is Jew free because Israel removed them.
> 
> 
> 
> Well, yes and no.  From Gaza, yes.  Because Israel feared for their safety.  From Jerusalem and the "West Bank" no -- they were forcibly removed during the war.  You are veering awfully close to justifying ethnic cleansing here.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And Israel IS the enemy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sure.  But the CONTEXT is a punishment of death or a lifetime of hard labor for selling property to the "enemy".  Surely, you can not be saying that it is legally and morally permissible for Israel to imprison or execute those who sell land to non-Israelis, are you?  Surely you are not saying that it is legally and morally permissible for Israel to block all sale of land to Arabs as "enemy", are you?  Your double standards are showing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You can’t make judgements on a nonexistent state.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What?  You most certainly can. The governments of Palestine and Gaza can most certainly be held responsible for their actions.  They must be.  They don't get a pass on bad behavior ("break down the border fence and rip the hearts out of Jews") because they are not a "real" country.  Please.  Your double standards are showing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The double standard is that we are not giving the Palestinians the same leeway Israel had when it got its state.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not giving Palestinians the same leeway?  I'm sorry, but where was the uproar about Palestine's constitution again?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Team Israel has already decided what to hat state would be like when the Palestinians can’t even agree on what it will be like.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> When people tell you who they are -- believe them.
Click to expand...




Shusha said:


> and the "West Bank" no -- they were forcibly removed during the war.


Yes but that was by Jordan. The Palestinians had nothing to do with it.


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> Yes but that was by Jordan. The Palestinians had nothing to do with it.


They are not exactly welcoming them back, now are they?


----------



## Humanity

Shusha said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> STOP MAKING SHIT UP!
> 
> Jesus! Team Israel are on good liar form today!
> 
> *Can you please show me where I accused Israel of apartheid?*
> 
> Consummate liars!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Post #698
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Arab Israelis are not being moved to Bantustans.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yet!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The obvious implication is apartheid.  And you are demonizing Israel for something they have not, in fact, done based on a belief you have that they will do such a thing at some point in the future.  That is NOT fair criticism of Israel's policies.  That is demonization.
Click to expand...


Is this a continuation of lies? Post #698 is *YOUR *post!

Still no demonization!

And to deal with "That is NOT fair criticism of Israel's policies" - Whether it is "fair" to critisize the policy of a government is a matter of opinion. Don't you think? 

If I critisize the policies of the US am I demonizing the US and the people of the US?


----------



## Olde Europe

flacaltenn said:


> Again -- the emphasis seems to be on strategic immigration policy -- not discrimination against the fully incorporated CURRENT Arab citizens. What good is the promise and priority of providing sanctuary to World Jewry if the very limited land held BY the state (not occupied territories) is not reserved in a fashion that ALLOWS them to honor that pledge.



That would be wrong.  From the first phrase to the last.  The Israeli state holds 93% of Israeli territory.  And it has nothing in particular to do with immigration.  And keeping Arabs in squalor because there might be Jews arriving is no way to "honor" a pledge.  It's merely a way to "justify" inhumanity.



flacaltenn said:


> You're kinda off in the weeds and so is Ha'Aretz with this editorial.  I encourage you to READ AGAIN the actual bill shown in OP, and point out the places YOU think turns Israel "into a racist Jewish State".  It's not there.



The editorial was spot on.  I'd suggest you take your time to read the thread.


----------



## Humanity

Coyote said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not demonizing anyone... Certainly not "an entire peoples"!
> 
> There in lies a common issue with Team Israel...
> 
> The distinction between people and politics!
> 
> My critisizing Israeli politics and policies does not, as you might claim, make me antisemetic!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What makes you antisemitic is that demonizing is all you do.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh dear, another retarded liar zionut!
> 
> Show me one post where I demonize Jews
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You don’t, it is just another attempt to derail the thread into personal attacks. Ignore it.
> 
> Criticizing Israeli policy is not anti Semitic, I think some tend to use it as a means of stifling opposition.  When it becomes potentially anti Semitic, imo, is when Israel is held to a different standard than other comparable countries or it turns in to a conversation on “the Jews”.  Recognizing the rights and grievances of minorities or the Palestinians is not anti Semitic.
> 
> Israel is different in some ways in that it is in the midst of an unresolved territorial conflict, a capital claimed two peoples, mixed indiginous populations, territory populated by a stateless population with diminished rights, a it is the only nation I am aware of who’s right to even exist is still being argued generations later.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Interesting comment...
> 
> "when Israel is held to a different standard than other comparable countries" - When Team Israel holds Israel to a different standard it seems to be acceptable and, when you read through the multitude of comments here that is EXACTLY what Team Israel does...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It depends on who in Team Israel you mean...and in what particulars.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I mean, seriously, how many other countries/peoples were chosen by 'god'? How many other people consider themselves the 'chosen ones'?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Islam, Christianity...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is this arrogance, this blind faith (faith being another word for ignorance) that is used time and again by Team Israel to try and differentiate themselves from the rest of humanity!
> 
> The arrogance and the hypocrisy is astonishing!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Ugh...Christians and Muslims act the same...they believe God made them special through special prophets who spoke for Her.
> 
> Humanity, don’t you see that in these words you are demonizing?  You are making generalizations about Jews as a group, not Israeli policies or culture
Click to expand...


No, these words are not demonizing. These are words taken straight from Team Israel!

You only have to look at comments from some members of Team Israel to see how they feel they are the chosen ones by god.

Need I mention the "Promised Land"?


----------



## admonit

Shusha said:


> admonit said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> My point is not to absolve Israel from discrimination.  I have said time and again that there is clearly deeply rooted, even systemic discrimination in Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> What you are saying is not enough. Prove it. Until now I didn't see even one confirmation.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are arguing that Israel is discrimination-free?
Click to expand...

It's a strange question. Discrimination is a general notion. Some people may think that declaring Israel as a Jewish state discriminates  Arabs. Others can consider the exemption of Arabs from military service as discrimination towards Jews.
Your words "there is clearly deeply rooted, even systemic discrimination in Israel" is a very strong statement and you should provide very strong evidences to support it.


----------



## Humanity

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> We do that often with the Palestinians as well as to how their future state would be Jew free or governed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No we don't.  For starters, their future state is ALREADY Jew-free.
Click to expand...


Is it clearing yet? 

The mists in your crystal ball?


----------



## Humanity

Shusha said:


> The idea of" choseness is not originating with us -- it is PUT ON US by others.



So there is nothing the in the torah or bible giving Jews "choseness"?


----------



## Humanity

ILOVEISRAEL said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> admonit said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> My point is not to absolve Israel from discrimination.  I have said time and again that there is clearly deeply rooted, even systemic discrimination in Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> What you are saying is not enough. Prove it. Until now I didn't see even one confirmation.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are arguing that Israel is discrimination-free?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Even if they are; So what? Look at the AntiSemetic background of the Arab World long before 1948
Click to expand...


You are very good at deflecting by moving from the question at hand about Israel and asking to look at others....

Typical move by you!


----------



## Humanity

ILOVEISRAEL said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> admonit said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> My point is not to absolve Israel from discrimination.  I have said time and again that there is clearly deeply rooted, even systemic discrimination in Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> What you are saying is not enough. Prove it. Until now I didn't see even one confirmation.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are arguing that Israel is discrimination-free?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Even if they are; So what? Look at the AntiSemetic background of the Arab World long before 1948
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> We can always look at other countries that are worse. Are you saying that it justifies discrimination?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Tired of the double standard. Why doesn’t the “ International Community “”. Condemn and do something about it?
Click to expand...


YOU are complaining about "double standards"?


----------



## Humanity

Shusha said:


> What? You most certainly can.



You can make a judgement on something that doesn't even exist?!?!

That is one special kind of psychic power you have there!


----------



## Olde Europe

Humanity said:


> No, these words are not demonizing. These are words taken straight from Team Israel!
> 
> You only have to look at comments from some members of Team Israel to see how they feel they are the chosen ones by god.
> 
> Need I mention the "Promised Land"?



I'd suggest you listen to Coyote on that score.  For one, there is no "Team Israel" other than as a form of stereotyping.  Second, if they feel they are their god's chosen people, so what?  That's perfectly okay, unless they try to legislate their chosen-ness in order to discriminate against the lesser-in-god's-eye people.  That means, you'd have to look at actual policies, actual legislation, not just feel-good-about-themselves prayer.


----------



## Olde Europe

Shusha said:


> Olde Europe said:
> 
> 
> 
> National self-determination either includes *all* citizens, or it creates an apartheid state.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So, any State which names a specific ethnic or cultural group in its constitution is an apartheid state?  Slovenia is an apartheid State because it mentions that its purpose is the self-determination of the Slovene people?
> 
> (Slovenia is, btw, about 15% non-Slovene)
Click to expand...


I say, "National self-determination either includes *all* citizens, or it creates an apartheid state."

You: "So, any State which names a specific ethnic or cultural group in its constitution is an apartheid state?"

That's just one phrase, and you can't deal with one phrase without misrepresenting it.  Serves to demonstrate, yet again, that any reply starting with "So, ..." is undoubtedly a lie.  That's true, in particular, in case that reply comes from a devoted propagandist.

As to the Slovenian constitution, you should have read it, for had you done so, you'd realize it's an admirable document, and Israel could have learned how to do it right.  But you didn't read it, and you are dutifully re-bleating the hasbara your handlers tasked you with catapulting.  Your handlers also knew, apparently, that you'd be too lazy to read the document, and so they confidently lied to you.  Why you debase yourself in that way I cannot understand, but hey... to each their own.

The only thing that even so much as smells of discrimination is a provision that allows for ethnic Slovenian citizens of other states to be granted, by law, privileges over other foreigners on Slovenian soil.

Oh, and BTW, as I've decided quite a number of years ago that life is way too short to waste any time debating hasbara peddlers, that's my first and last post to you.


----------



## Humanity

Olde Europe said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, these words are not demonizing. These are words taken straight from Team Israel!
> 
> You only have to look at comments from some members of Team Israel to see how they feel they are the chosen ones by god.
> 
> Need I mention the "Promised Land"?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'd suggest you listen to Coyote on that score.  For one, there is no "Team Israel" other than as a form of stereotyping.  Second, if they feel they are their god's chosen people, so what?  That's perfectly okay, unless they try to legislate their chosen-ness in order to discriminate against the lesser-in-god's-eye people.  That means, you'd have to look at actual policies, actual legislation, not just feel-good-about-themselves prayer.
Click to expand...


Thanks for your 'advice'... Not sure I asked for it but hey, that's your free choice.

Well, you really need to have been here a while to what the tag teaming from Team Israel. It really is like a comedy show sometimes.

I have NO problem if "they"(?) feel "they"(?) are gods chosen ones... I just cannot accept it as some kind of excuse for wrong doings through Israeli legistation and policies. When it's used as some kind of defense then you can forget it. Again, stick around, you will see plenty of that shit going on!

The 'holier than thou' attitude from some Team Israel members to defend Israels actions/policies is pretty horrendous!


----------



## Humanity

Olde Europe said:


> The only thing that even so much as smells of discrimination is a provision that allows for ethnic Slovenian citizens of other states to be granted, by law, privileges over other foreigners on Slovenian soil.



Pretty much like Israel then


----------



## Shusha

Humanity said:


> Is this a continuation of lies? Post #698 is *YOUR *post!
> 
> Still no demonization!
> 
> And to deal with "That is NOT fair criticism of Israel's policies" - Whether it is "fair" to critisize the policy of a government is a matter of opinion. Don't you think?
> 
> If I critisize the policies of the US am I demonizing the US and the people of the US?



My mistake.  It was #695.

It is absolutely fair to criticize the policies of a government.  What it is NOT fair to do is criticize a government for something they have not done.  Like create Bantustans.  The implication of your post #695 was that Israel WILL create Bantustans in the future and therefore deserve to be condemned for apartheid even though they have not done so now.  That is not fair criticism of a government's policies.


----------



## Olde Europe

Humanity said:


> I have NO problem if "they"(?) feel "they"(?) are gods chosen ones... I just cannot accept it as some kind of excuse for wrong doings through Israeli legistation and policies. When it's used as some kind of defense then you can forget it.



We agree, then.  That's nice.

Thanks for the update on the various trenches and front lines.  Any mine fields around?




Humanity said:


> Olde Europe said:
> 
> 
> 
> The only thing that even so much as smells of discrimination is a provision that allows for ethnic Slovenian citizens of other states to be granted, by law, privileges over other foreigners on Slovenian soil.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pretty much like Israel then
Click to expand...


Not at all, since Israel provides privileges to Jewish citizens of other states over Israeli non-Jews.  That's an entirely different ballpark.


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL

Olde Europe said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, these words are not demonizing. These are words taken straight from Team Israel!
> 
> You only have to look at comments from some members of Team Israel to see how they feel they are the chosen ones by god.
> 
> Need I mention the "Promised Land"?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'd suggest you listen to Coyote on that score.  For one, there is no "Team Israel" other than as a form of stereotyping.  Second, if they feel they are their god's chosen people, so what?  That's perfectly okay, unless they try to legislate their chosen-ness in order to discriminate against the lesser-in-god's-eye people.  That means, you'd have to look at actual policies, actual legislation, not just feel-good-about-themselves prayer.
Click to expand...


He is nothing but an  How many Jews refer to themselves that way? Maybe his Jewish “ friends” at the barbecue !


----------



## Shusha

Humanity said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> The idea of" choseness is not originating with us -- it is PUT ON US by others.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So there is nothing the in the torah or bible giving Jews "choseness"?
Click to expand...


The only person who brought up choseness is you.  It is a pattern on this board that the only people who bring up choseness are people wishing to demonize the Jewish people.  Oh, and its not "providing valid criticism of Israel's government policies" -- its a direct attack on the Jewish people. 

Jewish people do not bring up choseness.  It is a tool used by those who have an unreasonable hatred of Jews in order to apply traits of arrogance and superiority to Jews so that they can be demonized.  (Which, btw, is NOT what choseness means and anyone with any knowledge of actual Torah, rather than canards said about Torah, would know that.)


----------



## Shusha

Olde Europe said:


> As to the Slovenian constitution, you should have read it, for had you done so, you'd realize it's an admirable document, and Israel could have learned how to do it right.
> 
> The only thing that even so much as smells of discrimination is a provision that allows for ethnic Slovenian citizens of other states to be granted, by law, privileges over other foreigners on Slovenian soil.



Uh huh.  When Slovenia writes:
_the fundamental and permanent right of the Slovene nation to self-determination; and from the historical fact that in a centuries-long struggle for national liberation we Slovenes have established our national identity and asserted our statehood... _its ADMIRABLE.

And when Israel writes:
_The state of Israel is the nation-state of the Jewish people, in which it actualizes its natural, religious, and historical right for self-determination_...its APARTHEID.

And yet you don't see the double standard.  Its more than a little ridiculous.







> But you didn't read it, and you are dutifully re-bleating the hasbara your handlers tasked you with catapulting.  Your handlers also knew, apparently, that you'd be too lazy to read the document, and so they confidently lied to you.  Why you debase yourself in that way I cannot understand, but hey... to each their own.


Yes, the very latest antisemitic canard.  Thanks for sharing.  I appreciate know that about you.


----------



## Olde Europe

Shusha said:


> Uh huh.  When Slovenia writes:
> _the fundamental and permanent right of the Slovene nation to self-determination; and from the historical fact that in a centuries-long struggle for national liberation we Slovenes have established our national identity and asserted our statehood... _its ADMIRABLE.
> 
> And when Israel writes:
> _The state of Israel is the nation-state of the Jewish people, in which it actualizes its natural, religious, and historical right for self-determination_...its APARTHEID.
> 
> And yet you don't see the double standard.  Its more than a little ridiculous.



Yeah, it turns out, posts starting with grunts like "Uh huh." are also lies.

The "Slovene nation" includes all citizens of Slovenia, all participating on an equal footing in the national self-determination.

The "Jewish people", to which self-determination in Israel is "unique", is a group distinct from "Israeli citizens", for it excludes quite a few.

Sure, since your lies are so weak, ill-thought-out, and transparent, the accusation of "antisemitism" cannot be far away.  Wait...



Shusha said:


> Yes, the very latest antisemitic canard.  Thanks for sharing.  I appreciate know that about you.



You hasbara peddlers are nothing if not predictable.

Yeah, I know, but that was really my last post to you.


----------



## Shusha

Olde Europe said:


> The "Slovene nation" includes all citizens of Slovenia, all participating on an equal footing in the national self-determination.
> 
> The "Jewish people", to which self-determination in Israel is "unique", is a group distinct from "Israeli citizens", for it excludes quite a few.



So, uh huh, "we Slovenes" includes the Slovenes and all the non-Slovenes and excludes no one.  While "Jewish people" excludes non-Jews.  Slovene nation is inclusive.  But Jewish nation is exclusive.  Slovene nationality is admirable.  Jewish nationality is apartheid.  

And you can't smell the double standard?


----------



## Shusha

Olde Europe 

Let's try this one:  

_The continuous attachment of the Jewish people to the land of their fathers and forefathers, on which this people has historically lived, is a fact which has been expressed in the Declaration of Independence.  The strength of this attachment is confirmed by its consistency over time and place, by keeping faith with and holding on to national identity, and in the wonderous accomplishments of struggle.  The organic relationship between the Jewish people, their history and their land has confirmed itself in their unceasing effort to prompt the world to recognize the rights of the Jewish people and their national entity on equal footing with other nations.  

Israel is part of the larger Jewish world and the Jewish people are part of Israel.  

Jerusalem is the capital of Israel.

Judaism is the official religion in Israel.  Respect for the sanctity of all other religions shall be maintained.

Halacha shall be the principle source of legislation.

Hebrew shall be the official language.  _



Admirable or Apartheid?


----------



## Shusha

admonit said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> admonit said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> My point is not to absolve Israel from discrimination.  I have said time and again that there is clearly deeply rooted, even systemic discrimination in Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> What you are saying is not enough. Prove it. Until now I didn't see even one confirmation.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are arguing that Israel is discrimination-free?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It's a strange question. Discrimination is a general notion. Some people may think that declaring Israel as a Jewish state discriminates  Arabs. Others can consider the exemption of Arabs from military service as discrimination towards Jews.
> Your words "there is clearly deeply rooted, even systemic discrimination in Israel" is a very strong statement and you should provide very strong evidences to support it.
Click to expand...


Well, don't misunderstand me.  I think EVERY country which has a multiplicity of ethnic groups has discrimination on some level.  In Israel it is especially hard to address because of the conflict.  And I think Israel has done better than most despite all the additional problems she faces.  That said, I do think its likely there is an underlying social discrimination problem in Israel coming from all sorts of sides:  religious/non-religious, Arab/Jew, immigrants from different places, sabar/olim, etc.  

As an example, I was reading an article about the sale (lease) of apartments.  Can't remember the name of the city.  But an Arab placed an inquiry call and was told all the apartments were sold.  Yet the signs for the apartments were still up.  So she had a Jewish friend call.  Sure enough, plenty of apartments available.  Anytime someone with an Arab name called, the apartments were all sold.  Anytime someone with a Jewish name called, they were available.  I realize this is against the law in Israel.  But does it happen?  I'm guessing it does.  I'm sure it happens the other way around too -- with Arabs refusing to sell or rent to Jews.  

The restrictions on Jews visiting the Temple Mount is an example of institutionalized discrimination, despite laws and treaties which demand equality in religion.  

And there are disparities in funding to various municipalities as I understand it, though the cause of those disparities is remarkably difficult to parse out.  

And what about Gapso in Nazareth declaring it was a "Jewish city" and that he would permit no Arab schools or Arab housing?  Its a very, very fine line to walk to protect and preserve the Jewish culture while also providing all citizens with fair and equal access to services.


----------



## flacaltenn

Olde Europe said:


> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> 
> Again -- the emphasis seems to be on strategic immigration policy -- not discrimination against the fully incorporated CURRENT Arab citizens. What good is the promise and priority of providing sanctuary to World Jewry if the very limited land held BY the state (not occupied territories) is not reserved in a fashion that ALLOWS them to honor that pledge.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That would be wrong.  From the first phrase to the last.  The Israeli state holds 93% of Israeli territory.  And it has nothing in particular to do with immigration.  And keeping Arabs in squalor because there might be Jews arriving is no way to "honor" a pledge.  It's merely a way to "justify" inhumanity.
> 
> 
> 
> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> 
> You're kinda off in the weeds and so is Ha'Aretz with this editorial.  I encourage you to READ AGAIN the actual bill shown in OP, and point out the places YOU think turns Israel "into a racist Jewish State".  It's not there.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The editorial was spot on.  I'd suggest you take your time to read the thread.
Click to expand...


It's not wrong. Because the "Israeli State" ALREADY holds more than 1/2 Million Arab CITIZENS. You seem to not understand the demographics. And that's not counting CHRISTIANS as well. The 93% is also bogus because it counts the necessary Israeli supplied security/military infrastructure that HAS to be there in the Palestinian territories in the ABSENCE of any effective Palestinian govt. Also things like power/water/roads right of ways.

I also think you need to VISIT the "occupied territories because you OBVIOUSLY have no clue about "Arab squalor". The Palis in Gaza and West Bank are NOT "in squalor. Those are thriving places not lacking education, economy or services. Go LOOK at pictures of the West Bank cities or the restaurant choices in Gaza.

THEN what you need to do is go look at how about 225,000 Palestinian refugees ARE actually living in squalor in 60 year old ad hoc refugee camps in Lebanon and Jordan.

I'll let you go get a better perspective on Ramallah and Hebron, Nablus, Bethlehem, Gaza.

Does Ramallah look like SQUALOR to you????







How about a BRAND NEW Palestinian City built from NOTHING in the desert that just started selling units to residents? Take a look at THIS PLACE !!!!  You NEED TO WATCH THE ENTIRE VIDEO to even BEGIN to get over your false impressions of squalor. Palestinians have a higher standard of living in OCCUPIED Israel than in ANY Arab nation.




Want to see how Lebanon treats their Pali refugees in CAMPS? THIS is squalor and recently Lebanon actually built a prison wall around their largest Pali camp..


There's no comparison. If you THINK you're HELPING Palestinians -- you're not even familar with them and their problems.


----------



## flacaltenn

Shusha said:


> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> 
> I know there are several "mixed" private schools and daycares in the West Bank.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In Jerusalem?  In Area C?  In Palestine government-controlled areas?
Click to expand...


One is in that West-East Valley passage just west of Jenin. Not OFFICIALLY in Area C. Already has a large Arab CITIZEN population. But there are others that I've seen. And believe there to be at least a couple inside the Green Zone. Like in mixed settlement areas like where that brand new upscale Pali city is being built. THOSE folks are gonna want something BETTER than ad hoc Palestinian schools. And THEY can afford it.   LOL...  

Behind the Scenes of a Joint Israeli-Palestinian School - Video Dailymotion


----------



## Shusha

flacaltenn said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> 
> I know there are several "mixed" private schools and daycares in the West Bank.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In Jerusalem?  In Area C?  In Palestine government-controlled areas?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> One is in that West-East Valley passage just west of Jenin. Not OFFICIALLY in Area C. Already has a large Arab CITIZEN population. But there are others that I've seen. And believe there to be at least a couple inside the Green Zone. Like in mixed settlement areas like where that brand new upscale Pali city is being built. THOSE folks are gonna want something BETTER than ad hoc Palestinian schools. And THEY can afford it.   LOL...
> 
> Behind the Scenes of a Joint Israeli-Palestinian School - Video Dailymotion
Click to expand...



Yes, I've heard of these schools. There are a handful of them around. Most are in Israel. Some in Area C.


----------



## admonit

Shusha said:


> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> 
> I know there are several "mixed" private schools and daycares in the West Bank.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In Jerusalem?  In Area C?  *In Palestine government-controlled areas*?
Click to expand...

To start with, there is no Jews in Palestine government-controlled areas..


----------



## Humanity

Shusha said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> Is this a continuation of lies? Post #698 is *YOUR *post!
> 
> Still no demonization!
> 
> And to deal with "That is NOT fair criticism of Israel's policies" - Whether it is "fair" to critisize the policy of a government is a matter of opinion. Don't you think?
> 
> If I critisize the policies of the US am I demonizing the US and the people of the US?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My mistake.  It was #695.
> 
> It is absolutely fair to criticize the policies of a government.  What it is NOT fair to do is criticize a government for something they have not done.  Like create Bantustans.  The implication of your post #695 was that Israel WILL create Bantustans in the future and therefore deserve to be condemned for apartheid even though they have not done so now.  That is not fair criticism of a government's policies.
Click to expand...


Wow, just wow!

My commenting "Yet!" you consider demonization?

That really is hilarious! It would fall into your "fair" description if the Israeli government made that decision would it not?

Again, you telling lies and making shit up! Where did I say, where have I ever said that Israel is an apartheid state? 

"What it is NOT fair to do is criticize a government for something they have not done." - I made NO criticism! I simply commented "Yet!"

"What it is NOT fair to do is criticize a government for something they have not done." - I would suggest Team Israel needs to heed your words!


----------



## fncceo

Humanity said:


> Team Israel needs to heed your words!



Noted


----------



## Humanity

Olde Europe said:


> Not at all, since Israel provides privileges to Jewish citizens of other states over Israeli non-Jews.



Is that not what I said?!?!


----------



## Humanity

Shusha said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> The idea of" choseness is not originating with us -- it is PUT ON US by others.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So there is nothing the in the torah or bible giving Jews "choseness"?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The only person who brought up choseness is you.  It is a pattern on this board that the only people who bring up choseness are people wishing to demonize the Jewish people.  Oh, and its not "providing valid criticism of Israel's government policies" -- its a direct attack on the Jewish people.
> 
> Jewish people do not bring up choseness.  It is a tool used by those who have an unreasonable hatred of Jews in order to apply traits of arrogance and superiority to Jews so that they can be demonized.  (Which, btw, is NOT what choseness means and anyone with any knowledge of actual Torah, rather than canards said about Torah, would know that.)
Click to expand...


So, to get this straight, you are trying to tell me that not a single Team Israel member has ever said that Israel was given to them by god?

You are trying to tell me that Jews do not think that they are the chosen ones?


----------



## fncceo

Humanity said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> The idea of" choseness is not originating with us -- it is PUT ON US by others.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So there is nothing the in the torah or bible giving Jews "choseness"?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The only person who brought up choseness is you.  It is a pattern on this board that the only people who bring up choseness are people wishing to demonize the Jewish people.  Oh, and its not "providing valid criticism of Israel's government policies" -- its a direct attack on the Jewish people.
> 
> Jewish people do not bring up choseness.  It is a tool used by those who have an unreasonable hatred of Jews in order to apply traits of arrogance and superiority to Jews so that they can be demonized.  (Which, btw, is NOT what choseness means and anyone with any knowledge of actual Torah, rather than canards said about Torah, would know that.)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So, to get this straight, you are trying to tell me that not a single Team Israel member has ever said that Israel was given to them by god?
> 
> You are trying to tell me that Jews do not think that they are the chosen ones?
Click to expand...



You weren't chosen for a reason.


----------



## Olde Europe

flacaltenn said:


> It's not wrong. Because the "Israeli State" ALREADY holds more than 1/2 Million Arab CITIZENS. You seem to not understand the demographics. And that's not counting CHRISTIANS as well. The 93% is also bogus because it counts the necessary Israeli supplied security/military infrastructure that HAS to be there in the Palestinian territories in the ABSENCE of any effective Palestinian govt. Also things like power/water/roads right of ways.
> 
> [non-pertinent whataboutery excised]



You're still wrong, just in more... creative ways, and in caps.


----------



## admonit

Shusha said:


> admonit said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> admonit said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> My point is not to absolve Israel from discrimination.  I have said time and again that there is clearly deeply rooted, even systemic discrimination in Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> What you are saying is not enough. Prove it. Until now I didn't see even one confirmation.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are arguing that Israel is discrimination-free?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It's a strange question. Discrimination is a general notion. Some people may think that declaring Israel as a Jewish state discriminates  Arabs. Others can consider the exemption of Arabs from military service as discrimination towards Jews.
> Your words "there is clearly deeply rooted, even systemic discrimination in Israel" is a very strong statement and you should provide very strong evidences to support it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well, don't misunderstand me.  I think EVERY country which has a multiplicity of ethnic groups has discrimination on some level.
Click to expand...

OK, it's your opinion.


> As an example, I was reading an article about the sale (lease) of apartments.  Can't remember the name of the city.  But an Arab placed an inquiry call and was told all the apartments were sold.  Yet the signs for the apartments were still up.  So she had a Jewish friend call.  Sure enough, plenty of apartments available.  Anytime someone with an Arab name called, the apartments were all sold.  Anytime someone with a Jewish name called, they were available.  I realize this is against the law in Israel.  But does it happen?  I'm guessing it does.  I'm sure it happens the other way around too -- with Arabs refusing to sell or rent to Jews.


These people revealed nothing new. In mixed cities Jews and Arabs prefer to live in separate residential blocks. Also I never heard about Arab members in Kibbutzim and of course about Jews in Arab villages and cities - there is zero Jewish population there.


> The restrictions on Jews visiting the Temple Mount is an example of institutionalized discrimination, despite laws and treaties which demand equality in religion.


The religious aspect of these restrictions is not simple. The Chief Rabbinate of Israel forbids visiting the place "due to its sacredness". Also I never heard that Reform or Conservative movements condemned these restrictions.


> And there are disparities in funding to various municipalities as I understand it, though the cause of those disparities is remarkably difficult to parse out.


It means no proofs, just belief that discrimination should be. OK.
And I believe that the Arab sector gets huge additional investments from the state. One such plan of economical development of the Arab sector was presented here by Coyote as a proof of discrimination of Arabs...


> And what about Gapso in Nazareth declaring it was a "Jewish city" and that he would permit no Arab schools or Arab housing?  Its a very, very fine line to walk to protect and preserve the Jewish culture while also providing all citizens with fair and equal access to services.


Nazareth is an Arab city with zero Jewish population in it.
It's about Upper Nazareth. The city was established as a Jewish city. And again, as in case with apartments, the right of Jews to create their community is criticized, while the same behavior of Arabs is ignored. If there is discrimination, then only toward Jews.


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL

Humanity said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> The idea of" choseness is not originating with us -- it is PUT ON US by others.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So there is nothing the in the torah or bible giving Jews "choseness"?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The only person who brought up choseness is you.  It is a pattern on this board that the only people who bring up choseness are people wishing to demonize the Jewish people.  Oh, and its not "providing valid criticism of Israel's government policies" -- its a direct attack on the Jewish people.
> 
> Jewish people do not bring up choseness.  It is a tool used by those who have an unreasonable hatred of Jews in order to apply traits of arrogance and superiority to Jews so that they can be demonized.  (Which, btw, is NOT what choseness means and anyone with any knowledge of actual Torah, rather than canards said about Torah, would know that.)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So, to get this straight, you are trying to tell me that not a single Team Israel member has ever said that Israel was given to them by god?
> 
> You are trying to tell me that Jews do not think that they are the chosen ones?
Click to expand...


“ Chosen “ isn’t about good or bad according to your thread. . It’s about the Torah. So what??  I know Christians who feel that one day the Jewish people will recognize Jesus as their “ savior” and we know about the religious intolerance of the Muslim World.   During the Gulf War our Military weren’t even allowed to bring their bibles into Saudi Arabia. How would you feel if that were Israel??


----------



## Shusha

Humanity said:


> You are trying to tell me that Jews do not think that they are the chosen ones?


You are asking me if there are people who hold Jewish religious faith traditions?!  And that some of them are on this board arguing for Team Israel?  OF COURSE THERE ARE!  Duh. Newsflash -- there are also some people on this board who have religious ideas stemming from Islam.  And also some who believe JC committed suicide to save people from hell.  There may even be a Buddhist hanging around somewhere.  Whoa.



Humanity said:


> So, to get this straight, you are trying to tell me that not a single Team Israel member has ever said that Israel was given to them by god?


No.  I'm trying to tell you that your original assertion, posted below, which is that Team I routinely uses the "choseness argument" to assert claim over Israel is both false and demonizing.  To my recollection there is one occasional poster, possibly two, who very occasionally make a comment about G-d granting Eretz Israel to the Jewish people (which is not actually the "choseness argument", btw).  You can't expect religious people not to have religious ideas.  You don't have to agree with them or hold those ideas yourself.  

But what you have done weaponized the idea of choseness.  You've taken a simple religious concept, which you clearly do not understand, and twisted it into a knife used to cut the Jewish people -- accusing them, as a collective whole, of being arrogant, ignorant and separate from (above?) the rest of humanity.  Don't worry, you aren't alone, this is an antisemitic canard which goes back at least hundreds of years, and likely far longer.  

The regular posters for Team Israel use the Jewish people's historical and ancestral continued presence in the land for more than 3000 years, as indigenous peoples, for the basis of our arguments that the Jewish people, like all other peoples, have a right to a homeland, including a nation.  Our arguments are NOT based on religious concepts.  While, occasionally, a religious concept becomes part of the conversation, as part of the culture of the Jewish people, religion is not the basis for our claims.  (And I have argued consistently that it can't be).  

AND, if, as you claim, you fully support the rights of the Jewish people to a national homeland in that territory, you wouldn't be writing posts which collectively demonize the Jewish people and undermine their claim.  Though I do appreciate the opportunity to scratch the surface, as it were, and see what lies at your core.  

And, btw, speaking of other countries with ideas about being chosen, Korea has a fascinating religious origins story.




Humanity said:


> I mean, seriously, how many other countries/peoples were chosen by 'god'? How many other people consider themselves the 'chosen ones'?
> 
> It is this arrogance, this blind faith (faith being another word for ignorance) that is used time and again by Team Israel to try and differentiate themselves from the rest of humanity!
> 
> The arrogance and the hypocrisy is astonishing!


----------



## Sixties Fan

MK Shuli Moalem-Refaeli, chairman of the Jewish House faction, said on Sunday that the purpose of the national law is not to create equality.

"The Nationality Law is a good law. It is desirable, right and proper. The word "equality", which does not appear in the law, appears in two Basic Laws enacted in 1992. This is not a law aimed at equality, And not of any other nation," said Moalem-Refaeli in an interview with David Yusov on _Southern Radio.
_
(full article online)

'The purpose of the Nationality Law is not to create equality'


----------



## Sixties Fan

We have determined the personal equal rights of Israeli citizens in a series of laws including Basic Law: Human Dignity and Liberty, laws that ensure full equality before the law, beginning with the right to vote and be elected to the Knesset and ending with all other personal rights in the State of Israel.

However, we have never determined the national rights of the Jewish People in its land in a basic law – until now, when we passed the Nation-State Law. What is the meaning of national rights? They define the flag, the national anthem, the language and, of course, the fact that one of the basic goals of the state is the ingathering of exiles of our people and their absorption here in the land of Israel. This is the meaning of the Zionist vision.

Does determining that our flag bears the Star of David somehow abrogate the individual right of anyone among Israel's citizens? Nonsense, but determining this ensures that there will not be another flag. Does determining that Hatikvah is our national anthem detract from the personal rights of any person in Israel? Nonsense, but it does determine that there will not be another anthem. Already there are proposals to replace the flag and the anthem in the name of equality, as it were. There is opposition to the idea of a nation-state in many countries, but first of all in the State of Israel, something that undermines the foundation of our existence, and therefore, the attacks emanating from left-wing circles that define themselves as Zionist are absurd and expose the nadir to which the left has sunk.

Now, I would like to quote from the basic principles of the Nation-State Law. The first clause: 'The land of Israel is the historical homeland of the Jewish people, in which the State of Israel was established.' The second clause: 'The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people, in which it fulfills its natural, cultural, religious and historical right to self-determination.' The third clause: 'The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Israel is unique to the Jewish people.' The Nation-State law goes on to anchor in basic legislation our flag, our national anthem, the symbols of the state and that Jerusalem is our eternal capital. Would the fathers of Zionism not sign it?

(full article online)

'The attacks expose the depths to which the left has sunk'


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> It is Jew free because Israel removed them.
> 
> 
> 
> Well, yes and no.  From Gaza, yes.  Because Israel feared for their safety.  From Jerusalem and the "West Bank" no -- they were forcibly removed during the war.  *You are veering awfully close to justifying ethnic cleansing here. *
Click to expand...


Where in the hell do you get that out of what I said?


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> It is Jew free because Israel removed them.
> 
> 
> 
> Well, yes and no.  From Gaza, yes.  Because Israel feared for their safety.  From Jerusalem and the "West Bank" no -- they were forcibly removed during the war.  You are veering awfully close to justifying ethnic cleansing here.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And Israel IS the enemy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sure.  But the CONTEXT is a punishment of death or a lifetime of hard labor for selling property to the "enemy".  Surely, you can not be saying that it is legally and morally permissible for Israel to imprison or execute those who sell land to non-Israelis, are you?  Surely you are not saying that it is legally and morally permissible for Israel to block all sale of land to Arabs as "enemy", are you?  Your double standards are showing.
Click to expand...


Whoah.  You are putting a whole lot of words in my mouth.

As far as the Palestinians are concerned Israel IS the enemy. Do you deny this?  Acknowledging that fact has nothing to do with the legality or morality of their actions.  In fact you yourself justified morally questionable actions such as the use and abuse of absentee land owner laws to confiscate Palestinian property, saying it was ethically justified because a people were fighting for their existence.  Which, I might add can also be said of the Palestinians.  Double standards anyone?


----------



## Indeependent

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> We do that often with the Palestinians as well as to how their future state would be Jew free or governed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No we don't.  For starters, their future state is ALREADY Jew-free.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I have seen multiple claims by those claiming no Jews would be allowed in a Palestinian State.  That is as much speculation and demonizing as speculating Israel’s new law will lead to greater discrimination.  We don’t know what a Palestinian State will bring or what eventual constitution will be decided upon.
Click to expand...

Try taking a peek at the rest of the Middle East.
It's amazing someone actually has to tell you this.


----------



## Coyote

Shusha 

You can not hold the Palestinians to the same standards as Israel in regards to being a state actor, because they DO NOT HAVE a state or complete sovereignty over any territory.  Not even Gaza.   They have no state and everything they do have can be taken away or constrained by Israel.  They have nothing to gain or lose.  You can’t just assume their state, should it come to be, will be Jew free any more than you could have assumed Israel, in its formation, would be Arab free (and there were factions that wanted just that).  As far as Palestinians are concerned they are in a state of occupation by an enemy. That is their view, and if comparisons should be made...perhaps it should be to Israel in its war of independence.  There is no nation yet.

That does not mean they can’t be held accountable for their actions as people.  Lobbing rockets into civilian areas, terrorist attacks etc.


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> The idea of" choseness is not originating with us -- it is PUT ON US by others.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So there is nothing the in the torah or bible giving Jews "choseness"?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The only person who brought up choseness is you.  It is a pattern on this board that the only people who bring up choseness are people wishing to demonize the Jewish people.  *Oh, and its not "providing valid criticism of Israel's government policies" -- its a direct attack on the Jewish people. *
> 
> Jewish people do not bring up choseness.  It is a tool used by those who have an unreasonable hatred of Jews in order to apply traits of arrogance and superiority to Jews so that they can be demonized.  (Which, btw, is NOT what choseness means and anyone with any knowledge of actual Torah, rather than canards said about Torah, would know that.)
Click to expand...

I think that is an important distinction.


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Olde Europe said:
> 
> 
> 
> As to the Slovenian constitution, you should have read it, for had you done so, you'd realize it's an admirable document, and Israel could have learned how to do it right.
> 
> The only thing that even so much as smells of discrimination is a provision that allows for ethnic Slovenian citizens of other states to be granted, by law, privileges over other foreigners on Slovenian soil.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Uh huh.  When Slovenia writes:
> _the fundamental and permanent right of the Slovene nation to self-determination; and from the historical fact that in a centuries-long struggle for national liberation we Slovenes have established our national identity and asserted our statehood... _its ADMIRABLE.
> 
> And when Israel writes:
> _The state of Israel is the nation-state of the Jewish people, in which it actualizes its natural, religious, and historical right for self-determination_...its APARTHEID.
> 
> And yet you don't see the double standard.  Its more than a little ridiculous.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But you didn't read it, and you are dutifully re-bleating the hasbara your handlers tasked you with catapulting.  Your handlers also knew, apparently, that you'd be too lazy to read the document, and so they confidently lied to you.  Why you debase yourself in that way I cannot understand, but hey... to each their own.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes, the very latest antisemitic canard.  Thanks for sharing.  I appreciate know that about you.
Click to expand...

I would not call it Apartheid but there is a key difference.  The Slovene people...all the people...of Slovenia.  No distinctions.

A comparable statement for Israel would refer to the Israeli people...not just a subgroup of them.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> They have nothing to gain or lose.



They have absolutely EVERYTHING to gain and potentially a whole lot more to lose.  And whether they gain or lose it is directly dependent on THEIR actions -- not on Israel's.  Belligerence will bring them loss.  Co-operation and peace will bring them gain.  

Why is everyone SO reluctant to hold the Palestinians accountable?


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> I would not call it Apartheid but there is a key difference.  The Slovene people...all the people...of Slovenia.  No distinctions.



Ah, no.  Slovenes are a specific ethnic group.  About 15% of the citizens of Slovenia are non-Slovenes (Hungarians, Italians, Serbs, Croats, Bosniaks, etc).  The entire purpose of the dissolution of Yugoslavia was to create States built around specific national (ethnic) groups.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> You can’t just assume their state, should it come to be, will be Jew free ...



I'm not assuming it.  They've said as much.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Even as talks for a permanent Israeli-Palestinian peace got off to a cautious start in Washington Monday, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas told reporters in Egypt that no Israelis would be allowed to remain in a future Palestinian state.

“In a final resolution, we would not see the presence of a single Israeli — civilian or soldier — on our lands,” Abbas said following a meeting with interim Egyptian President Adly Mansour in Cairo.

(full article online)

Abbas pledges: There will be no Israelis in Palestine


----------



## Olde Europe

Coyote said:


> As far as the Palestinians are concerned Israel IS the enemy. Do you deny this?



Of course.  Whenever you think "the Palestinians", "the Jews", "the Americans" (etc.), you ought to think "diversity" - just as "Team Israel" isn't homogeneous.  Some, even many, Palestinians deem Israel the enemy, others do not, for instance those who would be happy to have escaped the rule by the mouth-breathers of Hamas.  I don't know how that can be disputed.  I'd venture a guess, most Palestinians are just like people everywhere: They'd like to live in a safe neighborhood, have food on the table, and a brighter future for their children.  The fact that they - understandably enough - react furiously to infringements on their small dreams doesn't necessarily mean they deem "Israel the enemy".


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL

Sixties Fan said:


> Even as talks for a permanent Israeli-Palestinian peace got off to a cautious start in Washington Monday, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas told reporters in Egypt that no Israelis would be allowed to remain in a future Palestinian state.
> 
> “In a final resolution, we would not see the presence of a single Israeli — civilian or soldier — on our lands,” Abbas said following a meeting with interim Egyptian President Adly Mansour in Cairo.
> 
> (full article online)
> 
> Abbas pledges: There will be no Israelis in Palestine




No Israelis in Palestine no “ Right of Return “ Sounds right to me!!


----------



## Sixties Fan

Omri Boehm, a philosopher who we have written about before, once again uses the New York Times to advance an anti-Israel argument which would receive a failing grade from any real philosophy class.

 Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu claims that the new legislation simply “determined in law the founding principle of our existence.” In fact, its primary function is to build a formal foundation for Israel’s annexation of the West Bank — and for a Jewish state eventually to stretch over the whole of Palestine. This is an assertion for which sham philosopher Boehm brings no proof. The words of the Basic Law may make such an annexation easier - but one can argue the opposite as well, since such an annexation would cause severe problems to Israel's existence as a Jewish state. In other words, Boehm is resorting to proof by assertion, a logical fallacy that a real philosopher would never do. After all, even the most right wing portion of the Likud coalition is not contemplating annexing the entire West Bank. Boehm simply made this up.

(full article online)

NYT op-ed using the Basic Law as an excuse to attack the very idea of a Jewish state ~ Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News


----------



## Dogmaphobe

Olde Europe said:


> "Team Israel" isn't homogeneous.  .




Neither is team antisemite.

You all have your own reasons for singling out Jews in ways you single out no other people.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Here are two interesting viewpoints on the Basic Law: Israel as the Nation-State of the Jewish People, from non-Jewish Israelis.

One is from a Maronite Christian who lives in Israel, in an article translated from Israel Hayom:


And a Druze Zionist has his own reasons to support the law,even though many Druze have expressed misgivings about it:

(full article online)

Non-Jewish Israelis supporting Nation-State Law ~ Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News


----------



## Humanity

fncceo said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> The idea of" choseness is not originating with us -- it is PUT ON US by others.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So there is nothing the in the torah or bible giving Jews "choseness"?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The only person who brought up choseness is you.  It is a pattern on this board that the only people who bring up choseness are people wishing to demonize the Jewish people.  Oh, and its not "providing valid criticism of Israel's government policies" -- its a direct attack on the Jewish people.
> 
> Jewish people do not bring up choseness.  It is a tool used by those who have an unreasonable hatred of Jews in order to apply traits of arrogance and superiority to Jews so that they can be demonized.  (Which, btw, is NOT what choseness means and anyone with any knowledge of actual Torah, rather than canards said about Torah, would know that.)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So, to get this straight, you are trying to tell me that not a single Team Israel member has ever said that Israel was given to them by god?
> 
> You are trying to tell me that Jews do not think that they are the chosen ones?
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You weren't chosen for a reason.
Click to expand...


I guess that would be because I am not a Jew! Point proven. Thanks


----------



## Humanity

Shusha said:


> You are asking me if there are people who hold Jewish religious faith traditions?! And that some of them are on this board arguing for Team Israel? OF COURSE THERE ARE! Duh.



So don't try and deny that there aren't.... Duh!



Shusha said:


> No. I'm trying to tell you that your original assertion, posted below, which is that Team I routinely uses the "choseness argument" to assert claim over Israel is both false and demonizing.



Seems that you want it both ways, as usual... You jump around like a beheaded frog with your 'ideas and how you try to defend/justify your 'ideas'.


----------



## Humanity

Shusha said:


> The regular posters for Team Israel use the Jewish people's historical and ancestral continued presence in the land for more than 3000 years, as indigenous peoples, for the basis of our arguments that the Jewish people, like all other peoples, have a right to a homeland, including a nation. Our arguments are NOT based on religious concepts. While, occasionally, a religious concept becomes part of the conversation, as part of the culture of the Jewish people, religion is not the basis for our claims. (And I have argued consistently that it can't be).



You are the spokesperson for Team Israel members now?



Shusha said:


> AND, if, as you claim, you fully support the rights of the Jewish people to a national homeland in that territory, you wouldn't be writing posts which collectively demonize the Jewish people and undermine their claim. Though I do appreciate the opportunity to scratch the surface, as it were, and see what lies at your core.



There is nothing that I have written that any sane person would consider "demonization" of anyone! That is your opinion based on you being Team Israel!


----------



## Humanity

ILOVEISRAEL said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> The idea of" choseness is not originating with us -- it is PUT ON US by others.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So there is nothing the in the torah or bible giving Jews "choseness"?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The only person who brought up choseness is you.  It is a pattern on this board that the only people who bring up choseness are people wishing to demonize the Jewish people.  Oh, and its not "providing valid criticism of Israel's government policies" -- its a direct attack on the Jewish people.
> 
> Jewish people do not bring up choseness.  It is a tool used by those who have an unreasonable hatred of Jews in order to apply traits of arrogance and superiority to Jews so that they can be demonized.  (Which, btw, is NOT what choseness means and anyone with any knowledge of actual Torah, rather than canards said about Torah, would know that.)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So, to get this straight, you are trying to tell me that not a single Team Israel member has ever said that Israel was given to them by god?
> 
> You are trying to tell me that Jews do not think that they are the chosen ones?
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> “ Chosen “ isn’t about good or bad according to your thread. . It’s about the Torah. So what??  I know Christians who feel that one day the Jewish people will recognize Jesus as their “ savior” and we know about the religious intolerance of the Muslim World.   During the Gulf War our Military weren’t even allowed to bring their bibles into Saudi Arabia. How would you feel if that were Israel??
Click to expand...


What a fascinating load of gibberish!

Surely even you can string a sentence together that makes SOME sense? Hmmm I guess not!


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> They have nothing to gain or lose.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They have absolutely EVERYTHING to gain and potentially a whole lot more to lose.  And whether they gain or lose it is directly dependent on THEIR actions -- not on Israel's.  Belligerence will bring them loss.  Co-operation and peace will bring them gain.
> 
> Why is everyone SO reluctant to hold the Palestinians accountable?
Click to expand...

Agree, belligerance will result in loss, but as to gain?  Nothing is certain there either.  Look at Jerusalem.

I have no problem holding them accountable for their actions, but they are not a state, not even under unified leadership.


----------



## Dogmaphobe

Humanity said:


> I guess that would be because I am not a Jew!




..... and here the speculation on such was absolutely rampant.


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> You can’t just assume their state, should it come to be, will be Jew free ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not assuming it.  They've said as much.
Click to expand...

In what Constitution?  What laws?


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> They have nothing to gain or lose.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They have absolutely EVERYTHING to gain and potentially a whole lot more to lose.  And whether they gain or lose it is directly dependent on THEIR actions -- not on Israel's.  Belligerence will bring them loss.  Co-operation and peace will bring them gain.
> 
> Why is everyone SO reluctant to hold the Palestinians accountable?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Agree, belligerance will result in loss, but as to gain?  Nothing is certain there either.  Look at Jerusalem.
> 
> I have no problem holding them accountable for their actions, but they are not a state, not even under unified leadership.
Click to expand...


Then they need to get their shit together, don't they?


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> You can’t just assume their state, should it come to be, will be Jew free ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not assuming it.  They've said as much.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In what Constitution?  What laws?
Click to expand...


Abbas just said it yesterday.  During negotiations.  

Take a look at this:

_The continuous attachment of the Jewish people to the land of their fathers and forefathers, on which this people has historically lived, is a fact which has been expressed in the Declaration of Independence. The strength of this attachment is confirmed by its consistency over time and place, by keeping faith with and holding on to national identity, and in the wonderous accomplishments of struggle. The organic relationship between the Jewish people, their history and their land has confirmed itself in their unceasing effort to prompt the world to recognize the rights of the Jewish people and their national entity on equal footing with other nations. 

Israel is part of the larger Jewish world and the Jewish people are part of Israel. 

Jerusalem is the capital of Israel.

Judaism is the official religion in Israel. Respect for the sanctity of all other religions shall be maintained.

Halacha shall be the principle source of legislation.

Hebrew shall be the official language. _



Admirable or Apartheid?


----------



## Shusha

Humanity said:


> There is nothing that I have written that any sane person would consider "demonization" of anyone! That is your opinion based on you being Team Israel!



Jew traits.  And something about the arrogance about being chosen and setting ourselves apart from humanity.  Nothing demonizing there at all.  /sarcasm

But I'm willing to test it if you want, I can start talking about Arab traits.


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL

Humanity said:


> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> The idea of" choseness is not originating with us -- it is PUT ON US by others.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So there is nothing the in the torah or bible giving Jews "choseness"?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The only person who brought up choseness is you.  It is a pattern on this board that the only people who bring up choseness are people wishing to demonize the Jewish people.  Oh, and its not "providing valid criticism of Israel's government policies" -- its a direct attack on the Jewish people.
> 
> Jewish people do not bring up choseness.  It is a tool used by those who have an unreasonable hatred of Jews in order to apply traits of arrogance and superiority to Jews so that they can be demonized.  (Which, btw, is NOT what choseness means and anyone with any knowledge of actual Torah, rather than canards said about Torah, would know that.)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So, to get this straight, you are trying to tell me that not a single Team Israel member has ever said that Israel was given to them by god?
> 
> You are trying to tell me that Jews do not think that they are the chosen ones?
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> “ Chosen “ isn’t about good or bad according to your thread. . It’s about the Torah. So what??  I know Christians who feel that one day the Jewish people will recognize Jesus as their “ savior” and we know about the religious intolerance of the Muslim World.   During the Gulf War our Military weren’t even allowed to bring their bibles into Saudi Arabia. How would you feel if that were Israel??
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What a fascinating load of gibberish!
> 
> Surely even you can string a sentence together that makes SOME sense? Hmmm I guess not!
Click to expand...


Nothing to say about Christmas who feel they are the true Religion or Muslims who have no tolerance or respect ✊ for others? 
  Not surprised!!!


----------



## P F Tinmore

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> You can’t just assume their state, should it come to be, will be Jew free ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not assuming it.  They've said as much.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In what Constitution?  What laws?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Abbas just said it yesterday.  During negotiations.
> 
> Take a look at this:
> 
> _The continuous attachment of the Jewish people to the land of their fathers and forefathers, on which this people has historically lived, is a fact which has been expressed in the Declaration of Independence. The strength of this attachment is confirmed by its consistency over time and place, by keeping faith with and holding on to national identity, and in the wonderous accomplishments of struggle. The organic relationship between the Jewish people, their history and their land has confirmed itself in their unceasing effort to prompt the world to recognize the rights of the Jewish people and their national entity on equal footing with other nations.
> 
> Israel is part of the larger Jewish world and the Jewish people are part of Israel.
> 
> Jerusalem is the capital of Israel.
> 
> Judaism is the official religion in Israel. Respect for the sanctity of all other religions shall be maintained.
> 
> Halacha shall be the principle source of legislation.
> 
> Hebrew shall be the official language. _
> 
> 
> 
> Admirable or Apartheid?
Click to expand...

Israel has been an apartheid state since 1948. This law is no big change.


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> You can’t just assume their state, should it come to be, will be Jew free ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not assuming it.  They've said as much.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In what Constitution?  What laws?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Abbas just said it yesterday.  During negotiations.
> 
> Take a look at this:
> 
> _The continuous attachment of the Jewish people to the land of their fathers and forefathers, on which this people has historically lived, is a fact which has been expressed in the Declaration of Independence. The strength of this attachment is confirmed by its consistency over time and place, by keeping faith with and holding on to national identity, and in the wonderous accomplishments of struggle. The organic relationship between the Jewish people, their history and their land has confirmed itself in their unceasing effort to prompt the world to recognize the rights of the Jewish people and their national entity on equal footing with other nations.
> 
> Israel is part of the larger Jewish world and the Jewish people are part of Israel.
> 
> Jerusalem is the capital of Israel.
> 
> Judaism is the official religion in Israel. Respect for the sanctity of all other religions shall be maintained.
> 
> Halacha shall be the principle source of legislation.
> 
> Hebrew shall be the official language. _
> 
> 
> 
> Admirable or Apartheid?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Israel has been an apartheid state since 1948. This law is no big change.
Click to expand...



You agree that the law quoted above is an apartheid law, yes?


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> You can’t just assume their state, should it come to be, will be Jew free ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not assuming it.  They've said as much.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In what Constitution?  What laws?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Abbas just said it yesterday.  During negotiations.
> 
> Take a look at this:
> 
> _The continuous attachment of the Jewish people to the land of their fathers and forefathers, on which this people has historically lived, is a fact which has been expressed in the Declaration of Independence. The strength of this attachment is confirmed by its consistency over time and place, by keeping faith with and holding on to national identity, and in the wonderous accomplishments of struggle. The organic relationship between the Jewish people, their history and their land has confirmed itself in their unceasing effort to prompt the world to recognize the rights of the Jewish people and their national entity on equal footing with other nations.
> 
> Israel is part of the larger Jewish world and the Jewish people are part of Israel.
> 
> Jerusalem is the capital of Israel.
> 
> Judaism is the official religion in Israel. Respect for the sanctity of all other religions shall be maintained.
> 
> Halacha shall be the principle source of legislation.
> 
> Hebrew shall be the official language. _
> 
> 
> 
> Admirable or Apartheid?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Israel has been an apartheid state since 1948. This law is no big change.
Click to expand...


Now, that is funny!   According to the Armistice Agreement that you make reference to the Israelis were supposed to let the Israelis enter E. Jerusalem to have access to their religious sites but of course didn’t. That isn’t Apartheid? Not only did Israelis not live in Jordan they were not even allowed to enter.
  What about Abbas No Israeli Allowed Statement? See anything wrong with that? You should get your own comedy show. You can call it “ Fake News”.


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> You can’t just assume their state, should it come to be, will be Jew free ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not assuming it.  They've said as much.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In what Constitution?  What laws?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Abbas just said it yesterday.  During negotiations.
> 
> Take a look at this:
> 
> _The continuous attachment of the Jewish people to the land of their fathers and forefathers, on which this people has historically lived, is a fact which has been expressed in the Declaration of Independence. The strength of this attachment is confirmed by its consistency over time and place, by keeping faith with and holding on to national identity, and in the wonderous accomplishments of struggle. The organic relationship between the Jewish people, their history and their land has confirmed itself in their unceasing effort to prompt the world to recognize the rights of the Jewish people and their national entity on equal footing with other nations.
> 
> Israel is part of the larger Jewish world and the Jewish people are part of Israel.
> 
> Jerusalem is the capital of Israel.
> 
> Judaism is the official religion in Israel. Respect for the sanctity of all other religions shall be maintained.
> 
> Halacha shall be the principle source of legislation.
> 
> Hebrew shall be the official language. _
> 
> 
> 
> Admirable or Apartheid?
Click to expand...

Do you have a link to what Abbas said?   And again, there is NO state.  What he says is no different then what different factions in the formation of Israel said.  What counts is what is put into law once a state is established.

Apartheid?  No.

Admirable?  Not sure.

Halacha will be the principle source of legislation? Halacha: The Laws of Jewish Life | My Jewish Learning

In a democratic society?

I find that as disturbing as the use of Sharia as the principle source of legislation.  Is that legislation then imposed on unbelievers?  What does this mean exactly?  

No matter how you look at it...it has the potential to exacerbate inequality.

Can it really coexist with democracy?


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> You can’t just assume their state, should it come to be, will be Jew free ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not assuming it.  They've said as much.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In what Constitution?  What laws?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Abbas just said it yesterday.  During negotiations.
> 
> Take a look at this:
> 
> _The continuous attachment of the Jewish people to the land of their fathers and forefathers, on which this people has historically lived, is a fact which has been expressed in the Declaration of Independence. The strength of this attachment is confirmed by its consistency over time and place, by keeping faith with and holding on to national identity, and in the wonderous accomplishments of struggle. The organic relationship between the Jewish people, their history and their land has confirmed itself in their unceasing effort to prompt the world to recognize the rights of the Jewish people and their national entity on equal footing with other nations.
> 
> Israel is part of the larger Jewish world and the Jewish people are part of Israel.
> 
> Jerusalem is the capital of Israel.
> 
> Judaism is the official religion in Israel. Respect for the sanctity of all other religions shall be maintained.
> 
> Halacha shall be the principle source of legislation.
> 
> Hebrew shall be the official language. _
> 
> 
> 
> Admirable or Apartheid?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Do you have a link to what Abbas said?   And again, there is NO state.  What he says is no different then what different factions in the formation of Israel said.  What counts is what is put into law once a state is established.
> 
> Apartheid?  No.
> 
> Admirable?  Not sure.
> 
> Halacha will be the principle source of legislation? Halacha: The Laws of Jewish Life | My Jewish Learning
> 
> In a democratic society?
> 
> I find that as disturbing as the use of Sharia as the principle source of legislation.  Is that legislation then imposed on unbelievers?  What does this mean exactly?
> 
> No matter how you look at it...it has the potential to exacerbate inequality.
> 
> Can it really coexist with democracy?
Click to expand...




Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> You can’t just assume their state, should it come to be, will be Jew free ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not assuming it.  They've said as much.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In what Constitution?  What laws?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Abbas just said it yesterday.  During negotiations.
> 
> Take a look at this:
> 
> _The continuous attachment of the Jewish people to the land of their fathers and forefathers, on which this people has historically lived, is a fact which has been expressed in the Declaration of Independence. The strength of this attachment is confirmed by its consistency over time and place, by keeping faith with and holding on to national identity, and in the wonderous accomplishments of struggle. The organic relationship between the Jewish people, their history and their land has confirmed itself in their unceasing effort to prompt the world to recognize the rights of the Jewish people and their national entity on equal footing with other nations.
> 
> Israel is part of the larger Jewish world and the Jewish people are part of Israel.
> 
> Jerusalem is the capital of Israel.
> 
> Judaism is the official religion in Israel. Respect for the sanctity of all other religions shall be maintained.
> 
> Halacha shall be the principle source of legislation.
> 
> Hebrew shall be the official language. _
> 
> 
> 
> Admirable or Apartheid?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Do you have a link to what Abbas said?   And again, there is NO state.  What he says is no different then what different factions in the formation of Israel said.  What counts is what is put into law once a state is established.
> 
> Apartheid?  No.
> 
> Admirable?  Not sure.
> 
> Halacha will be the principle source of legislation? Halacha: The Laws of Jewish Life | My Jewish Learning
> 
> In a democratic society?
> 
> I find that as disturbing as the use of Sharia as the principle source of legislation.  Is that legislation then imposed on unbelievers?  What does this mean exactly?
> 
> No matter how you look at it...it has the potential to exacerbate inequality.
> 
> Can it really coexist with democracy?
Click to expand...


“ In the final resolution; there will not be a single Israeli( either Civilian or Soldier on our Lands” That statement  has come from Abbas several times   This can be easily confirmed by those who want the truth. I


----------



## Coyote

ILOVEISRAEL said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> You can’t just assume their state, should it come to be, will be Jew free ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not assuming it.  They've said as much.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In what Constitution?  What laws?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Abbas just said it yesterday.  During negotiations.
> 
> Take a look at this:
> 
> _The continuous attachment of the Jewish people to the land of their fathers and forefathers, on which this people has historically lived, is a fact which has been expressed in the Declaration of Independence. The strength of this attachment is confirmed by its consistency over time and place, by keeping faith with and holding on to national identity, and in the wonderous accomplishments of struggle. The organic relationship between the Jewish people, their history and their land has confirmed itself in their unceasing effort to prompt the world to recognize the rights of the Jewish people and their national entity on equal footing with other nations.
> 
> Israel is part of the larger Jewish world and the Jewish people are part of Israel.
> 
> Jerusalem is the capital of Israel.
> 
> Judaism is the official religion in Israel. Respect for the sanctity of all other religions shall be maintained.
> 
> Halacha shall be the principle source of legislation.
> 
> Hebrew shall be the official language. _
> 
> 
> 
> Admirable or Apartheid?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Do you have a link to what Abbas said?   And again, there is NO state.  What he says is no different then what different factions in the formation of Israel said.  What counts is what is put into law once a state is established.
> 
> Apartheid?  No.
> 
> Admirable?  Not sure.
> 
> Halacha will be the principle source of legislation? Halacha: The Laws of Jewish Life | My Jewish Learning
> 
> In a democratic society?
> 
> I find that as disturbing as the use of Sharia as the principle source of legislation.  Is that legislation then imposed on unbelievers?  What does this mean exactly?
> 
> No matter how you look at it...it has the potential to exacerbate inequality.
> 
> Can it really coexist with democracy?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> You can’t just assume their state, should it come to be, will be Jew free ...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm not assuming it.  They've said as much.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In what Constitution?  What laws?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Abbas just said it yesterday.  During negotiations.
> 
> Take a look at this:
> 
> _The continuous attachment of the Jewish people to the land of their fathers and forefathers, on which this people has historically lived, is a fact which has been expressed in the Declaration of Independence. The strength of this attachment is confirmed by its consistency over time and place, by keeping faith with and holding on to national identity, and in the wonderous accomplishments of struggle. The organic relationship between the Jewish people, their history and their land has confirmed itself in their unceasing effort to prompt the world to recognize the rights of the Jewish people and their national entity on equal footing with other nations.
> 
> Israel is part of the larger Jewish world and the Jewish people are part of Israel.
> 
> Jerusalem is the capital of Israel.
> 
> Judaism is the official religion in Israel. Respect for the sanctity of all other religions shall be maintained.
> 
> Halacha shall be the principle source of legislation.
> 
> Hebrew shall be the official language. _
> 
> 
> 
> Admirable or Apartheid?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Do you have a link to what Abbas said?   And again, there is NO state.  What he says is no different then what different factions in the formation of Israel said.  What counts is what is put into law once a state is established.
> 
> Apartheid?  No.
> 
> Admirable?  Not sure.
> 
> Halacha will be the principle source of legislation? Halacha: The Laws of Jewish Life | My Jewish Learning
> 
> In a democratic society?
> 
> I find that as disturbing as the use of Sharia as the principle source of legislation.  Is that legislation then imposed on unbelievers?  What does this mean exactly?
> 
> No matter how you look at it...it has the potential to exacerbate inequality.
> 
> Can it really coexist with democracy?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> “ In the final resolution; there will not be a single Israeli( either Civilian or Soldier on our Lands” That statement  has come from Abbas several times   This can be easily confirmed by those who want the truth. I
Click to expand...

Israeli.  Not Jew.


----------



## admonit

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> You can’t just assume their state, should it come to be, will be Jew free ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not assuming it.  They've said as much.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In what Constitution?  What laws?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Abbas just said it yesterday.  During negotiations.
> 
> Take a look at this:
> 
> _The continuous attachment of the Jewish people to the land of their fathers and forefathers, on which this people has historically lived, is a fact which has been expressed in the Declaration of Independence. The strength of this attachment is confirmed by its consistency over time and place, by keeping faith with and holding on to national identity, and in the wonderous accomplishments of struggle. The organic relationship between the Jewish people, their history and their land has confirmed itself in their unceasing effort to prompt the world to recognize the rights of the Jewish people and their national entity on equal footing with other nations.
> 
> Israel is part of the larger Jewish world and the Jewish people are part of Israel.
> 
> Jerusalem is the capital of Israel.
> 
> Judaism is the official religion in Israel. Respect for the sanctity of all other religions shall be maintained.
> 
> Halacha shall be the principle source of legislation.
> 
> Hebrew shall be the official language. _
> 
> 
> 
> Admirable or Apartheid?
Click to expand...

Your simple and funny trap will change nothing, because "bad Israel" is not factual and logical conclusion, but rather a basic concept of self-proclaimed liberals.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> You can’t just assume their state, should it come to be, will be Jew free ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not assuming it.  They've said as much.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In what Constitution?  What laws?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Abbas just said it yesterday.  During negotiations.
> 
> Take a look at this:
> 
> _The continuous attachment of the Jewish people to the land of their fathers and forefathers, on which this people has historically lived, is a fact which has been expressed in the Declaration of Independence. The strength of this attachment is confirmed by its consistency over time and place, by keeping faith with and holding on to national identity, and in the wonderous accomplishments of struggle. The organic relationship between the Jewish people, their history and their land has confirmed itself in their unceasing effort to prompt the world to recognize the rights of the Jewish people and their national entity on equal footing with other nations.
> 
> Israel is part of the larger Jewish world and the Jewish people are part of Israel.
> 
> Jerusalem is the capital of Israel.
> 
> Judaism is the official religion in Israel. Respect for the sanctity of all other religions shall be maintained.
> 
> Halacha shall be the principle source of legislation.
> 
> Hebrew shall be the official language. _
> 
> 
> 
> Admirable or Apartheid?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Do you have a link to what Abbas said?   And again, there is NO state.  What he says is no different then what different factions in the formation of Israel said.  What counts is what is put into law once a state is established.
> 
> Apartheid?  No.
> 
> Admirable?  Not sure.
> 
> Halacha will be the principle source of legislation? Halacha: The Laws of Jewish Life | My Jewish Learning
> 
> In a democratic society?
> 
> I find that as disturbing as the use of Sharia as the principle source of legislation.  Is that legislation then imposed on unbelievers?  What does this mean exactly?
> 
> No matter how you look at it...it has the potential to exacerbate inequality.
> 
> Can it really coexist with democracy?
Click to expand...


Was the part about Halacha the only part that seems problematic to you?


----------



## rylah

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> You can’t just assume their state, should it come to be, will be Jew free ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not assuming it.  They've said as much.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In what Constitution?  What laws?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Abbas just said it yesterday.  During negotiations.
> 
> Take a look at this:
> 
> _The continuous attachment of the Jewish people to the land of their fathers and forefathers, on which this people has historically lived, is a fact which has been expressed in the Declaration of Independence. The strength of this attachment is confirmed by its consistency over time and place, by keeping faith with and holding on to national identity, and in the wonderous accomplishments of struggle. The organic relationship between the Jewish people, their history and their land has confirmed itself in their unceasing effort to prompt the world to recognize the rights of the Jewish people and their national entity on equal footing with other nations.
> 
> Israel is part of the larger Jewish world and the Jewish people are part of Israel.
> 
> Jerusalem is the capital of Israel.
> 
> Judaism is the official religion in Israel. Respect for the sanctity of all other religions shall be maintained.
> 
> Halacha shall be the principle source of legislation.
> 
> Hebrew shall be the official language. _
> 
> 
> 
> Admirable or Apartheid?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Do you have a link to what Abbas said?   And again, there is NO state.  What he says is no different then what different factions in the formation of Israel said.  What counts is what is put into law once a state is established.
> 
> Apartheid?  No.
> 
> Admirable?  Not sure.
> 
> Halacha will be the principle source of legislation? Halacha: The Laws of Jewish Life | My Jewish Learning
> 
> In a democratic society?
> 
> I find that as disturbing as the use of Sharia as the principle source of legislation.  Is that legislation then imposed on unbelievers?  What does this mean exactly?
> 
> No matter how you look at it...it has the potential to exacerbate inequality.
> 
> Can it really coexist with democracy?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Was the part about Halacha the only part that seems problematic to you?
Click to expand...


My 2 cents:

One of the proposed versions said _"Principles of Hebrew court"_, that's not exactly Halacha.
To the best of my knowledge it's already being in use, where lawyers have to study parts of Gmarah to learn the principles of interpretation. It's useful in cases where modern practice of law has no precedent, or when a case directly involving Jewish custom is viewed in a state court. Aside from that Sharia and Christian court practices are authorized by law.

My understanding was that principles of Hebrew law are not only a natural part of Israeli jurisprudence, but also an integral part of the Western law and its' practice.


----------



## Humanity

Shusha said:


> Jew traits. And something about the arrogance about being chosen and setting ourselves apart from humanity. Nothing demonizing there at all. /sarcasm



Correct there is NOTHING "demonising" there...



Shusha said:


> But I'm willing to test it if you want, I can start talking about Arab traits.



Please do!


----------



## Linkiloo

I am fine with the law stating the facts. The law does not impede on human rights in Israel and if all the Arab neighbours can have muslim lands and no one is bothered by that, why shouldn't Israel?


----------



## admonit

According to the portal Walla survey, 58% of Israelis support the nation law and 34% oppose it.
Most Israelis support nation-state law

Supposing that 100% of Arab population (20%) oppose the law, 74% of Jews support the law, while 14% oppose it.


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL

Coyote said:


> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not assuming it.  They've said as much.
> 
> 
> 
> In what Constitution?  What laws?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Abbas just said it yesterday.  During negotiations.
> 
> Take a look at this:
> 
> _The continuous attachment of the Jewish people to the land of their fathers and forefathers, on which this people has historically lived, is a fact which has been expressed in the Declaration of Independence. The strength of this attachment is confirmed by its consistency over time and place, by keeping faith with and holding on to national identity, and in the wonderous accomplishments of struggle. The organic relationship between the Jewish people, their history and their land has confirmed itself in their unceasing effort to prompt the world to recognize the rights of the Jewish people and their national entity on equal footing with other nations.
> 
> Israel is part of the larger Jewish world and the Jewish people are part of Israel.
> 
> Jerusalem is the capital of Israel.
> 
> Judaism is the official religion in Israel. Respect for the sanctity of all other religions shall be maintained.
> 
> Halacha shall be the principle source of legislation.
> 
> Hebrew shall be the official language. _
> 
> 
> 
> Admirable or Apartheid?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Do you have a link to what Abbas said?   And again, there is NO state.  What he says is no different then what different factions in the formation of Israel said.  What counts is what is put into law once a state is established.
> 
> Apartheid?  No.
> 
> Admirable?  Not sure.
> 
> Halacha will be the principle source of legislation? Halacha: The Laws of Jewish Life | My Jewish Learning
> 
> In a democratic society?
> 
> I find that as disturbing as the use of Sharia as the principle source of legislation.  Is that legislation then imposed on unbelievers?  What does this mean exactly?
> 
> No matter how you look at it...it has the potential to exacerbate inequality.
> 
> Can it really coexist with democracy?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not assuming it.  They've said as much.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In what Constitution?  What laws?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Abbas just said it yesterday.  During negotiations.
> 
> Take a look at this:
> 
> _The continuous attachment of the Jewish people to the land of their fathers and forefathers, on which this people has historically lived, is a fact which has been expressed in the Declaration of Independence. The strength of this attachment is confirmed by its consistency over time and place, by keeping faith with and holding on to national identity, and in the wonderous accomplishments of struggle. The organic relationship between the Jewish people, their history and their land has confirmed itself in their unceasing effort to prompt the world to recognize the rights of the Jewish people and their national entity on equal footing with other nations.
> 
> Israel is part of the larger Jewish world and the Jewish people are part of Israel.
> 
> Jerusalem is the capital of Israel.
> 
> Judaism is the official religion in Israel. Respect for the sanctity of all other religions shall be maintained.
> 
> Halacha shall be the principle source of legislation.
> 
> Hebrew shall be the official language. _
> 
> 
> 
> Admirable or Apartheid?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Do you have a link to what Abbas said?   And again, there is NO state.  What he says is no different then what different factions in the formation of Israel said.  What counts is what is put into law once a state is established.
> 
> Apartheid?  No.
> 
> Admirable?  Not sure.
> 
> Halacha will be the principle source of legislation? Halacha: The Laws of Jewish Life | My Jewish Learning
> 
> In a democratic society?
> 
> I find that as disturbing as the use of Sharia as the principle source of legislation.  Is that legislation then imposed on unbelievers?  What does this mean exactly?
> 
> No matter how you look at it...it has the potential to exacerbate inequality.
> 
> Can it really coexist with democracy?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> “ In the final resolution; there will not be a single Israeli( either Civilian or Soldier on our Lands” That statement  has come from Abbas several times   This can be easily confirmed by those who want the truth. I
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Israeli.  Not Jew.
Click to expand...


So what?? You don’t consider that discriminatory?


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL

Humanity said:


> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> The only person who brought up choseness is you.  It is a pattern on this board that the only people who bring up choseness are people wishing to demonize the Jewish people.  Oh, and its not "providing valid criticism of Israel's government policies" -- its a direct attack on the Jewish people.
> 
> Jewish people do not bring up choseness.  It is a tool used by those who have an unreasonable hatred of Jews in order to apply traits of arrogance and superiority to Jews so that they can be demonized.  (Which, btw, is NOT what choseness means and anyone with any knowledge of actual Torah, rather than canards said about Torah, would know that.)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So, to get this straight, you are trying to tell me that not a single Team Israel member has ever said that Israel was given to them by god?
> 
> You are trying to tell me that Jews do not think that they are the chosen ones?
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> “ Chosen “ isn’t about good or bad according to your thread. . It’s about the Torah. So what??  I know Christians who feel that one day the Jewish people will recognize Jesus as their “ savior” and we know about the religious intolerance of the Muslim World.   During the Gulf War our Military weren’t even allowed to bring their bibles into Saudi Arabia. How would you feel if that were Israel??
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What a fascinating load of gibberish!
> 
> Surely even you can string a sentence together that makes SOME sense? Hmmm I guess not!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Nothing to say about Christmas who feel they are the true Religion or Muslims who have no tolerance or respect ✊ for others?
> Not surprised!!!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> More gibberish?
> 
> Maybe you need to get back to the docs and get a change of meds... You are posting unintelligible nonsense
Click to expand...


I’m not telling the truth about my comments about Jordan or Abbas? Maybe you should  have yourself committed to get a reality check.


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL

Humanity said:


> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> There is nothing that I have written that any sane person would consider "demonization" of anyone! That is your opinion based on you being Team Israel!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jew traits.  And something about the arrogance about being chosen and setting ourselves apart from humanity.  Nothing demonizing there at all.  /sarcasm
> 
> But I'm willing to test it if you want, I can start talking about Arab traits.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Not going to get a response from the.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well don't you look like a fucking moron again
Click to expand...

After you!!!!


----------



## Humanity

ILOVEISRAEL said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> So, to get this straight, you are trying to tell me that not a single Team Israel member has ever said that Israel was given to them by god?
> 
> You are trying to tell me that Jews do not think that they are the chosen ones?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> “ Chosen “ isn’t about good or bad according to your thread. . It’s about the Torah. So what??  I know Christians who feel that one day the Jewish people will recognize Jesus as their “ savior” and we know about the religious intolerance of the Muslim World.   During the Gulf War our Military weren’t even allowed to bring their bibles into Saudi Arabia. How would you feel if that were Israel??
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What a fascinating load of gibberish!
> 
> Surely even you can string a sentence together that makes SOME sense? Hmmm I guess not!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Nothing to say about Christmas who feel they are the true Religion or Muslims who have no tolerance or respect ✊ for others?
> Not surprised!!!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> More gibberish?
> 
> Maybe you need to get back to the docs and get a change of meds... You are posting unintelligible nonsense
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I’m not telling the truth about my comments about Jordan or Abbas? Maybe you should  have yourself committed to get a reality check.
Click to expand...


Suggest you try and keep on topic... That may help you post something that actually makes sense moron!


----------



## Humanity

ILOVEISRAEL said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> There is nothing that I have written that any sane person would consider "demonization" of anyone! That is your opinion based on you being Team Israel!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jew traits.  And something about the arrogance about being chosen and setting ourselves apart from humanity.  Nothing demonizing there at all.  /sarcasm
> 
> But I'm willing to test it if you want, I can start talking about Arab traits.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Not going to get a response from the.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well don't you look like a fucking moron again
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> After you!!!!
Click to expand...


Your quick wit and comedic repartee is astounding for someone who is lacking a few brain cells...

Seriously though, are you sure you should be here? You are clearly too young, retarded or too old to make any meaningful contribution to debate!


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL

Humanity said:


> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> There is nothing that I have written that any sane person would consider "demonization" of anyone! That is your opinion based on you being Team Israel!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jew traits.  And something about the arrogance about being chosen and setting ourselves apart from humanity.  Nothing demonizing there at all.  /sarcasm
> 
> But I'm willing to test it if you want, I can start talking about Arab traits.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Not going to get a response from the.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well don't you look like a fucking moron again
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> After you!!!!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Your quick wit and comedic repartee is astounding for someone who is lacking a few brain cells...
> 
> Seriously though, are you sure you should be here? You are clearly too young, retarded or too old to make any meaningful contribution to debate!
Click to expand...


Denying my post about Abbas and what I saw about Jordan?


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL

Humanity said:


> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> “ Chosen “ isn’t about good or bad according to your thread. . It’s about the Torah. So what??  I know Christians who feel that one day the Jewish people will recognize Jesus as their “ savior” and we know about the religious intolerance of the Muslim World.   During the Gulf War our Military weren’t even allowed to bring their bibles into Saudi Arabia. How would you feel if that were Israel??
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What a fascinating load of gibberish!
> 
> Surely even you can string a sentence together that makes SOME sense? Hmmm I guess not!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Nothing to say about Christmas who feel they are the true Religion or Muslims who have no tolerance or respect ✊ for others?
> Not surprised!!!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> More gibberish?
> 
> Maybe you need to get back to the docs and get a change of meds... You are posting unintelligible nonsense
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I’m not telling the truth about my comments about Jordan or Abbas? Maybe you should  have yourself committed to get a reality check.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Suggest you try and keep on topic... That may help you post something that actually makes sense moron!
Click to expand...


I am on topic. I am not the one who spoke about “Apartheid “
Since 1949    
“


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL

Humanity said:


> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> The only person who brought up choseness is you.  It is a pattern on this board that the only people who bring up choseness are people wishing to demonize the Jewish people.  Oh, and its not "providing valid criticism of Israel's government policies" -- its a direct attack on the Jewish people.
> 
> Jewish people do not bring up choseness.  It is a tool used by those who have an unreasonable hatred of Jews in order to apply traits of arrogance and superiority to Jews so that they can be demonized.  (Which, btw, is NOT what choseness means and anyone with any knowledge of actual Torah, rather than canards said about Torah, would know that.)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So, to get this straight, you are trying to tell me that not a single Team Israel member has ever said that Israel was given to them by god?
> 
> You are trying to tell me that Jews do not think that they are the chosen ones?
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> “ Chosen “ isn’t about good or bad according to your thread. . It’s about the Torah. So what??  I know Christians who feel that one day the Jewish people will recognize Jesus as their “ savior” and we know about the religious intolerance of the Muslim World.   During the Gulf War our Military weren’t even allowed to bring their bibles into Saudi Arabia. How would you feel if that were Israel??
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What a fascinating load of gibberish!
> 
> Surely even you can string a sentence together that makes SOME sense? Hmmm I guess not!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Nothing to say about Christmas who feel they are the true Religion or Muslims who have no tolerance or respect ✊ for others?
> Not surprised!!!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> More gibberish?
> 
> Maybe you need to get back to the docs and get a change of meds... You are posting unintelligible nonsense
Click to expand...




Humanity said:


> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> There is nothing that I have written that any sane person would consider "demonization" of anyone! That is your opinion based on you being Team Israel!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jew traits.  And something about the arrogance about being chosen and setting ourselves apart from humanity.  Nothing demonizing there at all.  /sarcasm
> 
> But I'm willing to test it if you want, I can start talking about Arab traits.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Not going to get a response from the.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well don't you look like a fucking moron again
Click to expand...


You are a Fucking Moron!


----------



## Humanity

ILOVEISRAEL said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Jew traits.  And something about the arrogance about being chosen and setting ourselves apart from humanity.  Nothing demonizing there at all.  /sarcasm
> 
> But I'm willing to test it if you want, I can start talking about Arab traits.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not going to get a response from the.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well don't you look like a fucking moron again
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> After you!!!!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Your quick wit and comedic repartee is astounding for someone who is lacking a few brain cells...
> 
> Seriously though, are you sure you should be here? You are clearly too young, retarded or too old to make any meaningful contribution to debate!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Denying my post about Abbas and what I saw about Jordan?
Click to expand...


Here dumbass let me help you...

The title of the OP is *"Now it's a basic law: The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people"
*
Not about Abbas or Jordan!


----------



## Humanity

ILOVEISRAEL said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> So, to get this straight, you are trying to tell me that not a single Team Israel member has ever said that Israel was given to them by god?
> 
> You are trying to tell me that Jews do not think that they are the chosen ones?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> “ Chosen “ isn’t about good or bad according to your thread. . It’s about the Torah. So what??  I know Christians who feel that one day the Jewish people will recognize Jesus as their “ savior” and we know about the religious intolerance of the Muslim World.   During the Gulf War our Military weren’t even allowed to bring their bibles into Saudi Arabia. How would you feel if that were Israel??
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What a fascinating load of gibberish!
> 
> Surely even you can string a sentence together that makes SOME sense? Hmmm I guess not!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Nothing to say about Christmas who feel they are the true Religion or Muslims who have no tolerance or respect ✊ for others?
> Not surprised!!!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> More gibberish?
> 
> Maybe you need to get back to the docs and get a change of meds... You are posting unintelligible nonsense
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> There is nothing that I have written that any sane person would consider "demonization" of anyone! That is your opinion based on you being Team Israel!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Jew traits.  And something about the arrogance about being chosen and setting ourselves apart from humanity.  Nothing demonizing there at all.  /sarcasm
> 
> But I'm willing to test it if you want, I can start talking about Arab traits.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Not going to get a response from the.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well don't you look like a fucking moron again
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are a Fucking Moron!
Click to expand...


You are dumb, plain and simple, emphasis on "simple"!


----------



## Humanity

ILOVEISRAEL said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> What a fascinating load of gibberish!
> 
> Surely even you can string a sentence together that makes SOME sense? Hmmm I guess not!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nothing to say about Christmas who feel they are the true Religion or Muslims who have no tolerance or respect ✊ for others?
> Not surprised!!!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> More gibberish?
> 
> Maybe you need to get back to the docs and get a change of meds... You are posting unintelligible nonsense
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I’m not telling the truth about my comments about Jordan or Abbas? Maybe you should  have yourself committed to get a reality check.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Suggest you try and keep on topic... That may help you post something that actually makes sense moron!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I am on topic. I am not the one who spoke about “Apartheid “
> Since 1949
> “
Click to expand...


NOR DID I YOU FUCKING IDIOT!


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL

Humanity said:


> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nothing to say about Christmas who feel they are the true Religion or Muslims who have no tolerance or respect ✊ for others?
> Not surprised!!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> More gibberish?
> 
> Maybe you need to get back to the docs and get a change of meds... You are posting unintelligible nonsense
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I’m not telling the truth about my comments about Jordan or Abbas? Maybe you should  have yourself committed to get a reality check.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Suggest you try and keep on topic... That may help you post something that actually makes sense moron!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I am on topic. I am not the one who spoke about “Apartheid “
> Since 1949
> “
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> NOR DID I YOU FUCKING IDIOT!
Click to expand...


Don’t talk about yourself that way!!! On the other hand, maybe you should..


----------



## RoccoR

RE:  Now it's a basic law: The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people
※→  Humanity, et al,

"Demonization" is a propaganda technique as old as the concept of the "devil" and "evil" itself.  It assigns these two attributes to an entity as a means of communicating how wickedly damaging to the community the entity is → as well as → how threatening entity is relative to the defender's way of life.



Humanity said:


> There is nothing that I have written that any sane person would consider "demonization" of anyone! That is your opinion based on you being Team Israel!


*(COMMENT)*

It is strategies used to identify one's better qualities while, at the time, protect one’s self-image.  It sets one party to a confrontation morally above the opponent. 



 
_•  *Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy* (SEP) •_​
*Moral Skepticism * 
The famous Cartesian hypothesis is of a *demon* who deceives me in all of my beliefs about the external*...*experiences or beliefs, because of how the deceiving *demon* is defined.  (Source: SEP) "Demons" do "evil."

When the Arab Palestinians _(as an example)_ → attempts to justify the use of explosives and other lethal devices in, into, or against various defined public places with intent to kill or cause serious bodily injury, or with intent to cause extensive _(yet unnecessary)_ destruction of private property, public place and commercial industry → they take on the image of 'evil." 

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> You can’t just assume their state, should it come to be, will be Jew free ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not assuming it.  They've said as much.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In what Constitution?  What laws?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Abbas just said it yesterday.  During negotiations.
> 
> Take a look at this:
> 
> _The continuous attachment of the Jewish people to the land of their fathers and forefathers, on which this people has historically lived, is a fact which has been expressed in the Declaration of Independence. The strength of this attachment is confirmed by its consistency over time and place, by keeping faith with and holding on to national identity, and in the wonderous accomplishments of struggle. The organic relationship between the Jewish people, their history and their land has confirmed itself in their unceasing effort to prompt the world to recognize the rights of the Jewish people and their national entity on equal footing with other nations.
> 
> Israel is part of the larger Jewish world and the Jewish people are part of Israel.
> 
> Jerusalem is the capital of Israel.
> 
> Judaism is the official religion in Israel. Respect for the sanctity of all other religions shall be maintained.
> 
> Halacha shall be the principle source of legislation.
> 
> Hebrew shall be the official language. _
> 
> 
> 
> Admirable or Apartheid?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Do you have a link to what Abbas said?   And again, there is NO state.  What he says is no different then what different factions in the formation of Israel said.  What counts is what is put into law once a state is established.
> 
> Apartheid?  No.
> 
> Admirable?  Not sure.
> 
> Halacha will be the principle source of legislation? Halacha: The Laws of Jewish Life | My Jewish Learning
> 
> In a democratic society?
> 
> I find that as disturbing as the use of Sharia as the principle source of legislation.  Is that legislation then imposed on unbelievers?  What does this mean exactly?
> 
> No matter how you look at it...it has the potential to exacerbate inequality.
> 
> Can it really coexist with democracy?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Was the part about Halacha the only part that seems problematic to you?
Click to expand...


No.  I also question a democratic society having a state religion - but then, I feel that way about any state that has a "state religion" - that is certainly not unique to Israel. Some states have it as a remnant of a past where the monarchy and religion was entertwined.  Others have it in a more active sense, where the religion plays an active role in public life. I also question the capital being Jerusalem since theoretically all that was supposed to be resolved through negotiation not fiat.

I thought the part about Halacha was removed?


----------



## Coyote

ILOVEISRAEL said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> In what Constitution?  What laws?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Abbas just said it yesterday.  During negotiations.
> 
> Take a look at this:
> 
> _The continuous attachment of the Jewish people to the land of their fathers and forefathers, on which this people has historically lived, is a fact which has been expressed in the Declaration of Independence. The strength of this attachment is confirmed by its consistency over time and place, by keeping faith with and holding on to national identity, and in the wonderous accomplishments of struggle. The organic relationship between the Jewish people, their history and their land has confirmed itself in their unceasing effort to prompt the world to recognize the rights of the Jewish people and their national entity on equal footing with other nations.
> 
> Israel is part of the larger Jewish world and the Jewish people are part of Israel.
> 
> Jerusalem is the capital of Israel.
> 
> Judaism is the official religion in Israel. Respect for the sanctity of all other religions shall be maintained.
> 
> Halacha shall be the principle source of legislation.
> 
> Hebrew shall be the official language. _
> 
> 
> 
> Admirable or Apartheid?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Do you have a link to what Abbas said?   And again, there is NO state.  What he says is no different then what different factions in the formation of Israel said.  What counts is what is put into law once a state is established.
> 
> Apartheid?  No.
> 
> Admirable?  Not sure.
> 
> Halacha will be the principle source of legislation? Halacha: The Laws of Jewish Life | My Jewish Learning
> 
> In a democratic society?
> 
> I find that as disturbing as the use of Sharia as the principle source of legislation.  Is that legislation then imposed on unbelievers?  What does this mean exactly?
> 
> No matter how you look at it...it has the potential to exacerbate inequality.
> 
> Can it really coexist with democracy?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> In what Constitution?  What laws?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Abbas just said it yesterday.  During negotiations.
> 
> Take a look at this:
> 
> _The continuous attachment of the Jewish people to the land of their fathers and forefathers, on which this people has historically lived, is a fact which has been expressed in the Declaration of Independence. The strength of this attachment is confirmed by its consistency over time and place, by keeping faith with and holding on to national identity, and in the wonderous accomplishments of struggle. The organic relationship between the Jewish people, their history and their land has confirmed itself in their unceasing effort to prompt the world to recognize the rights of the Jewish people and their national entity on equal footing with other nations.
> 
> Israel is part of the larger Jewish world and the Jewish people are part of Israel.
> 
> Jerusalem is the capital of Israel.
> 
> Judaism is the official religion in Israel. Respect for the sanctity of all other religions shall be maintained.
> 
> Halacha shall be the principle source of legislation.
> 
> Hebrew shall be the official language. _
> 
> 
> 
> Admirable or Apartheid?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Do you have a link to what Abbas said?   And again, there is NO state.  What he says is no different then what different factions in the formation of Israel said.  What counts is what is put into law once a state is established.
> 
> Apartheid?  No.
> 
> Admirable?  Not sure.
> 
> Halacha will be the principle source of legislation? Halacha: The Laws of Jewish Life | My Jewish Learning
> 
> In a democratic society?
> 
> I find that as disturbing as the use of Sharia as the principle source of legislation.  Is that legislation then imposed on unbelievers?  What does this mean exactly?
> 
> No matter how you look at it...it has the potential to exacerbate inequality.
> 
> Can it really coexist with democracy?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> “ In the final resolution; there will not be a single Israeli( either Civilian or Soldier on our Lands” That statement  has come from Abbas several times   This can be easily confirmed by those who want the truth. I
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Israeli.  Not Jew.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So what?? You don’t consider that discriminatory?
Click to expand...


Sounds like they are saying they don't want any foriegn nationals of "the enemy" in their state.  Whether that occurs or not is up in the air.  A lot of it is rhetoric.  Let's see what happens when they actually form a state - then we can see if there is discrimmination or not.


----------



## Coyote

*Folks - there is some kindergarten fighting going on here, not going to name names, but take it to the Flame Zone if you want to go after each other.  Otherwise - let's discuss the topic.*


----------



## RoccoR

RE: Now it's a basic law: The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people
※→ Coyote, et al,

No matter what the provailing opinion is about any given political and legal framework is, the dometic population wants what it wants. 



Coyote said:


> No.  I also question a democratic society having a state religion - but then, I feel that way about any state that has a "state religion" - that is certainly not unique to Israel. Some states have it as a remnant of a past where the monarchy and religion was entertwined.  Others have it in a more active sense, where the religion plays an active role in public life.


*(COMMENT)*

I agree, there is nothing inherently wrong with a "State Religion" → a "Monarchy" → or a "Theocracy," if it is supported by the general domestic population. No matter what we may think of it _[(good, bad, or indifferent) (self-destructive or not)]_ they will eventually do what they want.



Coyote said:


> I also question the capital being Jerusalem since theoretically all that was supposed to be resolved through negotiation not fiat.


*(COMMENT)*

A capitol is wherever the demonsticpopulation settles it; and it can change.  This is not the first time Jerusalem has been designated a Capitol, and it will not be the last.

The designated use of Jerusalem as a Capitol was in 1950 almost → 70 years ago.  It was inside the 1949 Armnistice Line. Yes, the original concept was that Jerusalem would be a self-governing institution in its own right.  But there had been no meaningful negotiations over the issue until the Treaty of 1994 between Jordan and Israel.

Article 9* - Places of Historical and Religious Significance and Interfaith Relations*
1. Each Party will provide freedom of access to places of religious and historical significance. 

2. In this regard, in accordance with the Washington Declaration, Israel respects the present special role of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan in Muslim Holy shrines in Jerusalem. When negotiations on the permanent status will take place, Israel will give high priority to the Jordanian historic role in these shrines.

 3. The Parties will act together to promote interfaith relations among the three monotheistic religions, with the aim of working towards religious understanding, moral commitment, freedom of religious worship, and tolerance and peace.​
The deterioration of political and deplomatic relations have come to the end-state we see today.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Humanity

ILOVEISRAEL said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> More gibberish?
> 
> Maybe you need to get back to the docs and get a change of meds... You are posting unintelligible nonsense
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I’m not telling the truth about my comments about Jordan or Abbas? Maybe you should  have yourself committed to get a reality check.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Suggest you try and keep on topic... That may help you post something that actually makes sense moron!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I am on topic. I am not the one who spoke about “Apartheid “
> Since 1949
> “
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> NOR DID I YOU FUCKING IDIOT!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Don’t talk about yourself that way!!! On the other hand, maybe you should..
Click to expand...


Are you a child? Good grief!


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> Sounds like they are saying they don't want any foriegn nationals of "the enemy" in their state.  Whether that occurs or not is up in the air.  A lot of it is rhetoric.  Let's see what happens when they actually form a state - then we can see if there is discrimmination or not.



You don't see that as already being discrimination?  

In a final peace treaty, would you support both sides having no "foreign nationals of the enemy" in their State?


----------



## Humanity

RoccoR said:


> Yes, the original concept was that Jerusalem would be a self-governing institution in its own right. But there had been no meaningful negotiations over the issue until the Treaty of 1994 between Jordan and Israel.



Let's be honest about it...

There was NEVER going to be any "meaningful negotiations" as to the who/where/what/why of Jerusalem!

Jerusalem should be, as was set out in 1947, corpus separatum!


----------



## Humanity

Shusha said:


> You don't see that as already being discrimination?



How can it be when there is no state? When there is nothing to base that on?

Crystal ball time again!


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> No.  I also question a democratic society having a state religion - but then, I feel that way about any state that has a "state religion" - that is certainly not unique to Israel. Some states have it as a remnant of a past where the monarchy and religion was entertwined.  Others have it in a more active sense, where the religion plays an active role in public life. I also question the capital being Jerusalem since theoretically all that was supposed to be resolved through negotiation not fiat.
> 
> I thought the part about Halacha was removed?



So your concerns seem to be centered not around the concept of a State for the Jewish people, or a national language or the other trappings of a national identity such as the flag, holiday calendar, etc.  Your main concerns are about a State religion (which you correctly state are in many national constitutions and basic laws) and about Jerusalem specifically.  Yes?


----------



## Shusha

Humanity said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> You don't see that as already being discrimination?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How can it be when there is no state? When there is nothing to base that on?
> 
> Crystal ball time again!
Click to expand...


They are the current governments of the two territories.  They are the ones who will negotiate and create the peace treaty.  We can't just ignore what they are actually saying and pretend it is not "real".  What the current governments say about the future of their state is something to base that on.


----------



## admonit

Coyote said:


> *Folks - there is some kindergarten fighting going on here, not going to name names, but take it to the Flame Zone if you want to go after each other.  Otherwise - let's discuss the topic.*


I'd like to add: the thread is not about Palestine. It's about Israel and her new basic nation law.


----------



## Shusha

Humanity 

I'll ask you the same question I asked Coyote.  Should both sides be able to demand a state free of "foreign national enemies"?


----------



## Humanity

Shusha said:


> They are the current governments of the two territories.



But hopefully that will change!



Shusha said:


> They are the ones who will negotiate and create the peace treaty.



Hopefully NOT!



Shusha said:


> We can't just ignore what they are actually saying and pretend it is not "real".



Ignore? No. Pinch of salt? Sure.



Shusha said:


> What the current governments say about the future of their state is something to base that on.



Hardly. If we believed what every politician said then the US would be "great again"!


----------



## Shusha

Humanity said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> They are the current governments of the two territories.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But hopefully that will change!
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> They are the ones who will negotiate and create the peace treaty.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Hopefully NOT!
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> We can't just ignore what they are actually saying and pretend it is not "real".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Ignore? No. Pinch of salt? Sure.
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> What the current governments say about the future of their state is something to base that on.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Hardly. If we believed what every politician said then the US would be "great again"!
Click to expand...


Interesting.  Does this mean you think Israel should hold out for a better negotiating partner or two?


----------



## Humanity

Shusha said:


> Humanity
> 
> I'll ask you the same question I asked Coyote.  Should both sides be able to demand a state free of "foreign national enemies"?



Not entirely sure of the meaning or context but, I would suggest that a state free of "foreign national enemies" is an impossibility!


----------



## Humanity

Shusha said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> They are the current governments of the two territories.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But hopefully that will change!
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> They are the ones who will negotiate and create the peace treaty.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Hopefully NOT!
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> We can't just ignore what they are actually saying and pretend it is not "real".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Ignore? No. Pinch of salt? Sure.
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> What the current governments say about the future of their state is something to base that on.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Hardly. If we believed what every politician said then the US would be "great again"!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Interesting.  Does this mean you think Israel should hold out for a better negotiating partner or two?
Click to expand...


I believe now, as I have always believed, that Hamas is NOT the right organisation to deal with at any level and should be forced to hold free and open elections. However, there also needs to be a sensible alternative which, at the moment, I don't really see.


----------



## Shusha

Humanity said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity
> 
> I'll ask you the same question I asked Coyote.  Should both sides be able to demand a state free of "foreign national enemies"?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not entirely sure of the meaning or context but, I would suggest that a state free of "foreign national enemies" is an impossibility!
Click to expand...


Agree, but the question was more should a state in the process of ending a conflict be able to try to create a state free of people of foreign nationality who are considered enemies due to the conflict.


----------



## Shusha

Humanity said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> They are the current governments of the two territories.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But hopefully that will change!
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> They are the ones who will negotiate and create the peace treaty.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Hopefully NOT!
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> We can't just ignore what they are actually saying and pretend it is not "real".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Ignore? No. Pinch of salt? Sure.
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> What the current governments say about the future of their state is something to base that on.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Hardly. If we believed what every politician said then the US would be "great again"!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Interesting.  Does this mean you think Israel should hold out for a better negotiating partner or two?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I believe now, as I have always believed, that Hamas is NOT the right organisation to deal with at any level and should be forced to hold free and open elections. However, there also needs to be a sensible alternative which, at the moment, I don't really see.
Click to expand...


Would you say the same about Fatah?  And is there a sensible alternative?


----------



## Humanity

Shusha said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity
> 
> I'll ask you the same question I asked Coyote.  Should both sides be able to demand a state free of "foreign national enemies"?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not entirely sure of the meaning or context but, I would suggest that a state free of "foreign national enemies" is an impossibility!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Agree, but the question was more should a state in the process of ending a conflict be able to try to create a state free of people of foreign nationality who are considered enemies due to the conflict.
Click to expand...


In all honesty... I don't really have an answer on that one.


----------



## Humanity

Shusha said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> They are the current governments of the two territories.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But hopefully that will change!
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> They are the ones who will negotiate and create the peace treaty.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Hopefully NOT!
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> We can't just ignore what they are actually saying and pretend it is not "real".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Ignore? No. Pinch of salt? Sure.
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> What the current governments say about the future of their state is something to base that on.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Hardly. If we believed what every politician said then the US would be "great again"!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Interesting.  Does this mean you think Israel should hold out for a better negotiating partner or two?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I believe now, as I have always believed, that Hamas is NOT the right organisation to deal with at any level and should be forced to hold free and open elections. However, there also needs to be a sensible alternative which, at the moment, I don't really see.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Would you say the same about Fatah?  And is there a sensible alternative?
Click to expand...


I'm not so sure I would say the same. At least not as vehemently.

However, I would say that there needs to a change, a shift in leadership.


----------



## Shusha

Humanity said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity
> 
> I'll ask you the same question I asked Coyote.  Should both sides be able to demand a state free of "foreign national enemies"?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not entirely sure of the meaning or context but, I would suggest that a state free of "foreign national enemies" is an impossibility!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Agree, but the question was more should a state in the process of ending a conflict be able to try to create a state free of people of foreign nationality who are considered enemies due to the conflict.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> In all honesty... I don't really have an answer on that one.
Click to expand...


Fair.  Its easy, I think, to see both sides.  On the one hand, having people remain in your country after partition who refuse citizenship and continue to see themselves as "enemy" is problematic.  On the other hand, removing said people, especially forcibly, is ugly.

My preference would be for people in both new states to be citizens of the state of their residence, but permit dual-citizenship.  That way it matters less where the border is, since there will be people of both citizenships in both states, and presumably, people with dual citizenships would be able to cross freely. 

But I'm not sure that is realistic at this juncture.  So alternatively, I'm at peace with the idea of removing people with generous compensation, hopefully voluntarily, if they wish not to claim citizenship in the state of their residence.  And forcefully if they continue to act like enemies.

As long as it is applied equally to both peoples, I'm okay with it either way.  Its a balance between what is morally right and what is practically possible.


----------



## Shusha

Humanity said:


> However, I would say that there needs to a change, a shift in leadership.



We agree.  Its coming.  Abbas can't live forever.  My fear, though, is that the next generation is likely to be more like Hamas rather than less.  Then what?


----------



## Humanity

Shusha said:


> it matters less where the border is



As someone with dual citizenship I think that the two countries I have citizenship in would disagree that their borders matter less.


----------



## Shusha

Humanity said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> it matters less where the border is
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As someone with dual citizenship I think that the two countries I have citizenship in would disagree that their borders matter less.
Click to expand...


Ha!  I also have dual citizenship (Canada/USA).  What I meant by that is the border between an Israel and a Palestine won't have to be drawn in such a way that keeps the Jews on one side and the Arabs on the other because the assumption of the end result is that both states will have a substantial minority of the other.  It gives more flexibility.  But also requires more co-operation.  And at least with dual citizenship, crossing the border is much easier.  Always coming "home".


----------



## Humanity

Shusha said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> However, I would say that there needs to a change, a shift in leadership.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We agree.  Its coming.  Abbas can't live forever.  My fear, though, is that the next generation is likely to be more like Hamas rather than less.  Then what?
Click to expand...


You may recall several months ago I said that, in relation to Hamas, that they should be 'forced' to hold elections. I still believe that. However, there is no alternative at this time. Fatah? Maybe but with different leadership, with different, new ideas.

However, we cannot look at this situation in isolation. Israel needs to not just continue to march on it's merry way unabated. For example, declaring a unified capital? That is not what was proposed. That's does not help with finding moderate alternatives! And, no, I have no interest in arguing about that with you or anyone. There is nothing that would change my mind that Jerusalem should be corpus separatum.


----------



## Humanity

Shusha said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> it matters less where the border is
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As someone with dual citizenship I think that the two countries I have citizenship in would disagree that their borders matter less.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Ha!  I also have dual citizenship (Canada/USA).  What I meant by that is the border between an Israel and a Palestine won't have to be drawn in such a way that keeps the Jews on one side and the Arabs on the other because the assumption of the end result is that both states will have a substantial minority of the other.  It gives more flexibility.  But also requires more co-operation.  And at least with dual citizenship, crossing the border is much easier.  Always coming "home".
Click to expand...


I am not sure that I follow your border idea.

There is a fixed border between US and Canada that can be crossed by Americans and Canadians and anyone with valid travel documents.

In some ways it is MORE important to have a very distinct, defined border between Israel and Palestine.


----------



## Shusha

Humanity said:


> I am not sure that I follow your border idea.
> 
> There is a fixed border between US and Canada that can be crossed by Americans and Canadians and anyone with valid travel documents.
> 
> In some ways it is MORE important to have a very distinct, defined border between Israel and Palestine.



I'm not in any way arguing against a fixed border.  I am only saying that it will be easier in negotiations to DRAW a border IF we can be open to the idea that there will be a sizable minority of Jews in Palestine.  It will get Palestine a more usable territory for their state.  Make sense?


----------



## RoccoR

RE: Now it's a basic law: The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people
※→ Coyote, et al,

Now, *IF* we are going to be "honest" *THEN* by all means let's do!



Humanity said:


> Let's be honest about it...
> 
> There was NEVER going to be any "meaningful negotiations" as to the who/where/what/why of Jerusalem!
> 
> Jerusalem should be, as was set out in 1947, corpus separatum!


*(COMMENT)*

I make it a practice _(as best that I can)_ "never" to say "never."  I don't believe that the Israeli-Arab Palestinian (as oppose to the Israel-Lebonese, the Israeli-Syrian, the Israeli-Jordanian, of the Israeli-Egyptian) was as toxic as it is today.  There were misgivings, bad feelings, religious differences and economic disparities, to be sure.  But not near as toxic and venomous as they are today.  Other factors gradually came into play and compounded the situatution.

For the moment, let's set aside the complication that the Grand-Mufti _(and many close associates)_ had a dubious reputations.

✪→ Yes A/RES/181 (II) (Part IIIA) made the recommendation that "The City of Jerusalem shall be established as a _corpus separatum_ under a special international regime and shall be administered by the United Nations."  BUT, it also recommended that the "Trusteeship Council shall be designated to discharge the responsibilities of the Administering Authority on behalf of the United Nations."  And the Arab Legion, and in particular HM the King of Jordan, wanted the control over Jerusalem.  The Invasion of Israel by the Arab League set the conditions that prevented the establishment Trusteeship over Jerusalem.  While you can say that Israel did not do anthing to help the recommendation along, it was the Jordanians that saw no advantage to puting in place the UN Administrative Authority.  After the Six-Day War (1967), the roles were reversed.

✪→ On 29 January 1948, the UN Palestine Commission presented its First Monthly Progress Report.  The UNPC had received a communique from the Arab Higher Committee:

“ARAB HIGHER COMMITTEE IS DETERMINED PERSIST IN REJECTION PARTITION AND IN REFUSAL RECOGNIZE UNO RESOLUTION THIS RESPECT AND ANYTHING DERIVING THEREFROM. FOR THESE REASONS IT IS UNABLE ACCEPT INVITATION”​✪→   On 16 February 1948, the Statement of 6 February 1948 Communicated to the Secretary-General by Mr. Isa Nakhleh, Representative of the Arab Higher Committee, made it clear: 

•  "the Arabs of Palestine will never recognise the validity of the extorted partition recommendations or the authority of the United Nations to make them;
•  The Arabs of Palestine consider that any attempt by the Jews or any power group of powers to establish a Jewish state in Arab territory is an act of aggression which will be resisted in self-defense.
•  not a single Arab will cooperate with the said Commission.
•  The United Nations or its Commission should not be misled to believe that its efforts in the partition plan will meet with any success.
•  and further included the  "solemn declaration before the United Nations, before God and history, that they will never submit or yield to any power going to Palestine to enforce partition. The only way to establish partition is first to wipe them out — man, woman and child."​These position statements were well known on the very frontend of the "Stepts Preparatory to Independence" which the Arabs of Palestine declined to partcipate.

Now again, I can see many failures on the part of the Israelis.  BUT!  Clearly the first steps to obstructing the the establishment of a free City State (a _corpus separatum_ ) were taken by the Arabs Palestinians.  They refused to recognize or participate in the A/RES/181 (II) process.  They declared they would resist the establishment of the Jewish State, covered by Part II B of the same recomendation.  And!  The Arab Palestinians carried out the threat of violence _[Article 2(4) UN Charter - threats or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state]_; and a plan by members of the Arab League to take an unlawful action → endangering regional peace and security.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> No.  I also question a democratic society having a state religion - but then, I feel that way about any state that has a "state religion" - that is certainly not unique to Israel. Some states have it as a remnant of a past where the monarchy and religion was entertwined.  Others have it in a more active sense, where the religion plays an active role in public life. I also question the capital being Jerusalem since theoretically all that was supposed to be resolved through negotiation not fiat.
> 
> I thought the part about Halacha was removed?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So your concerns seem to be centered not around the concept of a State for the Jewish people, or a national language or the other trappings of a national identity such as the flag, holiday calendar, etc.  Your main concerns are about a State religion (which you correctly state are in many national constitutions and basic laws) and about Jerusalem specifically.  Yes?
Click to expand...


Yes. 

I have no issue with a state for Jewish people so long as minorities are protected and no group is disenfranchised.  I think that is very a very difficult balancing act when you have citizenship that is defined along ethnic/religious lines rather than nationality.  Are there any successful democratic states where it is recognized that the state is a the Homeland for only one segment of the population and all are truly equal?


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL

RoccoR said:


> RE: Now it's a basic law: The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people
> ※→ Coyote, et al,
> 
> Now, *IF* we are going to be "honest" *THEN* by all means let's do!
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> Let's be honest about it...
> 
> There was NEVER going to be any "meaningful negotiations" as to the who/where/what/why of Jerusalem!
> 
> Jerusalem should be, as was set out in 1947, corpus separatum!
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> I make it a practice _(as best that I can)_ "never" to say "never."  I don't believe that the Israeli-Arab Palestinian (as oppose to the Israel-Lebonese, the Israeli-Syrian, the Israeli-Jordanian, of the Israeli-Egyptian) was as toxic as it is today.  There were misgivings, bad feelings, religious differences and economic disparities, to be sure.  But not near as toxic and venomous as they are today.  Other factors gradually came into play and compounded the situatution.
> 
> For the moment, let's set aside the complication that the Grand-Mufti _(and many close associates)_ had a dubious reputations.
> 
> ✪→ Yes A/RES/181 (II) (Part IIIA) made the recommendation that "The City of Jerusalem shall be established as a _corpus separatum_ under a special international regime and shall be administered by the United Nations."  BUT, it also recommended that the "Trusteeship Council shall be designated to discharge the responsibilities of the Administering Authority on behalf of the United Nations."  And the Arab Legion, and in particular HM the King of Jordan, wanted the control over Jerusalem.  The Invasion of Israel by the Arab League set the conditions that prevented the establishment Trusteeship over Jerusalem.  While you can say that Israel did not do anthing to help the recommendation along, it was the Jordanians that saw no advantage to puting in place the UN Administrative Authority.  After the Six-Day War (1967), the roles were reversed.
> 
> ✪→ On 29 January 1948, the UN Palestine Commission presented its First Monthly Progress Report.  The UNPC had received a communique from the Arab Higher Committee:
> 
> “ARAB HIGHER COMMITTEE IS DETERMINED PERSIST IN REJECTION PARTITION AND IN REFUSAL RECOGNIZE UNO RESOLUTION THIS RESPECT AND ANYTHING DERIVING THEREFROM. FOR THESE REASONS IT IS UNABLE ACCEPT INVITATION”​✪→   On 16 February 1948, the Statement of 6 February 1948 Communicated to the Secretary-General by Mr. Isa Nakhleh, Representative of the Arab Higher Committee, made it clear:
> 
> •  "the Arabs of Palestine will never recognise the validity of the extorted partition recommendations or the authority of the United Nations to make them;
> •  The Arabs of Palestine consider that any attempt by the Jews or any power group of powers to establish a Jewish state in Arab territory is an act of aggression which will be resisted in self-defense.
> •  not a single Arab will cooperate with the said Commission.
> •  The United Nations or its Commission should not be misled to believe that its efforts in the partition plan will meet with any success.
> •  and further included the  "solemn declaration before the United Nations, before God and history, that they will never submit or yield to any power going to Palestine to enforce partition. The only way to establish partition is first to wipe them out — man, woman and child."​These position statements were well known on the very frontend of the "Stepts Preparatory to Independence" which the Arabs of Palestine declined to partcipate.
> 
> Now again, I can see many failures on the part of the Israelis.  BUT!  Clearly the first steps to obstructing the the establishment of a free City State (a _corpus separatum_ ) were taken by the Arabs Palestinians.  They refused to recognize or participate in the A/RES/181 (II) process.  They declared they would resist the establishment of the Jewish State, covered by Part II B of the same recomendation.  And!  The Arab Palestinians carried out the threat of violence _[Article 2(4) UN Charter - threats or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state]_; and a plan by members of the Arab League to take an unlawful action → endangering regional peace and security.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...




RoccoR said:


> RE: Now it's a basic law: The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people
> ※→ Coyote, et al,
> 
> Now, *IF* we are going to be "honest" *THEN* by all means let's do!
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> Let's be honest about it...
> 
> There was NEVER going to be any "meaningful negotiations" as to the who/where/what/why of Jerusalem!
> 
> Jerusalem should be, as was set out in 1947, corpus separatum!
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> I make it a practice _(as best that I can)_ "never" to say "never."  I don't believe that the Israeli-Arab Palestinian (as oppose to the Israel-Lebonese, the Israeli-Syrian, the Israeli-Jordanian, of the Israeli-Egyptian) was as toxic as it is today.  There were misgivings, bad feelings, religious differences and economic disparities, to be sure.  But not near as toxic and venomous as they are today.  Other factors gradually came into play and compounded the situatution.
> 
> For the moment, let's set aside the complication that the Grand-Mufti _(and many close associates)_ had a dubious reputations.
> 
> ✪→ Yes A/RES/181 (II) (Part IIIA) made the recommendation that "The City of Jerusalem shall be established as a _corpus separatum_ under a special international regime and shall be administered by the United Nations."  BUT, it also recommended that the "Trusteeship Council shall be designated to discharge the responsibilities of the Administering Authority on behalf of the United Nations."  And the Arab Legion, and in particular HM the King of Jordan, wanted the control over Jerusalem.  The Invasion of Israel by the Arab League set the conditions that prevented the establishment Trusteeship over Jerusalem.  While you can say that Israel did not do anthing to help the recommendation along, it was the Jordanians that saw no advantage to puting in place the UN Administrative Authority.  After the Six-Day War (1967), the roles were reversed.
> 
> ✪→ On 29 January 1948, the UN Palestine Commission presented its First Monthly Progress Report.  The UNPC had received a communique from the Arab Higher Committee:
> 
> “ARAB HIGHER COMMITTEE IS DETERMINED PERSIST IN REJECTION PARTITION AND IN REFUSAL RECOGNIZE UNO RESOLUTION THIS RESPECT AND ANYTHING DERIVING THEREFROM. FOR THESE REASONS IT IS UNABLE ACCEPT INVITATION”​✪→   On 16 February 1948, the Statement of 6 February 1948 Communicated to the Secretary-General by Mr. Isa Nakhleh, Representative of the Arab Higher Committee, made it clear:
> 
> •  "the Arabs of Palestine will never recognise the validity of the extorted partition recommendations or the authority of the United Nations to make them;
> •  The Arabs of Palestine consider that any attempt by the Jews or any power group of powers to establish a Jewish state in Arab territory is an act of aggression which will be resisted in self-defense.
> •  not a single Arab will cooperate with the said Commission.
> •  The United Nations or its Commission should not be misled to believe that its efforts in the partition plan will meet with any success.
> •  and further included the  "solemn declaration before the United Nations, before God and history, that they will never submit or yield to any power going to Palestine to enforce partition. The only way to establish partition is first to wipe them out — man, woman and child."​These position statements were well known on the very frontend of the "Stepts Preparatory to Independence" which the Arabs of Palestine declined to partcipate.
> 
> Now again, I can see many failures on the part of the Israelis.  BUT!  Clearly the first steps to obstructing the the establishment of a free City State (a _corpus separatum_ ) were taken by the Arabs Palestinians.  They refused to recognize or participate in the A/RES/181 (II) process.  They declared they would resist the establishment of the Jewish State, covered by Part II B of the same recomendation.  And!  The Arab Palestinians carried out the threat of violence _[Article 2(4) UN Charter - threats or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state]_; and a plan by members of the Arab League to take an unlawful action → endangering regional peace and security.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R[/Q
> 
> Jerusalem was supposed to be an “ International City” after 1948 according to the U.N.  it wasn’t followed or respected then and Israel isn’t going to “ respect” it now.
> Maybe it should; The Palestinians won’t be able to have.their Capital there
> i
Click to expand...


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> Yes.
> 
> I have no issue with a state for Jewish people so long as minorities are protected and no group is disenfranchised.  I think that is very a very difficult balancing act when you have citizenship that is defined along ethnic/religious lines rather than nationality.  Are there any successful democratic states where it is recognized that the state is a the Homeland for only one segment of the population and all are truly equal?



Okay, so here's the thing.  That list of Basic Law that I posted most recently and asked you specifically to comment on is NOT Israel's Basic Law.  Its Palestine's.  I simply switched "Arab" for "Jewish".  The wording is straight from Palestine's Basic Law.  It has been around since 2003.  15 years.  Where was the UPROAR?!  The OUTRAGE?!  The labels of apartheid and discrimination and just not cool?  I don't recall any.  Do you?

So, side by side, the two Basic Laws are virtually identical.  Except Palestine adds the requirement for Sharia law as the fundamental basis of law for the country, which Israel does not have.  And the state religion, which Israel does not have.  The rest is the same.  As are dozens of other countries which have virtually the exact same ideals written into their constitutions.  

Are there any successful democratic states where it is recognized that the state is a homeland for only one segment of the population and all are truly equal?  Yes.  I could give you dozens of examples. Are there successful democratic states where it is recognized that the state is a homeland for only one segment of the population and all are truly equal, but there are ethnic groups fighting (figuratively and literally) for their own self-determination? Yes. I can give you examples.  Are there successful democratic states where it is recognized that the state is homeland for only one segment of the population and all are NOT equal?  Yes.  Certainly.  Many.  Some are even literally apartheid in that they have laws specifying people by ethnic or religious or gender category have fewer rights than others.  Are there a few truly multi-ethnic countries in the world.  Yes.  A very few.  Are there a few truly ethnically homogeneous countries in the world.  Yes. Are they deliberately kept that way?  Yes.

My point is that NO COUNTRY -- not a single, solitary one -- is being SCRUTINIZED and VILIFIED for ANY of these positions.  From active, real apartheid; to deliberate discrimination against other ethnic, religious or gender groups; to complete ethnic homogeneity; to a homeland for a specific people; to a multi-ethnic community, every single one of those countries has escaped international condemnation and global news reports.  Every one.  Including Palestine.  It is an egregious affront to the Jewish people that they can not exist on par with the rest of the planet, but are subjected to unreasonable standards applied to no one else.


----------



## jillian

rylah said:


> cnm said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Unlike the Dutch people, Jews originated in the land of Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> Of course YHWH gave South Africa to the Boers. They said so.
> 
> _Canaan is the ancient name for the land of Israel. The Torah gave Abraham the land of Canaan, which in some cases stretched from southern Syria to the Eastern Sinai and, in other Torah references, was only a small strip hugging the Mediterranean. Under the leadership of Joshua the Israelites conquered Canaan, which had previously been divided into seven city states. Today, the land of Canaan is known as Palestine, Eretz Yisrael and Israel.
> The Canaanites_​
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> But Penelope says my mother was a Hittite and my father an Amorite.
Click to expand...

Amusing what people make up in their heads.


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> RE: Now it's a basic law: The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people
> ※→ Coyote, et al,
> 
> Now, *IF* we are going to be "honest" *THEN* by all means let's do!
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> Let's be honest about it...
> 
> There was NEVER going to be any "meaningful negotiations" as to the who/where/what/why of Jerusalem!
> 
> Jerusalem should be, as was set out in 1947, corpus separatum!
> 
> 
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> I make it a practice _(as best that I can)_ "never" to say "never."  I don't believe that the Israeli-Arab Palestinian (as oppose to the Israel-Lebonese, the Israeli-Syrian, the Israeli-Jordanian, of the Israeli-Egyptian) was as toxic as it is today.  There were misgivings, bad feelings, religious differences and economic disparities, to be sure.  But not near as toxic and venomous as they are today.  Other factors gradually came into play and compounded the situatution.
> 
> For the moment, let's set aside the complication that the Grand-Mufti _(and many close associates)_ had a dubious reputations.
> 
> ✪→ Yes A/RES/181 (II) (Part IIIA) made the recommendation that "The City of Jerusalem shall be established as a _corpus separatum_ under a special international regime and shall be administered by the United Nations."  BUT, it also recommended that the "Trusteeship Council shall be designated to discharge the responsibilities of the Administering Authority on behalf of the United Nations."  And the Arab Legion, and in particular HM the King of Jordan, wanted the control over Jerusalem.  The Invasion of Israel by the Arab League set the conditions that prevented the establishment Trusteeship over Jerusalem.  While you can say that Israel did not do anthing to help the recommendation along, it was the Jordanians that saw no advantage to puting in place the UN Administrative Authority.  After the Six-Day War (1967), the roles were reversed.
> 
> ✪→ On 29 January 1948, the UN Palestine Commission presented its First Monthly Progress Report.  The UNPC had received a communique from the Arab Higher Committee:
> 
> “ARAB HIGHER COMMITTEE IS DETERMINED PERSIST IN REJECTION PARTITION AND IN REFUSAL RECOGNIZE UNO RESOLUTION THIS RESPECT AND ANYTHING DERIVING THEREFROM. FOR THESE REASONS IT IS UNABLE ACCEPT INVITATION”​✪→   On 16 February 1948, the Statement of 6 February 1948 Communicated to the Secretary-General by Mr. Isa Nakhleh, Representative of the Arab Higher Committee, made it clear:
> 
> •  "the Arabs of Palestine will never recognise the validity of the extorted partition recommendations or the authority of the United Nations to make them;
> •  The Arabs of Palestine consider that any attempt by the Jews or any power group of powers to establish a Jewish state in Arab territory is an act of aggression which will be resisted in self-defense.
> •  not a single Arab will cooperate with the said Commission.
> •  The United Nations or its Commission should not be misled to believe that its efforts in the partition plan will meet with any success.
> •  and further included the  "solemn declaration before the United Nations, before God and history, that they will never submit or yield to any power going to Palestine to enforce partition. The only way to establish partition is first to wipe them out — man, woman and child."​These position statements were well known on the very frontend of the "Stepts Preparatory to Independence" which the Arabs of Palestine declined to partcipate.
> 
> Now again, I can see many failures on the part of the Israelis.  BUT!  Clearly the first steps to obstructing the the establishment of a free City State (a _corpus separatum_ ) were taken by the Arabs Palestinians.  They refused to recognize or participate in the A/RES/181 (II) process.  They declared they would resist the establishment of the Jewish State, covered by Part II B of the same recomendation.  And!  The Arab Palestinians carried out the threat of violence _[Article 2(4) UN Charter - threats or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state]_; and a plan by members of the Arab League to take an unlawful action → endangering regional peace and security.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...




RoccoR said:


> They refused to recognize or participate in the A/RES/181 (II) process.


The UN has no authority over territory or borders.The Palestinians were correct in rejecting this proposal.


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sounds like they are saying they don't want any foriegn nationals of "the enemy" in their state.  Whether that occurs or not is up in the air.  A lot of it is rhetoric.  Let's see what happens when they actually form a state - then we can see if there is discrimmination or not.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You don't see that as already being discrimination?
> 
> In a final peace treaty, would you support both sides having no "foreign nationals of the enemy" in their State?
Click to expand...

I think it would be a sad state of affairs.


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> You don't see that as already being discrimination?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How can it be when there is no state? When there is nothing to base that on?
> 
> Crystal ball time again!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They are the current governments of the two territories.  They are the ones who will negotiate and create the peace treaty.  We can't just ignore what they are actually saying and pretend it is not "real".  What the current governments say about the future of their state is something to base that on.
Click to expand...

It is not pretending it isn’t “real”, it is acknowledging that until there is a state, until it forms a constitution and creates laws, it is little more than rhetoric and you can not hold rhetoric to the same level as law. In fact, aren’t you essentially saying the same thing when you ask people to show any laws Israel has that are arpartheid vs talk?


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity
> 
> I'll ask you the same question I asked Coyote.  Should both sides be able to demand a state free of "foreign national enemies"?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not entirely sure of the meaning or context but, I would suggest that a state free of "foreign national enemies" is an impossibility!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Agree, but the question was more should a state in the process of ending a conflict be able to try to create a state free of people of foreign nationality who are considered enemies due to the conflict.
Click to expand...

I think if they wanted to...they could, it is the right of any state.  Israel could kick out those who choose to be citizens of Palestine and Palestine could kick out those who choose to be citizens of Israel.  But it is a bad idea and would perpetrate a conflict.  But right now, it is only rhetoric.


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes.
> 
> I have no issue with a state for Jewish people so long as minorities are protected and no group is disenfranchised.  I think that is very a very difficult balancing act when you have citizenship that is defined along ethnic/religious lines rather than nationality.  Are there any successful democratic states where it is recognized that the state is a the Homeland for only one segment of the population and all are truly equal?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Okay, so here's the thing.  That list of Basic Law that I posted most recently and asked you specifically to comment on is NOT Israel's Basic Law.  Its Palestine's.  I simply switched "Arab" for "Jewish".  The wording is straight from Palestine's Basic Law.  It has been around since 2003.  15 years.  Where was the UPROAR?!  The OUTRAGE?!  The labels of apartheid and discrimination and just not cool?  I don't recall any.  Do you?
> 
> So, side by side, the two Basic Laws are virtually identical.  Except Palestine adds the requirement for Sharia law as the fundamental basis of law for the country, which Israel does not have.  And the state religion, which Israel does not have.  The rest is the same.  As are dozens of other countries which have virtually the exact same ideals written into their constitutions.
> 
> Are there any successful democratic states where it is recognized that the state is a homeland for only one segment of the population and all are truly equal?  Yes.  I could give you dozens of examples. Are there successful democratic states where it is recognized that the state is a homeland for only one segment of the population and all are truly equal, but there are ethnic groups fighting (figuratively and literally) for their own self-determination? Yes. I can give you examples.  Are there successful democratic states where it is recognized that the state is homeland for only one segment of the population and all are NOT equal?  Yes.  Certainly.  Many.  Some are even literally apartheid in that they have laws specifying people by ethnic or religious or gender category have fewer rights than others.  Are there a few truly multi-ethnic countries in the world.  Yes.  A very few.  Are there a few truly ethnically homogeneous countries in the world.  Yes. Are they deliberately kept that way?  Yes.
> 
> My point is that NO COUNTRY -- not a single, solitary one -- is being SCRUTINIZED and VILIFIED for ANY of these positions.  From active, real apartheid; to deliberate discrimination against other ethnic, religious or gender groups; to complete ethnic homogeneity; to a homeland for a specific people; to a multi-ethnic community, every single one of those countries has escaped international condemnation and global news reports.  Every one.  Including Palestine.  It is an egregious affront to the Jewish people that they can not exist on par with the rest of the planet, but are subjected to unreasonable standards applied to no one else.
Click to expand...


First off, *there is no Palestinian State*.  Give them a state and open it up to the same criticisms that apply to any state. My feelings on the role of state religions etc is exactly the same.

I can give you many examples of countries criticized, from Egypt to Myanmar to Iran to Pakistan to Russia for their treatment of minorities or the ro,e of religion in the law.

What examples can you give of successful democracies where only one Ethnic or religious group is enshrined in the basic law above the rest?


----------



## MisterBeale

So Israel has gone full fascist huh?

Not surprising.

Is anyone surprised?


----------



## flacaltenn

Humanity said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> it matters less where the border is
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As someone with dual citizenship I think that the two countries I have citizenship in would disagree that their borders matter less.
Click to expand...


It might matter less where the borders are.  Living in the "occupied territories" has had an effect of providing the Palestinians more stability and security than any diaspora alternative. Very large middle class. I'd guess the upper 20% live better than 1/2 of America. And they certainly live better than in "exile" in most Arab states. 

It's BECAUSE they have failed to organized a national govt and leadership that I believe their natural comfort level is that tribal city state situation they have now. They even identify politically as being residents of one city or another. PARTLY because of the obstacles the occupation have put in the way of free movement, but also because the FAMILY places of origin are so important. 

And they might do just fine. Even better -- WITHOUT a national movement and govt if they HAD local autonomy and control of the greater city boundaries and the connectivity between them. Generous SOLID boundaries could be set for a form a "county" type govt that had a very loose "national federation".


----------



## RoccoR

w
RE: Now it's a basic law: The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

You say this without thinking.



P F Tinmore said:


> The UN has no authority over territory or borders.The Palestinians were correct in rejecting this proposal.


*(COMMENT)*

Laws and Authorities are ultimately made and enforced by men.  The broad sweeping set of events are:


•  Unconditional Surrender- Article 16 - Armistice of Mudros (1918).
•  The Allied Powers assumed the political decision capacity (Article 16 Authority) in 1920, as the Occupied Enemy Territory Administration (OETA) transferred control to the Territorial Civil Administration.
*  The Territorial Civil Administration was formalized through the Principal Allied Powers having agreed to entrust to a Mandatory selected by the said Powers the administration of the territory of Palestine (1922).
•  The Treaty of Sevres → Article 132, is replace by the Treaty of Lausanne (1924) and Turkey reaffirms and renounces in favour of the Principal Allied Powers all rights and title which she could claim on any ground over or concerning any territories outside Europe which are not otherwise disposed of by the present Treaty.  Turkey recognised that the "future of these territories and islands being settled or to be settled by the parties concerned."
•  The territory administered under mandate by His Majesty (Palestine) as a legal entity will be transferred to the United Nations Palestine Commission - the Government of Palestine; authority being → Article 77(1b) UN Charter (effective date of transfer 1948) → territories placed thereunder by means of trusteeship agreements.
•  Self-Government by the Israelis on termination.​
The UN does not establish borders and I don't believe that anyone claimed that.  Israel, as a matter of self-determination, established its sovereignty; and therein made what adjustments they might in the interest of Israeli National Security.  The Arab Palestinians have not once attempted to resolve the disputes over Israeli Sovereign Boundaries by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security and justice are not endangered, through the Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Cooperation.  Since 1968 the formal position has been that "_*Armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine*_." (Article 9, Palestinian National Covenant)

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> First off, *there is no Palestinian State*.  Give them a state and open it up to the same criticisms that apply to any state. My feelings on the role of state religions etc is exactly the same.
> 
> I can give you many examples of countries criticized, from Egypt to Myanmar to Iran to Pakistan to Russia for their treatment of minorities or the ro,e of religion in the law.
> 
> What examples can you give of successful democracies where only one Ethnic or religious group is enshrined in the basic law above the rest?



1.  PLENTY of states are (deservedly) criticized for their *treatment* of minorities, ethnicities, religions, gender, etc, etc, etc.  How many are called on to change their constitution? How many are *vilified for the language of their CONSTITUTION?  *So far, only Israel.

2.  States are not "given away" like candy.  States are not granted by the international community like winning a stuffed teddy at the carnival.  States are not held captive by neighbors like stealing newspapers from the front porch.  NO ONE can GIVE the Arab Palestinians a state.  If they want a state they have to start acting state-like.  There is only one way to get a state.  And that is to negotiate for one.  They have all the agency in the world to start acting state-like.  Seriously, its like saying that your teenager "deserves" an apartment so he can live independently, but he refuses to get a job so he can pay for an apartment, and your response is that his sister should just give him an apartment.

3.  WTF?  So when Arab Palestinians declare their intent by creating Basic Law for their future intended state -- its somehow doesn't count?  Its not real?  It should be dismissed and ignored?  I'm sorry, but when, exactly, should we start taking the Arab Palestinian seriously?  Honestly, you all keep acting like Arab Palestinians can't POSSIBLY be held accountable and be held to a standard and then also whine when Arabs aren't allowed to do have agency.  Make up your mind.  Which is it?  Are they real or not real, the Skin Horse wants to know.  The Basic Law for Palestine was created by the governing body of Palestine.  If you want us to ignore the government of Palestine and pretend that Palestine does not exist, well, fine.  But jeez, how can people who are not even competent to write a "real" Basic Law be *given* a STATE?!

4. Democracies where one ethnic group is enshrined?  I've been over this on this thread a dozen times.  Every single country which was created around a national ethnic group.  Ireland.  Slovenia.  Spain.  All the countries created from the dissolution of the former states of Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia, USSR, Ottoman Empire, former Palestine.  India and Pakistan and Bangladesh.  All of the split aparts of old African nations.  Nearly all of the ME countries.  

Yeah, for sure, not all of them are democratic.  There is mix of dictatorships, monarchies and all sorts of different crazy ass political structure -- but again who says Israel has to be a democracy?  (It is.  But who says it has to be?)


----------



## Humanity

Shusha said:


> but again who says Israel has to be a democracy? (It is. But who says it has to be?)



Israel, IMHO, is not a true democracy. Democracies treat all citizens equally. Israel doesn't!

No one says that Israel MUST be a democracy however, of all the failed political ideals, democracy is about the best to follow.

It feels that Israel, rather than looking to build a true democracy, is putting 'laws' in place to block a fair and equal democracy.


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> • Unconditional Surrender- Article 16 - Armistice of Mudros (1918).


There was no surrender in the 1949 Armistice agreements, nor have the Palestinians ever surrendered.


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> The Territorial Civil Administration was formalized through the Principal Allied Powers having agreed to entrust to a Mandatory selected by the said Powers the administration of the territory of Palestine (1922).


Administration, not sovereignty. Actually, Britain acted more like a military occupation than an administration.


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> The Treaty of Sevres → Article 132, is replace by the Treaty of Lausanne (1924) and Turkey reaffirms and renounces in favour of the Principal Allied Powers all rights and title which she could claim on any ground over or concerning any territories outside Europe which are not otherwise disposed of by the present Treaty. Turkey recognised that the "future of these territories and islands being settled or to be settled by the parties concerned."


The land was transferred to the new states where the residents would be the citizens. The Palestinians had the right to sovereignty that was reaffirmed by subsequent UN Resolutions.


----------



## Olde Europe

Coyote said:


> First off, *there is no Palestinian State*.  Give them a state and open it up to the same criticisms that apply to any state. My feelings on the role of state religions etc is exactly the same.
> 
> I can give you many examples of countries criticized, from Egypt to Myanmar to Iran to Pakistan to Russia for their treatment of minorities or the ro,e of religion in the law.
> 
> What examples can you give of successful democracies where only one Ethnic or religious group is enshrined in the basic law above the rest?



I find, while it looks plausible on first glance, the "there is no Palestinian State" argument is a rather weak one.  After all, it's likely the same set of politicos who form the ruling / legislative bodies during the last years of the Palestinian authorities and the first years of an eventual Palestinian State.  So, what is to be expected from them other than what they've done before?  One might even turn it around: Now that the PA has very little authority, and thus very little actually rests on getting their Basic Law right, what does it tell us if they don't?

Yet, we should rather look at the Basic Law itself, not at the falsification:

Article 1

Palestine is part of the larger Arab world, and the Palestinian people are part of the Arab nation.  Arab unity is an objective that the Palestinian people shall work to achieve.


Article 2

The people are the source of power, which shall be exercised through the legislative, executive and judicial authorities, based upon the principle of separation of powers and in the manner set forth in this Basic Law.


Article 3

Jerusalem is the capital of Palestine.


Article 4

1. Islam is the official religion in Palestine. Respect for the sanctity of all other divine religions shall be maintained.
2. The *principles* of Islamic Shari’a shall be *a principal* source of legislation.
3. Arabic shall be the official language.​
Easy enough to realize the larger first paragraph is missing in the (real) Basic Law, for it was just part of an introductory text written by the speaker of the "Palestinian Legislative Council".  There are also other changes that made the falsification far more damning than the Basic Law really is.  Still, there are troubling aspects in it, but there's one Article 2 that clarifies beyond doubt that there is not just "one Ethnic or religious group [] enshrined in the basic law above the rest".  It declares "The people are the source of power".  Not, Arabic people, or Muslim people, "the people".  And certainly it doesn't declare national self-determination unique to one subgroup.  "The people".

Surprise, surprise, you will not find that paragraph in the mendacious pap posted here:



Shusha said:


> Take a look at this:
> 
> _The continuous attachment of the Jewish people to the land of their fathers and forefathers, on which this people has historically lived, is a fact which has been expressed in the Declaration of Independence. The strength of this attachment is confirmed by its consistency over time and place, by keeping faith with and holding on to national identity, and in the wonderous accomplishments of struggle. The organic relationship between the Jewish people, their history and their land has confirmed itself in their unceasing effort to prompt the world to recognize the rights of the Jewish people and their national entity on equal footing with other nations.
> 
> Israel is part of the larger Jewish world and the Jewish people are part of Israel.
> 
> Jerusalem is the capital of Israel.
> 
> Judaism is the official religion in Israel. Respect for the sanctity of all other religions shall be maintained.
> 
> Halacha shall be the principle source of legislation.
> 
> Hebrew shall be the official language. _
> 
> 
> 
> Admirable or Apartheid?



Funny how that goes with the hasbara peddlers.

Of course, your question about "successful democracies where only one Ethnic or religious group is enshrined in the basic law above the rest" is an unfair one, since arguably such democracies cease to be democracies, certainly they cease to be successful ones.


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> • The territory administered under mandate by His Majesty (Palestine) as a legal entity will be transferred to the United Nations Palestine Commission


The UN dropped the ball. They never showed up to protect the people and territory in their trust. This left Palestine open for illegal military conquest.


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> The Arab Palestinians have not once attempted to resolve the disputes over Israeli Sovereign Boundaries by peaceful means


There is no dispute.

Israel has no borders.
Israel has its fat ass parked inside Palestine's borders.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Olde Europe said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> First off, *there is no Palestinian State*.  Give them a state and open it up to the same criticisms that apply to any state. My feelings on the role of state religions etc is exactly the same.
> 
> I can give you many examples of countries criticized, from Egypt to Myanmar to Iran to Pakistan to Russia for their treatment of minorities or the ro,e of religion in the law.
> 
> What examples can you give of successful democracies where only one Ethnic or religious group is enshrined in the basic law above the rest?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I find, while it looks plausible on first glance, the "there is no Palestinian State" argument is a rather weak one.  After all, it's likely the same set of politicos who form the ruling / legislative bodies during the last years of the Palestinian authorities and the first years of an eventual Palestinian State.  So, what is to be expected from them other than what they've done before?  One might even turn it around: Now that the PA has very little authority, and thus very little actually rests on getting their Basic Law right, what does it tell us if they don't?
> 
> Yet, we should rather look at the Basic Law itself, not at the falsification:
> 
> Article 1
> 
> Palestine is part of the larger Arab world, and the Palestinian people are part of the Arab nation.  Arab unity is an objective that the Palestinian people shall work to achieve.
> 
> 
> Article 2
> 
> The people are the source of power, which shall be exercised through the legislative, executive and judicial authorities, based upon the principle of separation of powers and in the manner set forth in this Basic Law.
> 
> 
> Article 3
> 
> Jerusalem is the capital of Palestine.
> 
> 
> Article 4
> 
> 1. Islam is the official religion in Palestine. Respect for the sanctity of all other divine religions shall be maintained.
> 2. The *principles* of Islamic Shari’a shall be *a principal* source of legislation.
> 3. Arabic shall be the official language.​
> Easy enough to realize the larger first paragraph is missing in the (real) Basic Law, for it was just part of an introductory text written by the speaker of the "Palestinian Legislative Council".  There are also other changes that made the falsification far more damning than the Basic Law really is.  Still, there are troubling aspects in it, but there's one Article 2 that clarifies beyond doubt that there is not just "one Ethnic or religious group [] enshrined in the basic law above the rest".  It declares "The people are the source of power".  Not, Arabic people, or Muslim people, "the people".  And certainly it doesn't declare national self-determination unique to one subgroup.  "The people".
> 
> Surprise, surprise, you will not find that paragraph in the mendacious pap posted here:
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Take a look at this:
> 
> _The continuous attachment of the Jewish people to the land of their fathers and forefathers, on which this people has historically lived, is a fact which has been expressed in the Declaration of Independence. The strength of this attachment is confirmed by its consistency over time and place, by keeping faith with and holding on to national identity, and in the wonderous accomplishments of struggle. The organic relationship between the Jewish people, their history and their land has confirmed itself in their unceasing effort to prompt the world to recognize the rights of the Jewish people and their national entity on equal footing with other nations.
> 
> Israel is part of the larger Jewish world and the Jewish people are part of Israel.
> 
> Jerusalem is the capital of Israel.
> 
> Judaism is the official religion in Israel. Respect for the sanctity of all other religions shall be maintained.
> 
> Halacha shall be the principle source of legislation.
> 
> Hebrew shall be the official language. _
> 
> 
> 
> Admirable or Apartheid?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Funny how that goes with the hasbara peddlers.
> 
> Of course, your question about "successful democracies where only one Ethnic or religious group is enshrined in the basic law above the rest" is an unfair one, since arguably such democracies cease to be democracies, certainly they cease to be successful ones.
Click to expand...

Then we should add:
*Article 9*
Palestinians shall be equal before the law and the judiciary, without distinction based upon race, sex, color, religion, political views or disability.

*Article 18*
Freedom of belief, worship and the performance of religious functions are guaranteed, provided public order or public morals are not violated.


----------



## P F Tinmore

flacaltenn said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> it matters less where the border is
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As someone with dual citizenship I think that the two countries I have citizenship in would disagree that their borders matter less.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It might matter less where the borders are.  Living in the "occupied territories" has had an effect of providing the Palestinians more stability and security than any diaspora alternative. Very large middle class. I'd guess the upper 20% live better than 1/2 of America. And they certainly live better than in "exile" in most Arab states.
> 
> It's BECAUSE they have failed to organized a national govt and leadership that I believe their natural comfort level is that tribal city state situation they have now. They even identify politically as being residents of one city or another. PARTLY because of the obstacles the occupation have put in the way of free movement, but also because the FAMILY places of origin are so important.
> 
> And they might do just fine. Even better -- WITHOUT a national movement and govt if they HAD local autonomy and control of the greater city boundaries and the connectivity between them. Generous SOLID boundaries could be set for a form a "county" type govt that had a very loose "national federation".
Click to expand...

This has a lot to do with the US violating its own laws. The US is not supposed to recognize coup governments. The PA in the West Bank is a coup government. The government in Egypt is a coup government as are many in Latin America. All recognized by the US as legit.


----------



## Hollie

P F Tinmore said:


> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> it matters less where the border is
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As someone with dual citizenship I think that the two countries I have citizenship in would disagree that their borders matter less.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It might matter less where the borders are.  Living in the "occupied territories" has had an effect of providing the Palestinians more stability and security than any diaspora alternative. Very large middle class. I'd guess the upper 20% live better than 1/2 of America. And they certainly live better than in "exile" in most Arab states.
> 
> It's BECAUSE they have failed to organized a national govt and leadership that I believe their natural comfort level is that tribal city state situation they have now. They even identify politically as being residents of one city or another. PARTLY because of the obstacles the occupation have put in the way of free movement, but also because the FAMILY places of origin are so important.
> 
> And they might do just fine. Even better -- WITHOUT a national movement and govt if they HAD local autonomy and control of the greater city boundaries and the connectivity between them. Generous SOLID boundaries could be set for a form a "county" type govt that had a very loose "national federation".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> This has a lot to do with the US violating its own laws. The US is not supposed to recognize coup governments. The PA in the West Bank is a coup government. The government in Egypt is a coup government as are many in Latin America. All recognized by the US as legit.
Click to expand...


The PA is “a coup government”? Obviously, you don’t know terms and definitions you’re stumbling over.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Hollie said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> it matters less where the border is
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As someone with dual citizenship I think that the two countries I have citizenship in would disagree that their borders matter less.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It might matter less where the borders are.  Living in the "occupied territories" has had an effect of providing the Palestinians more stability and security than any diaspora alternative. Very large middle class. I'd guess the upper 20% live better than 1/2 of America. And they certainly live better than in "exile" in most Arab states.
> 
> It's BECAUSE they have failed to organized a national govt and leadership that I believe their natural comfort level is that tribal city state situation they have now. They even identify politically as being residents of one city or another. PARTLY because of the obstacles the occupation have put in the way of free movement, but also because the FAMILY places of origin are so important.
> 
> And they might do just fine. Even better -- WITHOUT a national movement and govt if they HAD local autonomy and control of the greater city boundaries and the connectivity between them. Generous SOLID boundaries could be set for a form a "county" type govt that had a very loose "national federation".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> This has a lot to do with the US violating its own laws. The US is not supposed to recognize coup governments. The PA in the West Bank is a coup government. The government in Egypt is a coup government as are many in Latin America. All recognized by the US as legit.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The PA is “a coup government”? Obviously, you don’t know terms and definitions you’re stumbling over.
Click to expand...

Your ignorance is showing.


*Whose Coup, Exactly?*

An international community worried by the ‘coup’ accusation might endorse the Fayyad government as the seemingly correct position. But the ‘coup’ claim stumbles over a basic problem — that Abbas’s appointing a new prime minister was itself entirely illegal. The new ‘emergency government’ is illegal, too. According to the Basic Law of Palestine (as amended in 2003), which serves as the constitution of the PA, Abbas can do neither of these things. Nor can the new ‘emergency government’ claim any democratic mandate. This means that Abbas and the Fayyad government are ruling by decree, outside the framework of the Basic Law. So on what basis is that government supposed to govern — and on what basis are foreign governments supposed to deal with it?

According to the Basic Law, Abbas has violated a whole stream of Articles as well as the spirit of its checks and balances, which were designed during the Arafat era partly to limit the power of the presidency. With full US and Israel support (if not their insistence), Abbas has baldly trashed numerous provisions of the Basic Law, including:

*Whose Coup, Exactly?*


----------



## RoccoR

RE: Now it's a basic law: The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

You're batting ZERO.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Territorial Civil Administration was formalized through the Principal Allied Powers having agreed to entrust to a Mandatory selected by the said Powers the administration of the territory of Palestine (1922).
> 
> 
> 
> Administration, not sovereignty. Actually, Britain acted more like a military occupation than an administration.
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

I did not say that the Civil Administration was "sovereignty."  You get this wrong quite frequently.  However, the Ottoman Empire/Turkish Republic did relinquish "sovereignty."



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> • Unconditional Surrender- Article 16 - Armistice of Mudros (1918).
> 
> 
> 
> There was no surrender in the 1949 Armistice agreements, nor have the Palestinians ever surrendered.
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

Once again, I did not say 1949.  I said *1918**.*

I agree, the Arab Palestinians have never surrendered any territory, because they have never had any sovereigh territory to to surrender.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Treaty of Sevres → Article 132, is replaced by the Treaty of Lausanne (1924) and Turkey reaffirms and renounces in favour of the Principal Allied Powers all rights and title which she could claim on any ground over or concerning any territories outside Europe which are not otherwise disposed of by the present Treaty. Turkey recognized that the "future of these territories and islands being settled or to be settled by the parties concerned."
> 
> 
> 
> The land was transferred to the new states where the residents would be the citizens. The Palestinians had the right to sovereignty that was reaffirmed by subsequent UN Resolutions.
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

That is not at all what either Treaty said.  Your confusing topics again _(Part I - Section II - Nationality)_ with territorial control.  Not at all the same thing.

Yes, the Arab Palestinians have the Right to Sovereignty, if in fact, they had some territory that they previously had maintained sovereignty over.  BUT!  THERE IS NO LAW that requires Israel to surrender any territory to the HoAP that the HoAP had no previous sovereignty over. 



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Arab Palestinians have not once attempted to resolve the disputes over Israeli Sovereign Boundaries by peaceful means
> 
> 
> 
> There is no dispute.
> 
> Israel has no borders.
> Israel has its fat ass parked inside Palestine's borders.
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

It does not matter and makes no difference what you think.  What does matter and makes a true difference is what Israel protects and defends from Hostile Arab Palestinian (HoAP) incursions; or invasion from any other external nation. 

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> RE: Now it's a basic law: The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people
> ※→ P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> You're batting ZERO.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Territorial Civil Administration was formalized through the Principal Allied Powers having agreed to entrust to a Mandatory selected by the said Powers the administration of the territory of Palestine (1922).
> 
> 
> 
> Administration, not sovereignty. Actually, Britain acted more like a military occupation than an administration.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> I did not say that the Civil Administration was "sovereignty."  You get this wrong quite frequently.  However, the Ottoman Empire/Turkish Republic did relinquish "sovereignty."
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> • Unconditional Surrender- Article 16 - Armistice of Mudros (1918).
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There was no surrender in the 1949 Armistice agreements, nor have the Palestinians ever surrendered.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Once again, I did not say 1949.  I said *1918**.*
> 
> I agree, the Arab Palestinians have never surrendered any territory, because they have never had any sovereigh territory to to surrender.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Treaty of Sevres → Article 132, is replaced by the Treaty of Lausanne (1924) and Turkey reaffirms and renounces in favour of the Principal Allied Powers all rights and title which she could claim on any ground over or concerning any territories outside Europe which are not otherwise disposed of by the present Treaty. Turkey recognized that the "future of these territories and islands being settled or to be settled by the parties concerned."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The land was transferred to the new states where the residents would be the citizens. The Palestinians had the right to sovereignty that was reaffirmed by subsequent UN Resolutions.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> That is not at all what either Treaty said.  Your confusing topics again _(Part I - Section II - Nationality)_ with territorial control.  Not at all the same thing.
> 
> Yes, the Arab Palestinians have the Right to Sovereignty, if in fact, they had some territory that they previously had maintained sovereignty over.  BUT!  THERE IS NO LAW that requires Israel to surrender any territory to the HoAP that the HoAP had no previous sovereignty over.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Arab Palestinians have not once attempted to resolve the disputes over Israeli Sovereign Boundaries by peaceful means
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There is no dispute.
> 
> Israel has no borders.
> Israel has its fat ass parked inside Palestine's borders.
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> It does not matter and makes no difference what you think.  What does matter and makes a true difference is what Israel protects and defends from Hostile Arab Palestinian (HoAP) incursions; or invasion from any other external nation.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...

Palestine is not external.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Some Israeli Arab leaders speak disparagingly about Israel for publicity. They know that no newspaper would ever mention them if they were dealing with issues such as sewage or a shortage of classrooms in Arab schools. If they say something bad about Israel or provoke the Jews, however, they will certainly receive a headline in the press.


Israeli Arab leaders can incite against Israel as much as they wish. Their slander will not change the reality that Israel is the only thriving democracy in the Middle East, and treats its minorities with respect. While minorities are being persecuted and murdered in Syria, Lebanon, Egypt, Iraq, Libya and other Arab and Islamic countries, the Arab citizens of Israel are being integrated into the state. They hold high positions in the Supreme Court, the Foreign Ministry, the health sector and even the Israel Police. The majority of the Arabs in Israel can work anywhere they wish, they can travel anywhere in the country, and they will continue to enjoy all the privileges, benefits and freedoms that Jewish citizens do.


Some Israeli Arab leaders want Israel to give up its wish to be a Jewish homeland because they are hoping that one day Jews will become a minority in their own country. For far too long, they have been inciting their constituents against Israel and Jews. If these leaders are so unhappy in Israel, perhaps they would consider moving to Ramallah or the Gaza Strip or any Arab country. Perhaps they would care to resign from the Knesset. Why do they refrain from doing so? Because it is in the Jewish homeland, supposedly so harmful to them, that they and their children can live and thrive.

(full article online)

The Secret Reason Arabs Reject the Jewish Nation-State Law


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL

admonit said:


> I got a warning "Trolling/No Content" from a moderator, which includes a threat of possible administrative actions.
> Here is my public reply:
> I don't accept the warning, neither its form, nor its content.
> Thats why I prefer to stop "posting or using your site".



What does “ Trolling, no content “ mean? Not allowed to comment on other posts?


----------



## Coyote

P F Tinmore said:


> Olde Europe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> First off, *there is no Palestinian State*.  Give them a state and open it up to the same criticisms that apply to any state. My feelings on the role of state religions etc is exactly the same.
> 
> I can give you many examples of countries criticized, from Egypt to Myanmar to Iran to Pakistan to Russia for their treatment of minorities or the ro,e of religion in the law.
> 
> What examples can you give of successful democracies where only one Ethnic or religious group is enshrined in the basic law above the rest?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I find, while it looks plausible on first glance, the "there is no Palestinian State" argument is a rather weak one.  After all, it's likely the same set of politicos who form the ruling / legislative bodies during the last years of the Palestinian authorities and the first years of an eventual Palestinian State.  So, what is to be expected from them other than what they've done before?  One might even turn it around: Now that the PA has very little authority, and thus very little actually rests on getting their Basic Law right, what does it tell us if they don't?
> 
> Yet, we should rather look at the Basic Law itself, not at the falsification:
> 
> Article 1
> 
> Palestine is part of the larger Arab world, and the Palestinian people are part of the Arab nation.  Arab unity is an objective that the Palestinian people shall work to achieve.
> 
> 
> Article 2
> 
> The people are the source of power, which shall be exercised through the legislative, executive and judicial authorities, based upon the principle of separation of powers and in the manner set forth in this Basic Law.
> 
> 
> Article 3
> 
> Jerusalem is the capital of Palestine.
> 
> 
> Article 4
> 
> 1. Islam is the official religion in Palestine. Respect for the sanctity of all other divine religions shall be maintained.
> 2. The *principles* of Islamic Shari’a shall be *a principal* source of legislation.
> 3. Arabic shall be the official language.​
> Easy enough to realize the larger first paragraph is missing in the (real) Basic Law, for it was just part of an introductory text written by the speaker of the "Palestinian Legislative Council".  There are also other changes that made the falsification far more damning than the Basic Law really is.  Still, there are troubling aspects in it, but there's one Article 2 that clarifies beyond doubt that there is not just "one Ethnic or religious group [] enshrined in the basic law above the rest".  It declares "The people are the source of power".  Not, Arabic people, or Muslim people, "the people".  And certainly it doesn't declare national self-determination unique to one subgroup.  "The people".
> 
> Surprise, surprise, you will not find that paragraph in the mendacious pap posted here:
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Take a look at this:
> 
> _The continuous attachment of the Jewish people to the land of their fathers and forefathers, on which this people has historically lived, is a fact which has been expressed in the Declaration of Independence. The strength of this attachment is confirmed by its consistency over time and place, by keeping faith with and holding on to national identity, and in the wonderous accomplishments of struggle. The organic relationship between the Jewish people, their history and their land has confirmed itself in their unceasing effort to prompt the world to recognize the rights of the Jewish people and their national entity on equal footing with other nations.
> 
> Israel is part of the larger Jewish world and the Jewish people are part of Israel.
> 
> Jerusalem is the capital of Israel.
> 
> Judaism is the official religion in Israel. Respect for the sanctity of all other religions shall be maintained.
> 
> Halacha shall be the principle source of legislation.
> 
> Hebrew shall be the official language. _
> 
> 
> 
> Admirable or Apartheid?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Funny how that goes with the hasbara peddlers.
> 
> Of course, your question about "successful democracies where only one Ethnic or religious group is enshrined in the basic law above the rest" is an unfair one, since arguably such democracies cease to be democracies, certainly they cease to be successful ones.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Then we should add:
> *Article 9*
> Palestinians shall be equal before the law and the judiciary, without distinction based upon race, sex, color, religion, political views or disability.
> 
> *Article 18*
> Freedom of belief, worship and the performance of religious functions are guaranteed, provided public order or public morals are not violated.
Click to expand...



Thanks - I think this gets ignored!


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> I agree, the Arab Palestinians have never surrendered any territory, because they have never had any sovereigh territory to to surrender.


Then why does the UN call it Palestine and claim that they have territorial integrity?


----------



## Coyote

admonit said:


> I got a warning "Trolling/No Content" from a moderator, which includes a threat of possible administrative actions.
> Here is my public reply:
> I don't accept the warning, neither its form, nor its content.
> Thats why I prefer to stop "posting or using your site".



*Admonit, you need to READ THE RULES.  Read the rules pertaining to IP, the need for topical content along with flaming, don't ignore moderator messages in red, and if you have an issue with moderation - take it up with one of the staff via PM, not on the open boards.  This is the only public reminder you will get.  Now discuss the topic please.*


----------



## Coyote

ILOVEISRAEL said:


> admonit said:
> 
> 
> 
> I got a warning "Trolling/No Content" from a moderator, which includes a threat of possible administrative actions.
> Here is my public reply:
> I don't accept the warning, neither its form, nor its content.
> Thats why I prefer to stop "posting or using your site".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What does “ Trolling, no content “ mean? Not allowed to comment on other posts?
Click to expand...


*It means that when you are posting in IP, per the rules - you need to include material relevant to the topic in addition to flames and insults.  A post saying simply "You are a dumbass" isn't going to work.*


----------



## P F Tinmore

ILOVEISRAEL said:


> admonit said:
> 
> 
> 
> I got a warning "Trolling/No Content" from a moderator, which includes a threat of possible administrative actions.
> Here is my public reply:
> I don't accept the warning, neither its form, nor its content.
> Thats why I prefer to stop "posting or using your site".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What does “ Trolling, no content “ mean? Not allowed to comment on other posts?
Click to expand...

Indeed, should I not comment on another post. I thought that is what discussion meant.


----------



## Coyote

P F Tinmore said:


> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> admonit said:
> 
> 
> 
> I got a warning "Trolling/No Content" from a moderator, which includes a threat of possible administrative actions.
> Here is my public reply:
> I don't accept the warning, neither its form, nor its content.
> Thats why I prefer to stop "posting or using your site".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What does “ Trolling, no content “ mean? Not allowed to comment on other posts?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Indeed, should I not comment on another post. I thought that is what discussion meant.
Click to expand...


*See the post above yours.*


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL

Coyote said:


> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> admonit said:
> 
> 
> 
> I got a warning "Trolling/No Content" from a moderator, which includes a threat of possible administrative actions.
> Here is my public reply:
> I don't accept the warning, neither its form, nor its content.
> Thats why I prefer to stop "posting or using your site".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What does “ Trolling, no content “ mean? Not allowed to comment on other posts?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *It means that when you are posting in IP, per the rules - you need to include material relevant to the topic in addition to flames and insults.  A post saying simply "You are a dumbass" isn't going to work.*
Click to expand...


Agree!  Thank you!!


----------



## Shusha

Humanity said:


> Israel, IMHO, is not a true democracy. Democracies treat all citizens equally. Israel doesn't!



The equality of all citizens of Israel is firmly entrenched in law.


----------



## Shusha

Olde Europe said:


> Still, there are troubling aspects in it, but there's one Article 2 that clarifies beyond doubt that there is not just "one Ethnic or religious group [] enshrined in the basic law above the rest".  It declares "The people are the source of power".  Not, Arabic people, or Muslim people, "the people".  And certainly it doesn't declare national self-determination unique to one subgroup.  "The people".



Don't be so disingenuous as to claim that "the people" in Article 2 are not the same people in Article 1.  

*Article 1*
_Palestine is part of the larger Arab world, and the Palestinian people are part of the Arab nation.  Arab unity is an objective that the Palestinian people shall work to achieve.
_
*Article 2*
_The people are the source of power, which shall be exercised through the legislative, executive and judicial authorities, based upon the principle of separation of powers and in the manner set forth in this Basic Law._


And let's also remember how easy it is to claim a Basic Law on equality in Article 9 while simultaneously declaring that your future state will be deliberately kept free from all peoples for whom that equality would be necessary.  Creating a completely homogeneous state and then declaring that all people in that state are equal is rather disingenuous.


----------



## Humanity

Shusha said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> Israel, IMHO, is not a true democracy. Democracies treat all citizens equally. Israel doesn't!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The equality of all citizens of Israel is firmly entrenched in law.
Click to expand...


So why doesn't it then?


----------



## Shusha

Humanity said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> Israel, IMHO, is not a true democracy. Democracies treat all citizens equally. Israel doesn't!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The equality of all citizens of Israel is firmly entrenched in law.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So why doesn't it then?
Click to expand...


Treat all citizens equally?  It does.


----------



## Humanity

Shusha said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> Israel, IMHO, is not a true democracy. Democracies treat all citizens equally. Israel doesn't!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The equality of all citizens of Israel is firmly entrenched in law.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So why doesn't it then?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Treat all citizens equally?  It does.
Click to expand...


Clearly it doesn't! Just two examples...

Opinion | Not All Israeli Citizens Are Equal

Knesset disqualifies bill seeking equal status for Jews and Arabs


----------



## Shusha

Humanity said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> Israel, IMHO, is not a true democracy. Democracies treat all citizens equally. Israel doesn't!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The equality of all citizens of Israel is firmly entrenched in law.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So why doesn't it then?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Treat all citizens equally?  It does.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Clearly it doesn't! Just two examples...
> 
> Opinion | Not All Israeli Citizens Are Equal
> 
> Knesset disqualifies bill seeking equal status for Jews and Arabs
Click to expand...


The first is a discussion of the differences in treatment of an Israeli citizen and a foreign national.  Irrelevant to the topic. 

The second is a bill seeking to undermine the protection of the Jewish character of the State.  That is not "equality".  That is erasure.

Edited to add:  though I would love to see the text of that Bill


----------



## Shusha

I do wonder why this clause was removed, though, from the Israel Basic Law bill which passed.  Seems one that should have remained.  

_Preserving heritage

A. Every citizen of Israel, regardless of their religion or nationality, has the right to actively preserve their culture, heritage, language and identity._


----------



## RoccoR

RE: Now it's a basic law: The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

"Palestine" is just an old Regional Name.

*(A LITTLE STORY)*

I was born in the foothills of the Appalachian Mountains _(205,000-square-mile)_, along the Allegheny River _(actually the Allegheny County Hospital)_.  Every school kid of that era and from that region was taught, at one time or another, that the word "Allegheny" _(in the language of the Deleware Indian)_ meant the region of Western Pennsylvania.  And while there are ancient Delaware Indian Mounds sprinkled on both the Eastern and Western slopes of the Appalachian Mountains, there is no sovereign Delaware Indian Tribal Lands, the indigenous people that ranged over the Appalachian Mountains _(and more)_.  It was the Conquistador, Hernando de Soto, who named the mountain range "Appalachian" after one of the first large-scale Indian villages _(the Apalachee) _that he discovered on his survey expedition.  While there are still people with a lineage to the Delaware Indians, there are no decedents of the "Apalachee" today.  And I will admit that I cannot successfully hunt deer, I am an "Appalachian."

Just because I am "Appalachian" → does not mean I have some sort of "Appalachian" citizenship or nationality.  And just because I, and millions of other born Appalachians, have the "rights to sovereignty and territorial integrity" _(just like Arab Palestinians)_, does not mean that we may claim sovereignty, have sovereignty or were even denied sovereignty.

BUT!  The cultural region is still called "Appalachia."



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> I agree, the Arab Palestinians have never surrendered any territory, because they have never had any sovereign territory to surrender.
> 
> 
> 
> Then why does the UN call it Palestine and claim that they have territorial integrity?
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

The UN calls the region "Palestine" for much the same reason as Americans call "Appalachia" → well, Appalachia...  It was a Region defined by the agreed upon (artificial) boundaries established by the Allied Powers...  "The limits of this Order are the territories to which the Mandate for Palestine applies, hereinafter described as Palestine."  And in less than two years, it will be the Centennial of the San Remo Convention that laid the framework and underpinning for the first "Palestine Order in Council" and the "Mandate for Palestine."

*WHY?*  Because the Ottoman Empire/Turkish Republic renounced all rights and title over the territories over which the Ottoman Empire/Turkish Republic had sovereignty, to the Allied Powers.  The Treaty recognized that the future of the territories being settled or to be settled by the parties concerned.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Shusha

Quoting Eugene Kontorovich

"The objections to the laws are, themselves, discriminatory.  To say that the Jews in Israel can not exercise their national self-determination to create a polity with a corporately Jewish character while preserving individual rights is to deny Jews rights that nations throughout the world and throughout Western European democracies enjoy.  It is to create a special disability for Jews.  And it is not an answer to say that there is a 20% minority because there are minorities everywhere.  We just don't read about them in the New York Times quite so much.  Latvia, they are highly regarded as a very liberal democracy, they have nation state provisions that are significantly bolder than the ones in this Basic Law.  They have a 25% Russian minority.  They are generally not citizens and can not easily get citizenship.  Official language reflects the majority.  Days of rest reflect the majority religion.  So the question is why does an Arab minority disable the Jewish majority from having the kind of symbolic laws, the kind of expressive laws, that other Western democracies have?  It can't be anything about the laws because nobody complains about them when they are passed in Spain (and Spain has laws which are in many ways more obnoxious than these) so that means that it must not be something about the laws but about the Jews."


----------



## Humanity

Shusha said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> Israel, IMHO, is not a true democracy. Democracies treat all citizens equally. Israel doesn't!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The equality of all citizens of Israel is firmly entrenched in law.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So why doesn't it then?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Treat all citizens equally?  It does.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Clearly it doesn't! Just two examples...
> 
> Opinion | Not All Israeli Citizens Are Equal
> 
> Knesset disqualifies bill seeking equal status for Jews and Arabs
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The first is a discussion of the differences in treatment of an Israeli citizen and a foreign national.  Irrelevant to the topic.
> 
> The second is a bill seeking to undermine the protection of the Jewish character of the State.  That is not "equality".  That is erasure.
> 
> Edited to add:  though I would love to see the text of that Bill
Click to expand...



1950 law about confiscation of Absentee Landlord Property. This law defines persons who were expelled, fled, or who left the country after November 29, 1947 as “absentee.” Property belonging to “absentees” was placed under the control of the State of Israel with the Custodian for Absentees’ Property. The Absentee Property Law was the main legal instrument used by Israel to take possession of the land belonging to the internal and external Palestinian refugees, and Muslim Waqf properties across the state. This law continues to be used to this day by quasi-governmental agencies in Israel to take over Palestinian properties in East Jerusalem, for example.


1950 Law of Return. This allows every Jewish person to immigrate to Israel and this extends to the children and grandchildren of Jews, as well as their spouses, and the spouses of their children and grandchildren. The flip side of this is that the rights of Palestinians and others to enter the state and become citizens, even if they were born in the area that is now the State of Israel, are extremely restrictive. This discrimination against the non-Jewish minority has been periodically reinforced. For example, the ban on family unification law of 2003 prohibits citizens of Israel from reuniting with Palestinian spouses living in the West Bank or Gaza.


In 1952 the state authorized the World Zionist Organization, the Jewish Agency, and other Zionist bodies founded at the turn of the 20th century to function in Israel as quasi-governmental entities in order to further advance the goals of the Zionist movement, to the detriment of minorities.


The Land Acquisition Law of 1953 transferred the land of 349 Arab towns and villages—approximately 1.2 million dunams in all (~468 square miles)—to the state to be used preferentially for the Jewish majority.


In 1953, the Knesset bestowed governmental authorities on the Jewish National Fund (JNF or Keren Kayemeth LeIsrael) to purchase land for exclusively Jewish use. The state granted financial advantages, including tax relief to facilitate such purchases.


In 1960, the state passed a law which stipulates that the ownership of “Israel lands”—namely the 93% of land under the control of the state, the Jewish National Fund, and the Development Authority—cannot be transferred in any manner.


In 1969, the state passed a law that gave statutory recognition to cultural and educational institutions, and defined their aims, inter alia, as developing and fulfilling Zionist goals to promote Jewish culture and education at the expense of minority goals.


There is a law mandating that Knesset session must be opened with a reading of portions of Israel’s declaration of independence that emphasizes the exclusive connection of the state of Israel to the Jewish people.


There is a law that bans any political party that denies the existence of Israel as a “Jewish” state. In other words, a party that would advocate equal rights for all citizens of Israel irrespective of ethnicity would not be allowed to enter the Knesset.
There are laws that establish separate educational systems which are then unequally administered.


In 2011 the Knesset passed a law that empowers hundreds of local Jewish communities to exclude applicants based on ethnicity or religion. The Supreme Court upheld this law in September 2014.


In 2011 the Knesset passed a law prohibiting anyone from calling for a boycott of Israel, its institutions, or any person because of their affiliation with Israel, including the settlements in the occupied territories. The law creates a private right of action for persons targeted by a boycott to sue for damages. As Noam Sheizaf puts it: “You can boycott anything in Israel except the occupation.” This vague law is blatantly aimed at Palestinians who are supportive of the BDS movement—while it allows people like Avigdor Lieberman to call for boycott of Arab owned businesses with impunity. The law was upheld by Israel’s Supreme Court on April 15, 2015.


----------



## Humanity

Shusha said:


> The second is a bill seeking to undermine the protection of the Jewish character of the State



I'm intrigued as to how you come to this conclusion?


----------



## Shusha

Humanity said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> The second is a bill seeking to undermine the protection of the Jewish character of the State
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm intrigued as to how you come to this conclusion?
Click to expand...


I haven't been able to find the actual text of this bill.  But press releases and interviews with the writers suggest that it denies the Jewish character of the State and provides for TWO NATIONALITIES thereby undermining the rights of the Jewish people to independent self-determination and sovereignty.  I also understand it will remove Jewish character from all national symbols and while it will retain Hebrew as one of the national languages, will deny the right of Jewish return.  

As I said, I haven't been able to find the actual text.  If you find it, do please post.


----------



## Humanity

Shusha said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> The second is a bill seeking to undermine the protection of the Jewish character of the State
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm intrigued as to how you come to this conclusion?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I haven't been able to find the actual text of this bill.  But press releases and interviews with the writers suggest that it denies the Jewish character of the State and provides for TWO NATIONALITIES thereby undermining the rights of the Jewish people to independent self-determination and sovereignty.  I also understand it will remove Jewish character from all national symbols and while it will retain Hebrew as one of the national languages, will deny the right of Jewish return.
> 
> As I said, I haven't been able to find the actual text.  If you find it, do please post.
Click to expand...


The text of the bill stated its objective was "to anchor in constitutional law the principle of equal citizenship while recognising the existence and rights of the two, Jewish and Arab, national groups living within the country"

Your assumptions in relation to the wording of the bill simply reinforce the imbalance, the lack of equality!


----------



## Shusha

Humanity said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> The equality of all citizens of Israel is firmly entrenched in law.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So why doesn't it then?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Treat all citizens equally?  It does.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Clearly it doesn't! Just two examples...
> 
> Opinion | Not All Israeli Citizens Are Equal
> 
> Knesset disqualifies bill seeking equal status for Jews and Arabs
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The first is a discussion of the differences in treatment of an Israeli citizen and a foreign national.  Irrelevant to the topic.
> 
> The second is a bill seeking to undermine the protection of the Jewish character of the State.  That is not "equality".  That is erasure.
> 
> Edited to add:  though I would love to see the text of that Bill
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 1950 law about confiscation of Absentee Landlord Property. This law defines persons who were expelled, fled, or who left the country after November 29, 1947 as “absentee.” Property belonging to “absentees” was placed under the control of the State of Israel with the Custodian for Absentees’ Property. The Absentee Property Law was the main legal instrument used by Israel to take possession of the land belonging to the internal and external Palestinian refugees, and Muslim Waqf properties across the state. This law continues to be used to this day by quasi-governmental agencies in Israel to take over Palestinian properties in East Jerusalem, for example.
> 
> 
> 1950 Law of Return. This allows every Jewish person to immigrate to Israel and this extends to the children and grandchildren of Jews, as well as their spouses, and the spouses of their children and grandchildren. The flip side of this is that the rights of Palestinians and others to enter the state and become citizens, even if they were born in the area that is now the State of Israel, are extremely restrictive. This discrimination against the non-Jewish minority has been periodically reinforced. For example, the ban on family unification law of 2003 prohibits citizens of Israel from reuniting with Palestinian spouses living in the West Bank or Gaza.
> 
> 
> In 1952 the state authorized the World Zionist Organization, the Jewish Agency, and other Zionist bodies founded at the turn of the 20th century to function in Israel as quasi-governmental entities in order to further advance the goals of the Zionist movement, to the detriment of minorities.
> 
> 
> The Land Acquisition Law of 1953 transferred the land of 349 Arab towns and villages—approximately 1.2 million dunams in all (~468 square miles)—to the state to be used preferentially for the Jewish majority.
> 
> 
> In 1953, the Knesset bestowed governmental authorities on the Jewish National Fund (JNF or Keren Kayemeth LeIsrael) to purchase land for exclusively Jewish use. The state granted financial advantages, including tax relief to facilitate such purchases.
> 
> 
> In 1960, the state passed a law which stipulates that the ownership of “Israel lands”—namely the 93% of land under the control of the state, the Jewish National Fund, and the Development Authority—cannot be transferred in any manner.
> 
> 
> In 1969, the state passed a law that gave statutory recognition to cultural and educational institutions, and defined their aims, inter alia, as developing and fulfilling Zionist goals to promote Jewish culture and education at the expense of minority goals.
> 
> 
> There is a law mandating that Knesset session must be opened with a reading of portions of Israel’s declaration of independence that emphasizes the exclusive connection of the state of Israel to the Jewish people.
> 
> 
> There is a law that bans any political party that denies the existence of Israel as a “Jewish” state. In other words, a party that would advocate equal rights for all citizens of Israel irrespective of ethnicity would not be allowed to enter the Knesset.
> There are laws that establish separate educational systems which are then unequally administered.
> 
> 
> In 2011 the Knesset passed a law that empowers hundreds of local Jewish communities to exclude applicants based on ethnicity or religion. The Supreme Court upheld this law in September 2014.
> 
> 
> In 2011 the Knesset passed a law prohibiting anyone from calling for a boycott of Israel, its institutions, or any person because of their affiliation with Israel, including the settlements in the occupied territories. The law creates a private right of action for persons targeted by a boycott to sue for damages. As Noam Sheizaf puts it: “You can boycott anything in Israel except the occupation.” This vague law is blatantly aimed at Palestinians who are supportive of the BDS movement—while it allows people like Avigdor Lieberman to call for boycott of Arab owned businesses with impunity. The law was upheld by Israel’s Supreme Court on April 15, 2015.
Click to expand...


Well, that is a lot for one post.  And I won't have time to address them all.  But I will say that most of those laws do not actually discriminate against the individual rights of minority persons in Israel.  

For example, the fact that much of the land in Israel is owned by the State and not by individuals is not discriminatory of itself.  A law which prevents people from denying Israel as a State for the Jewish people does not create a system of unequality between individual members of the State.  It does nothing to curtail individual rights and freedoms.  Separate education systems do not discriminate against individuals and, in fact, is a point of expression of equality in permitting the minorities of Israel to have their own education system, according to their own culture and values and in their own language.  That creates equality, not denies it.  

If you wanted to pick one or two of these laws to go into more depth in, I'd be willing.


----------



## Shusha

Humanity said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> The second is a bill seeking to undermine the protection of the Jewish character of the State
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm intrigued as to how you come to this conclusion?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I haven't been able to find the actual text of this bill.  But press releases and interviews with the writers suggest that it denies the Jewish character of the State and provides for TWO NATIONALITIES thereby undermining the rights of the Jewish people to independent self-determination and sovereignty.  I also understand it will remove Jewish character from all national symbols and while it will retain Hebrew as one of the national languages, will deny the right of Jewish return.
> 
> As I said, I haven't been able to find the actual text.  If you find it, do please post.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The text of the bill stated its objective was "to anchor in constitutional law the principle of equal citizenship while recognising the existence and rights of the two, Jewish and Arab, national groups living within the country"
> 
> Your assumptions in relation to the wording of the bill simply reinforce the imbalance, the lack of equality!
Click to expand...


Equal individual rights is already embedded in the law of Israel.  The point of the nationality law is to express and protect the Jewish nationality uniquely.  This does not in any way harm the rights of minorities within the state.

As noted in my quote from Eugene K, no other country is disabled in this way.


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> RE: Now it's a basic law: The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people
> ※→ P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> "Palestine" is just an old Regional Name.
> 
> *(A LITTLE STORY)*
> 
> I was born in the foothills of the Appalachian Mountains _(205,000-square-mile)_, along the Allegheny River _(actually the Allegheny County Hospital)_.  Every school kid of that era and from that region was taught, at one time or another, that the word "Allegheny" _(in the language of the Deleware Indian)_ meant the region of Western Pennsylvania.  And while there are ancient Delaware Indian Mounds sprinkled on both the Eastern and Western slopes of the Appalachian Mountains, there is no sovereign Delaware Indian Tribal Lands, the indigenous people that ranged over the Appalachian Mountains _(and more)_.  It was the Conquistador, Hernando de Soto, who named the mountain range "Appalachian" after one of the first large-scale Indian villages _(the Apalachee) _that he discovered on his survey expedition.  While there are still people with a lineage to the Delaware Indians, there are no decedents of the "Apalachee" today.  And I will admit that I cannot successfully hunt deer, I am an "Appalachian."
> 
> Just because I am "Appalachian" → does not mean I have some sort of "Appalachian" citizenship or nationality.  And just because I, and millions of other born Appalachians, have the "rights to sovereignty and territorial integrity" _(just like Arab Palestinians)_, does not mean that we may claim sovereignty, have sovereignty or were even denied sovereignty.
> 
> BUT!  The cultural region is still called "Appalachia."
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> I agree, the Arab Palestinians have never surrendered any territory, because they have never had any sovereign territory to surrender.
> 
> 
> 
> Then why does the UN call it Palestine and claim that they have territorial integrity?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> The UN calls the region "Palestine" for much the same reason as Americans call "Appalachia" → well, Appalachia...  It was a Region defined by the agreed upon (artificial) boundaries established by the Allied Powers...  "The limits of this Order are the territories to which the Mandate for Palestine applies, hereinafter described as Palestine."  And in less than two years, it will be the Centennial of the San Remo Convention that laid the framework and underpinning for the first "Palestine Order in Council" and the "Mandate for Palestine."
> 
> *WHY?*  Because the Ottoman Empire/Turkish Republic renounced all rights and title over the territories over which the Ottoman Empire/Turkish Republic had sovereignty, to the Allied Powers.  The Treaty recognized that the future of the territories being settled or to be settled by the parties concerned.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...




RoccoR said:


> "Palestine" is just an old Regional Name.


It was until 1924 when the Palestinians acquired their nationality, Palestine acquired territory defined by international borders, and the Palestinians became citizens of Palestine.


RoccoR said:


> The Treaty recognized that the future of the territories being settled or to be settled by the parties concerned.


*"Or to be settled* by the parties concerned" was not mentioned in the Treaty of Lausanne, nor was it mentioned in Article 22 if the LoN Covenant.


----------



## Shusha

Humanity said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> The equality of all citizens of Israel is firmly entrenched in law.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So why doesn't it then?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Treat all citizens equally?  It does.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Clearly it doesn't! Just two examples...
> 
> Opinion | Not All Israeli Citizens Are Equal
> 
> Knesset disqualifies bill seeking equal status for Jews and Arabs
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The first is a discussion of the differences in treatment of an Israeli citizen and a foreign national.  Irrelevant to the topic.
> 
> The second is a bill seeking to undermine the protection of the Jewish character of the State.  That is not "equality".  That is erasure.
> 
> Edited to add:  though I would love to see the text of that Bill
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 1950 law about confiscation of Absentee Landlord Property. This law defines persons who were expelled, fled, or who left the country after November 29, 1947 as “absentee.” Property belonging to “absentees” was placed under the control of the State of Israel with the Custodian for Absentees’ Property. The Absentee Property Law was the main legal instrument used by Israel to take possession of the land belonging to the internal and external Palestinian refugees, and Muslim Waqf properties across the state. This law continues to be used to this day by quasi-governmental agencies in Israel to take over Palestinian properties in East Jerusalem, for example.
> 
> 
> 1950 Law of Return. This allows every Jewish person to immigrate to Israel and this extends to the children and grandchildren of Jews, as well as their spouses, and the spouses of their children and grandchildren. The flip side of this is that the rights of Palestinians and others to enter the state and become citizens, even if they were born in the area that is now the State of Israel, are extremely restrictive. This discrimination against the non-Jewish minority has been periodically reinforced. For example, the ban on family unification law of 2003 prohibits citizens of Israel from reuniting with Palestinian spouses living in the West Bank or Gaza.
> 
> 
> In 1952 the state authorized the World Zionist Organization, the Jewish Agency, and other Zionist bodies founded at the turn of the 20th century to function in Israel as quasi-governmental entities in order to further advance the goals of the Zionist movement, to the detriment of minorities.
> 
> 
> The Land Acquisition Law of 1953 transferred the land of 349 Arab towns and villages—approximately 1.2 million dunams in all (~468 square miles)—to the state to be used preferentially for the Jewish majority.
> 
> 
> In 1953, the Knesset bestowed governmental authorities on the Jewish National Fund (JNF or Keren Kayemeth LeIsrael) to purchase land for exclusively Jewish use. The state granted financial advantages, including tax relief to facilitate such purchases.
> 
> 
> In 1960, the state passed a law which stipulates that the ownership of “Israel lands”—namely the 93% of land under the control of the state, the Jewish National Fund, and the Development Authority—cannot be transferred in any manner.
> 
> 
> In 1969, the state passed a law that gave statutory recognition to cultural and educational institutions, and defined their aims, inter alia, as developing and fulfilling Zionist goals to promote Jewish culture and education at the expense of minority goals.
> 
> 
> There is a law mandating that Knesset session must be opened with a reading of portions of Israel’s declaration of independence that emphasizes the exclusive connection of the state of Israel to the Jewish people.
> 
> 
> There is a law that bans any political party that denies the existence of Israel as a “Jewish” state. In other words, a party that would advocate equal rights for all citizens of Israel irrespective of ethnicity would not be allowed to enter the Knesset.
> There are laws that establish separate educational systems which are then unequally administered.
> 
> 
> In 2011 the Knesset passed a law that empowers hundreds of local Jewish communities to exclude applicants based on ethnicity or religion. The Supreme Court upheld this law in September 2014.
> 
> 
> In 2011 the Knesset passed a law prohibiting anyone from calling for a boycott of Israel, its institutions, or any person because of their affiliation with Israel, including the settlements in the occupied territories. The law creates a private right of action for persons targeted by a boycott to sue for damages. As Noam Sheizaf puts it: “You can boycott anything in Israel except the occupation.” This vague law is blatantly aimed at Palestinians who are supportive of the BDS movement—while it allows people like Avigdor Lieberman to call for boycott of Arab owned businesses with impunity. The law was upheld by Israel’s Supreme Court on April 15, 2015.
Click to expand...



I'll make another statement, generally, about these laws which are labelled discriminatory, and that is one of the "zero sum game" which is frequently employed by Team P.  The zero sum games states that there can only be one winner and in all instances where rights are gained by one group, there is a corresponding loss in rights by another group.  This is a false premise.  There is no zero sum game in operation here.  The expression of a Jewish nationality is not, of itself, a rejection or a diminishing of other nationalities.  The expression of Jewish culture and history and language does not negate other cultures and languages and history.  The protection of Jewish rights, as an example, to prayer and worship and presence at Jewish Holy Places says nothing about the rights of other peoples at their own Holy Places, even if those two Holy Places share space or overlap in space.  

If you look at the wording of the laws listed above, you will see how language is used to create this false zero sum game:

"...to the detriment of"
"...the flip side is ... extremely restrictive"
"...to be used preferentially"
"...at the expense of minority goals"
"...unequally adminstered"

The fundamental expression of the law itself does not discriminate based on ethnic background or religion.  Its is the assumption that the expression of one people's rights are a denial of the other people's rights that creates the illusion of disparity where there is none.  Each of these laws is described as being discriminatory -- but the discrimination only becomes visible AFTER one applies the zero sum game rule.


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> *"Or to be settled* by the parties concerned" was not mentioned in the Treaty of Lausanne, ...



You really should not even attempt to go up against Rocco with respect to factual information.  It will never serve you well.  He spins circles around you with his knowledge.  

The actual text of the Treaty of Lausanne:

_ARTICLE I6.

Turkey hereby renounces all rights and title whatsoever over or respecting the territories situated outside the frontiers laid down in the present Treaty and the islands other than those over which her sovereignty is recognised by the said Treaty, the future of these territories and islands being settled *or to be settled by the parties concerned*.

The provisions of the present Article do not prejudice any special arrangements arising from neighbourly relations which have been or may be concluded between Turkey and any limitrophe countries.

_
*"or to be settled by the parties concerned"* is literally the exact words from the Treaty.


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> It was until 1924 when the Palestinians acquired their nationality, Palestine acquired territory defined by international borders, and the Palestinians became citizens of Palestine.



Yes.  And yes.  And yes.  

And that Palestine (after Jordan was removed) became, according to the Parties Concerned by virtue of historical rights, was established as the reconstitution of the National Homeland (State) of the Jewish people and has subsequently been re-named Israel through their Declaration of Independence and given recognition by the international community.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> *"Or to be settled* by the parties concerned" was not mentioned in the Treaty of Lausanne, ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You really should not even attempt to go up against Rocco with respect to factual information.  It will never serve you well.  He spins circles around you with his knowledge.
> 
> The actual text of the Treaty of Lausanne:
> 
> _ARTICLE I6.
> 
> Turkey hereby renounces all rights and title whatsoever over or respecting the territories situated outside the frontiers laid down in the present Treaty and the islands other than those over which her sovereignty is recognised by the said Treaty, the future of these territories and islands being settled *or to be settled by the parties concerned*.
> 
> The provisions of the present Article do not prejudice any special arrangements arising from neighbourly relations which have been or may be concluded between Turkey and any limitrophe countries.
> 
> _
> *"or to be settled by the parties concerned"* is literally the exact words from the Treaty.
Click to expand...

Sorry, I was thinking of something else.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> It was until 1924 when the Palestinians acquired their nationality, Palestine acquired territory defined by international borders, and the Palestinians became citizens of Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes.  And yes.  And yes.
> 
> And that Palestine (after Jordan was removed) became, according to the Parties Concerned by virtue of historical rights, was established as the reconstitution of the National Homeland (State) of the Jewish people and has subsequently been re-named Israel through their Declaration of Independence and given recognition by the international community.
Click to expand...

Where was exclusive Jewish state mentioned?


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> It was until 1924 when the Palestinians acquired their nationality, Palestine acquired territory defined by international borders, and the Palestinians became citizens of Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes.  And yes.  And yes.
> 
> And that Palestine (after Jordan was removed) became, according to the Parties Concerned by virtue of historical rights, was established as the reconstitution of the National Homeland (State) of the Jewish people and has subsequently been re-named Israel through their Declaration of Independence and given recognition by the international community.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Where was Jewish state mentioned?
Click to expand...


What difference does it make?  What wording is required in order for a state to form?  Or what wording prohibits a state from forming?  You are trying to create a standard for a Jewish state that doesn't apply to any other Palestinian or former Ottoman state.


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> Sorry, I was thinking of something else.



Fair.  That happens sometimes.  No worries.


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> It was until 1924 when the Palestinians acquired their nationality, Palestine acquired territory defined by international borders, and the Palestinians became citizens of Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes.  And yes.  And yes.
> 
> And that Palestine (after Jordan was removed) became, according to the Parties Concerned by virtue of historical rights, was established as the reconstitution of the National Homeland (State) of the Jewish people and has subsequently been re-named Israel through their Declaration of Independence and given recognition by the international community.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Where was exclusive Jewish state mentioned?
Click to expand...


Here we go again!!


----------



## P F Tinmore

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> It was until 1924 when the Palestinians acquired their nationality, Palestine acquired territory defined by international borders, and the Palestinians became citizens of Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes.  And yes.  And yes.
> 
> And that Palestine (after Jordan was removed) became, according to the Parties Concerned by virtue of historical rights, was established as the reconstitution of the National Homeland (State) of the Jewish people and has subsequently been re-named Israel through their Declaration of Independence and given recognition by the international community.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Where was Jewish state mentioned?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What difference does it make?  What wording is required in order for a state to form?  Or what wording prohibits a state from forming?  You are trying to create a standard for a Jewish state that doesn't apply to any other Palestinian or former Ottoman state.
Click to expand...

It was not to be a Jewish state.

Unauthorized statements have been made to the effect that the purpose in view is to create a wholly Jewish Palestine. Phrases have been used such as that Palestine is to become "as Jewish as England is English." His Majesty's Government regard any such expectation as impracticable and have no such aim in view. Nor have they at any time contemplated, as appears to be feared by the Arab delegation, the disappearance or the subordination of the Arabic population, language, or culture in Palestine. They would draw attention to the fact that the terms of the Declaration referred to do not contemplate that Palestine as a whole should be converted into a Jewish National Home, but that such a Home should be founded `in Palestine.'

Churchill White Paper (1922)

But this statement has not removed doubts, and His Majesty's Government therefore now declare unequivocally that *it is not part of their policy that Palestine should become a Jewish State.* They would indeed regard it as contrary to their obligations to the Arabs under the Mandate, as well as to the assurances which have been given to the Arab people in the past, *that the Arab population of Palestine should be made the subjects of a Jewish State against their will.*

The Avalon Project : British White Paper of 1939


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> It was not to be a Jewish state.



Why not?  Is there a specific prohibition on the Jewish people from having a state formed around their national culture?


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> It was not to be a Jewish state.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why not?  Is there a specific prohibition on the Jewish people from having a state formed around their national culture?
Click to expand...


I guess he never heard of the Balfour Declaration. If there was not to be a Jewish State then by definition it was not to be a “ Palestinian State” To suggest that one group can have something but the other group can’t isnt making people feel inclusive and therefore by definition is  an apartheid Gov’t.


----------



## Coyote

Humanity said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> Israel, IMHO, is not a true democracy. Democracies treat all citizens equally. Israel doesn't!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The equality of all citizens of Israel is firmly entrenched in law.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So why doesn't it then?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Treat all citizens equally?  It does.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Clearly it doesn't! Just two examples...
> 
> Opinion | Not All Israeli Citizens Are Equal
> 
> Knesset disqualifies bill seeking equal status for Jews and Arabs
Click to expand...


Second article is interesting, on two levels.  One is - why block Israel's Law of Return?   I don't see a problem with it.  Jews as a group have been heavily persecuted and expelled, through out history, around the world.  So they have one country where they can not be expelled and can return to.  Nothing wrong with that.  I think China is similar...in their view, once Chinese always Chinese...if they leave China, they are expats, but still Chinese.

The other part was this: 
_The text of the bill stated its objective was "to anchor in constitutional law the principle of equal citizenship while recognising *the existence and rights of the two, Jewish and Arab, national groups* living within the country"._​
IMO, I think this is a fundamental problem for Israel.  There should only be ONE national group: Israeli.  Not multiple national groups - Jewish, Arab, and - further divided now I believe in Arab Muslim and Arab Christian in order to further divide the Palestinians.  If you have two groups in Israel - Arabs and Jews, and one group is enshrined in basic law, but the other - who has lived there as long and are citizens - is not, then it's very hard NOT to see yourself as second class.


----------



## P F Tinmore

ILOVEISRAEL said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> It was not to be a Jewish state.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why not?  Is there a specific prohibition on the Jewish people from having a state formed around their national culture?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I guess he never heard of the Balfour Declaration. If there was not to be a Jewish State then by definition it was not to be a “ Palestinian State” To suggest that one group can have something but the other group can’t isnt making people feel inclusive and therefore by definition is  an apartheid Gov’t.
Click to expand...

The independent State should be one in which Arabs and Jews share government in such a way as to ensure that the essential interests of each community are safeguarded.

The Avalon Project : British White Paper of 1939


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> I do wonder why this clause was removed, though, from the Israel Basic Law bill which passed.  Seems one that should have remained.
> 
> _Preserving heritage
> 
> A. Every citizen of Israel, regardless of their religion or nationality, has the right to actively preserve their culture, heritage, language and identity._



Interesting - I agree, that should have remained.


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL

Shusha said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> Israel, IMHO, is not a true democracy. Democracies treat all citizens equally. Israel doesn't!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The equality of all citizens of Israel is firmly entrenched in law.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So why doesn't it then?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Treat all citizens equally?  It does.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Clearly it doesn't! Just two examples...
> 
> Opinion | Not All Israeli Citizens Are Equal
> 
> Knesset disqualifies bill seeking equal status for Jews and Arabs
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The first is a discussion of the differences in treatment of an Israeli citizen and a foreign national.  Irrelevant to the topic.
> 
> The second is a bill seeking to undermine the protection of the Jewish character of the State.  That is not "equality".  That is erasure.
> 
> Edited to add:  though I would love to see the text of that Bill
Click to expand...


If Israel can’t be both Jewish and Democratic then “ Palestine “ can’t be both Palestinian and Democratic


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> It was not to be a Jewish state.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why not?  Is there a specific prohibition on the Jewish people from having a state formed around their national culture?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I guess he never heard of the Balfour Declaration. If there was not to be a Jewish State then by definition it was not to be a “ Palestinian State” To suggest that one group can have something but the other group can’t isnt making people feel inclusive and therefore by definition is  an apartheid Gov’t.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The independent State should be one in which Arabs and Jews share government in such a way as to ensure that the essential interests of each community are safeguarded.
> 
> The Avalon Project : British White Paper of 1939
Click to expand...



Alternatively, Israel and Arab Palestine could be treated just like every other ethnic nationality on the planet and each have their own state based around their ethnic group with full and equal rights for individuals. 

Like the former Yugoslavia.


----------



## Shusha

ILOVEISRAEL said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> The equality of all citizens of Israel is firmly entrenched in law.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So why doesn't it then?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Treat all citizens equally?  It does.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Clearly it doesn't! Just two examples...
> 
> Opinion | Not All Israeli Citizens Are Equal
> 
> Knesset disqualifies bill seeking equal status for Jews and Arabs
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The first is a discussion of the differences in treatment of an Israeli citizen and a foreign national.  Irrelevant to the topic.
> 
> The second is a bill seeking to undermine the protection of the Jewish character of the State.  That is not "equality".  That is erasure.
> 
> Edited to add:  though I would love to see the text of that Bill
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If Israel can’t be both Jewish and Democratic then “ Palestine “ can’t be both Palestinian and Democratic
Click to expand...


And Latvia can't be Latvian and democratic. And Slovenia can't be Slovene and democratic. And Spain can't be Spanish and democratic.


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL

Shusha said:


> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> So why doesn't it then?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Treat all citizens equally?  It does.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Clearly it doesn't! Just two examples...
> 
> Opinion | Not All Israeli Citizens Are Equal
> 
> Knesset disqualifies bill seeking equal status for Jews and Arabs
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The first is a discussion of the differences in treatment of an Israeli citizen and a foreign national.  Irrelevant to the topic.
> 
> The second is a bill seeking to undermine the protection of the Jewish character of the State.  That is not "equality".  That is erasure.
> 
> Edited to add:  though I would love to see the text of that Bill
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If Israel can’t be both Jewish and Democratic then “ Palestine “ can’t be both Palestinian and Democratic
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And Latvia can't be Latvian and democratic. And Slovenia can't be Slovene and democratic. And Spain can't be Spanish and democratic.
Click to expand...


There are many Muslim Countries. 51 of them are either ALL Muslim or primarily Muslim. With that I say, Israel has the Right to be the lone Jewish State


----------



## RoccoR

RE:  Now it's a basic law: The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people
※→  P F Tinmore,  Shusha,  et al,

There is much more to the issuance of the "British Whited Paper of 1939" than meets the eye.

What we refer to as the "British White Paper of 1939" was actually written in late 1938.   It was "the statement on Palestine, issued on 9 November 1938;" literally on the eve of _Reichskristallnacht_...  It was presented to the Arab Higher Committee and Jewish Agency Delegations as the basis of an agreed settlement. Neither the Arab nor the Jewish delegation felt able to accept these proposals, and the conferences, therefore, did not result in an agreement.  But it was Ratified by Parliament anyway.  It was THE DAY that openly recognized the deliberate persecution of Jewish people in Germany → and the foundation for anti-Semitism for aristocrats and high society that supported better diplomatic relations with Germany.  It was the night that open attacks against Jews → the physical destruction of Jewish property → and looting of Jewish homes and businesses was → either approved or condoned by the NAZIs and local government authorities.

The 1939 White Paper was policy, yes...  But! as the world would come to see, many policies were to change during the course of the war that was but a few months away.  Policies would change, and the fact that the Arab Palestinians supported the Axis Powers, future policies them would be few and far between.



P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> 
> 
> But this statement has not removed doubts, and His Majesty's Government therefore now declare unequivocally that *it is not part of their policy that Palestine should become a Jewish State.* They would indeed regard it as contrary to their obligations to the Arabs under the Mandate, as well as to the assurances which have been given to the Arab people in the past, *that the Arab population of Palestine should be made the subjects of a Jewish State against their will.*
> 
> The Avalon Project : British White Paper of 1939
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

While there is no question that the idea of "Partition" was to have its flaws, it was better than nothing given the lack of interest in saving, preserving and protecting the Jewish People.  The establishment of an independent Jewish State gradually became more appealing.  At the end of the war, policymakers did not want to see a repeat of the SS St Louis. 

The concept of openly mistreating the Jewish was to undergo a dramatic change in the decade between Kristallnacht (1938) and Jewish Independence (1948).

*(SIDEBAR)*

Many people silently held misgivings towards the Arab Palestinians that opposed the Allied Powers in both WWI and WWII.  Many found suspect the convenient answer of "coincidence" in the case of the 9 November 1938 support of the White Paper; just as they were suspicious of the appearance of many of the same Arabs that opposed the Allies in the Middle East in both World Wars.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Humanity

ILOVEISRAEL said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> It was not to be a Jewish state.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why not?  Is there a specific prohibition on the Jewish people from having a state formed around their national culture?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I guess he never heard of the Balfour Declaration. If there was not to be a Jewish State then by definition it was not to be a “ Palestinian State” To suggest that one group can have something but the other group can’t isnt making people feel inclusive and therefore by definition is  an apartheid Gov’t.
Click to expand...


"His Majesty's government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a *national home for the Jewish people*, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that *nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.*"

Yes, everyone has heard of the Balfour Declaration in which it does NOT mention anything about a "Jewish state", an national home for Jewish people yes, a "Jewish state"? NO!


----------



## Humanity

ILOVEISRAEL said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> The equality of all citizens of Israel is firmly entrenched in law.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So why doesn't it then?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Treat all citizens equally?  It does.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Clearly it doesn't! Just two examples...
> 
> Opinion | Not All Israeli Citizens Are Equal
> 
> Knesset disqualifies bill seeking equal status for Jews and Arabs
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The first is a discussion of the differences in treatment of an Israeli citizen and a foreign national.  Irrelevant to the topic.
> 
> The second is a bill seeking to undermine the protection of the Jewish character of the State.  That is not "equality".  That is erasure.
> 
> Edited to add:  though I would love to see the text of that Bill
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If Israel can’t be both Jewish and Democratic then “ Palestine “ can’t be both Palestinian and Democratic
Click to expand...


Your point is?

Using this kind of juvenile argument has no validation...

"If we can't have it then THEY can't have it either"!


----------



## Shusha

Why do the Jewish people need to have some sort of special permission to have a State?!


----------



## Humanity

Shusha said:


> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> So why doesn't it then?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Treat all citizens equally?  It does.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Clearly it doesn't! Just two examples...
> 
> Opinion | Not All Israeli Citizens Are Equal
> 
> Knesset disqualifies bill seeking equal status for Jews and Arabs
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The first is a discussion of the differences in treatment of an Israeli citizen and a foreign national.  Irrelevant to the topic.
> 
> The second is a bill seeking to undermine the protection of the Jewish character of the State.  That is not "equality".  That is erasure.
> 
> Edited to add:  though I would love to see the text of that Bill
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If Israel can’t be both Jewish and Democratic then “ Palestine “ can’t be both Palestinian and Democratic
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And Latvia can't be Latvian and democratic. And Slovenia can't be Slovene and democratic. And Spain can't be Spanish and democratic.
Click to expand...


That is funny....

Does Latvia, Slovenia, Spain put their religions before democracy?


----------



## Humanity

ILOVEISRAEL said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Treat all citizens equally?  It does.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Clearly it doesn't! Just two examples...
> 
> Opinion | Not All Israeli Citizens Are Equal
> 
> Knesset disqualifies bill seeking equal status for Jews and Arabs
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The first is a discussion of the differences in treatment of an Israeli citizen and a foreign national.  Irrelevant to the topic.
> 
> The second is a bill seeking to undermine the protection of the Jewish character of the State.  That is not "equality".  That is erasure.
> 
> Edited to add:  though I would love to see the text of that Bill
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If Israel can’t be both Jewish and Democratic then “ Palestine “ can’t be both Palestinian and Democratic
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And Latvia can't be Latvian and democratic. And Slovenia can't be Slovene and democratic. And Spain can't be Spanish and democratic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There are many Muslim Countries. 51 of them are either ALL Muslim or primarily Muslim. With that I say, Israel has the Right to be the lone Jewish State
Click to expand...


To the exclusion of Palestinians and other non-Jewish minorities.


----------



## Humanity

Shusha said:


> Why do the Jewish people need to have some sort of special permission to have a State?!



Has anyone actually said that?


----------



## Shusha

Humanity said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Treat all citizens equally?  It does.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Clearly it doesn't! Just two examples...
> 
> Opinion | Not All Israeli Citizens Are Equal
> 
> Knesset disqualifies bill seeking equal status for Jews and Arabs
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The first is a discussion of the differences in treatment of an Israeli citizen and a foreign national.  Irrelevant to the topic.
> 
> The second is a bill seeking to undermine the protection of the Jewish character of the State.  That is not "equality".  That is erasure.
> 
> Edited to add:  though I would love to see the text of that Bill
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If Israel can’t be both Jewish and Democratic then “ Palestine “ can’t be both Palestinian and Democratic
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And Latvia can't be Latvian and democratic. And Slovenia can't be Slovene and democratic. And Spain can't be Spanish and democratic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That is funny....
> 
> Does Latvia, Slovenia, Spain put their religions before democracy?
Click to expand...


Does Israel?


----------



## Humanity

Shusha said:


> If you wanted to pick one or two of these laws to go into more depth in, I'd be willing.



It's ok thanks...

I would hate to waste my time cherry picking any one of 50 laws for you to deny the facts.


----------



## Humanity

Shusha said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> Clearly it doesn't! Just two examples...
> 
> Opinion | Not All Israeli Citizens Are Equal
> 
> Knesset disqualifies bill seeking equal status for Jews and Arabs
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The first is a discussion of the differences in treatment of an Israeli citizen and a foreign national.  Irrelevant to the topic.
> 
> The second is a bill seeking to undermine the protection of the Jewish character of the State.  That is not "equality".  That is erasure.
> 
> Edited to add:  though I would love to see the text of that Bill
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If Israel can’t be both Jewish and Democratic then “ Palestine “ can’t be both Palestinian and Democratic
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And Latvia can't be Latvian and democratic. And Slovenia can't be Slovene and democratic. And Spain can't be Spanish and democratic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That is funny....
> 
> Does Latvia, Slovenia, Spain put their religions before democracy?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Does Israel?
Click to expand...


Are you trying to say that Israel doesn't?!?!?!?!

Surely there has been more than enough shown in this thread to confirm that?!?!

Further... Did Latvia, Slovenia, Spain feel the need to declare themselves a 'Christian state'?


----------



## Shusha

Humanity said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> If you wanted to pick one or two of these laws to go into more depth in, I'd be willing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's ok thanks...
> 
> I would hate to waste my time cherry picking any one of 50 laws for you to deny the facts.
Click to expand...



Dude. Keep up. There are 65 now. Sheesh.


----------



## Shusha

Humanity said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> The first is a discussion of the differences in treatment of an Israeli citizen and a foreign national.  Irrelevant to the topic.
> 
> The second is a bill seeking to undermine the protection of the Jewish character of the State.  That is not "equality".  That is erasure.
> 
> Edited to add:  though I would love to see the text of that Bill
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If Israel can’t be both Jewish and Democratic then “ Palestine “ can’t be both Palestinian and Democratic
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And Latvia can't be Latvian and democratic. And Slovenia can't be Slovene and democratic. And Spain can't be Spanish and democratic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That is funny....
> 
> Does Latvia, Slovenia, Spain put their religions before democracy?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Does Israel?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Are you trying to say that Israel doesn't?!?!?!?!
> 
> Surely there has been more than enough shown in this thread to confirm that?!?!
> 
> Further... Did Latvia, Slovenia, Spain feel the need to declare themselves a 'Christian state'?
Click to expand...


They proclaim their ethnic national roots. Same as Israel.


----------



## Shusha

Humanity said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why do the Jewish people need to have some sort of special permission to have a State?!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Has anyone actually said that?
Click to expand...


So we can give up the whole "Jews can have a homeland but it was never meant to be an actual State" argument then, right?!


----------



## Humanity

Shusha said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> If Israel can’t be both Jewish and Democratic then “ Palestine “ can’t be both Palestinian and Democratic
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And Latvia can't be Latvian and democratic. And Slovenia can't be Slovene and democratic. And Spain can't be Spanish and democratic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That is funny....
> 
> Does Latvia, Slovenia, Spain put their religions before democracy?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Does Israel?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Are you trying to say that Israel doesn't?!?!?!?!
> 
> Surely there has been more than enough shown in this thread to confirm that?!?!
> 
> Further... Did Latvia, Slovenia, Spain feel the need to declare themselves a 'Christian state'?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They proclaim their ethnic national roots. Same as Israel.
Click to expand...


Well that was a nice dodge Shusha!


----------



## Olde Europe

Preserving heritage

A. Every citizen of Israel, regardless of their religion or nationality, has the right to actively preserve their culture, heritage, language and identity.​


Coyote said:


> Interesting - I agree, that should have remained.




Perhaps things become clearer if you look at the complete section, as conceived earlier:

9 — Preserving heritage

A. Every citizen of Israel, regardless of their religion or nationality, has the right to actively preserve their culture, heritage, language and identity.

B. The State may allow a community, including followers of a single religion or members of a single nationality, to establish a separate communal settlement.​
For, taken together, this section may have been interpreted as permission vigilante-style to cleanse neighborhoods of culturally suspect or detrimental elements ("actively preserve").  Not least, it would have handed even more power to those ethnic groups you upstream identified as the major problem in Israel.


----------



## Humanity

Shusha said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why do the Jewish people need to have some sort of special permission to have a State?!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Has anyone actually said that?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So we can give up the whole "Jews can have a homeland but it was never meant to be an actual State" argument then, right?!
Click to expand...


Oh here we go again...

You are highly skilled at making one comment, receiving a reply, then moving the goal posts and avoiding the original comment... Highly skilled Shusha! Congratulations!


----------



## Mindful

Humanity said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> If you wanted to pick one or two of these laws to go into more depth in, I'd be willing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's ok thanks...
> 
> I would hate to waste my time cherry picking any one of 50 laws for you to deny the facts.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You're just a troll.
> 
> You've not posted one constructive element, as yet.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Says the fool who has made NO contribution to this thread and posts a troll comment!
> 
> Idiot!
Click to expand...


Why are you debating Israel?

Why does it even need to be debated?


----------



## P F Tinmore

Shusha said:


> Why do the Jewish people need to have some sort of special permission to have a State?!


Why do the Palestinians need permission to have a state inside their own borders. Whose borders is Israel inside?


----------



## fncceo

Humanity said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> If you wanted to pick one or two of these laws to go into more depth in, I'd be willing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's ok thanks...
> 
> I would hate to waste my time cherry picking any one of 50 laws for you to deny the facts.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You're just a troll.
> 
> You've not posted one constructive element, as yet.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Says the fool who has made NO contribution to this thread and posts a troll comment!
> 
> Idiot!
Click to expand...


----------



## P F Tinmore

ILOVEISRAEL said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> The equality of all citizens of Israel is firmly entrenched in law.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So why doesn't it then?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Treat all citizens equally?  It does.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Clearly it doesn't! Just two examples...
> 
> Opinion | Not All Israeli Citizens Are Equal
> 
> Knesset disqualifies bill seeking equal status for Jews and Arabs
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The first is a discussion of the differences in treatment of an Israeli citizen and a foreign national.  Irrelevant to the topic.
> 
> The second is a bill seeking to undermine the protection of the Jewish character of the State.  That is not "equality".  That is erasure.
> 
> Edited to add:  though I would love to see the text of that Bill
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If Israel can’t be both Jewish and Democratic then “ Palestine “ can’t be both Palestinian and Democratic
Click to expand...

Apples and oranges. Palestine has always been multi religious.


----------



## Humanity

Mindful said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> If you wanted to pick one or two of these laws to go into more depth in, I'd be willing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's ok thanks...
> 
> I would hate to waste my time cherry picking any one of 50 laws for you to deny the facts.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You're just a troll.
> 
> You've not posted one constructive element, as yet.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Says the fool who has made NO contribution to this thread and posts a troll comment!
> 
> Idiot!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why are you debating Israel?
> 
> Why does it even need to be debated?
Click to expand...


Why are you here?

You should be at 3rd grade class by now!


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> There is much more to the issuance of the "British Whited Paper of 1939" than meets the eye.


Indeed, Britain tried to smooth over what they fucked up. Good job, Palestine is still fucked up.


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL

P F Tinmore said:


> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> So why doesn't it then?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Treat all citizens equally?  It does.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Clearly it doesn't! Just two examples...
> 
> Opinion | Not All Israeli Citizens Are Equal
> 
> Knesset disqualifies bill seeking equal status for Jews and Arabs
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The first is a discussion of the differences in treatment of an Israeli citizen and a foreign national.  Irrelevant to the topic.
> 
> The second is a bill seeking to undermine the protection of the Jewish character of the State.  That is not "equality".  That is erasure.
> 
> Edited to add:  though I would love to see the text of that Bill
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If Israel can’t be both Jewish and Democratic then “ Palestine “ can’t be both Palestinian and Democratic
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Apples an oranges. Palestine has always been multi religious.
Click to expand...


Apples and Oranges. So has Israel. If Israel can’t be both primarily Jewish and Democratic then Palestine can’t be both primarily  Palestinian and Democratic


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> The establishment of an independent Jewish State gradually became more appealing.


Of course none of those assholes gave any consideration to the Palestinians. It was all grab, grab, grab.


----------



## P F Tinmore

ILOVEISRAEL said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Treat all citizens equally?  It does.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Clearly it doesn't! Just two examples...
> 
> Opinion | Not All Israeli Citizens Are Equal
> 
> Knesset disqualifies bill seeking equal status for Jews and Arabs
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The first is a discussion of the differences in treatment of an Israeli citizen and a foreign national.  Irrelevant to the topic.
> 
> The second is a bill seeking to undermine the protection of the Jewish character of the State.  That is not "equality".  That is erasure.
> 
> Edited to add:  though I would love to see the text of that Bill
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If Israel can’t be both Jewish and Democratic then “ Palestine “ can’t be both Palestinian and Democratic
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Apples an oranges. Palestine has always been multi religious.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Apples and Oranges. So has Israel. If Israel can’t be both primarily Jewish and Democratic then Palestine can’t be both primarily  Palestinian and Democratic
Click to expand...

Palestine does not categorize people into different rights.


----------



## fncceo

P F Tinmore said:


> Of course none of those assholes gave any consideration to the Palestinians.



Before the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948, Jews were Palestinians.  

So, were Palestinian Arabs, and Palestinian Xtians, Palestinian Buddhists, and Palestinian Druids. If they lived in the British Mandate of Palestine, they were Palestinians.

The idea that Palestinian Arabs are an ethnicity unto themselves isn't historical.


----------



## theliq

admonit said:


> 70 years after the establishment of a Jewish state was declared, now it became a basic (constitutional) law.
> 
> The full text of the law:
> 
> *Basic Law: Israel as the Nation State of the Jewish People*
> 
> *1 — Basic principles*
> 
> A. The land of Israel is the historical homeland of the Jewish people, in which the State of Israel was established.
> 
> B. The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people, in which it fulfills its natural, cultural, religious and historical right to self-determination.
> 
> C. The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Israel is unique to the Jewish people.
> 
> *2 — The symbols of the state*
> 
> A. The name of the state is “Israel.”
> 
> B. The state flag is white with two blue stripes near the edges and a blue Star of David in the center.
> 
> C. The state emblem is a seven-branched menorah with olive leaves on both sides and the word “Israel” beneath it.
> 
> D. The state anthem is “Hatikvah.”
> 
> E. Details regarding state symbols will be determined by the law.
> 
> *3 — The capital of the state*
> 
> Jerusalem, complete and united, is the capital of Israel.
> 
> *4 — Language*
> 
> A. The state’s language is Hebrew.
> 
> B. The Arabic language has a special status in the state; Regulating the use of Arabic in state institutions or by them will be set in law.
> 
> C. This clause does not harm the status given to the Arabic language before this law came into effect.
> 
> *5 — Ingathering of the exiles*
> 
> The state will be open for Jewish immigration and the ingathering of exiles
> 
> *6 — Connection to the Jewish people*
> 
> A. The state will strive to ensure the safety of the members of the Jewish people in trouble or in captivity due to the fact of their Jewishness or their citizenship.
> 
> B. The state shall act within the Diaspora to strengthen the affinity between the state and members of the Jewish people.
> 
> C. The state shall act to preserve the cultural, historical and religious heritage of the Jewish people among Jews in the Diaspora.
> 
> *7 — Jewish settlement*
> 
> A. The state views the development of Jewish settlement as a national value and will act to encourage and promote its establishment and consolidation.
> 
> *8 — Official calendar*
> 
> The Hebrew calendar is the official calendar of the state and alongside it the Gregorian calendar will be used as an official calendar. Use of  the Hebrew calendar and the Gregorian calendar will be determined by law.
> 
> *9 — Independence Day and memorial days*
> 
> A. Independence Day is the official national holiday of the state.
> 
> B. Memorial Day for the Fallen in Israel’s Wars and Holocaust and Heroism Remembrance Day are official memorial days of the State.
> 
> *10 — Days of rest and sabbath*
> 
> The Sabbath and the festivals of Israel are the established days of rest in the state; Non-Jews have a right to maintain days of rest on their Sabbaths and festivals; Details of this issue will be determined by law.
> 
> *11 — Immutability*
> 
> This Basic Law shall not be amended, unless by another Basic Law passed by a majority of Knesset members.


SWINE


----------



## theliq

fncceo said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Of course none of those assholes gave any consideration to the Palestinians.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Before the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948, Jews were Palestinians.
> 
> So, were Palestinian Arabs, and Palestinian Xtians, Palestinian Buddhists, and Palestinian Druids. If they lived in the British Mandate of Palestine, they were Palestinians.
> 
> The idea that Palestinian Arabs are an ethnicity unto themselves isn't historical.
Click to expand...

They are more so than the Jews...Jews today are MAJORITY OTHER ETHNIC PEOPLES WHO MERELY CONVERTED TO JUDAISM...THEY ARE NOT,REPEAT NOT A SEMITIC PEOPLES AT ALL AND NEVER CAN BE...THE ONLY SEMITIC PEOPLE ARE THE PALESTINIANS AND JUST A FEW SHEPARDIC JEWS WHO THE ZIONIST TERRORISTS ARE SLOWLY ELIMINATING....this is the facts of the matter


----------



## theliq

rylah said:


> cnm said:
> 
> 
> 
> Like the official implementation of apartheid to ensure Boer values were preserved.
> 
> 
> 
> Unlike the Dutch people, Jews originated in the land of Israel.
> Do You see any reference to skin color?
Click to expand...

Jews originated in Mesopetainia...Fool


----------



## theliq

admonit said:


> 70 years after the establishment of a Jewish state was declared, now it became a basic (constitutional) law.
> 
> The full text of the law:
> 
> *Basic Law: Israel as the Nation State of the Jewish People*
> 
> *1 — Basic principles*
> 
> A. The land of Israel is the historical homeland of the Jewish people, in which the State of Israel was established.
> 
> B. The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people, in which it fulfills its natural, cultural, religious and historical right to self-determination.
> 
> C. The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Israel is unique to the Jewish people.
> 
> *2 — The symbols of the state*
> 
> A. The name of the state is “Israel.”
> 
> B. The state flag is white with two blue stripes near the edges and a blue Star of David in the center.
> 
> C. The state emblem is a seven-branched menorah with olive leaves on both sides and the word “Israel” beneath it.
> 
> D. The state anthem is “Hatikvah.”
> 
> E. Details regarding state symbols will be determined by the law.
> 
> *3 — The capital of the state*
> 
> Jerusalem, complete and united, is the capital of Israel.
> 
> *4 — Language*
> 
> A. The state’s language is Hebrew.
> 
> B. The Arabic language has a special status in the state; Regulating the use of Arabic in state institutions or by them will be set in law.
> 
> C. This clause does not harm the status given to the Arabic language before this law came into effect.
> 
> *5 — Ingathering of the exiles*
> 
> The state will be open for Jewish immigration and the ingathering of exiles
> 
> *6 — Connection to the Jewish people*
> 
> A. The state will strive to ensure the safety of the members of the Jewish people in trouble or in captivity due to the fact of their Jewishness or their citizenship.
> 
> B. The state shall act within the Diaspora to strengthen the affinity between the state and members of the Jewish people.
> 
> C. The state shall act to preserve the cultural, historical and religious heritage of the Jewish people among Jews in the Diaspora.
> 
> *7 — Jewish settlement*
> 
> A. The state views the development of Jewish settlement as a national value and will act to encourage and promote its establishment and consolidation.
> 
> *8 — Official calendar*
> 
> The Hebrew calendar is the official calendar of the state and alongside it the Gregorian calendar will be used as an official calendar. Use of  the Hebrew calendar and the Gregorian calendar will be determined by law.
> 
> *9 — Independence Day and memorial days*
> 
> A. Independence Day is the official national holiday of the state.
> 
> B. Memorial Day for the Fallen in Israel’s Wars and Holocaust and Heroism Remembrance Day are official memorial days of the State.
> 
> *10 — Days of rest and sabbath*
> 
> The Sabbath and the festivals of Israel are the established days of rest in the state; Non-Jews have a right to maintain days of rest on their Sabbaths and festivals; Details of this issue will be determined by law.
> 
> *11 — Immutability*
> 
> This Basic Law shall not be amended, unless by another Basic Law passed by a majority of Knesset members.


CRIMINALS...not Jews but Zionists


----------



## fncceo

theliq said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cnm said:
> 
> 
> 
> Like the official implementation of apartheid to ensure Boer values were preserved.
> 
> 
> 
> Unlike the Dutch people, Jews originated in the land of Israel.
> Do You see any reference to skin color?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Jews originated in Mesopetainia...Fool
Click to expand...


Mesopetunias?

Or, Mesopotamia?


----------



## Humanity

ILOVEISRAEL said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Treat all citizens equally?  It does.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Clearly it doesn't! Just two examples...
> 
> Opinion | Not All Israeli Citizens Are Equal
> 
> Knesset disqualifies bill seeking equal status for Jews and Arabs
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The first is a discussion of the differences in treatment of an Israeli citizen and a foreign national.  Irrelevant to the topic.
> 
> The second is a bill seeking to undermine the protection of the Jewish character of the State.  That is not "equality".  That is erasure.
> 
> Edited to add:  though I would love to see the text of that Bill
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If Israel can’t be both Jewish and Democratic then “ Palestine “ can’t be both Palestinian and Democratic
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Apples an oranges. Palestine has always been multi religious.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Apples and Oranges. So has Israel. If Israel can’t be both primarily Jewish and Democratic then Palestine can’t be both primarily  Palestinian and Democratic
Click to expand...


I really don't get why you keep on with a nonsensical comparison!

Israel - Jewish and Democratic? Hardly!

As the Palestinians don't have a state at the moment you are simply demonising the Palestinians!

However, to compare apples and oranges you would have to say... Palestine - Muslim and Democratic!

See the difference!


----------



## theliq

fncceo said:


> theliq said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cnm said:
> 
> 
> 
> Like the official implementation of apartheid to ensure Boer values were preserved.
> 
> 
> 
> Unlike the Dutch people, Jews originated in the land of Israel.
> Do You see any reference to skin color?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Jews originated in Mesopetainia...Fool
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Mesopetunias?
> 
> Or, Mesopotamia?
Click to expand...

Lol...Well anywhere other than the Holy Land AKA Palestine


----------



## Olde Europe

P F Tinmore said:


> Palestine does not categorize people into different rights.



Yeah, that's the core point.

Hence the lying about the Slovak citizen - as misrepresented as an ethnic Slovak - and the Spanish citizen - as misrepresented as an ethnic Spanish (etc. etc. etc.).

Hence the deliberate confusion about a religion (Jewish) that doubles as "nationality", for it were a national catastrophe if Judaism were reduced to a mere religion.

Hence the claim to equal treatment of all Israeli citizens, countered with dozens of discriminatory laws, "countered" with lack of time to go through all of them, followed up - no doubt - by renewed claims to equal treatment of all Israeli citizens.

Hence the disingenuous, false claim that the extraordinary nature of the Nationality Law is just what others are doing, but only Jews are being criticized for it.  The victim card is worn out, it's been played so often.

Hence the mendacious accusation that Palestine, while formally granting universal human and civil rights to all her citizen, plans ethnic cleansing to avoid granting rights to non-Arabs.

Everyone knows that Spain and Slovakia are apartheid states, and, while doing the same as Slovakia and Spain, Israel still isn't, because...

Yeah, the hasbara peddlers are nothing if not ingenuous, and one has to marvel at the intellectual work going into justifying the unjustifiable, contributing to political developments both in Israel and abroad that will have everyone worse off.

C. The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Israel is unique to the Jewish people​
Of course, double standards is standard fare in politics, and the charge of double standards (as applied to Jews and Jews only) is standard in the hasbara peddlers' toolbox.  Yet, the textbook definition of double standards is to declare the above quote "just what everyone does", and "acceptable", and this below, were it to find its way into the German Constitution, outrageous and an abomination (which it is):

C. The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Germany is unique to Aryan Germans.

As far as I am concerned, case closed.


----------



## theliq

Olde Europe said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Palestine does not categorize people into different rights.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, that's the core point.
> 
> Hence the lying about the Slovak citizen - as misrepresented as an ethnic Slovak - and the Spanish citizen - as misrepresented as an ethnic Spanish (etc. etc. etc.).
> 
> Hence the deliberate confusion about a religion (Jewish) that doubles as "nationality", for it were a national catastrophe if Judaism were reduced to a mere religion.
> 
> Hence the claim to equal treatment of all Israeli citizens, countered with dozens of discriminatory laws, "countered" with lack of time to go through all of them, followed up - no doubt - by renewed claims to equal treatment of all Israeli citizens.
> 
> Hence the disingenuous, false claim that the extraordinary nature of the Nationality Law is just what others are doing, but only Jews are being criticized for it.  The victim card is worn out, it's been played so often.
> 
> Hence the mendacious accusation that Palestine, while formally granting universal human and civil rights to all her citizen, plans ethnic cleansing to avoid granting rights to non-Arabs.
> 
> Everyone knows that Spain and Slovakia are apartheid states, and, while doing the same as Slovakia and Spain, Israel still isn't, because...
> 
> Yeah, the hasbara peddlers are nothing if not ingenuous, and one has to marvel at the intellectual work going into justifying the unjustifiable, contributing to political developments both in Israel and abroad that will have everyone worse off.
> 
> C. The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Israel is unique to the Jewish people​
> Of course, double standards is standard fare in politics, and the charge of double standards (as applied to Jews and Jews only) is standard in the hasbara peddlers' toolbox.  Yet, the textbook definition of double standards is to declare the above quote "just what everyone does", and "acceptable", and this below, were it to find its way into the German Constitution, outrageous and an abomination (which it is):
> 
> C. The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Germany is unique to Aryan Germans.
> 
> As far as I am concerned, case closed.
Click to expand...

Who cares about your concerns,you speak shit


----------



## RoccoR

RE:  Now it's a basic law: The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people
※→  P F Tinmore, et al,

OH, I'll try this one more time.



P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why do the Jewish people need to have some sort of special permission to have a State?!
> 
> 
> 
> Why do the Palestinians need permission to have a state inside their own borders? Whose borders is Israel inside?
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

The Arab Palestinians do not need permission to set borders.  _(I have no idea where you get such thoughts.) _ Borders are a by-product of establishing sovereignty. _(Supreme Authority over a territorial area.  Each area has a shape, that shape being represented by lines known as a border.)_  Where ever the Arab Palestinians have become the Supreme Authority, the geography associated with that sovereign control is bounded by a border.

There is a direct relationship between supreme authority over territorial - and - the p[erimeter of that territory called a border.  

No area can be defined without a shape.  And each shape must have a defined border.  The shape inherently has a border.  It need not ask for permission.  *IF* a people have a country of any size and area, *THEN* it has a border.

In order for a people to have a country, an independent and self-governing territory, it must have the supreme authority.  

*(QUESTION)*

Where does the Arab Palestinian maintain Supreme Authority?  

*(COMMENT)*

Don't be confused by the names.

England is NOT a sovereignty unto itself.  England is part of Great Britan; along with Wales, and Scotland.  The entire sovereignty is "United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland."

Get away from this naming convention you've invented.  Draw a perimeter around the territory over which is under one sovereignty. 

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## RoccoR

RE:  Now it's a basic law: The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people 
※→  P F Tinmore, et al,

Let's not get mad.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> The establishment of an independent Jewish State gradually became more appealing.
> 
> 
> 
> Of course none of those assholes gave any consideration to the Palestinians. It was all grab, grab, grab.
Click to expand...




P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> There is much more to the issuance of the "British Whited Paper of 1939" than meets the eye.
> 
> 
> 
> Indeed, Britain tried to smooth over what they fucked up. Good job, Palestine is still fucked up.
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

There is no one single reason or mistake for the evolution into the current situation.  There is no one political entity that is responsible for the current situation.  But there is one entity that is principally responsible for the lack of progress towards peace; that being the Arab Palestinian.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> RE:  Now it's a basic law: The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people
> ※→  P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> OH, I'll try this one more time.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why do the Jewish people need to have some sort of special permission to have a State?!
> 
> 
> 
> Why do the Palestinians need permission to have a state inside their own borders? Whose borders is Israel inside?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> The Arab Palestinians do not need permission to set borders.  _(I have no idea where you get such thoughts.) _ Borders are a by-product of establishing sovereignty. _(Supreme Authority over a territorial area.  Each area has a shape, that shape being represented by lines known as a border.)_  Where ever the Arab Palestinians have become the Supreme Authority, the geography associated with that sovereign control is bounded by a border.
> 
> There is a direct relationship between supreme authority over territorial - and - the p[erimeter of that territory called a border.
> 
> No area can be defined without a shape.  And each shape must have a defined border.  The shape inherently has a border.  It need not ask for permission.  *IF* a people have a country of any size and area, *THEN* it has a border.
> 
> In order for a people to have a country, an independent and self-governing territory, it must have the supreme authority.
> 
> *(QUESTION)*
> 
> Where does the Arab Palestinian maintain Supreme Authority?
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Don't be confused by the names.
> 
> England is NOT a sovereignty unto itself.  England is part of Great Britan; along with Wales, and Scotland.  The entire sovereignty is "United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland."
> 
> Get away from this naming convention you've invented.  Draw a perimeter around the territory over which is under one sovereignty.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...




RoccoR said:


> Draw a perimeter around the territory over which is under one sovereignty.


Occupations doe not acquire sovereignty.


----------



## P F Tinmore

RoccoR said:


> RE:  Now it's a basic law: The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people
> ※→  P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> Let's not get mad.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> The establishment of an independent Jewish State gradually became more appealing.
> 
> 
> 
> Of course none of those assholes gave any consideration to the Palestinians. It was all grab, grab, grab.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> There is much more to the issuance of the "British Whited Paper of 1939" than meets the eye.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Indeed, Britain tried to smooth over what they fucked up. Good job, Palestine is still fucked up.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> There is no one single reason or mistake for the evolution into the current situation.  There is no one political entity that is responsible for the current situation.  But there is one entity that is principally responsible for the lack of progress towards peace; that being the Arab Palestinian.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...

Not mad. Just honest.

Another one of your slime the Palestinians post.


----------



## mudwhistle

theliq said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cnm said:
> 
> 
> 
> Like the official implementation of apartheid to ensure Boer values were preserved.
> 
> 
> 
> Unlike the Dutch people, Jews originated in the land of Israel.
> Do You see any reference to skin color?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Jews originated in Mesopetainia...Fool
Click to expand...

So did you.


----------



## mudwhistle

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> RE:  Now it's a basic law: The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people
> ※→  P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> Let's not get mad.
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> The establishment of an independent Jewish State gradually became more appealing.
> 
> 
> 
> Of course none of those assholes gave any consideration to the Palestinians. It was all grab, grab, grab.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> There is much more to the issuance of the "British Whited Paper of 1939" than meets the eye.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Indeed, Britain tried to smooth over what they fucked up. Good job, Palestine is still fucked up.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> There is no one single reason or mistake for the evolution into the current situation.  There is no one political entity that is responsible for the current situation.  But there is one entity that is principally responsible for the lack of progress towards peace; that being the Arab Palestinian.
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not mad. Just honest.
> 
> Another one of your slime the Palestinians post.
Click to expand...

I think Palestinians are used as pawns by Arab countries the way blacks are used by Dimocraps.


----------



## Humanity

RoccoR said:


> The Arab Palestinians do not need permission to set borders.



What would happen if Arab Palestinians followed the original plans and set their border incorporating East Jerusalem, for example?

Asking permission? No, of course not... But I suspect that there may be a few people upset by their simply declaring their borders without negotiation. Don't you agree?


----------



## Coyote

ILOVEISRAEL said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> The equality of all citizens of Israel is firmly entrenched in law.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So why doesn't it then?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Treat all citizens equally?  It does.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Clearly it doesn't! Just two examples...
> 
> Opinion | Not All Israeli Citizens Are Equal
> 
> Knesset disqualifies bill seeking equal status for Jews and Arabs
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The first is a discussion of the differences in treatment of an Israeli citizen and a foreign national.  Irrelevant to the topic.
> 
> The second is a bill seeking to undermine the protection of the Jewish character of the State.  That is not "equality".  That is erasure.
> 
> Edited to add:  though I would love to see the text of that Bill
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If Israel can’t be both Jewish and Democratic then “ Palestine “ can’t be both Palestinian and Democratic
Click to expand...

Palestinian is not a religious group or an ethnic group.


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Why do the Jewish people need to have some sort of special permission to have a State?!


They don’t.  Neither do the Palestinians....


----------



## P F Tinmore

Humanity said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Arab Palestinians do not need permission to set borders.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What would happen if Arab Palestinians followed the original plans and set their border incorporating East Jerusalem, for example?
> 
> Asking permission? No, of course not... But I suspect that there may be a few people upset by their simply declaring their borders without negotiation. Don't you agree?
Click to expand...




Humanity said:


> What would happen if Arab Palestinians followed the original plans and set their border incorporating East Jerusalem, for example?



Already done.


----------



## Coyote

Humanity said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Treat all citizens equally?  It does.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Clearly it doesn't! Just two examples...
> 
> Opinion | Not All Israeli Citizens Are Equal
> 
> Knesset disqualifies bill seeking equal status for Jews and Arabs
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The first is a discussion of the differences in treatment of an Israeli citizen and a foreign national.  Irrelevant to the topic.
> 
> The second is a bill seeking to undermine the protection of the Jewish character of the State.  That is not "equality".  That is erasure.
> 
> Edited to add:  though I would love to see the text of that Bill
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If Israel can’t be both Jewish and Democratic then “ Palestine “ can’t be both Palestinian and Democratic
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And Latvia can't be Latvian and democratic. And Slovenia can't be Slovene and democratic. And Spain can't be Spanish and democratic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That is funny....
> 
> Does Latvia, Slovenia, Spain put their religions before democracy?
Click to expand...

That is a problem with these comparisons...all people who are citizens of Spain can be Spanish. That is not the case with Judaism and Israel...


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> If Israel can’t be both Jewish and Democratic then “ Palestine “ can’t be both Palestinian and Democratic
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And Latvia can't be Latvian and democratic. And Slovenia can't be Slovene and democratic. And Spain can't be Spanish and democratic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That is funny....
> 
> Does Latvia, Slovenia, Spain put their religions before democracy?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Does Israel?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Are you trying to say that Israel doesn't?!?!?!?!
> 
> Surely there has been more than enough shown in this thread to confirm that?!?!
> 
> Further... Did Latvia, Slovenia, Spain feel the need to declare themselves a 'Christian state'?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They proclaim their ethnic national roots. Same as Israel.
Click to expand...

Judaism is also a religion, it is disengenius to put it forth as just an ethnic group.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why do the Jewish people need to have some sort of special permission to have a State?!
> 
> 
> 
> They don’t.  Neither do the Palestinians....
Click to expand...

So why is there a problem?

I HAVE THE HONOR TO INFORM YOUR EXCELLENCY THAT IN VIRTUE OF THE NATURAL RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE OF PALESTINE FOR SELF-DETERMINATION WHICH PRINCIPLE IS SUPPORTED BY THE CHARTERS OF THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS, THE UNITED NATIONS AND OTHERS AND IN VIEW OF THE TERMINATION OF THE BRITISH MANDATE OVER PALESTINE WHICH HAD PREVENTED THE ARABS FROM EXERCISING THEIR INDEPENDENCE, THE ARABS OF PALESTINE WHO ARE THE OWNERS OF THE COUNTRY AND ITS INDIGENOUS INHABITANTS AND WHO CONSTITUTE THE GREAT MAJORITY OF ITS LEGAL POPULATION HAVE SOLEMNLY RESOLVED TO DECLARE PALESTINE IN ITS ENTIRETY AND WITHIN ITS BOUNDARIES AS ESTABLISHED BEFORE THE TERMINATION OF THE BRITISH MANDATE AN INDEPENDENT STATE AND CONSTITUTED A GOVERNMENT UNDER THE NAME OF THE ALL-PALESTINE GOVERNMENT DERIVING ITS AUTHORITY FROM A REPRESENTATIVE COUNCIL BASED ON DEMOCRATIC PRINCIPLES AND AIMING TO SAFEGUARD THE RIGHTS OF MINORITIES AND FOREIGNERS PROTECT THE HOLY PLACES AND GUARANTEE FREEDOM OF WORSHIP TO ALL COMMUNITIES

A/C.1/330 of 14 October 1948


----------



## Coyote

P F Tinmore said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why do the Jewish people need to have some sort of special permission to have a State?!
> 
> 
> 
> They don’t.  Neither do the Palestinians....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So why is there a problem?
> 
> I HAVE THE HONOR TO INFORM YOUR EXCELLENCY THAT IN VIRTUE OF THE NATURAL RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE OF PALESTINE FOR SELF-DETERMINATION WHICH PRINCIPLE IS SUPPORTED BY THE CHARTERS OF THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS, THE UNITED NATIONS AND OTHERS AND IN VIEW OF THE TERMINATION OF THE BRITISH MANDATE OVER PALESTINE WHICH HAD PREVENTED THE ARABS FROM EXERCISING THEIR INDEPENDENCE, THE ARABS OF PALESTINE WHO ARE THE OWNERS OF THE COUNTRY AND ITS INDIGENOUS INHABITANTS AND WHO CONSTITUTE THE GREAT MAJORITY OF ITS LEGAL POPULATION HAVE SOLEMNLY RESOLVED TO DECLARE PALESTINE IN ITS ENTIRETY AND WITHIN ITS BOUNDARIES AS ESTABLISHED BEFORE THE TERMINATION OF THE BRITISH MANDATE AN INDEPENDENT STATE AND CONSTITUTED A GOVERNMENT UNDER THE NAME OF THE ALL-PALESTINE GOVERNMENT DERIVING ITS AUTHORITY FROM A REPRESENTATIVE COUNCIL BASED ON DEMOCRATIC PRINCIPLES AND AIMING TO SAFEGUARD THE RIGHTS OF MINORITIES AND FOREIGNERS PROTECT THE HOLY PLACES AND GUARANTEE FREEDOM OF WORSHIP TO ALL COMMUNITIES
> 
> A/C.1/330 of 14 October 1948
Click to expand...

The problem is when more than one group of people claim the same land.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Coyote said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why do the Jewish people need to have some sort of special permission to have a State?!
> 
> 
> 
> They don’t.  Neither do the Palestinians....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So why is there a problem?
> 
> I HAVE THE HONOR TO INFORM YOUR EXCELLENCY THAT IN VIRTUE OF THE NATURAL RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE OF PALESTINE FOR SELF-DETERMINATION WHICH PRINCIPLE IS SUPPORTED BY THE CHARTERS OF THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS, THE UNITED NATIONS AND OTHERS AND IN VIEW OF THE TERMINATION OF THE BRITISH MANDATE OVER PALESTINE WHICH HAD PREVENTED THE ARABS FROM EXERCISING THEIR INDEPENDENCE, THE ARABS OF PALESTINE WHO ARE THE OWNERS OF THE COUNTRY AND ITS INDIGENOUS INHABITANTS AND WHO CONSTITUTE THE GREAT MAJORITY OF ITS LEGAL POPULATION HAVE SOLEMNLY RESOLVED TO DECLARE PALESTINE IN ITS ENTIRETY AND WITHIN ITS BOUNDARIES AS ESTABLISHED BEFORE THE TERMINATION OF THE BRITISH MANDATE AN INDEPENDENT STATE AND CONSTITUTED A GOVERNMENT UNDER THE NAME OF THE ALL-PALESTINE GOVERNMENT DERIVING ITS AUTHORITY FROM A REPRESENTATIVE COUNCIL BASED ON DEMOCRATIC PRINCIPLES AND AIMING TO SAFEGUARD THE RIGHTS OF MINORITIES AND FOREIGNERS PROTECT THE HOLY PLACES AND GUARANTEE FREEDOM OF WORSHIP TO ALL COMMUNITIES
> 
> A/C.1/330 of 14 October 1948
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The problem is when more than one group of people claim the same land.
Click to expand...

Indeed, but it is all inside Palestine's international borders. That is the rub.

DECLARE PALESTINE IN ITS ENTIRETY AND WITHIN ITS BOUNDARIES AS ESTABLISHED BEFORE THE TERMINATION OF THE BRITISH MANDATE​


----------



## rylah

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> It was until 1924 when the Palestinians acquired their nationality, Palestine acquired territory defined by international borders, and the Palestinians became citizens of Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes.  And yes.  And yes.
> 
> And that Palestine (after Jordan was removed) became, according to the Parties Concerned by virtue of historical rights, was established as the reconstitution of the National Homeland (State) of the Jewish people and has subsequently been re-named Israel through their Declaration of Independence and given recognition by the international community.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Where was Jewish state mentioned?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What difference does it make?  What wording is required in order for a state to form?  Or what wording prohibits a state from forming?  You are trying to create a standard for a Jewish state that doesn't apply to any other Palestinian or former Ottoman state.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It was not to be a Jewish state.
> 
> Unauthorized statements have been made to the effect that the purpose in view is to create a wholly Jewish Palestine. Phrases have been used such as that Palestine is to become "as Jewish as England is English." His Majesty's Government regard any such expectation as impracticable and have no such aim in view. Nor have they at any time contemplated, as appears to be feared by the Arab delegation, the disappearance or the subordination of the Arabic population, language, or culture in Palestine. They would draw attention to the fact that the terms of the Declaration referred to do not contemplate that Palestine as a whole should be converted into a Jewish National Home, but that such a Home should be founded `in Palestine.'
> 
> Churchill White Paper (1922)
> 
> But this statement has not removed doubts, and His Majesty's Government therefore now declare unequivocally that *it is not part of their policy that Palestine should become a Jewish State.* They would indeed regard it as contrary to their obligations to the Arabs under the Mandate, as well as to the assurances which have been given to the Arab people in the past, *that the Arab population of Palestine should be made the subjects of a Jewish State against their will.*
> 
> The Avalon Project : British White Paper of 1939
Click to expand...


It was, it is.
Work towards Jewish independence started long before the British occupation.

The White Paper was illegal, Britain had obligations, facilitating Jewish immigration was one.
In fact Britain did was the opposite, blocked the Jews and aided the Arabs.


----------



## Humanity

P F Tinmore said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Arab Palestinians do not need permission to set borders.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What would happen if Arab Palestinians followed the original plans and set their border incorporating East Jerusalem, for example?
> 
> Asking permission? No, of course not... But I suspect that there may be a few people upset by their simply declaring their borders without negotiation. Don't you agree?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> What would happen if Arab Palestinians followed the original plans and set their border incorporating East Jerusalem, for example?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Already done.
Click to expand...


Well, with Israel declaring a unified capital, how does Palestine cement their declared border to incorporate East Jerusalem or, for that matter, the whole of Jerusalem?

The point is that it is NOT as simple as self declaration of borders!


----------



## rylah

Humanity said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Arab Palestinians do not need permission to set borders.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What would happen if Arab Palestinians followed the original plans and set their border incorporating East Jerusalem, for example?
> 
> Asking permission? No, of course not... But I suspect that there may be a few people upset by their simply declaring their borders without negotiation. Don't you agree?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> What would happen if Arab Palestinians followed the original plans and set their border incorporating East Jerusalem, for example?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Already done.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well, with Israel declaring a unified capital, how does Palestine cement their declared border to incorporate East Jerusalem or, for that matter, the whole of Jerusalem?
> 
> The point is that it is NOT as simple as self declaration of borders!
Click to expand...


Why should Jerusalem be an Arab capital, was it ever?


----------



## Humanity

rylah said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Arab Palestinians do not need permission to set borders.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What would happen if Arab Palestinians followed the original plans and set their border incorporating East Jerusalem, for example?
> 
> Asking permission? No, of course not... But I suspect that there may be a few people upset by their simply declaring their borders without negotiation. Don't you agree?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> What would happen if Arab Palestinians followed the original plans and set their border incorporating East Jerusalem, for example?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Already done.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well, with Israel declaring a unified capital, how does Palestine cement their declared border to incorporate East Jerusalem or, for that matter, the whole of Jerusalem?
> 
> The point is that it is NOT as simple as self declaration of borders!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why should Jerusalem be an Arab capital, was it ever?
Click to expand...


Did I say it should be? Did I saw it was? NO!

Something going wrong in your head again? Keep up and read what the thread is about before commenting crap!


----------



## rylah

P F Tinmore said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why do the Jewish people need to have some sort of special permission to have a State?!
> 
> 
> 
> They don’t.  Neither do the Palestinians....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So why is there a problem?
> 
> I HAVE THE HONOR TO INFORM YOUR EXCELLENCY THAT IN VIRTUE OF THE NATURAL RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE OF PALESTINE FOR SELF-DETERMINATION WHICH PRINCIPLE IS SUPPORTED BY THE CHARTERS OF THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS, THE UNITED NATIONS AND OTHERS AND IN VIEW OF THE TERMINATION OF THE BRITISH MANDATE OVER PALESTINE WHICH HAD PREVENTED THE ARABS FROM EXERCISING THEIR INDEPENDENCE, THE ARABS OF PALESTINE WHO ARE THE OWNERS OF THE COUNTRY AND ITS INDIGENOUS INHABITANTS AND WHO CONSTITUTE THE GREAT MAJORITY OF ITS LEGAL POPULATION HAVE SOLEMNLY RESOLVED TO DECLARE PALESTINE IN ITS ENTIRETY AND WITHIN ITS BOUNDARIES AS ESTABLISHED BEFORE THE TERMINATION OF THE BRITISH MANDATE AN INDEPENDENT STATE AND CONSTITUTED A GOVERNMENT UNDER THE NAME OF THE ALL-PALESTINE GOVERNMENT DERIVING ITS AUTHORITY FROM A REPRESENTATIVE COUNCIL BASED ON DEMOCRATIC PRINCIPLES AND AIMING TO SAFEGUARD THE RIGHTS OF MINORITIES AND FOREIGNERS PROTECT THE HOLY PLACES AND GUARANTEE FREEDOM OF WORSHIP TO ALL COMMUNITIES
> 
> A/C.1/330 of 14 October 1948
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The problem is when more than one group of people claim the same land.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Indeed, but it is all inside Palestine's international borders. That is the rub.
> 
> DECLARE PALESTINE IN ITS ENTIRETY AND WITHIN ITS BOUNDARIES AS ESTABLISHED BEFORE THE TERMINATION OF THE BRITISH MANDATE​
Click to expand...


No rub, Palestine was vested wholly with the sovereignty of the Jewish nation.
The parts that were alloted to a different, Arab sovereign, were established on the other side of the river.


Anything beyond is an act of great generosity.


----------



## rylah

Humanity said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Arab Palestinians do not need permission to set borders.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What would happen if Arab Palestinians followed the original plans and set their border incorporating East Jerusalem, for example?
> 
> Asking permission? No, of course not... But I suspect that there may be a few people upset by their simply declaring their borders without negotiation. Don't you agree?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> What would happen if Arab Palestinians followed the original plans and set their border incorporating East Jerusalem, for example?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Already done.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well, with Israel declaring a unified capital, how does Palestine cement their declared border to incorporate East Jerusalem or, for that matter, the whole of Jerusalem?
> 
> The point is that it is NOT as simple as self declaration of borders!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why should Jerusalem be an Arab capital, was it ever?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Did I say it should be? Did I saw it was? NO!
> 
> Something going wrong in your head again? Keep up and read what the thread is about before commenting crap!
Click to expand...


I say Paris should be governed by a mayor from a different country each quarter.
Even BETTER - lets get some 100 mayors from all corners of the world, to govern Paris,
For all we know it's a world heritage that doesn't belong only to the French...

JERUSALEM -  UNITED, BUILDING and JEWISH.


----------



## rylah

Humanity said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Already done.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well, with Israel declaring a unified capital, how does Palestine cement their declared border to incorporate East Jerusalem or, for that matter, the whole of Jerusalem?
> 
> The point is that it is NOT as simple as self declaration of borders!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why should Jerusalem be an Arab capital, was it ever?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Did I say it should be? Did I saw it was? NO!
> 
> Something going wrong in your head again? Keep up and read what the thread is about before commenting crap!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I say Paris should be governed by a mayor from a different country each quarter.
> Even BETTER - lets get some 100 mayors from all corners of the world, to govern Paris,
> For all we know it's a world heritage that doesn't belong only to the French...
> 
> JERUSALEM -  UNITED, BUILDING and JEWISH.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> COMPLETELY OFF TOPIC MORON!
> 
> Your attempt at hilarity fails because you are a failure!
> 
> Either post in context idiot of piss off!
Click to expand...


I guess You're pissed because it's YOUR CAPITAL that was suggested to be a corpus separatum.


----------



## Humanity

rylah said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well, with Israel declaring a unified capital, how does Palestine cement their declared border to incorporate East Jerusalem or, for that matter, the whole of Jerusalem?
> 
> The point is that it is NOT as simple as self declaration of borders!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why should Jerusalem be an Arab capital, was it ever?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Did I say it should be? Did I saw it was? NO!
> 
> Something going wrong in your head again? Keep up and read what the thread is about before commenting crap!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I say Paris should be governed by a mayor from a different country each quarter.
> Even BETTER - lets get some 100 mayors from all corners of the world, to govern Paris,
> For all we know it's a world heritage that doesn't belong only to the French...
> 
> JERUSALEM -  UNITED, BUILDING and JEWISH.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> COMPLETELY OFF TOPIC MORON!
> 
> Your attempt at hilarity fails because you are a failure!
> 
> Either post in context idiot of piss off!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I guess You're pissed because it's YOUR CAPITAL that was suggested to be a corpus separatum.
Click to expand...


Jerusalem SHOULD be corpus separatum moron!

That would fit your zionut ass perfectly eh!


----------



## rylah

Humanity said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why should Jerusalem be an Arab capital, was it ever?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Did I say it should be? Did I saw it was? NO!
> 
> Something going wrong in your head again? Keep up and read what the thread is about before commenting crap!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I say Paris should be governed by a mayor from a different country each quarter.
> Even BETTER - lets get some 100 mayors from all corners of the world, to govern Paris,
> For all we know it's a world heritage that doesn't belong only to the French...
> 
> JERUSALEM -  UNITED, BUILDING and JEWISH.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> COMPLETELY OFF TOPIC MORON!
> 
> Your attempt at hilarity fails because you are a failure!
> 
> Either post in context idiot of piss off!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I guess You're pissed because it's YOUR CAPITAL that was suggested to be a corpus separatum.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Jerusalem SHOULD be corpus separatum moron!
> 
> That would fit your zionut ass perfectly eh!
Click to expand...


Therefore knowing beforehand of Your obsession with Jerusalem, I suggested we do the same to Paris.

Maybe we should even give a street to each country in YOUR capital, and who knows maybe an Afghani mayor is good for Washington DC...


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> Palestine does not categorize people into different rights.



Sure they do. You don't hear them yelling "Rip the hearts out of Jews and Arabs equally!"


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why do the Jewish people need to have some sort of special permission to have a State?!
> 
> 
> 
> They don’t.  Neither do the Palestinians....
Click to expand...


We agree. But the argument made by some here that the Jewish people were never meant to have a state, but only a homeland, is then shown to be a false argument.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> And Latvia can't be Latvian and democratic. And Slovenia can't be Slovene and democratic. And Spain can't be Spanish and democratic.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That is funny....
> 
> Does Latvia, Slovenia, Spain put their religions before democracy?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Does Israel?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Are you trying to say that Israel doesn't?!?!?!?!
> 
> Surely there has been more than enough shown in this thread to confirm that?!?!
> 
> Further... Did Latvia, Slovenia, Spain feel the need to declare themselves a 'Christian state'?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They proclaim their ethnic national roots. Same as Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Judaism is also a religion, it is disengenius to put it forth as just an ethnic group.
Click to expand...


Most ethic groups and cultures have a religion incorporated into it. It is part of the frame that makes up and ethnic culture. 

What people are trying to do is disable (deny) the Jewish people by claiming they are ONLY a religion and therefore different rules apply to them.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> Clearly it doesn't! Just two examples...
> 
> Opinion | Not All Israeli Citizens Are Equal
> 
> Knesset disqualifies bill seeking equal status for Jews and Arabs
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The first is a discussion of the differences in treatment of an Israeli citizen and a foreign national.  Irrelevant to the topic.
> 
> The second is a bill seeking to undermine the protection of the Jewish character of the State.  That is not "equality".  That is erasure.
> 
> Edited to add:  though I would love to see the text of that Bill
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If Israel can’t be both Jewish and Democratic then “ Palestine “ can’t be both Palestinian and Democratic
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And Latvia can't be Latvian and democratic. And Slovenia can't be Slovene and democratic. And Spain can't be Spanish and democratic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That is funny....
> 
> Does Latvia, Slovenia, Spain put their religions before democracy?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That is a problem with these comparisons...all people who are citizens of Spain can be Spanish. That is not the case with Judaism and Israel...
Click to expand...


Russians can be citizens of Slovenia. They can't become ethnic Slovenes. 

Catalans can be citizens of Spain. That doesn't make them Spanish. 

Just so Arabs can be citizens of Israel. And Jews can be citizens of Palestine but they remain ethnically Arabs and Jews.


----------



## P F Tinmore

rylah said:


> No rub, Palestine was vested wholly with the sovereignty of the Jewish nation.


Got a link?


----------



## Humanity

rylah said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> Did I say it should be? Did I saw it was? NO!
> 
> Something going wrong in your head again? Keep up and read what the thread is about before commenting crap!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I say Paris should be governed by a mayor from a different country each quarter.
> Even BETTER - lets get some 100 mayors from all corners of the world, to govern Paris,
> For all we know it's a world heritage that doesn't belong only to the French...
> 
> JERUSALEM -  UNITED, BUILDING and JEWISH.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> COMPLETELY OFF TOPIC MORON!
> 
> Your attempt at hilarity fails because you are a failure!
> 
> Either post in context idiot of piss off!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I guess You're pissed because it's YOUR CAPITAL that was suggested to be a corpus separatum.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Jerusalem SHOULD be corpus separatum moron!
> 
> That would fit your zionut ass perfectly eh!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Therefore knowing beforehand of Your obsession with Jerusalem, I suggested we do the same to Paris.
> 
> Maybe we should even give a street to each country in YOUR capital, and who knows maybe an Afghani mayor is good for Washington DC...
Click to expand...


Your fixation with Paris is hilarious!

Maybe we should divide Paris between France and Germany. That would work eh. You dumbfuck!


----------



## Humanity

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> The first is a discussion of the differences in treatment of an Israeli citizen and a foreign national.  Irrelevant to the topic.
> 
> The second is a bill seeking to undermine the protection of the Jewish character of the State.  That is not "equality".  That is erasure.
> 
> Edited to add:  though I would love to see the text of that Bill
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If Israel can’t be both Jewish and Democratic then “ Palestine “ can’t be both Palestinian and Democratic
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And Latvia can't be Latvian and democratic. And Slovenia can't be Slovene and democratic. And Spain can't be Spanish and democratic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That is funny....
> 
> Does Latvia, Slovenia, Spain put their religions before democracy?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That is a problem with these comparisons...all people who are citizens of Spain can be Spanish. That is not the case with Judaism and Israel...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Russians can be citizens of Slovenia. They can't become ethnic Slovenes.
> 
> Catalans can be citizens of Spain. That doesn't make them Spanish.
> 
> Just so Arabs can be citizens of Israel. And Jews can be citizens of Palestine but they remain ethnically Arabs and Jews.
Click to expand...


That is simply NOT true!

Nothing precludes Catalans from being Spanish!!! They have Spanish nationality!

There is nothing written that says that a Catalan cannot be Spanish. Spain is NOT Israel!


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Palestine does not categorize people into different rights.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sure they do. You don't hear them yelling "Rip the hearts out of Jews and Arabs equally!"
Click to expand...

Is it written in the law anywhere?


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Palestine does not categorize people into different rights.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sure they do. You don't hear them yelling "Rip the hearts out of Jews and Arabs equally!"
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Is it written in the law anywhere?
Click to expand...


It doesn’t have to be written into “ law” The Palestinians have declared that the Jewish people have no right to prey at the Western Wall.  Just one small example 
 Ironically, Tinmore posted a You Tube Video not too long ago in which a Palestinian Young Woman very reluctantly stated that Palestinians and Israelis could live together but basically Palestine was for the Palestinians.


----------



## Humanity

ILOVEISRAEL said:


> The Palestinians have declared that the Jewish people have no right to prey at the Western Wall



Thats going well then 

Is it a law?


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> That is funny....
> 
> Does Latvia, Slovenia, Spain put their religions before democracy?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Does Israel?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Are you trying to say that Israel doesn't?!?!?!?!
> 
> Surely there has been more than enough shown in this thread to confirm that?!?!
> 
> Further... Did Latvia, Slovenia, Spain feel the need to declare themselves a 'Christian state'?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They proclaim their ethnic national roots. Same as Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Judaism is also a religion, it is disengenius to put it forth as just an ethnic group.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Most ethic groups and cultures have a religion incorporated into it. It is part of the frame that makes up and ethnic culture.
> 
> What people are trying to do is disable (deny) the Jewish people by claiming they are ONLY a religion and therefore different rules apply to them.
Click to expand...

I disagree.  Here is the issue.  Other ethnic groups may share a religion but they are not themselves a religion and that does seperate Judaism from being just an ethnic group.  

You cant pick and choose anymore than your opponents can when they insist it is only a religion.


----------



## Coyote

ILOVEISRAEL said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Palestine does not categorize people into different rights.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sure they do. You don't hear them yelling "Rip the hearts out of Jews and Arabs equally!"
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Is it written in the law anywhere?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It doesn’t have to be written into “ law” The Palestinians have declared that the Jewish people have no right to prey at the Western Wall.  Just one small example
> Ironically, Tinmore posted a You Tube Video not too long ago in which a Palestinian Young Woman very reluctantly stated that Palestinians and Israelis could live together but basically Palestine was for the Palestinians.
Click to expand...

it does matter if it is written into the laws.  For example throughout this conversation, we have had posters claiming Israel is apartheid, but where in the laws is there anything supporting this claim?  The same arguments are brought up over discrimmination for example.  There is what is in the state's laws on side... And then how people choose to act on the other.


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> The first is a discussion of the differences in treatment of an Israeli citizen and a foreign national.  Irrelevant to the topic.
> 
> The second is a bill seeking to undermine the protection of the Jewish character of the State.  That is not "equality".  That is erasure.
> 
> Edited to add:  though I would love to see the text of that Bill
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If Israel can’t be both Jewish and Democratic then “ Palestine “ can’t be both Palestinian and Democratic
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And Latvia can't be Latvian and democratic. And Slovenia can't be Slovene and democratic. And Spain can't be Spanish and democratic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That is funny....
> 
> Does Latvia, Slovenia, Spain put their religions before democracy?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That is a problem with these comparisons...all people who are citizens of Spain can be Spanish. That is not the case with Judaism and Israel...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Russians can be citizens of Slovenia. They can't become ethnic Slovenes.
> 
> Catalans can be citizens of Spain. That doesn't make them Spanish.
> 
> Just so Arabs can be citizens of Israel. And Jews can be citizens of Palestine but they remain ethnically Arabs and Jews.
Click to expand...

But people can convert to Judaism and become Jews.  

Does Slovenia have different categories of citizenship?  One for ethnic Slovenes and one for others?


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL

Humanity said:


> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Palestinians have declared that the Jewish people have no right to prey at the Western Wall
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thats going well then
> 
> Is it a law?
Click to expand...


Ever hear the phrase “ Actions speak Louder then Words?”According to the U.N. Jordan was supposed to let the Israelis have access to their Religious Sites but refused.  If you prohibit someone from doing something they have the Right to do, why does it matter whether it’s written or not and why don’t you condemn it?  Ecause you are a.


----------



## Humanity

ILOVEISRAEL said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Palestinians have declared that the Jewish people have no right to prey at the Western Wall
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thats going well then
> 
> Is it a law?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Ever hear the phrase “ Actions speak Louder then Words?”According to the U.N. Jordan was supposed to let the Israelis have access to their Religious Sites but refused.  If you prohibit someone from doing something they have the Right to do, why does it matter whether it’s written or not and why don’t you condemn it?  Ecause you are a.
Click to expand...


Oh dear, did you forget your meds today?

If you want to try and post that again when you have taken them then you may actually make some sense!

Do you really want to discuss what the UN says? That one always sends you zionuts like you running for cover!


----------



## rylah

P F Tinmore said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> No rub, Palestine was vested wholly with the sovereignty of the Jewish nation.
> 
> 
> 
> Got a link?
Click to expand...


Of course, April 25 1920

*It was agreed –*

*(a)* To accept the terms of the Mandates Article as given below with reference to Palestine, on the understanding that there was inserted in the procès-verbal an undertaking by the Mandatory Power that this would not involve the surrender of the rights hitherto enjoyed by the non-Jewish communities in Palestine; this undertaking not to refer to the question of the religious protectorate of France, which had been settled earlier in the previous afternoon by the undertaking given by the French Government that they recognized this protectorate as being at an end.

*(b)* that the terms of the Mandates Article should be as follows:

The High Contracting Parties agree that Syria and Mesopotamia shall, in accordance with the fourth paragraph of Article 22, Part I (Covenant of the League of Nations), be provisionally recognized as independent States, subject to the rendering of administrative advice and assistance by a mandatory until such time as they are able to stand alone. The boundaries of the said States will be determined, and the selection of the Mandatories made, by the Principal Allied Powers.

The High Contracting Parties agree to entrust, by application of the provisions of Article 22, the administration of Palestine, within such boundaries as may be determined by the Principal Allied Powers, to a Mandatory, to be selected by the said Powers. The Mandatory will be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on the 8th [2nd] November, 1917, by the British Government, and adopted by the other Allied Powers, in favour of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.

San Remo Convention - Palestine Mandate - 1920

Avalon Project - The Covenant of the League of Nations

Q. Was there any other sovereign nation named?


----------



## rylah

Humanity said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> If Israel can’t be both Jewish and Democratic then “ Palestine “ can’t be both Palestinian and Democratic
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And Latvia can't be Latvian and democratic. And Slovenia can't be Slovene and democratic. And Spain can't be Spanish and democratic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That is funny....
> 
> Does Latvia, Slovenia, Spain put their religions before democracy?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That is a problem with these comparisons...all people who are citizens of Spain can be Spanish. That is not the case with Judaism and Israel...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Russians can be citizens of Slovenia. They can't become ethnic Slovenes.
> 
> Catalans can be citizens of Spain. That doesn't make them Spanish.
> 
> Just so Arabs can be citizens of Israel. And Jews can be citizens of Palestine but they remain ethnically Arabs and Jews.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That is simply NOT true!
> 
> Nothing precludes Catalans from being Spanish!!! They have Spanish nationality!
> 
> There is nothing written that says that a Catalan cannot be Spanish. Spain is NOT Israel!
Click to expand...


Yes and nothing precludes You from calling Yourself Chinese or Gypsy if feels like.
Or identifying with a new sexual orientation every week or so.


----------



## RoccoR

RE: Now it's a basic law: The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people
※→  et al,

Are we sure that this is the current political policy that the Arab Palestinians are promoting?  I'm not sure everyone is reading off the same page; especially the Hostile Arab Palestinians.



Humanity said:


> Jerusalem SHOULD be corpus separatum moron!
> 
> That would fit your zionut ass perfectly eh!


*(COMMENT)*

The PLO-Negotiation Affairs Department (NAD) holds that:




​In 1988, after the Kingdom of Jordan cut all ties with the Palestinians west of the Jordan River, and while the Israelis had effective control of these formerly annex and sovereign territories, the following declaration was made (excerpt):

The Palestine National Council hereby declares,
in the Name of God and on behalf of the Palestinian Arab people,
the establishment of the
_*State of Palestine in the land of Palestine with its capital at Jerusalem*_.​I'm not sure that policy has changed.

It is my observation that the Hostile Arab Palestinians representing the general Arab Palestinian Population, do not want "Jerusalem and its environs _(including the city of Bethlehem to the south)_ were to be administered internationally as a separate entity, or _corpus separatum_."

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Humanity

rylah said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> And Latvia can't be Latvian and democratic. And Slovenia can't be Slovene and democratic. And Spain can't be Spanish and democratic.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That is funny....
> 
> Does Latvia, Slovenia, Spain put their religions before democracy?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That is a problem with these comparisons...all people who are citizens of Spain can be Spanish. That is not the case with Judaism and Israel...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Russians can be citizens of Slovenia. They can't become ethnic Slovenes.
> 
> Catalans can be citizens of Spain. That doesn't make them Spanish.
> 
> Just so Arabs can be citizens of Israel. And Jews can be citizens of Palestine but they remain ethnically Arabs and Jews.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That is simply NOT true!
> 
> Nothing precludes Catalans from being Spanish!!! They have Spanish nationality!
> 
> There is nothing written that says that a Catalan cannot be Spanish. Spain is NOT Israel!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes and nothing precludes You from calling Yourself Chinese or Gypsy if feels like.
> Or identifying with a new sexual orientation every week or so.
Click to expand...


In an attempt to keep you focused on the comment...

Catalans are Spanish. Don't you agree?


----------



## Sixties Fan

This country, the law avers, will not become just a "country of its citizens" whose main ideology is "man's honor and freedom" nor will it become a bi-national state. It will be a Jewish state with equal rights for minorities.

What bore witness to the greatness of the hour, albeit by means of irony and intentional malice, was the sight of Arab MKs tearing the law to bits in front of the cameras. If anything, this showed beyond doubt how necessary and important the law is. The Arab MKs displayed their real opinion of Israel and their unending subversion, support for Hamas and the Mavi Marmara, their serving as microphones for terrorists and IDF haters, are justification enough for a clear and precise Nationality Law.

(full article online)

From the Hebrew press: On the Nationality Law


----------



## rylah

Humanity said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> That is funny....
> 
> Does Latvia, Slovenia, Spain put their religions before democracy?
> 
> 
> 
> That is a problem with these comparisons...all people who are citizens of Spain can be Spanish. That is not the case with Judaism and Israel...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Russians can be citizens of Slovenia. They can't become ethnic Slovenes.
> 
> Catalans can be citizens of Spain. That doesn't make them Spanish.
> 
> Just so Arabs can be citizens of Israel. And Jews can be citizens of Palestine but they remain ethnically Arabs and Jews.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That is simply NOT true!
> 
> Nothing precludes Catalans from being Spanish!!! They have Spanish nationality!
> 
> There is nothing written that says that a Catalan cannot be Spanish. Spain is NOT Israel!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes and nothing precludes You from calling Yourself Chinese or Gypsy if feels like.
> Or identifying with a new sexual orientation every week or so.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> In an attempt to keep you focused on the comment...
> 
> Catalans are Spanish. Don't you agree?
Click to expand...


 Ask me about the middle east...Some call Kurds 'Arabs', some call them 'Syrians'...yet they're *distinctly* Kurds plain and simple.


----------



## Humanity

rylah said:


> yet they're *distinctly* Kurds plain and simple.



What makes them distinctly Kurds?


----------



## rylah

Humanity said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> yet they're *distinctly* Kurds plain and simple.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What makes them distinctly Kurds?
Click to expand...

All the usual properties of a distinct nation/ethnic group.
Behavior, looks, tradition, social structure, music, food, history and land.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> Does Slovenia have different categories of citizenship?  One for ethnic Slovenes and one for others?



Israel does not have different categories of citizenship.  All citizens are equal in law.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> I disagree.  Here is the issue.  Other ethnic groups may share a religion but they are not themselves a religion and that does seperate Judaism from being just an ethnic group.



This makes no difference whatsoever.  All cultures have some combination of religion and a list of other attributes which form the culture. This doesn't mean that the culture and nationality of the Jewish people should be treated differently than other cultures or that different rules should apply to them.


----------



## Humanity

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Does Slovenia have different categories of citizenship?  One for ethnic Slovenes and one for others?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Israel does not have different categories of citizenship.  All citizens are equal in law.
Click to expand...


As has been shown. That is clearly not the case!


----------



## Humanity

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I disagree.  Here is the issue.  Other ethnic groups may share a religion but they are not themselves a religion and that does seperate Judaism from being just an ethnic group.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This makes no difference whatsoever.  All cultures have some combination of religion and a list of other attributes which form the culture. This doesn't mean that the culture and nationality of the Jewish people should be treated differently than other cultures or that different rules should apply to them.
Click to expand...


I am not sure that it is other people treating "Jewish people" differently... I think that Israel and her policies does that very nicely!

Note: I used "Israel and her policies" rather than "Jewish people" as you used. I think it's important to distinguish between the two! Though it would seem that many Team Israel find it hard to make that distinction.


----------



## Shusha

Humanity said:


> Nothing precludes Catalans from being Spanish!!! They have Spanish nationality!
> 
> There is nothing written that says that a Catalan cannot be Spanish.



Just so, nothing precludes Arabs from being Israeli, that is holding Israeli citizenship.

A Catalan holds Spanish nationality but is culturally, ethnically Catalan.  That is the WHOLE POINT of their drive for self-determination and sovereignty.  They wish to live in a nation state where their own culture and language is expressed.  That is the foundation of self-determination which is written into the Constitutions of MOST countries in the world.

If your argument is that there is nothing wrong with or discriminatory about Catalans living in a Spanish state, built around the nationality of the Spanish people, and being forced (by law) to speak Spanish (Castillian) -- then there is nothing wrong or discriminatory about Arabs living in a Jewish state, built around the nationality of the Jewish people.  

But if your argument is that NO COUNTRY should be permitted to write an expression of ethnic or cultural self-determination into their Basic Law or Constitutions then you have a whole world which needs to change.  

But so far on this thread, Team P insists that only Israel should be disabled in how they write their constitution.  As Eugene K wrote:  It can't be about the laws, so it must be about the Jews.


----------



## Shusha

Humanity said:


> I am not sure that it is other people treating "Jewish people" differently... I think that Israel and her policies does that very nicely!



But Israel's Basic Laws are EXACTLY THE SAME as most other countries in the world.  So clearly, it is not about Israel's policies.


----------



## Shusha

Humanity said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Does Slovenia have different categories of citizenship?  One for ethnic Slovenes and one for others?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Israel does not have different categories of citizenship.  All citizens are equal in law.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> As has been shown. That is clearly not the case!
Click to expand...


That has NOT been shown to be the case.  There is no distinction in citizenship by ethnicity or religion and it is expressly illegal to discriminate in Israel based on race, nationality, ethnicity, religion, gender, sexual orientation, etc.  

As I have stated before on this thread, the laws listed by Adalah are not written to discriminate based on ethnic group or religion.  For example, you quoted that there are two educations systems.  This is not legislated discrimination against Arabs.  If anything, it is the opposite.  Its affirmative action which respects a minority group to go to school in their own language and with their own cultural curriculum.  We have the same thing here with French schools in English-speaking Canada.  If I am not mistaken there are also schools in the US and Canada which are taught in First Nations languages.


----------



## Olde Europe

Coyote said:


> it does matter if it is written into the laws.  For example throughout this conversation, we have had posters claiming Israel is apartheid, but where in the laws is there anything supporting this claim?  The same arguments are brought up over discrimmination for example.  There is what is in the state's laws on side... And then how people choose to act on the other.



To be read in conjunction:

The Inequality Report

The Discriminatory Laws Database

Since the "Report" had been filed, Netanyahu and his reactionary coalition partners got to work, and the situation got much, much worse.  The Nationality Law is set to speed up things even more, as Jewish nationality gets even more weight against the already feeble, and barely, if at all, implemented protections against discrimination.


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL

Humanity said:


> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Palestinians have declared that the Jewish people have no right to prey at the Western Wall
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thats going well then
> 
> Is it a law?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Ever hear the phrase “ Actions speak Louder then Words?”According to the U.N. Jordan was supposed to let the Israelis have access to their Religious Sites but refused.  If you prohibit someone from doing something they have the Right to do, why does it matter whether it’s written or not and why don’t you condemn it?  Ecause you are a.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh dear, did you forget your meds today?
> 
> If you want to try and post that again when you have taken them then you may actually make some sense!
> 
> Do you really want to discuss what the UN says? That one always sends you zionuts like you running for cover!
Click to expand...



https://www.quora.com/Why-werent-Je...rusalem-when-it-was-under-Jordanian-Arab-rule

 To say that the Israelis were given the Right to Worship and have access to their Holy Sites is a lie.  However we all know that the Pro Palestinian Team is an expert when it comes to that. You are an.


----------



## Shusha

Olde Europe said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> it does matter if it is written into the laws.  For example throughout this conversation, we have had posters claiming Israel is apartheid, but where in the laws is there anything supporting this claim?  The same arguments are brought up over discrimmination for example.  There is what is in the state's laws on side... And then how people choose to act on the other.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> To be read in conjunction:
> 
> The Inequality Report
> 
> The Discriminatory Laws Database
> 
> Since the "Report" had been filed, Netanyahu and his reactionary coalition partners got to work, and the situation got much, much worse.  The Nationality Law is set to speed up things even more, as Jewish nationality gets even more weight against the already feeble, and barely, if at all, implemented protections against discrimination.
Click to expand...



The Adalah Scam


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL

P F Tinmore said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> No rub, Palestine was vested wholly with the sovereignty of the Jewish nation.
> 
> 
> 
> Got a link?
Click to expand...

The Declaration of the Establishment of the State of Israel


----------



## P F Tinmore

Coyote said:


> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Palestine does not categorize people into different rights.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sure they do. You don't hear them yelling "Rip the hearts out of Jews and Arabs equally!"
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Is it written in the law anywhere?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It doesn’t have to be written into “ law” The Palestinians have declared that the Jewish people have no right to prey at the Western Wall.  Just one small example
> Ironically, Tinmore posted a You Tube Video not too long ago in which a Palestinian Young Woman very reluctantly stated that Palestinians and Israelis could live together but basically Palestine was for the Palestinians.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> it does matter if it is written into the laws.  For example throughout this conversation, we have had posters claiming Israel is apartheid, but where in the laws is there anything supporting this claim?  The same arguments are brought up over discrimmination for example.  There is what is in the state's laws on side... And then how people choose to act on the other.
Click to expand...


----------



## Humanity

Shusha said:


> If your argument is that there is nothing wrong with or discriminatory about Catalans living in a Spanish state, built around the nationality of the Spanish people, and being forced (by law) to speak Spanish (Castillian) -- then there is nothing wrong or discriminatory about Arabs living in a Jewish state, built around the nationality of the Jewish people.



You sure are mixing a lot of things up here so let me see if I can dissect this part...

Catalonia is an autonomous region of Spain, built around the Catalan culture and people. No one is forced to speak Spanish (by law or otherwise unless you want to consider the Franco regime and he force Spanish on the Catalans and didn't ban Catalan language). 

The clamor for independence by the MINORITY of Catalans is one of folly.

There is no overriding religion in Spain that operates above the civil law as there is in Israel. Catalans are not second class citizens in Spain. 

You appear, not for the first time, to be wanting your cake and eat it but with rather confused views, rather one sided, zionist views.


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL

P F Tinmore said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Palestine does not categorize people into different rights.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sure they do. You don't hear them yelling "Rip the hearts out of Jews and Arabs equally!"
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Is it written in the law anywhere?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It doesn’t have to be written into “ law” The Palestinians have declared that the Jewish people have no right to prey at the Western Wall.  Just one small example
> Ironically, Tinmore posted a You Tube Video not too long ago in which a Palestinian Young Woman very reluctantly stated that Palestinians and Israelis could live together but basically Palestine was for the Palestinians.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> it does matter if it is written into the laws.  For example throughout this conversation, we have had posters claiming Israel is apartheid, but where in the laws is there anything supporting this claim?  The same arguments are brought up over discrimmination for example.  There is what is in the state's laws on side... And then how people choose to act on the other.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


You forgot a few links like the one where  the Jordanians denied the Israelis the Rights to their Religious Sites, Abbas stating no Israelis in Palestine or where they state Israel would not have any access to the Western Wall if they ever had control of it. Nice try though!!!!!


----------



## P F Tinmore

Humanity said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> yet they're *distinctly* Kurds plain and simple.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What makes them distinctly Kurds?
Click to expand...

They weren't Kurds until they were called Kurds. Like everybody else, they weren't until they were.


----------



## P F Tinmore

ILOVEISRAEL said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Palestinians have declared that the Jewish people have no right to prey at the Western Wall
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thats going well then
> 
> Is it a law?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Ever hear the phrase “ Actions speak Louder then Words?”According to the U.N. Jordan was supposed to let the Israelis have access to their Religious Sites but refused.  If you prohibit someone from doing something they have the Right to do, why does it matter whether it’s written or not and why don’t you condemn it?  Ecause you are a.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh dear, did you forget your meds today?
> 
> If you want to try and post that again when you have taken them then you may actually make some sense!
> 
> Do you really want to discuss what the UN says? That one always sends you zionuts like you running for cover!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.quora.com/Why-werent-Je...rusalem-when-it-was-under-Jordanian-Arab-rule
> 
> To say that the Israelis were given the Right to Worship and have access to their Holy Sites is a lie.  However we all know that the Pro Palestinian Team is an expert when it comes to that. You are an.
Click to expand...

Off topic. That was a Jordan thing. The Palestinians had nothing to do with it.


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL

P F Tinmore said:


> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Palestinians have declared that the Jewish people have no right to prey at the Western Wall
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thats going well then
> 
> Is it a law?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Ever hear the phrase “ Actions speak Louder then Words?”According to the U.N. Jordan was supposed to let the Israelis have access to their Religious Sites but refused.  If you prohibit someone from doing something they have the Right to do, why does it matter whether it’s written or not and why don’t you condemn it?  Ecause you are a.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh dear, did you forget your meds today?
> 
> If you want to try and post that again when you have taken them then you may actually make some sense!
> 
> Do you really want to discuss what the UN says? That one always sends you zionuts like you running for cover!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.quora.com/Why-werent-Je...rusalem-when-it-was-under-Jordanian-Arab-rule
> 
> To say that the Israelis were given the Right to Worship and have access to their Holy Sites is a lie.  However we all know that the Pro Palestinian Team is an expert when it comes to that. You are an.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Off topic. That was a Jordan thing. The Palestinians had nothing to do with it.
Click to expand...


I was challenged to provide proof and I did.
Your “ topic” is “ Apartheid “.  It works both ways...  No comment about the Palestinians claim that if they had control Israel would be denied access to the Western Wall? Of course not. Typical Team Palestine Double Standard Keep Trying!!!!


----------



## Coyote

Sixties Fan said:


> This country, the law avers, will not become just a "country of its citizens" whose main ideology is "man's honor and freedom" nor will it become a bi-national state*. It will be a Jewish state with equal rights for minorities.*
> 
> What bore witness to the greatness of the hour, albeit by means of irony and intentional malice, was the sight of Arab MKs tearing the law to bits in front of the cameras. If anything, this showed beyond doubt how necessary and important the law is. The Arab MKs displayed their real opinion of Israel and their unending subversion, support for Hamas and the Mavi Marmara, their serving as microphones for terrorists and IDF haters, are justification enough for a clear and precise Nationality Law.
> 
> (full article online)
> 
> From the Hebrew press: On the Nationality Law



The difficulty with that is when you have a religious state, then it is extremely hard to have real equality for minority religions.


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Does Slovenia have different categories of citizenship?  One for ethnic Slovenes and one for others?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Israel does not have different categories of citizenship.  All citizens are equal in law.
Click to expand...

So there is one unitary Israeli citizenship?


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I disagree.  Here is the issue.  Other ethnic groups may share a religion but they are not themselves a religion and that does seperate Judaism from being just an ethnic group.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This makes no difference whatsoever.  All cultures have some combination of religion and a list of other attributes which form the culture. This doesn't mean that the culture and nationality of the Jewish people should be treated differently than other cultures or that different rules should apply to them.
Click to expand...

It absolutely makes a difference. Judaism IS a religion.  Slovene is not.  Kurd is not.  If you are creating a Slovene state, religion may or may not play role in it. The ethnic group is not defined by its religion.  Judaism is and to that extent religion plays a strong public role and there is a constant tension between secular and sacred forces in governance.


----------



## RoccoR

RE:  Now it's a basic law: The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people
※→  Coyote, et al,

I agree.

But I also think that the allegation of "apartheid" is a very crafty PSYOPS way of furthering a politically motivated work-around _[Article 7 Crimes Against Humanity - Paragraphs (1j) and (2h) Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court]_.



Coyote said:


> it does matter if it is written into the laws.  For example throughout this conversation, we have had posters claiming Israel is apartheid, but where in the laws is there anything supporting this claim?  The same arguments are brought up over discrimination for example.  There is what is in the state's laws on side... And then how people choose to act on the other.


*(COMMENT)*

If one actually reads the Law, you'll find that there is a critical requirement [_Element to the Offense - Article 7 (1j) Crime Against Humanity of  "Apartheid"_] that needs addressed.  This element is:

_Element #4:   The conduct was committed in the context of an institutionalized regime of systematic 
oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group or groups._​
A critical thought here is that it involves "one racial group over any other racial group or groups."   The racial component is a very slippery slope.  And in a concerted effort within the UN attempted to make the _determination _"that Zionism is a form of racism and racial discrimination" through the application of A/RES/3379 (XXX) 10 November 1975 United Nations Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination damage to the State of Israel was done before corrective action could be taken.  When the international judicial system actually and formally wrote the law, the UN had to revoke the Resolution 3379 (XXX).  The revocation was in the form of A/RES/46/86 16 December 1991 Elimination of racism and racial discrimination, wherein the UN "Decides to revoke the determination contained in its resolution 3379 (XXX)

 of 10 November 1975."  Over the last quarter century, a plethora of attempts have been made by a numerous anti-Israeli and anti-Zionist Arab Consortiums to make the element of race in the matter of the Israeli-Arab Palestinian Conflict to stick; with no success.

A second critical factor is that "nothing contained in the present Charter shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state." [Article 2(7), Chapter I of the UN Charter]  It takes no real understanding of International Law to know that Basic Law of Israel is in the "domestic jurisdiction."  This is a matter for the Israelis and the Israelis alone.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Shusha

Humanity said:


> You sure are mixing a lot of things up here so let me see if I can dissect this part...
> 
> Catalonia is an autonomous region of Spain, built around the Catalan culture and people. No one is forced to speak Spanish (by law or otherwise unless you want to consider the Franco regime and he force Spanish on the Catalans and didn't ban Catalan language).
> 
> The clamor for independence by the MINORITY of Catalans is one of folly.
> 
> There is no overriding religion in Spain that operates above the civil law as there is in Israel. Catalans are not second class citizens in Spain.
> 
> You appear, not for the first time, to be wanting your cake and eat it but with rather confused views, rather one sided, zionist views.



This thread concerns the Basic Laws and Constitutions of various countries, and specifically, whether or not Israel's Basic Law is out of line with the Basic Laws and Constitutions of other countries and therefore deserves condemnation.  

Spain's Constitution not only claims Spanish (Castillian) as the official language, it requires every citizen to know that language.  It is a Constitutional, legislated requirement that every citizen MUST learn Castillian, regardless of their mother tongue. 

The answer to the question posed in this thread, then, when comparing Basic Laws and Constitutions, is that Israel's Basic Law is NOT out of line with other States.  It is virtually identical to other States and therefore Israel can not be condemned for her Basic Law or Constitution.  The fact that Israel's Basic Law IS condemned when it is identical to other Basic Laws and Constitutions is problematic.  


A secondary question which has come up is whether or not the Basic Laws and Constitutions create the condition of "second class citizens".  Team P insists that the wording of Basic Law creates conditions of second class citizenship in Israel, but also insists that citizens of other countries, *with virtually identical wording*, does not create conditions of second class citizenship.  Arabs are second class citizens in Israel because of the Basic Laws.  Catalans are not second class citizens in Spain despite the same Basic Laws.  So the problem, clearly, is not in the law itself.

This thread should NEVER have gotten the pages and pages of posts that it has.  Because the answer to the opening post is clear and obvious and absolutely without argument:  When Israel MEETS the standard of a majority of other countries in the world it CAN NOT possibly be condemned for it unless you subscribe to a special standard for Israel.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Does Slovenia have different categories of citizenship?  One for ethnic Slovenes and one for others?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Israel does not have different categories of citizenship.  All citizens are equal in law.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So there is one unitary Israeli citizenship?
Click to expand...


Um.  Yes.  There is no difference in law between any Israeli citizenships EXCEPT that some citizens are exempt from military service due to their ethnicity.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> It absolutely makes a difference. Judaism IS a religion.  Slovene is not.  Kurd is not.  If you are creating a Slovene state, religion may or may not play role in it. The ethnic group is not defined by its religion.



Judaism IS a religion.  But the Jewish peoples ethnic and cultural collective is MORE than just their religion.  Just as MOST cultural groups have a religion but are MORE than their religion.  If you are creating a Slovene state you are taking the collective culture of being Slovene, which may, or may not include religious aspects.  You said it yourself -- the ethnic group is not defined by its religion.  The Jewish people are also NOT defined by their religion.  Their religion is a part of their culture, even a large part, but they are not defined by their religion.  They also have history, and language and all the other parts which make up a culture.  

To disable the Jewish people from their culture because of the aspect of religion is to create separate rules for them.  

(Btw, as a side note, I disagree that Judaism is a strictly a religion.  One can not simply adopt certain doctrines and become Jewish.  It doesn't work like that.  If you want to differentiate between the strict religion of the Jewish people as opposed to the fullness of their culture, I'd suggest you speak of B'Nei Noach as the religion and Judaism or Jewishness as the cultural collective).


----------



## Humanity

ILOVEISRAEL said:


> To say that the Israelis were given the Right to Worship and have access to their Holy Sites is a lie.



Now come on dumbass, I want to see where I said that?

The # of the comment where I said that will do!

It's ok, I will wait...


----------



## Humanity

Shusha said:


> The Jewish people are also NOT defined by their religion.



Did you really write that?


----------



## Humanity

Shusha said:


> I disagree that Judaism is a strictly a religion



And that???

Wow, it just gets madder!!


----------



## Humanity

Shusha said:


> Spain's Constitution not only claims Spanish (Castillian) as the official language, it requires every citizen to know that language. It is a Constitutional, legislated requirement that every citizen MUST learn Castillian, regardless of their mother tongue.



Well, Catalonia has FOUR official languages.

I fail to see what the issue would be with a citizen living in Spain, France, Germany, UK or any other country for that matter, speaking the language of that country. I mean come on, a French child being born in France and refusing to learn French.

An interesting development around Europe has been the requirement for language tests. Currently a friend of mine a Brit by birth but living in a different European country, is studying the local language so that he can apply for residency, NOT citizenship, residency. Makes sense don't you think?


----------



## Humanity

Shusha said:


> This thread should NEVER have gotten the pages and pages of posts that it has. Because the answer to the opening post is clear and obvious and absolutely without argument: When Israel MEETS the standard of a majority of other countries in the world it CAN NOT possibly be condemned for it unless you subscribe to a special standard for Israel.



In YOUR opinion...

Seems that there are a lot of opposing opinions hence the thread.


----------



## Humanity

Shusha said:


> Judaism IS a religion.





Shusha said:


> I disagree that Judaism is a strictly a religion



It's that good old cake eating time again!

I mean, seriously? 

And then didn't you suggest that Jewish is ethnic/cultural and not religion?

I think that you are protesting a little too much and ending up going round in circles.


----------



## Shusha

Humanity said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> This thread should NEVER have gotten the pages and pages of posts that it has. Because the answer to the opening post is clear and obvious and absolutely without argument: When Israel MEETS the standard of a majority of other countries in the world it CAN NOT possibly be condemned for it unless you subscribe to a special standard for Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In YOUR opinion...
> 
> Seems that there are a lot of opposing opinions hence the thread.
Click to expand...



You are either applying the same standards to Israel or you are applying different standards to Israel.

This thread has certainly demonstrated that that Israel is held to a totally different standard.


----------



## Shusha

Humanity said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Judaism IS a religion.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> I disagree that Judaism is a strictly a religion
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's that good old cake eating time again!
> 
> I mean, seriously?
> 
> And then didn't you suggest that Jewish is ethnic/cultural and not religion?
> 
> I think that you are protesting a little too much and ending up going round in circles.
Click to expand...



Wow. This isn't exactly hard. The Jewish people have a rich culture which includes dozens of attributes. One of those attributes is religion. The collective of all these attributes is what makes one culturally and ethnically Jewish.


----------



## Shusha

Humanity said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Spain's Constitution not only claims Spanish (Castillian) as the official language, it requires every citizen to know that language. It is a Constitutional, legislated requirement that every citizen MUST learn Castillian, regardless of their mother tongue.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well, Catalonia has FOUR official languages.
> 
> I fail to see what the issue would be with a citizen living in Spain, France, Germany, UK or any other country for that matter, speaking the language of that country. I mean come on, a French child being born in France and refusing to learn French.
> 
> An interesting development around Europe has been the requirement for language tests. Currently a friend of mine a Brit by birth but living in a different European country, is studying the local language so that he can apply for residency, NOT citizenship, residency. Makes sense don't you think?
Click to expand...



Yes. But we are discussing Constitutions here. The question on the table is why excluding minority languages as official languages is to be accepted when other countries do it and vilified when Israel does it. 

And why constitutionally compelling people to speak a language is fine when it's Castilian and vilified when it's Hebrew. (Even though that is not actually in  Israel's basic law). 

What is the STANDARD for the nations of the world?  The objective standard. If Israel meets that standard you can't not fairly condemn her. If your standard is one that virtually no state meets it's a false standard. 

Just taking language as a starting point, what is the objective global standard for Basic Laws and Constitutions?


----------



## Humanity

Shusha said:


> Yes. But we are discussing Constitutions here. The question on the table is why excluding minority languages as official languages is to be accepted when other countries do it and vilified when Israel does it.



Catalan is NOT an excluded minority language! Why would you think that? 



Shusha said:


> And why constitutionally compelling people to speak a language is fine when it's Castilian and vilified when it's Hebrew. (Even though that is not actually in Israel's basic law).



You are ignoring the fact that, living in a country with a different language to your own mother tongue, knowing the local language is of some importance.

I haven't vilified Israel for expecting people to know/learn Hebrew! Just another assumption Shusha!

I am resident in a country that is not my birth country and, unless I speak the local language then I would be pretty limited to my life. My adopted country ALSO has a language requirement to be resident not citizen, resident.


----------



## Humanity

Shusha said:


> This thread has certainly demonstrated that that Israel is held to a totally different standard.



No, I don't hold Israel to a different standard.... Israel does it to herself!

That is something that you really need to see but, as you have shown, you will not see this and then start making contradictory comments and try to apply reverse psychology in saying that these 'laws' are to protect Jewish culture and NOT discriminate against minorities.... You can surely see that however you dress that up it is still discriminating.

Perhaps you would like to adopt 'positive discrimination' as a term to describe the protecting and defending of Jewish culture in Israel?


----------



## Olde Europe

Humanity said:


> No, I don't hold Israel to a different standard.



No one does.

Why, you have to ask, is it that a bill mandating equal treatment for all Israeli citizens is being disqualified before it even reached the floor?

Oh, the outrage.  Equal treatment, equality before the law, that is, the most basic standard for a society's fairness, was to be written into ordinary law (not even the Constitution, where it really belongs), but even that had the reactionary majority in the Knesset in spluttering apoplexy.  Not ever shall such abomination even be discussed between the people's representatives, let alone voted on, so as to have those representatives stand up for the standards to which they are willing to adhere (or rather not).

The whole "different standard" scam is yet another over-used tool in the hasbara peddlers' box.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Does Slovenia have different categories of citizenship?  One for ethnic Slovenes and one for others?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Israel does not have different categories of citizenship.  All citizens are equal in law.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So there is one unitary Israeli citizenship?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Um.  Yes.  There is no difference in law between any Israeli citizenships EXCEPT that some citizens are exempt from military service due to their ethnicity.
Click to expand...

You are oblivious to the fact that Israel has two rights systems. There are citizens rights where all citizens have (more or less) equal rights. Then there are nationality rights. Only the Jewish nationality has access to these rights.

The World Zionist Organisation-Jewish Agency (Status) Law is linked to a second body of Israeli law and jurisprudence that distinguishes between citizenship (in Hebrew, ezrahut) and nationality (le’um). Other States have made this distinction: for example, in the former Soviet Union, Soviet citizens also held distinct “national” identities (Kazakh, Turkmen, Uzbek and so forth), but all nationalities had equal legal standing. In Israel, by contrast, only one nationality, Jewish, has legal standing and only Jewish nationality is associated with the legitimacy and mission of the State. According to the country’s Supreme Court, Israel is indeed not the State of the “Israeli nation”, which does not legally exist, but of the “Jewish nation” 58 National rights are reserved to Jewish nationality. For instance, the Law of Return serves the “in-gathering” mission cited above by allowing any Jew to immigrate to Israel and, through the Citizenship Law 59, to gain immediate citizenship. No other group has a remotely comparable right and only Jews enjoy any collective rights under Israeli law.

Landmark UN report backs Israel boycott​https://electronicintifada.net/blogs/ali-abunimah/landmark-un-report-backs-israel-boycott


----------



## Olde Europe

P F Tinmore said:


> You are oblivious to the fact that Israel has two rights systems. There are citizens rights where all citizens have (more or less) equal rights. Then there are nationality rights. Only the Jewish nationality has access to these rights.
> 
> The World Zionist Organisation-Jewish Agency (Status) Law is linked to a second body of Israeli law and jurisprudence that distinguishes between citizenship (in Hebrew, ezrahut) and nationality (le’um). Other States have made this distinction: for example, in the former Soviet Union, Soviet citizens also held distinct “national” identities (Kazakh, Turkmen, Uzbek and so forth), but all nationalities had equal legal standing. In Israel, by contrast, only one nationality, Jewish, has legal standing and only Jewish nationality is associated with the legitimacy and mission of the State. According to the country’s Supreme Court, Israel is indeed not the State of the “Israeli nation”, which does not legally exist, but of the “Jewish nation” 58 National rights are reserved to Jewish nationality. For instance, the Law of Return serves the “in-gathering” mission cited above by allowing any Jew to immigrate to Israel and, through the Citizenship Law 59, to gain immediate citizenship. No other group has a remotely comparable right and only Jews enjoy any collective rights under Israeli law.
> 
> Landmark UN report backs Israel boycott​https://electronicintifada.net/blogs/ali-abunimah/landmark-un-report-backs-israel-boycott



Thanks.

Here's what I quoted 600 posts ago:

But in Israel, Zeidan pointed out, “officials are often breaking the law if they do not discriminate. It is their job to discriminate.”

This state-sanctioned racism is achieved by establishing “nationalities” separate from citizenship. The primary nationalities in Israel are “Jew” and “Arab”. The state has refused to recognise an “Israeli nationality”, a position supported by the Israeli supreme court, precisely to sanction a hierarchy of rights.

Individual rights are enjoyed by all citizens by virtue of their citizenship, whether they are Jews or Palestinians. In this regard, Israel looks like a liberal democracy. But Israel also recognises “national rights”, and reserves them almost exclusively for the Jewish population.

National rights are treated as superior to individual citizenship rights. So if there is a conflict between the two, the Jewish national right will invariably be given priority by officials and the courts.​
Maybe, just maybe, you'll get lucky.


----------



## Humanity

ILOVEISRAEL said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> To say that the Israelis were given the Right to Worship and have access to their Holy Sites is a lie.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now come on dumbass, I want to see where I said that?
> 
> The # of the comment where I said that will do!
> 
> It's ok, I will wait...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I already did you.
Click to expand...


No you didn't fucking moron.... Quote the comment # where I said that!

Show me and the rest of this board where I said that!

Fact is you can't because you are a fucking liar!


----------



## Olde Europe

*Israeli Practices towards the Palestinian People and the Question of Apartheid*


For the first 20 years of the country’s existence, they [Palestinians] lived under martial law and to this day are subjected to oppression on the basis of not being Jewish. That policy of domination manifests itself in inferior services, restrictive zoning laws and limited budget allocations made to Palestinian communities; in restrictions on jobs and professional opportunities; and in the mostly segregated landscape in which Jewish and Palestinian citizens of Israel live. Palestinian political parties can campaign for minor reforms and better budgets, but are legally prohibited by the Basic Law from challenging legislation maintaining the racial regime. The policy is reinforced by the implications of the distinction made in Israel between “citizenship” (ezrahut) and “nationality” (le’um): all Israeli citizens enjoy the former, but only Jews enjoy the latter. “National” rights in Israeli law signify Jewish-national rights. [...]

The choice of evidence is guided by the Apartheid Convention, which sets forth that the crime of apartheid consists of discrete inhuman acts, but that such acts acquire the status of crimes against humanity only if they intentionally serve the core purpose of racial domination. The Rome Statute specifies in its definition the presence of an “institutionalized regime” serving the “intention” of racial domination. Since “purpose” and “intention” lie at the core of both definitions, this report examines factors ostensibly separate from the Palestinian dimension — especially, the doctrine of Jewish statehood as expressed in law and the design of Israeli State institutions — to establish beyond doubt the presence of such a core purpose.

That the Israeli regime is designed for this core purpose was found to be evident in the body of laws, only some of which are discussed in the report for reasons of scope. One prominent example is land policy. The Israeli Basic Law (Constitution) mandates that land held by the State of Israel, the Israeli Development Authority or the Jewish National Fund shall not be transferred in any manner, placing its management permanently under their authority. The State Property Law of 1951 provides for the reversion of property (including land) to the State in any area “in which the law of the State of Israel applies”. The Israel Lands Authority (ILA) manages State land, which accounts for 93 per cent of the land within the internationally recognized borders of Israel and is by law closed to use, development or ownership by non-Jews. Those laws reflect the concept of “public purpose” as expressed in the Basic Law. Such laws may be changed by Knesset vote, but the Basic Law: Knesset prohibits any political party from challenging that public purpose. Effectively, Israeli law renders opposition to racial domination illegal. [...]

This report finds that the strategic fragmentation of the Palestinian people is the principal method by which Israel imposes an apartheid regime. It first examines how the history of war, partition, de jure and de facto annexation and prolonged occupation in Palestine has led to the Palestinian people being divided into different geographic regions administered by distinct sets of law. This fragmentation operates to stabilize the Israeli regime of racial domination over the Palestinians and to weaken the will and capacity of the Palestinian people to mount a unified and effective resistance. Different methods are deployed depending on where Palestinians live. This is the core means by which Israel enforces apartheid and at the same time impedes international recognition of how the system works as a complementary whole to comprise an apartheid regime. [...]

The report concludes that the weight of the evidence supports beyond a reasonable doubt the proposition that Israel is guilty of imposing an apartheid regime on the Palestinian people, which amounts to the commission of a crime against humanity, the prohibition of which is considered jus cogens in international customary law. The international community, especially the United Nations and its agencies, and Member States, have a legal obligation to act within the limits of their capabilities to prevent and punish instances of apartheid that are responsibly brought to their attention. More specifically, States have a collective duty: (a) not to recognize an apartheid regime as lawful; (b) not to aid or assist a State in maintaining an apartheid regime; and (c) to cooperate with the United Nations and other States in bringing apartheid regimes to an end. Civil society institutions and individuals also have a moral and political duty to use the instruments at their disposal to raise awareness of this ongoing criminal enterprise, and to exert pressure on Israel in order to persuade it to dismantle apartheid structures in compliance with international law. The report ends with general and specific recommendations to the United Nations, national Governments, and civil society and private actors on actions they should take in view of the finding that Israel maintains a regime of apartheid in its exercise of control over the Palestinian people.​


----------



## Humanity

Olde Europe said:


> *Israeli Practices towards the Palestinian People and the Question of Apartheid*
> 
> 
> For the first 20 years of the country’s existence, they [Palestinians] lived under martial law and to this day are subjected to oppression on the basis of not being Jewish. That policy of domination manifests itself in inferior services, restrictive zoning laws and limited budget allocations made to Palestinian communities; in restrictions on jobs and professional opportunities; and in the mostly segregated landscape in which Jewish and Palestinian citizens of Israel live. Palestinian political parties can campaign for minor reforms and better budgets, but are legally prohibited by the Basic Law from challenging legislation maintaining the racial regime. The policy is reinforced by the implications of the distinction made in Israel between “citizenship” (ezrahut) and “nationality” (le’um): all Israeli citizens enjoy the former, but only Jews enjoy the latter. “National” rights in Israeli law signify Jewish-national rights. [...]
> 
> The choice of evidence is guided by the Apartheid Convention, which sets forth that the crime of apartheid consists of discrete inhuman acts, but that such acts acquire the status of crimes against humanity only if they intentionally serve the core purpose of racial domination. The Rome Statute specifies in its definition the presence of an “institutionalized regime” serving the “intention” of racial domination. Since “purpose” and “intention” lie at the core of both definitions, this report examines factors ostensibly separate from the Palestinian dimension — especially, the doctrine of Jewish statehood as expressed in law and the design of Israeli State institutions — to establish beyond doubt the presence of such a core purpose.
> 
> That the Israeli regime is designed for this core purpose was found to be evident in the body of laws, only some of which are discussed in the report for reasons of scope. One prominent example is land policy. The Israeli Basic Law (Constitution) mandates that land held by the State of Israel, the Israeli Development Authority or the Jewish National Fund shall not be transferred in any manner, placing its management permanently under their authority. The State Property Law of 1951 provides for the reversion of property (including land) to the State in any area “in which the law of the State of Israel applies”. The Israel Lands Authority (ILA) manages State land, which accounts for 93 per cent of the land within the internationally recognized borders of Israel and is by law closed to use, development or ownership by non-Jews. Those laws reflect the concept of “public purpose” as expressed in the Basic Law. Such laws may be changed by Knesset vote, but the Basic Law: Knesset prohibits any political party from challenging that public purpose. Effectively, Israeli law renders opposition to racial domination illegal. [...]
> 
> This report finds that the strategic fragmentation of the Palestinian people is the principal method by which Israel imposes an apartheid regime. It first examines how the history of war, partition, de jure and de facto annexation and prolonged occupation in Palestine has led to the Palestinian people being divided into different geographic regions administered by distinct sets of law. This fragmentation operates to stabilize the Israeli regime of racial domination over the Palestinians and to weaken the will and capacity of the Palestinian people to mount a unified and effective resistance. Different methods are deployed depending on where Palestinians live. This is the core means by which Israel enforces apartheid and at the same time impedes international recognition of how the system works as a complementary whole to comprise an apartheid regime. [...]
> 
> The report concludes that the weight of the evidence supports beyond a reasonable doubt the proposition that Israel is guilty of imposing an apartheid regime on the Palestinian people, which amounts to the commission of a crime against humanity, the prohibition of which is considered jus cogens in international customary law. The international community, especially the United Nations and its agencies, and Member States, have a legal obligation to act within the limits of their capabilities to prevent and punish instances of apartheid that are responsibly brought to their attention. More specifically, States have a collective duty: (a) not to recognize an apartheid regime as lawful; (b) not to aid or assist a State in maintaining an apartheid regime; and (c) to cooperate with the United Nations and other States in bringing apartheid regimes to an end. Civil society institutions and individuals also have a moral and political duty to use the instruments at their disposal to raise awareness of this ongoing criminal enterprise, and to exert pressure on Israel in order to persuade it to dismantle apartheid structures in compliance with international law. The report ends with general and specific recommendations to the United Nations, national Governments, and civil society and private actors on actions they should take in view of the finding that Israel maintains a regime of apartheid in its exercise of control over the Palestinian people.​



I cannot agree that Israel is an apartheid state.

However, IMHO, it is sailing VERY close to it!

Having witnessed apartheid in S. Africa I know what apartheid is!

In some ways I feel that using apartheid to describe Israel actually deflects from the issues there and gives Team Israel a nice easy focus to argue that Israel is indeed not an apartheid state whilst ignoring the true imbalance within.


----------



## Olde Europe

Humanity said:


> I cannot agree that Israel is an apartheid state.
> 
> However, IMHO, it is sailing VERY close to it!
> 
> Having witnessed apartheid in S. Africa I know what apartheid is!
> 
> In some ways I feel that using apartheid to describe Israel actually deflects from the issues there and gives Team Israel a nice easy focus to argue that Israel is indeed not an apartheid state whilst ignoring the true imbalance within.



Suit yourself.

Apartheid is the creation of separate legal systems to bring about the domination of one societal group over another.  Israel falls squarely within that definition, aspects different from SA's apartheid regime notwithstanding.

Most of the aspects of the "true imbalance within" emanated from, or are exacerbated by, the apartheid regime's crime against humanity.  Methinks, you just refuse to see the forest for the trees.


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL

Humanity said:


> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> To say that the Israelis were given the Right to Worship and have access to their Holy Sites is a lie.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now come on dumbass, I want to see where I said that?
> 
> The # of the comment where I said that will do!
> 
> It's ok, I will wait...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I already did you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No you didn't fucking moron.... Quote the comment # where I said that!
> 
> Show me and the rest of this board where I said that!
> 
> Fact is you can't because you are a fucking liar!
Click to expand...


You are the Fucking liar!!! I stated that the Palestinians have said that the Israelis have no right to pray at


Humanity said:


> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> To say that the Israelis were given the Right to Worship and have access to their Holy Sites is a lie.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now come on dumbass, I want to see where I said that?
> 
> The # of the comment where I said that will do!
> 
> It's ok, I will wait...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I already did you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No you didn't fucking moron.... Quote the comment # where I said that!
> 
> Show me and the rest of this board where I said that!
> 
> Fact is you can't because you are a fucking liar!
Click to expand...


You are the FUCKING LIAR!!! I stated that the Palestinians have said the Israelis have no right to pray at the Western Wall.  You challenged me, wanting to know if it was a law and I responded 
     I then stated the U.N. gave Israel the Right to their Sacred Religious Sites which you challenged and I provided proof


----------



## Humanity

Olde Europe said:


> Suit yourself.



Don't worry... I will



Olde Europe said:


> Apartheid is the creation of separate legal systems to bring about the domination of one societal group over another. Israel falls squarely within that definition, aspects different from SA's apartheid regime notwithstanding.



I am guessing you did witness apartheid in S. Africa? 

How does something fall "squarley" within a definition but be different? Interesting concept. Is it like calling a banana an orange because they are classified as fruit?


----------



## Humanity

ILOVEISRAEL said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> To say that the Israelis were given the Right to Worship and have access to their Holy Sites is a lie.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now come on dumbass, I want to see where I said that?
> 
> The # of the comment where I said that will do!
> 
> It's ok, I will wait...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I already did you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No you didn't fucking moron.... Quote the comment # where I said that!
> 
> Show me and the rest of this board where I said that!
> 
> Fact is you can't because you are a fucking liar!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are the Fucking liar!!! I stated that the Palestinians have said that the Israelis have no right to pray at
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> To say that the Israelis were given the Right to Worship and have access to their Holy Sites is a lie.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Now come on dumbass, I want to see where I said that?
> 
> The # of the comment where I said that will do!
> 
> It's ok, I will wait...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I already did you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No you didn't fucking moron.... Quote the comment # where I said that!
> 
> Show me and the rest of this board where I said that!
> 
> Fact is you can't because you are a fucking liar!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are the FUCKING LIAR!!! I stated that the Palestinians have said the Israelis have no right to pray at the Western Wall.  You challenged me, wanting to know if it was a law and I responded
> I then stated the U.N. gave Israel the Right to their Sacred Religious Sites which you challenged and I provided proof
Click to expand...


You my friend clearly have mental health issues and should not be trying to get involved in adult conversation.

You accuse me of saying something yet you cannot show me where or when? 

You are a fucking liar and an idiot! 

GO GET SOME HELP MORON!


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL

Humanity said:


> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> To say that the Israelis were given the Right to Worship and have access to their Holy Sites is a lie.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now come on dumbass, I want to see where I said that?
> 
> The # of the comment where I said that will do!
> 
> It's ok, I will wait...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I already did you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No you didn't fucking moron.... Quote the comment # where I said that!
> 
> Show me and the rest of this board where I said that!
> 
> Fact is you can't because you are a fucking liar!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are the Fucking liar!!! I stated that the Palestinians have said that the Israelis have no right to pray at
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> 
> To say that the Israelis were given the Right to Worship and have access to their Holy Sites is a lie.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Now come on dumbass, I want to see where I said that?
> 
> The # of the comment where I said that will do!
> 
> It's ok, I will wait...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I already did you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No you didn't fucking moron.... Quote the comment # where I said that!
> 
> Show me and the rest of this board where I said that!
> 
> Fact is you can't because you are a fucking liar!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are the FUCKING LIAR!!! I stated that the Palestinians have said the Israelis have no right to pray at the Western Wall.  You challenged me, wanting to know if it was a law and I responded
> I then stated the U.N. gave Israel the Right to their Sacred Religious Sites which you challenged and I provided proof
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You my friend clearly have mental health issues and should not be trying to get involved in adult conversation.
> 
> You accuse me of saying something yet you cannot show me where or when?
> 
> You are a fucking liar and an idiot!
> 
> GO GET SOME HELP MORON!
Click to expand...


I did you Moron! Wanting to know if it was a “ law?”   What the FUCK is that supposed to mean? Challenging me on what the U. N. Position was regarding Israel’s rights to their religious sites? FUCK  YOURSELF


----------



## Olde Europe

Humanity said:


> How does something fall "squarley" within a definition but be different? Interesting concept. Is it like calling a banana an orange because they are classified as fruit?



No, it's calling an apple and apple, even though one might be green, the other red.

You didn't read the report, did you?


----------



## Humanity

Olde Europe said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> How does something fall "squarley" within a definition but be different? Interesting concept. Is it like calling a banana an orange because they are classified as fruit?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No, it's calling an apple and apple, even though one might be green, the other red.
> 
> You didn't read the report, did you?
Click to expand...


Well, yes, I read the report... It is NOT apartheid as I have seen with my own eyes!

So, in your opinion, it is apartheid, just a different version?


----------



## RoccoR

RE:  Now it's a basic law: The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people
 ※→  Humanity,  et al,

This is an interesting line of questioning, but still something for the Jewish People to decide for themselves; just as Catholics decide who is a Catholic.



Humanity said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Jewish people are also NOT defined by their religion.
> 
> 
> 
> Did you really write that?
Click to expand...

*(A PROSPECTIVE)*

*•  Are the Jews a Nation?  •*
Judaism 101

"The traditional explanation, and the one given in the Torah, is that the Jews are a nation. The Hebrew word, believe it or not, is "goyª." The Torah and the rabbis used this term not in the modern sense meaning a territorial and political entity, but in the ancient sense meaning a group of people with a common history, a common destiny, and a sense that we are all connected to each other.

ª: Lit. nation. _A non-Jew, that is, a member of one of the other nations. There is nothing_
_ inherently insulting about the term; the word "goy" is used in the Torah to describe _
_Israel. See Jewish Attitudes Toward Non-Jews._​
Unfortunately, in modern times, the term "nation" has become too contaminated by ugly, jingoistic notions of a country obsessed with its own superiority and bent on world domination. Because of this notion of "nationhood," Jews are often falsely accused of being disloyal to their own country in favor of their loyalty to the Jewish "nation," of being more loyal to Israel than to their home country. Some have gone so far as to use this distorted interpretation of "nationhood" to prove that Jews do, or seek to, control the world. In fact, a surprising number of antisemitic websites and newsgroup postings linked to this page (in an earlier form) as proof of their antisemitic delusions that Jews are nationalistic, that Israel is a colonial power and so forth.

Because of the inaccurate connotations that have attached themselves to _*the term "nation," the term can no longer be used to accurately describe the Jewish people*_."

*(COMMENT)*

It is up to them to decide, not us.  It is part of the "why" a "Jewish National Home" is a necessity.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Shusha

Humanity said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes. But we are discussing Constitutions here. The question on the table is why excluding minority languages as official languages is to be accepted when other countries do it and vilified when Israel does it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Catalan is NOT an excluded minority language! Why would you think that?
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> And why constitutionally compelling people to speak a language is fine when it's Castilian and vilified when it's Hebrew. (Even though that is not actually in Israel's basic law).
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are ignoring the fact that, living in a country with a different language to your own mother tongue, knowing the local language is of some importance.
> 
> I haven't vilified Israel for expecting people to know/learn Hebrew! Just another assumption Shusha!
> 
> I am resident in a country that is not my birth country and, unless I speak the local language then I would be pretty limited to my life. My adopted country ALSO has a language requirement to be resident not citizen, resident.
Click to expand...


But again, you are deliberately ignoring the point, which is NOT whether learning a local majority language is useful.

The questions are:

1.  Is it acceptable for a state to have only one official language in their Basic Law or Constitution?
2.  Is it acceptable for a state to compel, through Basic Law or Constitution, citizens to learn the majority language?


----------



## Shusha

Humanity said:


> Perhaps you would like to adopt 'positive discrimination' as a term to describe the protecting and defending of Jewish culture in Israel?



Most people call it affirmative action.  I happen to think affirmative action is a good idea.  Both for Arab citizens of Israel and globally for the Jewish people.


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> You are oblivious to the fact that Israel has two rights systems. There are citizens rights where all citizens have (more or less) equal rights. Then there are nationality rights. Only the Jewish nationality has access to these rights



Only the Jewish people have nationality rights IN ISRAEL.  Others have nationality rights elsewhere.  That is actually how the global system currently works.  Citizens have national rights in their nation.

Are you suggesting that the Jewish people should have nationality rights in Palestine?  Or not?


----------



## Humanity

Shusha said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes. But we are discussing Constitutions here. The question on the table is why excluding minority languages as official languages is to be accepted when other countries do it and vilified when Israel does it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Catalan is NOT an excluded minority language! Why would you think that?
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> And why constitutionally compelling people to speak a language is fine when it's Castilian and vilified when it's Hebrew. (Even though that is not actually in Israel's basic law).
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are ignoring the fact that, living in a country with a different language to your own mother tongue, knowing the local language is of some importance.
> 
> I haven't vilified Israel for expecting people to know/learn Hebrew! Just another assumption Shusha!
> 
> I am resident in a country that is not my birth country and, unless I speak the local language then I would be pretty limited to my life. My adopted country ALSO has a language requirement to be resident not citizen, resident.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> But again, you are deliberately ignoring the point, which is NOT whether learning a local majority language is useful.
> 
> The questions are:
> 
> 1.  Is it acceptable for a state to have only one official language in their Basic Law or Constitution?
> 2.  Is it acceptable for a state to compel, through Basic Law or Constitution, citizens to learn the majority language?
Click to expand...


I wonder sometimes WHOM is actually deliberately ignoring the point here...

I have already stated that there are MORE than one official language in Spain. Did you miss that one?
I have already said that it makes TOTAL sense to learn the language of the country you live in!
Many countries have/use language tests as a requirement for residency. It's not new, it's a residency requirement that I and many friends have had to go through. Again, makes total sense!

I really do not get what your issue is with this! If you are trying to make some kind of point that it is discriminatory then you have failed terribly!

From what you are saying you disagree... Which, IMHO, is utter nuts!!!


----------



## Humanity

Shusha said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> Perhaps you would like to adopt 'positive discrimination' as a term to describe the protecting and defending of Jewish culture in Israel?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Most people call it affirmative action.  I happen to think affirmative action is a good idea.  Both for Arab citizens of Israel and globally for the Jewish people.
Click to expand...


Aha, now we are getting somewhere...

No, most people do not call it "affirmation action". However, I am not going to even bother debating the semantics... Just a point to note, in S. Africa this is also known as "reverse apartheid".

It is 'positive discrimination'... Guess what... NO discrimination is positive!

And you think the above is a good idea? Jesus christ... Thanks for showing your true colours for once!


----------



## Shusha

Humanity said:


> I have already stated that there are MORE than one official language in Spain. Did you miss that one?
> I have already said that it makes TOTAL sense to learn the language of the country you live in!



And again you are ignoring the questions.  There are many countries which have only one official language.  Spain, as far as I know, is the only which compels all citizens to learn the language of the majority.

Are these stipulations acceptable in the Basic Law or Constitution of nations?  Yes or no?  Its not a hard question.


----------



## Shusha

Humanity said:


> Aha, now we are getting somewhere...
> 
> No, most people do not call it "affirmation action". However, I am not going to even bother debating the semantics... Just a point to note, in S. Africa this is also known as "reverse apartheid".
> 
> It is 'positive discrimination'... Guess what... NO discrimination is positive!
> 
> And you think the above is a good idea? Jesus christ... Thanks for showing your true colours for once!



Except that Israel is not asking for anything that other countries don't already have.  France protects the French language.  Where is the outrage?  Spain protects only the Castilian language and not the other languages of its people.  Where is the outrage?


----------



## Humanity

Shusha said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have already stated that there are MORE than one official language in Spain. Did you miss that one?
> I have already said that it makes TOTAL sense to learn the language of the country you live in!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And again you are ignoring the questions.  There are many countries which have only one official language.  Spain, as far as I know, is the only which compels all citizens to learn the language of the majority.
> 
> Are these stipulations acceptable in the Basic Law or Constitution of nations?  Yes or no?  Its not a hard question.
Click to expand...


Shusha... What is it that you want me to say exactly?

Please do tell me...

And, just for a fact check, NO dear, Spain is NOT the only country that compels citizens to learn the language of the majority... Think about it for fuck sake!


----------



## Humanity

Shusha said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> Aha, now we are getting somewhere...
> 
> No, most people do not call it "affirmation action". However, I am not going to even bother debating the semantics... Just a point to note, in S. Africa this is also known as "reverse apartheid".
> 
> It is 'positive discrimination'... Guess what... NO discrimination is positive!
> 
> And you think the above is a good idea? Jesus christ... Thanks for showing your true colours for once!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Except that Israel is not asking for anything that other countries don't already have.  France protects the French language.  Where is the outrage?  Spain protects only the Castilian language and not the other languages of its people.  Where is the outrage?
Click to expand...


You are losing the plot Shusha...

Close down your computer and come back another day!

No, Spain does NOT protect ONLY the Castilian language. I already told you that!

You are confused , confusing yourself and your argument!


----------



## Shusha

Humanity said:


> And, just for a fact check, NO dear, Spain is NOT the only country that compels citizens to learn the language of the majority... Think about it for fuck sake!



Link?


----------



## Shusha

Humanity said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> Aha, now we are getting somewhere...
> 
> No, most people do not call it "affirmation action". However, I am not going to even bother debating the semantics... Just a point to note, in S. Africa this is also known as "reverse apartheid".
> 
> It is 'positive discrimination'... Guess what... NO discrimination is positive!
> 
> And you think the above is a good idea? Jesus christ... Thanks for showing your true colours for once!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Except that Israel is not asking for anything that other countries don't already have.  France protects the French language.  Where is the outrage?  Spain protects only the Castilian language and not the other languages of its people.  Where is the outrage?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are losing the plot Shusha...
> 
> Close down your computer and come back another day!
> 
> No, Spain does NOT protect ONLY the Castilian language. I already told you that!
> 
> You are confused , confusing yourself and your argument!
Click to expand...


When posters flat out refuse to answer simple questions, that is telling.


----------



## Humanity

Shusha said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> And, just for a fact check, NO dear, Spain is NOT the only country that compels citizens to learn the language of the majority... Think about it for fuck sake!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Link?
Click to expand...


Hahaha let's see if you can actually engage your brain...

France - French speaking nation... What is the first language that French children learn?

Germany - German speaking nation... What is the first language that German children learn?

You are flogging a dead horse with your "state compulsory" bullshit Shusha...

Did you not read my previous post where I told you that, to be a resident of the country I live in, I had to pass a language test?

Give it up Shusha... You have ZERO argument! Just accept and move on!


----------



## Humanity

Shusha said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> Aha, now we are getting somewhere...
> 
> No, most people do not call it "affirmation action". However, I am not going to even bother debating the semantics... Just a point to note, in S. Africa this is also known as "reverse apartheid".
> 
> It is 'positive discrimination'... Guess what... NO discrimination is positive!
> 
> And you think the above is a good idea? Jesus christ... Thanks for showing your true colours for once!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Except that Israel is not asking for anything that other countries don't already have.  France protects the French language.  Where is the outrage?  Spain protects only the Castilian language and not the other languages of its people.  Where is the outrage?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are losing the plot Shusha...
> 
> Close down your computer and come back another day!
> 
> No, Spain does NOT protect ONLY the Castilian language. I already told you that!
> 
> You are confused , confusing yourself and your argument!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> When posters flat out refuse to answer simple questions, that is telling.
Click to expand...


I have answered, you are simply being ignorant because you refuse to accept facts!

When the obvious is shown and ignored where else is there to go?

I have answered, you choose to ignore.... So.......


----------



## Shusha

Humanity said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> And, just for a fact check, NO dear, Spain is NOT the only country that compels citizens to learn the language of the majority... Think about it for fuck sake!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Link?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Hahaha let's see if you can actually engage your brain...
> 
> France - French speaking nation... What is the first language that French children learn?
> 
> Germany - German speaking nation... What is the first language that German children learn?
> 
> You are flogging a dead horse with your "state compulsory" bullshit Shusha...
> 
> Did you not read my previous post where I told you that, to be a resident of the country I live in, I had to pass a language test?
> 
> Give it up Shusha... You have ZERO argument! Just accept and move on!
Click to expand...


Have you even bothered to read Spain's Constitution?  

The wording of the Constitution states that is is the DUTY of every Spanish citizen to learn Castilian.  As far as I know, no other country compels learning a specific language as a constitutional requirement.  

Are you agreeing that this is perfectly fair and reasonable to have in a Constitution?  If yes, just say so.  Its not hard.


----------



## Shusha

Humanity said:


> I have answered, you choose to ignore.... So.......



You have not answered the questions.  They are easy "yes or no".


----------



## Humanity

Shusha said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> And, just for a fact check, NO dear, Spain is NOT the only country that compels citizens to learn the language of the majority... Think about it for fuck sake!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Link?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Hahaha let's see if you can actually engage your brain...
> 
> France - French speaking nation... What is the first language that French children learn?
> 
> Germany - German speaking nation... What is the first language that German children learn?
> 
> You are flogging a dead horse with your "state compulsory" bullshit Shusha...
> 
> Did you not read my previous post where I told you that, to be a resident of the country I live in, I had to pass a language test?
> 
> Give it up Shusha... You have ZERO argument! Just accept and move on!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Have you even bothered to read Spain's Constitution?
> 
> The wording of the Constitution states that is is the DUTY of every Spanish citizen to learn Castilian.  As far as I know, no other country compels learning a specific language as a constitutional requirement.
> 
> Are you agreeing that this is perfectly fair and reasonable to have in a Constitution?  If yes, just say so.  Its not hard.
Click to expand...


I lived in Spain Shusha... I know what is and isn't required!

I know, let's try this... Turn up in Spain, with zero knowledge of Spanish and see how long you last! No, I am NOT talking about the Costas, I am talking about real Spain where English is hardly spoken... In fact, 'your' compulsory Spanish is also hardly spoken! 

You need to get into the real world Shusha...

Let me tell you AGAIN....

I am resident in a country where it is compulsory to speak the language of the country or you are simply NOT going to be resident... This, in case you are unaware, is becoming a Europe wide requirement!

Now, either accept the facts or, respectfully, shut the fuck up!


----------



## Humanity

Shusha said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have answered, you choose to ignore.... So.......
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You have not answered the questions.  They are easy "yes or no".
Click to expand...


Oh Shusha... 

Close your computer and come back tomorrow!

This is getting incredibly boring dear!


----------



## Shusha

Humanity said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> And, just for a fact check, NO dear, Spain is NOT the only country that compels citizens to learn the language of the majority... Think about it for fuck sake!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Link?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Hahaha let's see if you can actually engage your brain...
> 
> France - French speaking nation... What is the first language that French children learn?
> 
> Germany - German speaking nation... What is the first language that German children learn?
> 
> You are flogging a dead horse with your "state compulsory" bullshit Shusha...
> 
> Did you not read my previous post where I told you that, to be a resident of the country I live in, I had to pass a language test?
> 
> Give it up Shusha... You have ZERO argument! Just accept and move on!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Have you even bothered to read Spain's Constitution?
> 
> The wording of the Constitution states that is is the DUTY of every Spanish citizen to learn Castilian.  As far as I know, no other country compels learning a specific language as a constitutional requirement.
> 
> Are you agreeing that this is perfectly fair and reasonable to have in a Constitution?  If yes, just say so.  Its not hard.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I lived in Spain Shusha... I know what is and isn't required!
> 
> I know, let's try this... Turn up in Spain, with zero knowledge of Spanish and see how long you last! No, I am NOT talking about the Costas, I am talking about real Spain where English is hardly spoken... In fact, 'your' compulsory Spanish is also hardly spoken!
> 
> You need to get into the real world Shusha...
> 
> Let me tell you AGAIN....
> 
> I am resident in a country where it is compulsory to speak the language of the country or you are simply NOT going to be resident... This, in case you are unaware, is becoming a Europe wide requirement!
> 
> Now, either accept the facts or, respectfully, shut the fuck up!
Click to expand...



Since you apparently have no problem with the wording of the Constitution of Spain, you can not possibly have a problem with the Basic Law of Israel.  I WILL take that as your answer.  And call you out if you turn hypocrite on me.  

Meanwhile, you are in luck.  I am off to NYC for work and you won't hear much from me in the next two weeks.  Have a lovely vacay from me.  MMMMWHA.


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL

Humanity said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> And, just for a fact check, NO dear, Spain is NOT the only country that compels citizens to learn the language of the majority... Think about it for fuck sake!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Link?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Hahaha let's see if you can actually engage your brain...
> 
> France - French speaking nation... What is the first language that French children learn?
> 
> Germany - German speaking nation... What is the first language that German children learn?
> 
> You are flogging a dead horse with your "state compulsory" bullshit Shusha...
> 
> Did you not read my previous post where I told you that, to be a resident of the country I live in, I had to pass a language test?
> 
> Give it up Shusha... You have ZERO argument! Just accept and move on!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Have you even bothered to read Spain's Constitution?
> 
> The wording of the Constitution states that is is the DUTY of every Spanish citizen to learn Castilian.  As far as I know, no other country compels learning a specific language as a constitutional requirement.
> 
> Are you agreeing that this is perfectly fair and reasonable to have in a Constitution?  If yes, just say so.  Its not hard.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I lived in Spain Shusha... I know what is and isn't required!
> 
> I know, let's try this... Turn up in Spain, with zero knowledge of Spanish and see how long you last! No, I am NOT talking about the Costas, I am talking about real Spain where English is hardly spoken... In fact, 'your' compulsory Spanish is also hardly spoken!
> 
> You need to get into the real world Shusha...
> 
> Let me tell you AGAIN....
> 
> I am resident in a country where it is compulsory to speak the language of the country or you are simply NOT going to be resident... This, in case you are unaware, is becoming a Europe wide requirement!
> 
> Now, either accept the facts or, respectfully, shut the fuck up!
Click to expand...


----------



## Humanity

Shusha said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> And, just for a fact check, NO dear, Spain is NOT the only country that compels citizens to learn the language of the majority... Think about it for fuck sake!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Link?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Hahaha let's see if you can actually engage your brain...
> 
> France - French speaking nation... What is the first language that French children learn?
> 
> Germany - German speaking nation... What is the first language that German children learn?
> 
> You are flogging a dead horse with your "state compulsory" bullshit Shusha...
> 
> Did you not read my previous post where I told you that, to be a resident of the country I live in, I had to pass a language test?
> 
> Give it up Shusha... You have ZERO argument! Just accept and move on!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Have you even bothered to read Spain's Constitution?
> 
> The wording of the Constitution states that is is the DUTY of every Spanish citizen to learn Castilian.  As far as I know, no other country compels learning a specific language as a constitutional requirement.
> 
> Are you agreeing that this is perfectly fair and reasonable to have in a Constitution?  If yes, just say so.  Its not hard.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I lived in Spain Shusha... I know what is and isn't required!
> 
> I know, let's try this... Turn up in Spain, with zero knowledge of Spanish and see how long you last! No, I am NOT talking about the Costas, I am talking about real Spain where English is hardly spoken... In fact, 'your' compulsory Spanish is also hardly spoken!
> 
> You need to get into the real world Shusha...
> 
> Let me tell you AGAIN....
> 
> I am resident in a country where it is compulsory to speak the language of the country or you are simply NOT going to be resident... This, in case you are unaware, is becoming a Europe wide requirement!
> 
> Now, either accept the facts or, respectfully, shut the fuck up!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Meanwhile, you are in luck.  I am off to NYC for work and you won't hear much from me in the next two weeks.  Have a lovely vacay from me.  MMMMWHA.
Click to expand...


Oh thats a shame Shusha...

Nice way to avoid having to deal with your belief in "positive discrimination".

Though, to be honest, once a zionut always a zionut eh.

Of course, let me just touch on the Spain bee in your bonnet...

Did you actually read that I had to learn a new language to be resident?

Did you read that MANY countries in Europe are insisting on being of a linguistic level, as natives, before you can achieve residency?

Nah, of course you didn't!

That bee a buzzin in your head is blocking factual statements!

Enjoy your trip... We can discuss you being an apartheid promoter, discrimination believing nazi upon your return.


----------



## rylah

P F Tinmore said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> yet they're *distinctly* Kurds plain and simple.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What makes them distinctly Kurds?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They weren't Kurds until they were called Kurds. Like everybody else, they weren't until they were.
Click to expand...


That's just idiotic.
A mere name doesn't make a distinct people,
but we all know why You're trying to sell us this BS,

Your guys don't even know the meaning of "Palestine" - the name of their fantasy nation.


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> You are oblivious to the fact that Israel has two rights systems. There are citizens rights where all citizens have (more or less) equal rights. Then there are nationality rights. Only the Jewish nationality has access to these rights
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Only the Jewish people have nationality rights IN ISRAEL.  Others have nationality rights elsewhere.  That is actually how the global system currently works.  Citizens have national rights in their nation.
> 
> Are you suggesting that the Jewish people should have nationality rights in Palestine?  Or not?
Click to expand...

Arab Israeli citizens have nationality rights where?


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> You are oblivious to the fact that Israel has two rights systems. There are citizens rights where all citizens have (more or less) equal rights. Then there are nationality rights. Only the Jewish nationality has access to these rights
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Only the Jewish people have nationality rights IN ISRAEL.  Others have nationality rights elsewhere.  That is actually how the global system currently works.  Citizens have national rights in their nation.
> 
> Are you suggesting that the Jewish people should have nationality rights in Palestine?  Or not?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Arab Israeli citizens have nationality rights where?
Click to expand...


Arab Palestinians have nationality rights in a hopefully if they can get their act together future state of Palestine. 

Arab Israelis can exercise their Israeli nationality in Israel. 

A nationality is formed around a culture. You aren't suggesting that Arab Israeli is a separate and distinct culture from Arab Palestinian, are you?


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> You are oblivious to the fact that Israel has two rights systems. There are citizens rights where all citizens have (more or less) equal rights. Then there are nationality rights. Only the Jewish nationality has access to these rights
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Only the Jewish people have nationality rights IN ISRAEL.  Others have nationality rights elsewhere.  That is actually how the global system currently works.  Citizens have national rights in their nation.
> 
> Are you suggesting that the Jewish people should have nationality rights in Palestine?  Or not?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Arab Israeli citizens have nationality rights where?
Click to expand...

Ever heard of the Arabian Peninsula?
Being Arabs they would have the right to any of the nationalities
created in the past century.  Saudi, Yemenite, etc, etc.
It all depends on where their ancestors came from in the first place within that Peninsula, would it not?

Irish Americans are Americans, but their ancestral roots are in Ireland.

Arab Israelis are Israelis, but their ancestral roots are in Arabia.

One gets the gist.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> You are oblivious to the fact that Israel has two rights systems. There are citizens rights where all citizens have (more or less) equal rights. Then there are nationality rights. Only the Jewish nationality has access to these rights
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Only the Jewish people have nationality rights IN ISRAEL.  Others have nationality rights elsewhere.  That is actually how the global system currently works.  Citizens have national rights in their nation.
> 
> Are you suggesting that the Jewish people should have nationality rights in Palestine?  Or not?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Arab Israeli citizens have nationality rights where?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Arab Palestinians have nationality rights in a hopefully if they can get their act together future state of Palestine.
> 
> Arab Israelis can exercise their Israeli nationality in Israel.
> 
> A nationality is formed around a culture. You aren't suggesting that Arab Israeli is a separate and distinct culture from Arab Palestinian, are you?
Click to expand...

In a broader international legal context, the “Nationality law...showed that the Palestinians formed a nation, and that Palestine was a State, though provisionally under guardianship”. 

The status of Palestine and the nationality of its inhabitants were finally settled by the Treaty of Lausanne from the international law perspective. In a report submitted to the League of Nations, the British Government rightly pointed out: “The ratification of the Treaty of Lausanne in Aug., 1924, finally regularised the international status of Palestine”. And, thereafter, “Palestine could, at last, obtain a separate nationality”.

https://doc.rero.ch/record/9065/files/these.pdf


----------



## rylah

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> You are oblivious to the fact that Israel has two rights systems. There are citizens rights where all citizens have (more or less) equal rights. Then there are nationality rights. Only the Jewish nationality has access to these rights
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Only the Jewish people have nationality rights IN ISRAEL.  Others have nationality rights elsewhere.  That is actually how the global system currently works.  Citizens have national rights in their nation.
> 
> Are you suggesting that the Jewish people should have nationality rights in Palestine?  Or not?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Arab Israeli citizens have nationality rights where?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Arab Palestinians have nationality rights in a hopefully if they can get their act together future state of Palestine.
> 
> Arab Israelis can exercise their Israeli nationality in Israel.
> 
> A nationality is formed around a culture. You aren't suggesting that Arab Israeli is a separate and distinct culture from Arab Palestinian, are you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In a broader international legal context, the “Nationality law...showed that the Palestinians formed a nation, and that Palestine was a State, though provisionally under guardianship”.
> 
> The status of Palestine and the nationality of its inhabitants were finally settled by the Treaty of Lausanne from the international law perspective. In a report submitted to the League of Nations, the British Government rightly pointed out: “The ratification of the Treaty of Lausanne in Aug., 1924, finally regularised the international status of Palestine”. And, thereafter, “Palestine could, at last, obtain a separate nationality”.
> 
> https://doc.rero.ch/record/9065/files/these.pdf
Click to expand...


And what's Your point?


----------



## P F Tinmore

rylah said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> You are oblivious to the fact that Israel has two rights systems. There are citizens rights where all citizens have (more or less) equal rights. Then there are nationality rights. Only the Jewish nationality has access to these rights
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Only the Jewish people have nationality rights IN ISRAEL.  Others have nationality rights elsewhere.  That is actually how the global system currently works.  Citizens have national rights in their nation.
> 
> Are you suggesting that the Jewish people should have nationality rights in Palestine?  Or not?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Arab Israeli citizens have nationality rights where?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Arab Palestinians have nationality rights in a hopefully if they can get their act together future state of Palestine.
> 
> Arab Israelis can exercise their Israeli nationality in Israel.
> 
> A nationality is formed around a culture. You aren't suggesting that Arab Israeli is a separate and distinct culture from Arab Palestinian, are you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In a broader international legal context, the “Nationality law...showed that the Palestinians formed a nation, and that Palestine was a State, though provisionally under guardianship”.
> 
> The status of Palestine and the nationality of its inhabitants were finally settled by the Treaty of Lausanne from the international law perspective. In a report submitted to the League of Nations, the British Government rightly pointed out: “The ratification of the Treaty of Lausanne in Aug., 1924, finally regularised the international status of Palestine”. And, thereafter, “Palestine could, at last, obtain a separate nationality”.
> 
> https://doc.rero.ch/record/9065/files/these.pdf
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And what's Your point?
Click to expand...

Glad you asked. Moved it to here:

The Official Discussion Thread for the creation of Israel, the UN and the British Mandate 

to stay on topic.


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> You are oblivious to the fact that Israel has two rights systems. There are citizens rights where all citizens have (more or less) equal rights. Then there are nationality rights. Only the Jewish nationality has access to these rights
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Only the Jewish people have nationality rights IN ISRAEL.  Others have nationality rights elsewhere.  That is actually how the global system currently works.  Citizens have national rights in their nation.
> 
> Are you suggesting that the Jewish people should have nationality rights in Palestine?  Or not?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Arab Israeli citizens have nationality rights where?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Arab Palestinians have nationality rights in a hopefully if they can get their act together future state of Palestine.
> 
> Arab Israelis can exercise their Israeli nationality in Israel.
> 
> A nationality is formed around a culture. You aren't suggesting that Arab Israeli is a separate and distinct culture from Arab Palestinian, are you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In a broader international legal context, the “Nationality law...showed that the Palestinians formed a nation, and that Palestine was a State, though provisionally under guardianship”.
> 
> The status of Palestine and the nationality of its inhabitants were finally settled by the Treaty of Lausanne from the international law perspective. In a report submitted to the League of Nations, the British Government rightly pointed out: “The ratification of the Treaty of Lausanne in Aug., 1924, finally regularised the international status of Palestine”. And, thereafter, “Palestine could, at last, obtain a separate nationality”.
> 
> https://doc.rero.ch/record/9065/files/these.pdf
Click to expand...


The problem with this is that there were two distinct nationalities within the territory.  Could not be more clear. Hence the conflict. The solution is to form two states. Always has been. Standard procedure globally in cases like this.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> You are oblivious to the fact that Israel has two rights systems. There are citizens rights where all citizens have (more or less) equal rights. Then there are nationality rights. Only the Jewish nationality has access to these rights
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Only the Jewish people have nationality rights IN ISRAEL.  Others have nationality rights elsewhere.  That is actually how the global system currently works.  Citizens have national rights in their nation.
> 
> Are you suggesting that the Jewish people should have nationality rights in Palestine?  Or not?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Arab Israeli citizens have nationality rights where?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Arab Palestinians have nationality rights in a hopefully if they can get their act together future state of Palestine.
> 
> Arab Israelis can exercise their Israeli nationality in Israel.
> 
> A nationality is formed around a culture. You aren't suggesting that Arab Israeli is a separate and distinct culture from Arab Palestinian, are you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In a broader international legal context, the “Nationality law...showed that the Palestinians formed a nation, and that Palestine was a State, though provisionally under guardianship”.
> 
> The status of Palestine and the nationality of its inhabitants were finally settled by the Treaty of Lausanne from the international law perspective. In a report submitted to the League of Nations, the British Government rightly pointed out: “The ratification of the Treaty of Lausanne in Aug., 1924, finally regularised the international status of Palestine”. And, thereafter, “Palestine could, at last, obtain a separate nationality”.
> 
> https://doc.rero.ch/record/9065/files/these.pdf
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The problem with this is that there were two distinct nationalities within the territory.  Could not be more clear. Hence the conflict. The solution is to form two states. Always has been. Standard procedure globally in cases like this.
Click to expand...

Indeed, natives and colonial settlers.


----------



## Sixties Fan

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Only the Jewish people have nationality rights IN ISRAEL.  Others have nationality rights elsewhere.  That is actually how the global system currently works.  Citizens have national rights in their nation.
> 
> Are you suggesting that the Jewish people should have nationality rights in Palestine?  Or not?
> 
> 
> 
> Arab Israeli citizens have nationality rights where?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Arab Palestinians have nationality rights in a hopefully if they can get their act together future state of Palestine.
> 
> Arab Israelis can exercise their Israeli nationality in Israel.
> 
> A nationality is formed around a culture. You aren't suggesting that Arab Israeli is a separate and distinct culture from Arab Palestinian, are you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In a broader international legal context, the “Nationality law...showed that the Palestinians formed a nation, and that Palestine was a State, though provisionally under guardianship”.
> 
> The status of Palestine and the nationality of its inhabitants were finally settled by the Treaty of Lausanne from the international law perspective. In a report submitted to the League of Nations, the British Government rightly pointed out: “The ratification of the Treaty of Lausanne in Aug., 1924, finally regularised the international status of Palestine”. And, thereafter, “Palestine could, at last, obtain a separate nationality”.
> 
> https://doc.rero.ch/record/9065/files/these.pdf
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The problem with this is that there were two distinct nationalities within the territory.  Could not be more clear. Hence the conflict. The solution is to form two states. Always has been. Standard procedure globally in cases like this.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Indeed, natives and colonial settlers.
Click to expand...

A reminder to all the Tinmores of the world:


----------



## Sixties Fan

Netanyahu at Cabinet Meeting: Israel is the National State of the Jewish People, Exclusively


----------



## Coyote

Sixties Fan said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> You are oblivious to the fact that Israel has two rights systems. There are citizens rights where all citizens have (more or less) equal rights. Then there are nationality rights. Only the Jewish nationality has access to these rights
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Only the Jewish people have nationality rights IN ISRAEL.  Others have nationality rights elsewhere.  That is actually how the global system currently works.  Citizens have national rights in their nation.
> 
> Are you suggesting that the Jewish people should have nationality rights in Palestine?  Or not?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Arab Israeli citizens have nationality rights where?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Ever heard of the Arabian Peninsula?
> Being Arabs they would have the right to any of the nationalities
> created in the past century.  Saudi, Yemenite, etc, etc.
> It all depends on where their ancestors came from in the first place within that Peninsula, would it not?
Click to expand...


Not really.  Because many Palestinians descend from older native people's in the area. Not Yemen. We don't even know where they all come from, the nations and countries that existed then do not now. People migrate, from before known history.  Even Israel is not old.  It's a newly invented state.



> Irish Americans are Americans, but their ancestral roots are in Ireland.
> 
> Arab Israelis are Israelis, but their ancestral roots are in Arabia.
> 
> One gets the gist.



Many Palestinians have their ancestral roots in what is now Israel.

They are citizens of Israel, Israel was formed AROUND them.  They didn't move in.

So where do the Non-Jewish citizens of Israel have national rights?  How about people of mixed ancestry?  That would include both Palestinians and Jews.  Where are their national rights?

If you are a citizen, of a state, that is where your national rights should be.  Anything else will lead to a multi-tiered system, and inevitably that leads to some inequality and a division between "real Israeli's" and others.


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> You are oblivious to the fact that Israel has two rights systems. There are citizens rights where all citizens have (more or less) equal rights. Then there are nationality rights. Only the Jewish nationality has access to these rights
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Only the Jewish people have nationality rights IN ISRAEL.  Others have nationality rights elsewhere.  That is actually how the global system currently works.  Citizens have national rights in their nation.
> 
> Are you suggesting that the Jewish people should have nationality rights in Palestine?  Or not?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Arab Israeli citizens have nationality rights where?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Arab Palestinians have nationality rights in a hopefully if they can get their act together future state of Palestine.
> 
> Arab Israelis can exercise their Israeli nationality in Israel.
> 
> A nationality is formed around a culture. You aren't suggesting that Arab Israeli is a separate and distinct culture from Arab Palestinian, are you?
Click to expand...


I am to the degree that they've formed something of their own culture with regional differences including dialect, we did talk about that in other threads and doubtless don't agree .  But it's irrelevant.  

Israel is a new state, imposed on a region with multiple ethnic groups already residing there.  It has since decided create a "nationality" law that only includes ONE of those groups despite the fact that most of those groups have been in that region since ancient history.  As a state does Israel have the right to do that?  Yes.  Any state does.  Does it make it right?  That is questionable.  How can you maintain equality?

Think about it - you are citizen of Israel.  You have served in the IDF, defended your country, supported it, and were born there.  But now - because you are NOT Jewish - you do not have any "national rights" there.  There is no way to look at that and not somehow see yourself as a different category of citizen.  As an outsider or somehow less than.  Why should you fight for Israel and defend it?



Nationality - Wikipedia
_*Nationality* is a legal relationship between an individual person and a state.[1] Nationality affords the state jurisdiction over the person and affords the person the protection of the state. What these rights and duties are varies from state to state.[2]

By custom and international conventions, it is the right of each state to determine who its nationals are.[3] Such determinations are part of nationality law. In some cases, determinations of nationality are also governed by public international law—for example, by treaties on statelessness and the European Convention on Nationality. 

Nationality differs technically and legally from citizenship, which is a different legal relationship between a person and a country. The noun national can include both citizens and non-citizens. The most common distinguishing feature of citizenship is that citizens have the right to participate in the political life of the state, such as by voting or standing for election. *However, in most modern countries all nationals are citizens of the state, and full citizens are always nationals of the state*.[1][4]

In older texts, the word nationality rather than ethnicity, often used to refer to an ethnic group (a group of people who share a common ethnic identity, language, culture, descent, history, and so forth). This older meaning of nationality is not defined by political borders or passport ownership and includes nations that lack an independent state (such as the Arameans, Scots, Welsh, English, Basques, Catalans, Kurds, Kabyles, Baloch, Berbers, Bosniaks, Kashmiris, Palestinians, Sindhi, Tamils, Hmong, Inuit, Copts, Māori, Sikhs, Wakhi and Székelys).[citation needed] _​


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> You are oblivious to the fact that Israel has two rights systems. There are citizens rights where all citizens have (more or less) equal rights. Then there are nationality rights. Only the Jewish nationality has access to these rights
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Only the Jewish people have nationality rights IN ISRAEL.  Others have nationality rights elsewhere.  That is actually how the global system currently works.  Citizens have national rights in their nation.
> 
> Are you suggesting that the Jewish people should have nationality rights in Palestine?  Or not?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Arab Israeli citizens have nationality rights where?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Ever heard of the Arabian Peninsula?
> Being Arabs they would have the right to any of the nationalities
> created in the past century.  Saudi, Yemenite, etc, etc.
> It all depends on where their ancestors came from in the first place within that Peninsula, would it not?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Not really.  Because many Palestinians descend from older native people's in the area. Not Yemen. We don't even know where they all come from, the nations and countries that existed then do not now. People migrate, from before known history.  Even Israel is not old.  It's a newly invented state.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Irish Americans are Americans, but their ancestral roots are in Ireland.
> 
> Arab Israelis are Israelis, but their ancestral roots are in Arabia.
> 
> One gets the gist.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Many Palestinians have their ancestral roots in what is now Israel.
> 
> They are citizens of Israel, Israel was formed AROUND them.  They didn't move in.
> 
> So where do the Non-Jewish citizens of Israel have national rights?  How about people of mixed ancestry?  That would include both Palestinians and Jews.  Where are their national rights?
> 
> If you are a citizen, of a state, that is where your national rights should be.  Anything else will lead to a multi-tiered system, and inevitably that leads to some inequality and a division between "real Israeli's" and others.
Click to expand...

Arabs, Druze, Bedouins and all others, if they are citizens of Israel that is where their national rights are.

The rest of what you wrote does not apply to the Arabs in general.

Which Palestinians are you talking about who have ancient roots in the land of Israel before the Muslim Arab invasion?

The Jewish People encompasses ALL of the nations, peoples who lived on the land of Israel before the Muslim Arab invasion.

Modern Israel is not old.

Ancient Israel, with its population, culture, religion, laws, etc, which dealt with ALL of the people who lived there at the time is 3000 years old.  And the descendants know very well who they are, scattered around the world or not.

Please read some of the articles posted again.

ALL citizens in Modern Israel have THE SAME RIGHTS under Israeli law.

Do not mix Jews and non Jews living in Israel with "Rea Israelis" or anything else.  It does not work.

There are citizens of Israel .
There are residents of Israel.

The laws take care of all of them.


----------



## Dogmaphobe

Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> You are oblivious to the fact that Israel has two rights systems. There are citizens rights where all citizens have (more or less) equal rights. Then there are nationality rights. Only the Jewish nationality has access to these rights
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Only the Jewish people have nationality rights IN ISRAEL.  Others have nationality rights elsewhere.  That is actually how the global system currently works.  Citizens have national rights in their nation.
> 
> Are you suggesting that the Jewish people should have nationality rights in Palestine?  Or not?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Arab Israeli citizens have nationality rights where?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Ever heard of the Arabian Peninsula?
> Being Arabs they would have the right to any of the nationalities
> created in the past century.  Saudi, Yemenite, etc, etc.
> It all depends on where their ancestors came from in the first place within that Peninsula, would it not?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Not really.  Because many Palestinians descend from older native people's in the area. Not Yemen. We don't even know where they all come from, the nations and countries that existed then do not now. People migrate, from before known history.  Even Israel is not old.  It's a newly invented state.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Irish Americans are Americans, but their ancestral roots are in Ireland.
> 
> Arab Israelis are Israelis, but their ancestral roots are in Arabia.
> 
> One gets the gist.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Many Palestinians have their ancestral roots in what is now Israel.
> 
> They are citizens of Israel, Israel was formed AROUND them.  They didn't move in.
> 
> So where do the Non-Jewish citizens of Israel have national rights?  How about people of mixed ancestry?  That would include both Palestinians and Jews.  Where are their national rights?
> 
> If you are a citizen, of a state, that is where your national rights should be.  Anything else will lead to a multi-tiered system, and inevitably that leads to some inequality and a division between "real Israeli's" and others.
Click to expand...



The term "Palestinian" was not even invented until the middle part of the twentieth century.  It was just a propaganda ploy to hoodwink people into seeing Arabs as victim when they were really the aggressor.  Arabs have attacked the fledgling state en masse on more than one occasion, yet we are told it was "Palestinians" who are the victims.

It's a great sleight of hand if you can get away with it.

There should be no more furor over Israel's establishment as the Jewish state than there is over  all those states established as Arab. The reason there IS such an uproar is patently obvious -- the identity of the people for whom such a state represents their self determination.  The utter hypocrisy of the double standards removes all but one single explanation for such, and that is antisemitism.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> You are oblivious to the fact that Israel has two rights systems. There are citizens rights where all citizens have (more or less) equal rights. Then there are nationality rights. Only the Jewish nationality has access to these rights
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Only the Jewish people have nationality rights IN ISRAEL.  Others have nationality rights elsewhere.  That is actually how the global system currently works.  Citizens have national rights in their nation.
> 
> Are you suggesting that the Jewish people should have nationality rights in Palestine?  Or not?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Arab Israeli citizens have nationality rights where?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Arab Palestinians have nationality rights in a hopefully if they can get their act together future state of Palestine.
> 
> Arab Israelis can exercise their Israeli nationality in Israel.
> 
> A nationality is formed around a culture. You aren't suggesting that Arab Israeli is a separate and distinct culture from Arab Palestinian, are you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I am to the degree that they've formed something of their own culture with regional differences including dialect, we did talk about that in other threads and doubtless don't agree .  But it's irrelevant.
> 
> Israel is a new state, imposed on a region with multiple ethnic groups already residing there.  It has since decided create a "nationality" law that only includes ONE of those groups despite the fact that most of those groups have been in that region since ancient history.  As a state does Israel have the right to do that?  Yes.  Any state does.  Does it make it right?  That is questionable.  How can you maintain equality?
> 
> Think about it - you are citizen of Israel.  You have served in the IDF, defended your country, supported it, and were born there.  But now - because you are NOT Jewish - you do not have any "national rights" there.  There is no way to look at that and not somehow see yourself as a different category of citizen.  As an outsider or somehow less than.  Why should you fight for Israel and defend it?
> 
> 
> 
> Nationality - Wikipedia
> _*Nationality* is a legal relationship between an individual person and a state.[1] Nationality affords the state jurisdiction over the person and affords the person the protection of the state. What these rights and duties are varies from state to state.[2]
> 
> By custom and international conventions, it is the right of each state to determine who its nationals are.[3] Such determinations are part of nationality law. In some cases, determinations of nationality are also governed by public international law—for example, by treaties on statelessness and the European Convention on Nationality.
> 
> Nationality differs technically and legally from citizenship, which is a different legal relationship between a person and a country. The noun national can include both citizens and non-citizens. The most common distinguishing feature of citizenship is that citizens have the right to participate in the political life of the state, such as by voting or standing for election. *However, in most modern countries all nationals are citizens of the state, and full citizens are always nationals of the state*.[1][4]
> 
> In older texts, the word nationality rather than ethnicity, often used to refer to an ethnic group (a group of people who share a common ethnic identity, language, culture, descent, history, and so forth). This older meaning of nationality is not defined by political borders or passport ownership and includes nations that lack an independent state (such as the Arameans, Scots, Welsh, English, Basques, Catalans, Kurds, Kabyles, Baloch, Berbers, Bosniaks, Kashmiris, Palestinians, Sindhi, Tamils, Hmong, Inuit, Copts, Māori, Sikhs, Wakhi and Székelys).[citation needed] _​
Click to expand...

Sorry, but the delusion that :

The Jews seem to be "imposing" their will on all other "ancient people" of the land.

There is no such thing.

The Jewish People are the most ancient of those people.  The Palestinian Arabs are not.  Neither would be the Greeks, the Romans or any other people who stayed after they invaded and conquered the land after the Jewish People had established themselves over 3000 years ago.

There are no Philistines.
There are no Amorites.
There are no Hitites, etc.  to come and claim the land as the ancient people from that very place. 
There are no Romans, Greeks, Crusaders claiming anything over the Jewish People's rights to their ancient homeland.

Are you to tell me that all people who now inhabit Kurdistan (even though not allow to declare Independence) have the same National rights as the descendants of the ancient Kurds?  
Do the Yazidis who fled to that area have the right to demand some National rights to the land, which should only be for the Kurdish people?

It is a very simple example, which shows how the descendants of the Jewish People are the ones with the rights for any National self-determination definition on that land.

It does not take away one bit the rights of all of those who are not Jewish, and are either citizens or residents of Israel.

Their rights are written in the laws of the land.

What they do not have the right to do, as Arabs, etc, is to demand that Israel be their Ancestral national anything in place of the Jewish People's rights, which is Exactly what the Muslim Arabs have been doing in the past decades with their endless "The Jews are from Europe", "There was no Temple Mount", "There were no Jews in the area", etc, which continues to come hard and furious from the Arab side.


--------------
Individual rights, Netanyahu said, are anchored in many of the Jewish state’s (existing) laws, but not so Jewish national rights. No one was harmed by the Nationality Law and no one intends to to harm anyone’s individual rights.

(full article online)

Netanyahu at Cabinet Meeting: Israel is the National State of the Jewish People, Exclusively
-------------
The only reason why so many are complaining is because it is the State of the Jews.

Any other place on the planet, they will never care less.


----------



## Coyote

Sixties Fan said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> You are oblivious to the fact that Israel has two rights systems. There are citizens rights where all citizens have (more or less) equal rights. Then there are nationality rights. Only the Jewish nationality has access to these rights
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Only the Jewish people have nationality rights IN ISRAEL.  Others have nationality rights elsewhere.  That is actually how the global system currently works.  Citizens have national rights in their nation.
> 
> Are you suggesting that the Jewish people should have nationality rights in Palestine?  Or not?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Arab Israeli citizens have nationality rights where?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Arab Palestinians have nationality rights in a hopefully if they can get their act together future state of Palestine.
> 
> Arab Israelis can exercise their Israeli nationality in Israel.
> 
> A nationality is formed around a culture. You aren't suggesting that Arab Israeli is a separate and distinct culture from Arab Palestinian, are you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I am to the degree that they've formed something of their own culture with regional differences including dialect, we did talk about that in other threads and doubtless don't agree .  But it's irrelevant.
> 
> Israel is a new state, imposed on a region with multiple ethnic groups already residing there.  It has since decided create a "nationality" law that only includes ONE of those groups despite the fact that most of those groups have been in that region since ancient history.  As a state does Israel have the right to do that?  Yes.  Any state does.  Does it make it right?  That is questionable.  How can you maintain equality?
> 
> Think about it - you are citizen of Israel.  You have served in the IDF, defended your country, supported it, and were born there.  But now - because you are NOT Jewish - you do not have any "national rights" there.  There is no way to look at that and not somehow see yourself as a different category of citizen.  As an outsider or somehow less than.  Why should you fight for Israel and defend it?
> 
> 
> 
> Nationality - Wikipedia
> _*Nationality* is a legal relationship between an individual person and a state.[1] Nationality affords the state jurisdiction over the person and affords the person the protection of the state. What these rights and duties are varies from state to state.[2]
> 
> By custom and international conventions, it is the right of each state to determine who its nationals are.[3] Such determinations are part of nationality law. In some cases, determinations of nationality are also governed by public international law—for example, by treaties on statelessness and the European Convention on Nationality.
> 
> Nationality differs technically and legally from citizenship, which is a different legal relationship between a person and a country. The noun national can include both citizens and non-citizens. The most common distinguishing feature of citizenship is that citizens have the right to participate in the political life of the state, such as by voting or standing for election. *However, in most modern countries all nationals are citizens of the state, and full citizens are always nationals of the state*.[1][4]
> 
> In older texts, the word nationality rather than ethnicity, often used to refer to an ethnic group (a group of people who share a common ethnic identity, language, culture, descent, history, and so forth). This older meaning of nationality is not defined by political borders or passport ownership and includes nations that lack an independent state (such as the Arameans, Scots, Welsh, English, Basques, Catalans, Kurds, Kabyles, Baloch, Berbers, Bosniaks, Kashmiris, Palestinians, Sindhi, Tamils, Hmong, Inuit, Copts, Māori, Sikhs, Wakhi and Székelys).[citation needed] _​
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sorry, but the delusion that :
> 
> The Jews seem to be "imposing" their will on all other "ancient people" of the land.
> 
> There is no such thing.
> 
> The Jewish People are the most ancient of those people.  The Palestinian Arabs are not.  Neither would be the Greeks, the Romans or any other people who stayed after they invaded and conquered the land after the Jewish People had established themselves over 3000 years ago.
> 
> There are no Philistines.
> There are no Amorites.
> There are no Hitites, etc.  to come and claim the land as the ancient people from that very place.
> There are no Romans, Greeks, Crusaders claiming anything over the Jewish People's rights to their ancient homeland.
> 
> Are you to tell me that all people who now inhabit Kurdistan (even though not allow to declare Independence) have the same National rights as the descendants of the ancient Kurds?
> Do the Yazidis who fled to that area have the right to demand some National rights to the land, which should only be for the Kurdish people?
Click to expand...


We will have to agree to disagree on this, since I don't want to derail this into another thread on who is indiginous.  There are multiple indiginous groups there, and they all have rights.

The question is - how do you maintain equality?  In most modern countries citizenship confers nationality rights.



> It is a very simple example, which shows how the descendants of the Jewish People are the ones with the rights for any National self-determination definition on that land.
> 
> It does not take away one bit the rights of all of those who are not Jewish, and are either citizens or residents of Israel.
> 
> Their rights are written in the laws of the land.
> 
> What they do not have the right to do, as Arabs, etc, is to demand that Israel be their Ancestral national anything *in place of the Jewish People's rights*, which is Exactly what the Muslim Arabs have been doing in the past decades with their endless "The Jews are from Europe", "There was no Temple Mount", "There were no Jews in the area", etc, which continues to come hard and furious from the Arab side.



Why does it have to be* in place of*?  Why can't any citizen of Israel have nationality rights in Israel?  If a Palestinian state is ever established, there will likely be Jewish communities within it.  Jewish communities in those areas should have every right to nationality rights within Palestine.




> --------------
> Individual rights, Netanyahu said, are anchored in many of the Jewish state’s (existing) laws, but not so Jewish national rights. *No one was harmed by the Nationality Law and no one intends to to harm anyone’s individual rights.*
> 
> (full article online)
> 
> Netanyahu at Cabinet Meeting: Israel is the National State of the Jewish People, Exclusively
> -------------
> The only reason why so many are complaining is because it is the State of the Jews.
> 
> Any other place on the planet, they will never care less.



I think that remains to be seen.  Most other modern countries do not confer nationality rights only to one ethnic group.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Only the Jewish people have nationality rights IN ISRAEL.  Others have nationality rights elsewhere.  That is actually how the global system currently works.  Citizens have national rights in their nation.
> 
> Are you suggesting that the Jewish people should have nationality rights in Palestine?  Or not?
> 
> 
> 
> Arab Israeli citizens have nationality rights where?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Arab Palestinians have nationality rights in a hopefully if they can get their act together future state of Palestine.
> 
> Arab Israelis can exercise their Israeli nationality in Israel.
> 
> A nationality is formed around a culture. You aren't suggesting that Arab Israeli is a separate and distinct culture from Arab Palestinian, are you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I am to the degree that they've formed something of their own culture with regional differences including dialect, we did talk about that in other threads and doubtless don't agree .  But it's irrelevant.
> 
> Israel is a new state, imposed on a region with multiple ethnic groups already residing there.  It has since decided create a "nationality" law that only includes ONE of those groups despite the fact that most of those groups have been in that region since ancient history.  As a state does Israel have the right to do that?  Yes.  Any state does.  Does it make it right?  That is questionable.  How can you maintain equality?
> 
> Think about it - you are citizen of Israel.  You have served in the IDF, defended your country, supported it, and were born there.  But now - because you are NOT Jewish - you do not have any "national rights" there.  There is no way to look at that and not somehow see yourself as a different category of citizen.  As an outsider or somehow less than.  Why should you fight for Israel and defend it?
> 
> 
> 
> Nationality - Wikipedia
> _*Nationality* is a legal relationship between an individual person and a state.[1] Nationality affords the state jurisdiction over the person and affords the person the protection of the state. What these rights and duties are varies from state to state.[2]
> 
> By custom and international conventions, it is the right of each state to determine who its nationals are.[3] Such determinations are part of nationality law. In some cases, determinations of nationality are also governed by public international law—for example, by treaties on statelessness and the European Convention on Nationality.
> 
> Nationality differs technically and legally from citizenship, which is a different legal relationship between a person and a country. The noun national can include both citizens and non-citizens. The most common distinguishing feature of citizenship is that citizens have the right to participate in the political life of the state, such as by voting or standing for election. *However, in most modern countries all nationals are citizens of the state, and full citizens are always nationals of the state*.[1][4]
> 
> In older texts, the word nationality rather than ethnicity, often used to refer to an ethnic group (a group of people who share a common ethnic identity, language, culture, descent, history, and so forth). This older meaning of nationality is not defined by political borders or passport ownership and includes nations that lack an independent state (such as the Arameans, Scots, Welsh, English, Basques, Catalans, Kurds, Kabyles, Baloch, Berbers, Bosniaks, Kashmiris, Palestinians, Sindhi, Tamils, Hmong, Inuit, Copts, Māori, Sikhs, Wakhi and Székelys).[citation needed] _​
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sorry, but the delusion that :
> 
> The Jews seem to be "imposing" their will on all other "ancient people" of the land.
> 
> There is no such thing.
> 
> The Jewish People are the most ancient of those people.  The Palestinian Arabs are not.  Neither would be the Greeks, the Romans or any other people who stayed after they invaded and conquered the land after the Jewish People had established themselves over 3000 years ago.
> 
> There are no Philistines.
> There are no Amorites.
> There are no Hitites, etc.  to come and claim the land as the ancient people from that very place.
> There are no Romans, Greeks, Crusaders claiming anything over the Jewish People's rights to their ancient homeland.
> 
> Are you to tell me that all people who now inhabit Kurdistan (even though not allow to declare Independence) have the same National rights as the descendants of the ancient Kurds?
> Do the Yazidis who fled to that area have the right to demand some National rights to the land, which should only be for the Kurdish people?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We will have to agree to disagree on this, since I don't want to derail this into another thread on who is indiginous.  There are multiple indiginous groups there, and they all have rights.
> 
> The question is - how do you maintain equality?  In most modern countries citizenship confers nationality rights.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is a very simple example, which shows how the descendants of the Jewish People are the ones with the rights for any National self-determination definition on that land.
> 
> It does not take away one bit the rights of all of those who are not Jewish, and are either citizens or residents of Israel.
> 
> Their rights are written in the laws of the land.
> 
> What they do not have the right to do, as Arabs, etc, is to demand that Israel be their Ancestral national anything *in place of the Jewish People's rights*, which is Exactly what the Muslim Arabs have been doing in the past decades with their endless "The Jews are from Europe", "There was no Temple Mount", "There were no Jews in the area", etc, which continues to come hard and furious from the Arab side.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why does it have to be* in place of*?  Why can't any citizen of Israel have nationality rights in Israel?  If a Palestinian state is ever established, there will likely be Jewish communities within it.  Jewish communities in those areas should have every right to nationality rights within Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --------------
> Individual rights, Netanyahu said, are anchored in many of the Jewish state’s (existing) laws, but not so Jewish national rights. *No one was harmed by the Nationality Law and no one intends to to harm anyone’s individual rights.*
> 
> (full article online)
> 
> Netanyahu at Cabinet Meeting: Israel is the National State of the Jewish People, Exclusively
> -------------
> The only reason why so many are complaining is because it is the State of the Jews.
> 
> Any other place on the planet, they will never care less.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think that remains to be seen.  Most other modern countries do not confer nationality rights only to one ethnic group.
Click to expand...




Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Only the Jewish people have nationality rights IN ISRAEL.  Others have nationality rights elsewhere.  That is actually how the global system currently works.  Citizens have national rights in their nation.
> 
> Are you suggesting that the Jewish people should have nationality rights in Palestine?  Or not?
> 
> 
> 
> Arab Israeli citizens have nationality rights where?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Arab Palestinians have nationality rights in a hopefully if they can get their act together future state of Palestine.
> 
> Arab Israelis can exercise their Israeli nationality in Israel.
> 
> A nationality is formed around a culture. You aren't suggesting that Arab Israeli is a separate and distinct culture from Arab Palestinian, are you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I am to the degree that they've formed something of their own culture with regional differences including dialect, we did talk about that in other threads and doubtless don't agree .  But it's irrelevant.
> 
> Israel is a new state, imposed on a region with multiple ethnic groups already residing there.  It has since decided create a "nationality" law that only includes ONE of those groups despite the fact that most of those groups have been in that region since ancient history.  As a state does Israel have the right to do that?  Yes.  Any state does.  Does it make it right?  That is questionable.  How can you maintain equality?
> 
> Think about it - you are citizen of Israel.  You have served in the IDF, defended your country, supported it, and were born there.  But now - because you are NOT Jewish - you do not have any "national rights" there.  There is no way to look at that and not somehow see yourself as a different category of citizen.  As an outsider or somehow less than.  Why should you fight for Israel and defend it?
> 
> 
> 
> Nationality - Wikipedia
> _*Nationality* is a legal relationship between an individual person and a state.[1] Nationality affords the state jurisdiction over the person and affords the person the protection of the state. What these rights and duties are varies from state to state.[2]
> 
> By custom and international conventions, it is the right of each state to determine who its nationals are.[3] Such determinations are part of nationality law. In some cases, determinations of nationality are also governed by public international law—for example, by treaties on statelessness and the European Convention on Nationality.
> 
> Nationality differs technically and legally from citizenship, which is a different legal relationship between a person and a country. The noun national can include both citizens and non-citizens. The most common distinguishing feature of citizenship is that citizens have the right to participate in the political life of the state, such as by voting or standing for election. *However, in most modern countries all nationals are citizens of the state, and full citizens are always nationals of the state*.[1][4]
> 
> In older texts, the word nationality rather than ethnicity, often used to refer to an ethnic group (a group of people who share a common ethnic identity, language, culture, descent, history, and so forth). This older meaning of nationality is not defined by political borders or passport ownership and includes nations that lack an independent state (such as the Arameans, Scots, Welsh, English, Basques, Catalans, Kurds, Kabyles, Baloch, Berbers, Bosniaks, Kashmiris, Palestinians, Sindhi, Tamils, Hmong, Inuit, Copts, Māori, Sikhs, Wakhi and Székelys).[citation needed] _​
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sorry, but the delusion that :
> 
> The Jews seem to be "imposing" their will on all other "ancient people" of the land.
> 
> There is no such thing.
> 
> The Jewish People are the most ancient of those people.  The Palestinian Arabs are not.  Neither would be the Greeks, the Romans or any other people who stayed after they invaded and conquered the land after the Jewish People had established themselves over 3000 years ago.
> 
> There are no Philistines.
> There are no Amorites.
> There are no Hitites, etc.  to come and claim the land as the ancient people from that very place.
> There are no Romans, Greeks, Crusaders claiming anything over the Jewish People's rights to their ancient homeland.
> 
> Are you to tell me that all people who now inhabit Kurdistan (even though not allow to declare Independence) have the same National rights as the descendants of the ancient Kurds?
> Do the Yazidis who fled to that area have the right to demand some National rights to the land, which should only be for the Kurdish people?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We will have to agree to disagree on this, since I don't want to derail this into another thread on who is indiginous.  There are multiple indiginous groups there, and they all have rights.
> 
> The question is - how do you maintain equality?  In most modern countries citizenship confers nationality rights.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is a very simple example, which shows how the descendants of the Jewish People are the ones with the rights for any National self-determination definition on that land.
> 
> It does not take away one bit the rights of all of those who are not Jewish, and are either citizens or residents of Israel.
> 
> Their rights are written in the laws of the land.
> 
> What they do not have the right to do, as Arabs, etc, is to demand that Israel be their Ancestral national anything *in place of the Jewish People's rights*, which is Exactly what the Muslim Arabs have been doing in the past decades with their endless "The Jews are from Europe", "There was no Temple Mount", "There were no Jews in the area", etc, which continues to come hard and furious from the Arab side.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why does it have to be* in place of*?  Why can't any citizen of Israel have nationality rights in Israel?  If a Palestinian state is ever established, there will likely be Jewish communities within it.  Jewish communities in those areas should have every right to nationality rights within Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --------------
> Individual rights, Netanyahu said, are anchored in many of the Jewish state’s (existing) laws, but not so Jewish national rights. *No one was harmed by the Nationality Law and no one intends to to harm anyone’s individual rights.*
> 
> (full article online)
> 
> Netanyahu at Cabinet Meeting: Israel is the National State of the Jewish People, Exclusively
> -------------
> The only reason why so many are complaining is because it is the State of the Jews.
> 
> Any other place on the planet, they will never care less.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think that remains to be seen.  Most other modern countries do not confer nationality rights only to one ethnic group.
Click to expand...

That is exactly the point:'

There are NO OTHER INDIGENOUS PEOPLE with rights to the land and self determination but the Jewish People.

There never has been.

No other people has ever declared indigenous rights to the land of Israel before 1948.

Self Determination is different from "National Rights" to think of myself as an American.

I am not descendant from the First Nations of America.  Not one of them.
I do not have the right to demand the same rights to self determination over their ancestral lands as they do.  I never will.

Therefore, if the Apaches choose to declare self-determination over their ancient homeland, no other First Nation can do the same, and neither can any European or Asian who came over after 1492.

Therefore, here we have the Arabs, who came into the land 2400 years after the Jewish People established their Nation, culture, etc, saying that They have exactly the same rights, or worse, they have more rights to self-determination over the land then the Jewish People.

And that is exactly what you and others cannot come to understand.


----------



## Humanity

Sixties Fan said:


> Netanyahu at Cabinet Meeting: Israel is the National State of the Jewish People, Exclusively



Wow, theres a game changer right there!

Nutanduahoo just crossed the.line and created an apartheid state!

I have always said Israel is NOT an apartheid state but was sailing very close to it.

I guess now its official...

How to win friends and influence people (but only if you are Jewish) - B. NUTANDYAHOO


----------



## Coyote

Sixties Fan said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Arab Israeli citizens have nationality rights where?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Arab Palestinians have nationality rights in a hopefully if they can get their act together future state of Palestine.
> 
> Arab Israelis can exercise their Israeli nationality in Israel.
> 
> A nationality is formed around a culture. You aren't suggesting that Arab Israeli is a separate and distinct culture from Arab Palestinian, are you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I am to the degree that they've formed something of their own culture with regional differences including dialect, we did talk about that in other threads and doubtless don't agree .  But it's irrelevant.
> 
> Israel is a new state, imposed on a region with multiple ethnic groups already residing there.  It has since decided create a "nationality" law that only includes ONE of those groups despite the fact that most of those groups have been in that region since ancient history.  As a state does Israel have the right to do that?  Yes.  Any state does.  Does it make it right?  That is questionable.  How can you maintain equality?
> 
> Think about it - you are citizen of Israel.  You have served in the IDF, defended your country, supported it, and were born there.  But now - because you are NOT Jewish - you do not have any "national rights" there.  There is no way to look at that and not somehow see yourself as a different category of citizen.  As an outsider or somehow less than.  Why should you fight for Israel and defend it?
> 
> 
> 
> Nationality - Wikipedia
> _*Nationality* is a legal relationship between an individual person and a state.[1] Nationality affords the state jurisdiction over the person and affords the person the protection of the state. What these rights and duties are varies from state to state.[2]
> 
> By custom and international conventions, it is the right of each state to determine who its nationals are.[3] Such determinations are part of nationality law. In some cases, determinations of nationality are also governed by public international law—for example, by treaties on statelessness and the European Convention on Nationality.
> 
> Nationality differs technically and legally from citizenship, which is a different legal relationship between a person and a country. The noun national can include both citizens and non-citizens. The most common distinguishing feature of citizenship is that citizens have the right to participate in the political life of the state, such as by voting or standing for election. *However, in most modern countries all nationals are citizens of the state, and full citizens are always nationals of the state*.[1][4]
> 
> In older texts, the word nationality rather than ethnicity, often used to refer to an ethnic group (a group of people who share a common ethnic identity, language, culture, descent, history, and so forth). This older meaning of nationality is not defined by political borders or passport ownership and includes nations that lack an independent state (such as the Arameans, Scots, Welsh, English, Basques, Catalans, Kurds, Kabyles, Baloch, Berbers, Bosniaks, Kashmiris, Palestinians, Sindhi, Tamils, Hmong, Inuit, Copts, Māori, Sikhs, Wakhi and Székelys).[citation needed] _​
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sorry, but the delusion that :
> 
> The Jews seem to be "imposing" their will on all other "ancient people" of the land.
> 
> There is no such thing.
> 
> The Jewish People are the most ancient of those people.  The Palestinian Arabs are not.  Neither would be the Greeks, the Romans or any other people who stayed after they invaded and conquered the land after the Jewish People had established themselves over 3000 years ago.
> 
> There are no Philistines.
> There are no Amorites.
> There are no Hitites, etc.  to come and claim the land as the ancient people from that very place.
> There are no Romans, Greeks, Crusaders claiming anything over the Jewish People's rights to their ancient homeland.
> 
> Are you to tell me that all people who now inhabit Kurdistan (even though not allow to declare Independence) have the same National rights as the descendants of the ancient Kurds?
> Do the Yazidis who fled to that area have the right to demand some National rights to the land, which should only be for the Kurdish people?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We will have to agree to disagree on this, since I don't want to derail this into another thread on who is indiginous.  There are multiple indiginous groups there, and they all have rights.
> 
> The question is - how do you maintain equality?  In most modern countries citizenship confers nationality rights.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is a very simple example, which shows how the descendants of the Jewish People are the ones with the rights for any National self-determination definition on that land.
> 
> It does not take away one bit the rights of all of those who are not Jewish, and are either citizens or residents of Israel.
> 
> Their rights are written in the laws of the land.
> 
> What they do not have the right to do, as Arabs, etc, is to demand that Israel be their Ancestral national anything *in place of the Jewish People's rights*, which is Exactly what the Muslim Arabs have been doing in the past decades with their endless "The Jews are from Europe", "There was no Temple Mount", "There were no Jews in the area", etc, which continues to come hard and furious from the Arab side.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why does it have to be* in place of*?  Why can't any citizen of Israel have nationality rights in Israel?  If a Palestinian state is ever established, there will likely be Jewish communities within it.  Jewish communities in those areas should have every right to nationality rights within Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --------------
> Individual rights, Netanyahu said, are anchored in many of the Jewish state’s (existing) laws, but not so Jewish national rights. *No one was harmed by the Nationality Law and no one intends to to harm anyone’s individual rights.*
> 
> (full article online)
> 
> Netanyahu at Cabinet Meeting: Israel is the National State of the Jewish People, Exclusively
> -------------
> The only reason why so many are complaining is because it is the State of the Jews.
> 
> Any other place on the planet, they will never care less.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think that remains to be seen.  Most other modern countries do not confer nationality rights only to one ethnic group.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Arab Israeli citizens have nationality rights where?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Arab Palestinians have nationality rights in a hopefully if they can get their act together future state of Palestine.
> 
> Arab Israelis can exercise their Israeli nationality in Israel.
> 
> A nationality is formed around a culture. You aren't suggesting that Arab Israeli is a separate and distinct culture from Arab Palestinian, are you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I am to the degree that they've formed something of their own culture with regional differences including dialect, we did talk about that in other threads and doubtless don't agree .  But it's irrelevant.
> 
> Israel is a new state, imposed on a region with multiple ethnic groups already residing there.  It has since decided create a "nationality" law that only includes ONE of those groups despite the fact that most of those groups have been in that region since ancient history.  As a state does Israel have the right to do that?  Yes.  Any state does.  Does it make it right?  That is questionable.  How can you maintain equality?
> 
> Think about it - you are citizen of Israel.  You have served in the IDF, defended your country, supported it, and were born there.  But now - because you are NOT Jewish - you do not have any "national rights" there.  There is no way to look at that and not somehow see yourself as a different category of citizen.  As an outsider or somehow less than.  Why should you fight for Israel and defend it?
> 
> 
> 
> Nationality - Wikipedia
> _*Nationality* is a legal relationship between an individual person and a state.[1] Nationality affords the state jurisdiction over the person and affords the person the protection of the state. What these rights and duties are varies from state to state.[2]
> 
> By custom and international conventions, it is the right of each state to determine who its nationals are.[3] Such determinations are part of nationality law. In some cases, determinations of nationality are also governed by public international law—for example, by treaties on statelessness and the European Convention on Nationality.
> 
> Nationality differs technically and legally from citizenship, which is a different legal relationship between a person and a country. The noun national can include both citizens and non-citizens. The most common distinguishing feature of citizenship is that citizens have the right to participate in the political life of the state, such as by voting or standing for election. *However, in most modern countries all nationals are citizens of the state, and full citizens are always nationals of the state*.[1][4]
> 
> In older texts, the word nationality rather than ethnicity, often used to refer to an ethnic group (a group of people who share a common ethnic identity, language, culture, descent, history, and so forth). This older meaning of nationality is not defined by political borders or passport ownership and includes nations that lack an independent state (such as the Arameans, Scots, Welsh, English, Basques, Catalans, Kurds, Kabyles, Baloch, Berbers, Bosniaks, Kashmiris, Palestinians, Sindhi, Tamils, Hmong, Inuit, Copts, Māori, Sikhs, Wakhi and Székelys).[citation needed] _​
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sorry, but the delusion that :
> 
> The Jews seem to be "imposing" their will on all other "ancient people" of the land.
> 
> There is no such thing.
> 
> The Jewish People are the most ancient of those people.  The Palestinian Arabs are not.  Neither would be the Greeks, the Romans or any other people who stayed after they invaded and conquered the land after the Jewish People had established themselves over 3000 years ago.
> 
> There are no Philistines.
> There are no Amorites.
> There are no Hitites, etc.  to come and claim the land as the ancient people from that very place.
> There are no Romans, Greeks, Crusaders claiming anything over the Jewish People's rights to their ancient homeland.
> 
> Are you to tell me that all people who now inhabit Kurdistan (even though not allow to declare Independence) have the same National rights as the descendants of the ancient Kurds?
> Do the Yazidis who fled to that area have the right to demand some National rights to the land, which should only be for the Kurdish people?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We will have to agree to disagree on this, since I don't want to derail this into another thread on who is indiginous.  There are multiple indiginous groups there, and they all have rights.
> 
> The question is - how do you maintain equality?  In most modern countries citizenship confers nationality rights.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is a very simple example, which shows how the descendants of the Jewish People are the ones with the rights for any National self-determination definition on that land.
> 
> It does not take away one bit the rights of all of those who are not Jewish, and are either citizens or residents of Israel.
> 
> Their rights are written in the laws of the land.
> 
> What they do not have the right to do, as Arabs, etc, is to demand that Israel be their Ancestral national anything *in place of the Jewish People's rights*, which is Exactly what the Muslim Arabs have been doing in the past decades with their endless "The Jews are from Europe", "There was no Temple Mount", "There were no Jews in the area", etc, which continues to come hard and furious from the Arab side.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why does it have to be* in place of*?  Why can't any citizen of Israel have nationality rights in Israel?  If a Palestinian state is ever established, there will likely be Jewish communities within it.  Jewish communities in those areas should have every right to nationality rights within Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --------------
> Individual rights, Netanyahu said, are anchored in many of the Jewish state’s (existing) laws, but not so Jewish national rights. *No one was harmed by the Nationality Law and no one intends to to harm anyone’s individual rights.*
> 
> (full article online)
> 
> Netanyahu at Cabinet Meeting: Israel is the National State of the Jewish People, Exclusively
> -------------
> The only reason why so many are complaining is because it is the State of the Jews.
> 
> Any other place on the planet, they will never care less.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think that remains to be seen.  Most other modern countries do not confer nationality rights only to one ethnic group.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That is exactly the point:'
> 
> There are NO OTHER INDIGENOUS PEOPLE with rights to the land and self determination but the Jewish People.
> 
> There never has been.
> 
> No other people has ever declared indigenous rights to the land of Israel before 1948.
> 
> Self Determination is different from "National Rights" to think of myself as an American.
> 
> I am not descendant from the First Nations of America.  Not one of them.
> I do not have the right to demand the same rights to self determination over their ancestral lands as they do.  I never will.
> 
> Therefore, if the Apaches choose to declare self-determination over their ancient homeland, no other First Nation can do the same, and neither can any European or Asian who came over after 1492.
> 
> Therefore, here we have the Arabs, who came into the land 2400 years after the Jewish People established their Nation, culture, etc, saying that They have exactly the same rights, or worse, they have more rights to self-determination over the land then the Jewish People.
> 
> And that is exactly what you and others cannot come to understand.
Click to expand...


I completely understand and completely disagree. There are mutliple indiginous groups, not just one.  But you believe only one has rights to that region.  And that is the problem - each side only believes in the legitimacy of their side's position.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> You are oblivious to the fact that Israel has two rights systems. There are citizens rights where all citizens have (more or less) equal rights. Then there are nationality rights. Only the Jewish nationality has access to these rights
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Only the Jewish people have nationality rights IN ISRAEL.  Others have nationality rights elsewhere.  That is actually how the global system currently works.  Citizens have national rights in their nation.
> 
> Are you suggesting that the Jewish people should have nationality rights in Palestine?  Or not?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Arab Israeli citizens have nationality rights where?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Arab Palestinians have nationality rights in a hopefully if they can get their act together future state of Palestine.
> 
> Arab Israelis can exercise their Israeli nationality in Israel.
> 
> A nationality is formed around a culture. You aren't suggesting that Arab Israeli is a separate and distinct culture from Arab Palestinian, are you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I am to the degree that they've formed something of their own culture with regional differences including dialect, we did talk about that in other threads and doubtless don't agree .  But it's irrelevant.
> 
> Israel is a new state, imposed on a region with multiple ethnic groups already residing there.  It has since decided create a "nationality" law that only includes ONE of those groups despite the fact that most of those groups have been in that region since ancient history.  As a state does Israel have the right to do that?  Yes.  Any state does.  Does it make it right?  That is questionable.  How can you maintain equality?
> 
> Think about it - you are citizen of Israel.  You have served in the IDF, defended your country, supported it, and were born there.  But now - because you are NOT Jewish - you do not have any "national rights" there.  There is no way to look at that and not somehow see yourself as a different category of citizen.  As an outsider or somehow less than.  Why should you fight for Israel and defend it?
> 
> 
> 
> Nationality - Wikipedia
> _*Nationality* is a legal relationship between an individual person and a state.[1] Nationality affords the state jurisdiction over the person and affords the person the protection of the state. What these rights and duties are varies from state to state.[2]
> 
> By custom and international conventions, it is the right of each state to determine who its nationals are.[3] Such determinations are part of nationality law. In some cases, determinations of nationality are also governed by public international law—for example, by treaties on statelessness and the European Convention on Nationality.
> 
> Nationality differs technically and legally from citizenship, which is a different legal relationship between a person and a country. The noun national can include both citizens and non-citizens. The most common distinguishing feature of citizenship is that citizens have the right to participate in the political life of the state, such as by voting or standing for election. *However, in most modern countries all nationals are citizens of the state, and full citizens are always nationals of the state*.[1][4]
> 
> In older texts, the word nationality rather than ethnicity, often used to refer to an ethnic group (a group of people who share a common ethnic identity, language, culture, descent, history, and so forth). This older meaning of nationality is not defined by political borders or passport ownership and includes nations that lack an independent state (such as the Arameans, Scots, Welsh, English, Basques, Catalans, Kurds, Kabyles, Baloch, Berbers, Bosniaks, Kashmiris, Palestinians, Sindhi, Tamils, Hmong, Inuit, Copts, Māori, Sikhs, Wakhi and Székelys).[citation needed] _​
Click to expand...




Coyote said:


> F, defended your country, supported it, and were born there. But now - because you are NOT Jewish - you do not have any "national rights" there. There is no way to look at that and not somehow see yourself as a different category of citizen.


Indeed, that is called apartheid.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> You are oblivious to the fact that Israel has two rights systems. There are citizens rights where all citizens have (more or less) equal rights. Then there are nationality rights. Only the Jewish nationality has access to these rights
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Only the Jewish people have nationality rights IN ISRAEL.  Others have nationality rights elsewhere.  That is actually how the global system currently works.  Citizens have national rights in their nation.
> 
> Are you suggesting that the Jewish people should have nationality rights in Palestine?  Or not?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Arab Israeli citizens have nationality rights where?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Arab Palestinians have nationality rights in a hopefully if they can get their act together future state of Palestine.
> 
> Arab Israelis can exercise their Israeli nationality in Israel.
> 
> A nationality is formed around a culture. You aren't suggesting that Arab Israeli is a separate and distinct culture from Arab Palestinian, are you?
Click to expand...




Shusha said:


> Arab Israelis can exercise their Israeli nationality in Israel.


Uhh, there is no Israeli nationality.


----------



## P F Tinmore

Sixties Fan said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> You are oblivious to the fact that Israel has two rights systems. There are citizens rights where all citizens have (more or less) equal rights. Then there are nationality rights. Only the Jewish nationality has access to these rights
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Only the Jewish people have nationality rights IN ISRAEL.  Others have nationality rights elsewhere.  That is actually how the global system currently works.  Citizens have national rights in their nation.
> 
> Are you suggesting that the Jewish people should have nationality rights in Palestine?  Or not?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Arab Israeli citizens have nationality rights where?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Ever heard of the Arabian Peninsula?
> Being Arabs they would have the right to any of the nationalities
> created in the past century.  Saudi, Yemenite, etc, etc.
> It all depends on where their ancestors came from in the first place within that Peninsula, would it not?
> 
> Irish Americans are Americans, but their ancestral roots are in Ireland.
> 
> Arab Israelis are Israelis, but their ancestral roots are in Arabia.
> 
> One gets the gist.
Click to expand...

My grandparents are Scottish and German and I live in the US.

What is my nationality?


----------



## Humanity

Sixties Fan said:


> There are NO OTHER INDIGENOUS PEOPLE with rights to the land and self determination but the Jewish People.



Sounds like an extract from a Hitler address!

Just replace "Jewish" for "German"!


----------



## Sixties Fan

Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Arab Palestinians have nationality rights in a hopefully if they can get their act together future state of Palestine.
> 
> Arab Israelis can exercise their Israeli nationality in Israel.
> 
> A nationality is formed around a culture. You aren't suggesting that Arab Israeli is a separate and distinct culture from Arab Palestinian, are you?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am to the degree that they've formed something of their own culture with regional differences including dialect, we did talk about that in other threads and doubtless don't agree .  But it's irrelevant.
> 
> Israel is a new state, imposed on a region with multiple ethnic groups already residing there.  It has since decided create a "nationality" law that only includes ONE of those groups despite the fact that most of those groups have been in that region since ancient history.  As a state does Israel have the right to do that?  Yes.  Any state does.  Does it make it right?  That is questionable.  How can you maintain equality?
> 
> Think about it - you are citizen of Israel.  You have served in the IDF, defended your country, supported it, and were born there.  But now - because you are NOT Jewish - you do not have any "national rights" there.  There is no way to look at that and not somehow see yourself as a different category of citizen.  As an outsider or somehow less than.  Why should you fight for Israel and defend it?
> 
> 
> 
> Nationality - Wikipedia
> _*Nationality* is a legal relationship between an individual person and a state.[1] Nationality affords the state jurisdiction over the person and affords the person the protection of the state. What these rights and duties are varies from state to state.[2]
> 
> By custom and international conventions, it is the right of each state to determine who its nationals are.[3] Such determinations are part of nationality law. In some cases, determinations of nationality are also governed by public international law—for example, by treaties on statelessness and the European Convention on Nationality.
> 
> Nationality differs technically and legally from citizenship, which is a different legal relationship between a person and a country. The noun national can include both citizens and non-citizens. The most common distinguishing feature of citizenship is that citizens have the right to participate in the political life of the state, such as by voting or standing for election. *However, in most modern countries all nationals are citizens of the state, and full citizens are always nationals of the state*.[1][4]
> 
> In older texts, the word nationality rather than ethnicity, often used to refer to an ethnic group (a group of people who share a common ethnic identity, language, culture, descent, history, and so forth). This older meaning of nationality is not defined by political borders or passport ownership and includes nations that lack an independent state (such as the Arameans, Scots, Welsh, English, Basques, Catalans, Kurds, Kabyles, Baloch, Berbers, Bosniaks, Kashmiris, Palestinians, Sindhi, Tamils, Hmong, Inuit, Copts, Māori, Sikhs, Wakhi and Székelys).[citation needed] _​
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sorry, but the delusion that :
> 
> The Jews seem to be "imposing" their will on all other "ancient people" of the land.
> 
> There is no such thing.
> 
> The Jewish People are the most ancient of those people.  The Palestinian Arabs are not.  Neither would be the Greeks, the Romans or any other people who stayed after they invaded and conquered the land after the Jewish People had established themselves over 3000 years ago.
> 
> There are no Philistines.
> There are no Amorites.
> There are no Hitites, etc.  to come and claim the land as the ancient people from that very place.
> There are no Romans, Greeks, Crusaders claiming anything over the Jewish People's rights to their ancient homeland.
> 
> Are you to tell me that all people who now inhabit Kurdistan (even though not allow to declare Independence) have the same National rights as the descendants of the ancient Kurds?
> Do the Yazidis who fled to that area have the right to demand some National rights to the land, which should only be for the Kurdish people?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We will have to agree to disagree on this, since I don't want to derail this into another thread on who is indiginous.  There are multiple indiginous groups there, and they all have rights.
> 
> The question is - how do you maintain equality?  In most modern countries citizenship confers nationality rights.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is a very simple example, which shows how the descendants of the Jewish People are the ones with the rights for any National self-determination definition on that land.
> 
> It does not take away one bit the rights of all of those who are not Jewish, and are either citizens or residents of Israel.
> 
> Their rights are written in the laws of the land.
> 
> What they do not have the right to do, as Arabs, etc, is to demand that Israel be their Ancestral national anything *in place of the Jewish People's rights*, which is Exactly what the Muslim Arabs have been doing in the past decades with their endless "The Jews are from Europe", "There was no Temple Mount", "There were no Jews in the area", etc, which continues to come hard and furious from the Arab side.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why does it have to be* in place of*?  Why can't any citizen of Israel have nationality rights in Israel?  If a Palestinian state is ever established, there will likely be Jewish communities within it.  Jewish communities in those areas should have every right to nationality rights within Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --------------
> Individual rights, Netanyahu said, are anchored in many of the Jewish state’s (existing) laws, but not so Jewish national rights. *No one was harmed by the Nationality Law and no one intends to to harm anyone’s individual rights.*
> 
> (full article online)
> 
> Netanyahu at Cabinet Meeting: Israel is the National State of the Jewish People, Exclusively
> -------------
> The only reason why so many are complaining is because it is the State of the Jews.
> 
> Any other place on the planet, they will never care less.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think that remains to be seen.  Most other modern countries do not confer nationality rights only to one ethnic group.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Arab Palestinians have nationality rights in a hopefully if they can get their act together future state of Palestine.
> 
> Arab Israelis can exercise their Israeli nationality in Israel.
> 
> A nationality is formed around a culture. You aren't suggesting that Arab Israeli is a separate and distinct culture from Arab Palestinian, are you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I am to the degree that they've formed something of their own culture with regional differences including dialect, we did talk about that in other threads and doubtless don't agree .  But it's irrelevant.
> 
> Israel is a new state, imposed on a region with multiple ethnic groups already residing there.  It has since decided create a "nationality" law that only includes ONE of those groups despite the fact that most of those groups have been in that region since ancient history.  As a state does Israel have the right to do that?  Yes.  Any state does.  Does it make it right?  That is questionable.  How can you maintain equality?
> 
> Think about it - you are citizen of Israel.  You have served in the IDF, defended your country, supported it, and were born there.  But now - because you are NOT Jewish - you do not have any "national rights" there.  There is no way to look at that and not somehow see yourself as a different category of citizen.  As an outsider or somehow less than.  Why should you fight for Israel and defend it?
> 
> 
> 
> Nationality - Wikipedia
> _*Nationality* is a legal relationship between an individual person and a state.[1] Nationality affords the state jurisdiction over the person and affords the person the protection of the state. What these rights and duties are varies from state to state.[2]
> 
> By custom and international conventions, it is the right of each state to determine who its nationals are.[3] Such determinations are part of nationality law. In some cases, determinations of nationality are also governed by public international law—for example, by treaties on statelessness and the European Convention on Nationality.
> 
> Nationality differs technically and legally from citizenship, which is a different legal relationship between a person and a country. The noun national can include both citizens and non-citizens. The most common distinguishing feature of citizenship is that citizens have the right to participate in the political life of the state, such as by voting or standing for election. *However, in most modern countries all nationals are citizens of the state, and full citizens are always nationals of the state*.[1][4]
> 
> In older texts, the word nationality rather than ethnicity, often used to refer to an ethnic group (a group of people who share a common ethnic identity, language, culture, descent, history, and so forth). This older meaning of nationality is not defined by political borders or passport ownership and includes nations that lack an independent state (such as the Arameans, Scots, Welsh, English, Basques, Catalans, Kurds, Kabyles, Baloch, Berbers, Bosniaks, Kashmiris, Palestinians, Sindhi, Tamils, Hmong, Inuit, Copts, Māori, Sikhs, Wakhi and Székelys).[citation needed] _​
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sorry, but the delusion that :
> 
> The Jews seem to be "imposing" their will on all other "ancient people" of the land.
> 
> There is no such thing.
> 
> The Jewish People are the most ancient of those people.  The Palestinian Arabs are not.  Neither would be the Greeks, the Romans or any other people who stayed after they invaded and conquered the land after the Jewish People had established themselves over 3000 years ago.
> 
> There are no Philistines.
> There are no Amorites.
> There are no Hitites, etc.  to come and claim the land as the ancient people from that very place.
> There are no Romans, Greeks, Crusaders claiming anything over the Jewish People's rights to their ancient homeland.
> 
> Are you to tell me that all people who now inhabit Kurdistan (even though not allow to declare Independence) have the same National rights as the descendants of the ancient Kurds?
> Do the Yazidis who fled to that area have the right to demand some National rights to the land, which should only be for the Kurdish people?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We will have to agree to disagree on this, since I don't want to derail this into another thread on who is indiginous.  There are multiple indiginous groups there, and they all have rights.
> 
> The question is - how do you maintain equality?  In most modern countries citizenship confers nationality rights.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is a very simple example, which shows how the descendants of the Jewish People are the ones with the rights for any National self-determination definition on that land.
> 
> It does not take away one bit the rights of all of those who are not Jewish, and are either citizens or residents of Israel.
> 
> Their rights are written in the laws of the land.
> 
> What they do not have the right to do, as Arabs, etc, is to demand that Israel be their Ancestral national anything *in place of the Jewish People's rights*, which is Exactly what the Muslim Arabs have been doing in the past decades with their endless "The Jews are from Europe", "There was no Temple Mount", "There were no Jews in the area", etc, which continues to come hard and furious from the Arab side.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why does it have to be* in place of*?  Why can't any citizen of Israel have nationality rights in Israel?  If a Palestinian state is ever established, there will likely be Jewish communities within it.  Jewish communities in those areas should have every right to nationality rights within Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --------------
> Individual rights, Netanyahu said, are anchored in many of the Jewish state’s (existing) laws, but not so Jewish national rights. *No one was harmed by the Nationality Law and no one intends to to harm anyone’s individual rights.*
> 
> (full article online)
> 
> Netanyahu at Cabinet Meeting: Israel is the National State of the Jewish People, Exclusively
> -------------
> The only reason why so many are complaining is because it is the State of the Jews.
> 
> Any other place on the planet, they will never care less.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think that remains to be seen.  Most other modern countries do not confer nationality rights only to one ethnic group.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That is exactly the point:'
> 
> There are NO OTHER INDIGENOUS PEOPLE with rights to the land and self determination but the Jewish People.
> 
> There never has been.
> 
> No other people has ever declared indigenous rights to the land of Israel before 1948.
> 
> Self Determination is different from "National Rights" to think of myself as an American.
> 
> I am not descendant from the First Nations of America.  Not one of them.
> I do not have the right to demand the same rights to self determination over their ancestral lands as they do.  I never will.
> 
> Therefore, if the Apaches choose to declare self-determination over their ancient homeland, no other First Nation can do the same, and neither can any European or Asian who came over after 1492.
> 
> Therefore, here we have the Arabs, who came into the land 2400 years after the Jewish People established their Nation, culture, etc, saying that They have exactly the same rights, or worse, they have more rights to self-determination over the land then the Jewish People.
> 
> And that is exactly what you and others cannot come to understand.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I completely understand and completely disagree. There are mutliple indiginous groups, not just one.  But you believe only one has rights to that region.  And that is the problem - each side only believes in the legitimacy of their side's position.
Click to expand...

Sadly, you have bought into the extremely new definition of the word "indigenous", which is only used where the Jewish People and the Arabs are concerned.

Nearly ALL the indigenous people of Ancient Canaan came to form the Jewish People 3000 years ago.

One cannot consider the Greeks, Romans, Turks, Arabs, British and others who came to stay and live on the land as Indigenous.

Yes, only ONE has the right to that region because it is their ancient homeland.  And let us NOT forget that they have already lost 80% of their ancient homeland to those who are claiming rights over ALL of the land, be it the Hashemite Arabs, or any other clan of Arabs.

No.  The Arab side "only" believes in the Muslim supremacy over the Jews, as taught by their "holy book".  And they teach it on a daily basis in their schools, their medias, etc.

It has absolutely nothing to do with the Jewish People's absolute right to declare Self-determination to what has been theirs for over 3000 years.  

Part of their ancient homeland.
Their language.
Their culture.
Their religion
And everything else that basic law is about.


Jews have never taken away the right of the Arabs to create their own State.  They simply cannot do it INSIDE of what is Israel proper.

Which is exactly what they have been trying to do for the past 100 years.

As long as there is no understanding of what the word indigenous actually means, what it has always meant before it became a bargaining chip in the war against Israel.........Israel will continue to do what it takes to strengthen it legal claim of what was left to the Jews out of the Mandate for Palestine.


----------



## Sixties Fan

P F Tinmore said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> You are oblivious to the fact that Israel has two rights systems. There are citizens rights where all citizens have (more or less) equal rights. Then there are nationality rights. Only the Jewish nationality has access to these rights
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Only the Jewish people have nationality rights IN ISRAEL.  Others have nationality rights elsewhere.  That is actually how the global system currently works.  Citizens have national rights in their nation.
> 
> Are you suggesting that the Jewish people should have nationality rights in Palestine?  Or not?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Arab Israeli citizens have nationality rights where?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Ever heard of the Arabian Peninsula?
> Being Arabs they would have the right to any of the nationalities
> created in the past century.  Saudi, Yemenite, etc, etc.
> It all depends on where their ancestors came from in the first place within that Peninsula, would it not?
> 
> Irish Americans are Americans, but their ancestral roots are in Ireland.
> 
> Arab Israelis are Israelis, but their ancestral roots are in Arabia.
> 
> One gets the gist.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> My grandparents are Scottish and German and I live in the US.
> 
> What is my nationality?
Click to expand...

An Ignorant American


----------



## Sixties Fan

Humanity said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> There are NO OTHER INDIGENOUS PEOPLE with rights to the land and self determination but the Jewish People.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sounds like an extract from a Hitler address!
> 
> Just replace "Jewish" for "German"!
Click to expand...

Nein, Nein, Nein !!!!!!!

Du bist ein ignoramus !!!!

Ya !!!!


----------



## Sixties Fan

Let me correct something:

*The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people*

*(NO)*

*ISRAEL  has ALWAYS been the National Home of the Jewish People*

*From King David on, it has NEVER stopped being the national home of the Jewish People.*

No number of invaders, conquerors has ever stopped the Land Of Israel from being the National Home of the Jewish People.

No numbers of useless UN resolutions, Muslim or Christian attacks on the veracity of the Jewish People's rights to its ancient land and homeland is ever going to change that.


----------



## Humanity

Sixties Fan said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I am to the degree that they've formed something of their own culture with regional differences including dialect, we did talk about that in other threads and doubtless don't agree .  But it's irrelevant.
> 
> Israel is a new state, imposed on a region with multiple ethnic groups already residing there.  It has since decided create a "nationality" law that only includes ONE of those groups despite the fact that most of those groups have been in that region since ancient history.  As a state does Israel have the right to do that?  Yes.  Any state does.  Does it make it right?  That is questionable.  How can you maintain equality?
> 
> Think about it - you are citizen of Israel.  You have served in the IDF, defended your country, supported it, and were born there.  But now - because you are NOT Jewish - you do not have any "national rights" there.  There is no way to look at that and not somehow see yourself as a different category of citizen.  As an outsider or somehow less than.  Why should you fight for Israel and defend it?
> 
> 
> 
> Nationality - Wikipedia
> _*Nationality* is a legal relationship between an individual person and a state.[1] Nationality affords the state jurisdiction over the person and affords the person the protection of the state. What these rights and duties are varies from state to state.[2]
> 
> By custom and international conventions, it is the right of each state to determine who its nationals are.[3] Such determinations are part of nationality law. In some cases, determinations of nationality are also governed by public international law—for example, by treaties on statelessness and the European Convention on Nationality.
> 
> Nationality differs technically and legally from citizenship, which is a different legal relationship between a person and a country. The noun national can include both citizens and non-citizens. The most common distinguishing feature of citizenship is that citizens have the right to participate in the political life of the state, such as by voting or standing for election. *However, in most modern countries all nationals are citizens of the state, and full citizens are always nationals of the state*.[1][4]
> 
> In older texts, the word nationality rather than ethnicity, often used to refer to an ethnic group (a group of people who share a common ethnic identity, language, culture, descent, history, and so forth). This older meaning of nationality is not defined by political borders or passport ownership and includes nations that lack an independent state (such as the Arameans, Scots, Welsh, English, Basques, Catalans, Kurds, Kabyles, Baloch, Berbers, Bosniaks, Kashmiris, Palestinians, Sindhi, Tamils, Hmong, Inuit, Copts, Māori, Sikhs, Wakhi and Székelys).[citation needed] _​
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry, but the delusion that :
> 
> The Jews seem to be "imposing" their will on all other "ancient people" of the land.
> 
> There is no such thing.
> 
> The Jewish People are the most ancient of those people.  The Palestinian Arabs are not.  Neither would be the Greeks, the Romans or any other people who stayed after they invaded and conquered the land after the Jewish People had established themselves over 3000 years ago.
> 
> There are no Philistines.
> There are no Amorites.
> There are no Hitites, etc.  to come and claim the land as the ancient people from that very place.
> There are no Romans, Greeks, Crusaders claiming anything over the Jewish People's rights to their ancient homeland.
> 
> Are you to tell me that all people who now inhabit Kurdistan (even though not allow to declare Independence) have the same National rights as the descendants of the ancient Kurds?
> Do the Yazidis who fled to that area have the right to demand some National rights to the land, which should only be for the Kurdish people?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We will have to agree to disagree on this, since I don't want to derail this into another thread on who is indiginous.  There are multiple indiginous groups there, and they all have rights.
> 
> The question is - how do you maintain equality?  In most modern countries citizenship confers nationality rights.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is a very simple example, which shows how the descendants of the Jewish People are the ones with the rights for any National self-determination definition on that land.
> 
> It does not take away one bit the rights of all of those who are not Jewish, and are either citizens or residents of Israel.
> 
> Their rights are written in the laws of the land.
> 
> What they do not have the right to do, as Arabs, etc, is to demand that Israel be their Ancestral national anything *in place of the Jewish People's rights*, which is Exactly what the Muslim Arabs have been doing in the past decades with their endless "The Jews are from Europe", "There was no Temple Mount", "There were no Jews in the area", etc, which continues to come hard and furious from the Arab side.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why does it have to be* in place of*?  Why can't any citizen of Israel have nationality rights in Israel?  If a Palestinian state is ever established, there will likely be Jewish communities within it.  Jewish communities in those areas should have every right to nationality rights within Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --------------
> Individual rights, Netanyahu said, are anchored in many of the Jewish state’s (existing) laws, but not so Jewish national rights. *No one was harmed by the Nationality Law and no one intends to to harm anyone’s individual rights.*
> 
> (full article online)
> 
> Netanyahu at Cabinet Meeting: Israel is the National State of the Jewish People, Exclusively
> -------------
> The only reason why so many are complaining is because it is the State of the Jews.
> 
> Any other place on the planet, they will never care less.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think that remains to be seen.  Most other modern countries do not confer nationality rights only to one ethnic group.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I am to the degree that they've formed something of their own culture with regional differences including dialect, we did talk about that in other threads and doubtless don't agree .  But it's irrelevant.
> 
> Israel is a new state, imposed on a region with multiple ethnic groups already residing there.  It has since decided create a "nationality" law that only includes ONE of those groups despite the fact that most of those groups have been in that region since ancient history.  As a state does Israel have the right to do that?  Yes.  Any state does.  Does it make it right?  That is questionable.  How can you maintain equality?
> 
> Think about it - you are citizen of Israel.  You have served in the IDF, defended your country, supported it, and were born there.  But now - because you are NOT Jewish - you do not have any "national rights" there.  There is no way to look at that and not somehow see yourself as a different category of citizen.  As an outsider or somehow less than.  Why should you fight for Israel and defend it?
> 
> 
> 
> Nationality - Wikipedia
> _*Nationality* is a legal relationship between an individual person and a state.[1] Nationality affords the state jurisdiction over the person and affords the person the protection of the state. What these rights and duties are varies from state to state.[2]
> 
> By custom and international conventions, it is the right of each state to determine who its nationals are.[3] Such determinations are part of nationality law. In some cases, determinations of nationality are also governed by public international law—for example, by treaties on statelessness and the European Convention on Nationality.
> 
> Nationality differs technically and legally from citizenship, which is a different legal relationship between a person and a country. The noun national can include both citizens and non-citizens. The most common distinguishing feature of citizenship is that citizens have the right to participate in the political life of the state, such as by voting or standing for election. *However, in most modern countries all nationals are citizens of the state, and full citizens are always nationals of the state*.[1][4]
> 
> In older texts, the word nationality rather than ethnicity, often used to refer to an ethnic group (a group of people who share a common ethnic identity, language, culture, descent, history, and so forth). This older meaning of nationality is not defined by political borders or passport ownership and includes nations that lack an independent state (such as the Arameans, Scots, Welsh, English, Basques, Catalans, Kurds, Kabyles, Baloch, Berbers, Bosniaks, Kashmiris, Palestinians, Sindhi, Tamils, Hmong, Inuit, Copts, Māori, Sikhs, Wakhi and Székelys).[citation needed] _​
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sorry, but the delusion that :
> 
> The Jews seem to be "imposing" their will on all other "ancient people" of the land.
> 
> There is no such thing.
> 
> The Jewish People are the most ancient of those people.  The Palestinian Arabs are not.  Neither would be the Greeks, the Romans or any other people who stayed after they invaded and conquered the land after the Jewish People had established themselves over 3000 years ago.
> 
> There are no Philistines.
> There are no Amorites.
> There are no Hitites, etc.  to come and claim the land as the ancient people from that very place.
> There are no Romans, Greeks, Crusaders claiming anything over the Jewish People's rights to their ancient homeland.
> 
> Are you to tell me that all people who now inhabit Kurdistan (even though not allow to declare Independence) have the same National rights as the descendants of the ancient Kurds?
> Do the Yazidis who fled to that area have the right to demand some National rights to the land, which should only be for the Kurdish people?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We will have to agree to disagree on this, since I don't want to derail this into another thread on who is indiginous.  There are multiple indiginous groups there, and they all have rights.
> 
> The question is - how do you maintain equality?  In most modern countries citizenship confers nationality rights.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is a very simple example, which shows how the descendants of the Jewish People are the ones with the rights for any National self-determination definition on that land.
> 
> It does not take away one bit the rights of all of those who are not Jewish, and are either citizens or residents of Israel.
> 
> Their rights are written in the laws of the land.
> 
> What they do not have the right to do, as Arabs, etc, is to demand that Israel be their Ancestral national anything *in place of the Jewish People's rights*, which is Exactly what the Muslim Arabs have been doing in the past decades with their endless "The Jews are from Europe", "There was no Temple Mount", "There were no Jews in the area", etc, which continues to come hard and furious from the Arab side.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why does it have to be* in place of*?  Why can't any citizen of Israel have nationality rights in Israel?  If a Palestinian state is ever established, there will likely be Jewish communities within it.  Jewish communities in those areas should have every right to nationality rights within Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --------------
> Individual rights, Netanyahu said, are anchored in many of the Jewish state’s (existing) laws, but not so Jewish national rights. *No one was harmed by the Nationality Law and no one intends to to harm anyone’s individual rights.*
> 
> (full article online)
> 
> Netanyahu at Cabinet Meeting: Israel is the National State of the Jewish People, Exclusively
> -------------
> The only reason why so many are complaining is because it is the State of the Jews.
> 
> Any other place on the planet, they will never care less.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think that remains to be seen.  Most other modern countries do not confer nationality rights only to one ethnic group.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That is exactly the point:'
> 
> There are NO OTHER INDIGENOUS PEOPLE with rights to the land and self determination but the Jewish People.
> 
> There never has been.
> 
> No other people has ever declared indigenous rights to the land of Israel before 1948.
> 
> Self Determination is different from "National Rights" to think of myself as an American.
> 
> I am not descendant from the First Nations of America.  Not one of them.
> I do not have the right to demand the same rights to self determination over their ancestral lands as they do.  I never will.
> 
> Therefore, if the Apaches choose to declare self-determination over their ancient homeland, no other First Nation can do the same, and neither can any European or Asian who came over after 1492.
> 
> Therefore, here we have the Arabs, who came into the land 2400 years after the Jewish People established their Nation, culture, etc, saying that They have exactly the same rights, or worse, they have more rights to self-determination over the land then the Jewish People.
> 
> And that is exactly what you and others cannot come to understand.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I completely understand and completely disagree. There are mutliple indiginous groups, not just one.  But you believe only one has rights to that region.  And that is the problem - each side only believes in the legitimacy of their side's position.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sadly, you have bought into the extremely new definition of the word "indigenous", which is only used where the Jewish People and the Arabs are concerned.
> 
> Nearly ALL the indigenous people of Ancient Canaan came to form the Jewish People 3000 years ago.
> 
> One cannot consider the Greeks, Romans, Turks, Arabs, British and others who came to stay and live on the land as Indigenous.
> 
> Yes, only ONE has the right to that region because it is their ancient homeland.  And let us NOT forget that they have already lost 80% of their ancient homeland to those who are claiming rights over ALL of the land, be it the Hashemite Arabs, or any other clan of Arabs.
> 
> No.  The Arab side "only" believes in the Muslim supremacy over the Jews, as taught by their "holy book".  And they teach it on a daily basis in their schools, their medias, etc.
> 
> It has absolutely nothing to do with the Jewish People's absolute right to declare Self-determination to what has been theirs for over 3000 years.
> 
> Part of their ancient homeland.
> Their language.
> Their culture.
> Their religion
> And everything else that basic law is about.
> 
> 
> Jews have never taken away the right of the Arabs to create their own State.  They simply cannot do it INSIDE of what is Israel proper.
> 
> Which is exactly what they have been trying to do for the past 100 years.
> 
> As long as there is no understanding of what the word indigenous actually means, what it has always meant before it became a bargaining chip in the war against Israel.........Israel will continue to do what it takes to strengthen it legal claim of what was left to the Jews out of the Mandate for Palestine.
Click to expand...


Well, that is a new twist on historical fact I have never heard before!

Would suggest you get a little education before trying to spout historical nonsense!

There are plenty of 3rd grade books that will show you the error of your ways!


----------



## Sixties Fan

Humanity said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry, but the delusion that :
> 
> The Jews seem to be "imposing" their will on all other "ancient people" of the land.
> 
> There is no such thing.
> 
> The Jewish People are the most ancient of those people.  The Palestinian Arabs are not.  Neither would be the Greeks, the Romans or any other people who stayed after they invaded and conquered the land after the Jewish People had established themselves over 3000 years ago.
> 
> There are no Philistines.
> There are no Amorites.
> There are no Hitites, etc.  to come and claim the land as the ancient people from that very place.
> There are no Romans, Greeks, Crusaders claiming anything over the Jewish People's rights to their ancient homeland.
> 
> Are you to tell me that all people who now inhabit Kurdistan (even though not allow to declare Independence) have the same National rights as the descendants of the ancient Kurds?
> Do the Yazidis who fled to that area have the right to demand some National rights to the land, which should only be for the Kurdish people?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We will have to agree to disagree on this, since I don't want to derail this into another thread on who is indiginous.  There are multiple indiginous groups there, and they all have rights.
> 
> The question is - how do you maintain equality?  In most modern countries citizenship confers nationality rights.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is a very simple example, which shows how the descendants of the Jewish People are the ones with the rights for any National self-determination definition on that land.
> 
> It does not take away one bit the rights of all of those who are not Jewish, and are either citizens or residents of Israel.
> 
> Their rights are written in the laws of the land.
> 
> What they do not have the right to do, as Arabs, etc, is to demand that Israel be their Ancestral national anything *in place of the Jewish People's rights*, which is Exactly what the Muslim Arabs have been doing in the past decades with their endless "The Jews are from Europe", "There was no Temple Mount", "There were no Jews in the area", etc, which continues to come hard and furious from the Arab side.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why does it have to be* in place of*?  Why can't any citizen of Israel have nationality rights in Israel?  If a Palestinian state is ever established, there will likely be Jewish communities within it.  Jewish communities in those areas should have every right to nationality rights within Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --------------
> Individual rights, Netanyahu said, are anchored in many of the Jewish state’s (existing) laws, but not so Jewish national rights. *No one was harmed by the Nationality Law and no one intends to to harm anyone’s individual rights.*
> 
> (full article online)
> 
> Netanyahu at Cabinet Meeting: Israel is the National State of the Jewish People, Exclusively
> -------------
> The only reason why so many are complaining is because it is the State of the Jews.
> 
> Any other place on the planet, they will never care less.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think that remains to be seen.  Most other modern countries do not confer nationality rights only to one ethnic group.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry, but the delusion that :
> 
> The Jews seem to be "imposing" their will on all other "ancient people" of the land.
> 
> There is no such thing.
> 
> The Jewish People are the most ancient of those people.  The Palestinian Arabs are not.  Neither would be the Greeks, the Romans or any other people who stayed after they invaded and conquered the land after the Jewish People had established themselves over 3000 years ago.
> 
> There are no Philistines.
> There are no Amorites.
> There are no Hitites, etc.  to come and claim the land as the ancient people from that very place.
> There are no Romans, Greeks, Crusaders claiming anything over the Jewish People's rights to their ancient homeland.
> 
> Are you to tell me that all people who now inhabit Kurdistan (even though not allow to declare Independence) have the same National rights as the descendants of the ancient Kurds?
> Do the Yazidis who fled to that area have the right to demand some National rights to the land, which should only be for the Kurdish people?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We will have to agree to disagree on this, since I don't want to derail this into another thread on who is indiginous.  There are multiple indiginous groups there, and they all have rights.
> 
> The question is - how do you maintain equality?  In most modern countries citizenship confers nationality rights.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is a very simple example, which shows how the descendants of the Jewish People are the ones with the rights for any National self-determination definition on that land.
> 
> It does not take away one bit the rights of all of those who are not Jewish, and are either citizens or residents of Israel.
> 
> Their rights are written in the laws of the land.
> 
> What they do not have the right to do, as Arabs, etc, is to demand that Israel be their Ancestral national anything *in place of the Jewish People's rights*, which is Exactly what the Muslim Arabs have been doing in the past decades with their endless "The Jews are from Europe", "There was no Temple Mount", "There were no Jews in the area", etc, which continues to come hard and furious from the Arab side.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why does it have to be* in place of*?  Why can't any citizen of Israel have nationality rights in Israel?  If a Palestinian state is ever established, there will likely be Jewish communities within it.  Jewish communities in those areas should have every right to nationality rights within Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --------------
> Individual rights, Netanyahu said, are anchored in many of the Jewish state’s (existing) laws, but not so Jewish national rights. *No one was harmed by the Nationality Law and no one intends to to harm anyone’s individual rights.*
> 
> (full article online)
> 
> Netanyahu at Cabinet Meeting: Israel is the National State of the Jewish People, Exclusively
> -------------
> The only reason why so many are complaining is because it is the State of the Jews.
> 
> Any other place on the planet, they will never care less.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think that remains to be seen.  Most other modern countries do not confer nationality rights only to one ethnic group.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That is exactly the point:'
> 
> There are NO OTHER INDIGENOUS PEOPLE with rights to the land and self determination but the Jewish People.
> 
> There never has been.
> 
> No other people has ever declared indigenous rights to the land of Israel before 1948.
> 
> Self Determination is different from "National Rights" to think of myself as an American.
> 
> I am not descendant from the First Nations of America.  Not one of them.
> I do not have the right to demand the same rights to self determination over their ancestral lands as they do.  I never will.
> 
> Therefore, if the Apaches choose to declare self-determination over their ancient homeland, no other First Nation can do the same, and neither can any European or Asian who came over after 1492.
> 
> Therefore, here we have the Arabs, who came into the land 2400 years after the Jewish People established their Nation, culture, etc, saying that They have exactly the same rights, or worse, they have more rights to self-determination over the land then the Jewish People.
> 
> And that is exactly what you and others cannot come to understand.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I completely understand and completely disagree. There are mutliple indiginous groups, not just one.  But you believe only one has rights to that region.  And that is the problem - each side only believes in the legitimacy of their side's position.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sadly, you have bought into the extremely new definition of the word "indigenous", which is only used where the Jewish People and the Arabs are concerned.
> 
> Nearly ALL the indigenous people of Ancient Canaan came to form the Jewish People 3000 years ago.
> 
> One cannot consider the Greeks, Romans, Turks, Arabs, British and others who came to stay and live on the land as Indigenous.
> 
> Yes, only ONE has the right to that region because it is their ancient homeland.  And let us NOT forget that they have already lost 80% of their ancient homeland to those who are claiming rights over ALL of the land, be it the Hashemite Arabs, or any other clan of Arabs.
> 
> No.  The Arab side "only" believes in the Muslim supremacy over the Jews, as taught by their "holy book".  And they teach it on a daily basis in their schools, their medias, etc.
> 
> It has absolutely nothing to do with the Jewish People's absolute right to declare Self-determination to what has been theirs for over 3000 years.
> 
> Part of their ancient homeland.
> Their language.
> Their culture.
> Their religion
> And everything else that basic law is about.
> 
> 
> Jews have never taken away the right of the Arabs to create their own State.  They simply cannot do it INSIDE of what is Israel proper.
> 
> Which is exactly what they have been trying to do for the past 100 years.
> 
> As long as there is no understanding of what the word indigenous actually means, what it has always meant before it became a bargaining chip in the war against Israel.........Israel will continue to do what it takes to strengthen it legal claim of what was left to the Jews out of the Mandate for Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well, that is a new twist on historical fact I have never heard before!
> 
> Would suggest you get a little education before trying to spout historical nonsense!
> 
> There are plenty of 3rd grade books that will show you the error of your ways!
Click to expand...

Point those books out to me. Let us have some links.
Make sure that they have not been written recently with the intent of taking away the land from the Jewish People.

Just make sure which part of all I wrote you are referring to.
All of it? Some of it?  A paragraph?  A sentence?
Which ones?

I am just waiting to see the new revised history 3rd graders are learning all over the world.


----------



## Humanity

Sixties Fan said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> There are NO OTHER INDIGENOUS PEOPLE with rights to the land and self determination but the Jewish People.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sounds like an extract from a Hitler address!
> 
> Just replace "Jewish" for "German"!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nein, Nein, Nein !!!!!!!
> 
> Du bist ein ignoramus !!!!
> 
> Ya !!!!
Click to expand...


Oh, du sprichst Deutsch! Ausgezeichnet! Sie werden also wissen, dass Hitler ein großer Fan für faschistische Wege war, genau wie Nutandyahoo!

Wie auch immer du versuchst, diese letzte Nutyahahoo-Erklärung zu verkleiden, er hat sich gerade als Nazi-Faschist bewiesen, der einen faschistischen Apartheid-Staat geschaffen hat!


----------



## Sixties Fan

Humanity said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> There are NO OTHER INDIGENOUS PEOPLE with rights to the land and self determination but the Jewish People.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sounds like an extract from a Hitler address!
> 
> Just replace "Jewish" for "German"!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nein, Nein, Nein !!!!!!!
> 
> Du bist ein ignoramus !!!!
> 
> Ya !!!!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh, du sprichst Deutsch! Ausgezeichnet! Sie werden also wissen, dass Hitler ein großer Fan für faschistische Wege war, genau wie Nutandyahoo!
> 
> Wie auch immer du versuchst, diese letzte Nutyahahoo-Erklärung zu verkleiden, er hat sich gerade als Nazi-Faschist bewiesen, der einen faschistischen Apartheid-Staat geschaffen hat!
Click to expand...


Yavoll.  Zig Heil to your favorite Nazis of the 1930s.  The real ones.

We do not care about worthless accusations of being Nazis, Fascists, etc, coming from those who wish all Jews were gone and give the Land of Israel to the enemies of the Jewish people.

That is what it is all about.

Haters looked to hate and found the world's favorite hating target.

Fascinating how you and others just fall Hook, Line and Sinker into it.

Say HELLO to the endless Inquisition against the Jewish People.

Christians and Muslims NEVER have to pay for what they do.


----------



## Humanity

Sixties Fan said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> We will have to agree to disagree on this, since I don't want to derail this into another thread on who is indiginous.  There are multiple indiginous groups there, and they all have rights.
> 
> The question is - how do you maintain equality?  In most modern countries citizenship confers nationality rights.
> 
> Why does it have to be* in place of*?  Why can't any citizen of Israel have nationality rights in Israel?  If a Palestinian state is ever established, there will likely be Jewish communities within it.  Jewish communities in those areas should have every right to nationality rights within Palestine.
> 
> 
> I think that remains to be seen.  Most other modern countries do not confer nationality rights only to one ethnic group.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> We will have to agree to disagree on this, since I don't want to derail this into another thread on who is indiginous.  There are multiple indiginous groups there, and they all have rights.
> 
> The question is - how do you maintain equality?  In most modern countries citizenship confers nationality rights.
> 
> Why does it have to be* in place of*?  Why can't any citizen of Israel have nationality rights in Israel?  If a Palestinian state is ever established, there will likely be Jewish communities within it.  Jewish communities in those areas should have every right to nationality rights within Palestine.
> 
> 
> I think that remains to be seen.  Most other modern countries do not confer nationality rights only to one ethnic group.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That is exactly the point:'
> 
> There are NO OTHER INDIGENOUS PEOPLE with rights to the land and self determination but the Jewish People.
> 
> There never has been.
> 
> No other people has ever declared indigenous rights to the land of Israel before 1948.
> 
> Self Determination is different from "National Rights" to think of myself as an American.
> 
> I am not descendant from the First Nations of America.  Not one of them.
> I do not have the right to demand the same rights to self determination over their ancestral lands as they do.  I never will.
> 
> Therefore, if the Apaches choose to declare self-determination over their ancient homeland, no other First Nation can do the same, and neither can any European or Asian who came over after 1492.
> 
> Therefore, here we have the Arabs, who came into the land 2400 years after the Jewish People established their Nation, culture, etc, saying that They have exactly the same rights, or worse, they have more rights to self-determination over the land then the Jewish People.
> 
> And that is exactly what you and others cannot come to understand.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I completely understand and completely disagree. There are mutliple indiginous groups, not just one.  But you believe only one has rights to that region.  And that is the problem - each side only believes in the legitimacy of their side's position.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sadly, you have bought into the extremely new definition of the word "indigenous", which is only used where the Jewish People and the Arabs are concerned.
> 
> Nearly ALL the indigenous people of Ancient Canaan came to form the Jewish People 3000 years ago.
> 
> One cannot consider the Greeks, Romans, Turks, Arabs, British and others who came to stay and live on the land as Indigenous.
> 
> Yes, only ONE has the right to that region because it is their ancient homeland.  And let us NOT forget that they have already lost 80% of their ancient homeland to those who are claiming rights over ALL of the land, be it the Hashemite Arabs, or any other clan of Arabs.
> 
> No.  The Arab side "only" believes in the Muslim supremacy over the Jews, as taught by their "holy book".  And they teach it on a daily basis in their schools, their medias, etc.
> 
> It has absolutely nothing to do with the Jewish People's absolute right to declare Self-determination to what has been theirs for over 3000 years.
> 
> Part of their ancient homeland.
> Their language.
> Their culture.
> Their religion
> And everything else that basic law is about.
> 
> 
> Jews have never taken away the right of the Arabs to create their own State.  They simply cannot do it INSIDE of what is Israel proper.
> 
> Which is exactly what they have been trying to do for the past 100 years.
> 
> As long as there is no understanding of what the word indigenous actually means, what it has always meant before it became a bargaining chip in the war against Israel.........Israel will continue to do what it takes to strengthen it legal claim of what was left to the Jews out of the Mandate for Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well, that is a new twist on historical fact I have never heard before!
> 
> Would suggest you get a little education before trying to spout historical nonsense!
> 
> There are plenty of 3rd grade books that will show you the error of your ways!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Point those books out to me. Let us have some links.
> Make sure that they have not been written recently with the intent of taking away the land from the Jewish People.
> 
> Just make sure which part of all I wrote you are referring to.
> All of it? Some of it?  A paragraph?  A sentence?
> Which ones?
> 
> I am just waiting to see the new revised history 3rd graders are learning all over the world.
Click to expand...


Let me make it even easier for you... I know you would struggle with 3rd grade history books...

Canaanites were all but wiped out, (read exterminated, annihilated) by the Jews so, interesting that you believe they FORMED the Jewish people... How would that work exactly? 

Something like 90% of genes of Lebanese come from Canaanites!

Now, toddle off and learn something before spouting your psychotic bullshit!


----------



## Humanity

Sixties Fan said:


> We do not care about worthless accusations of being Nazis, Fascists, etc



Accusations?

I would suggest you go see what your boyfriend has been saying...

If he is not the epitome of a racist Nazi I really do not know what is!


----------



## Sixties Fan

Humanity said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> That is exactly the point:'
> 
> There are NO OTHER INDIGENOUS PEOPLE with rights to the land and self determination but the Jewish People.
> 
> There never has been.
> 
> No other people has ever declared indigenous rights to the land of Israel before 1948.
> 
> Self Determination is different from "National Rights" to think of myself as an American.
> 
> I am not descendant from the First Nations of America.  Not one of them.
> I do not have the right to demand the same rights to self determination over their ancestral lands as they do.  I never will.
> 
> Therefore, if the Apaches choose to declare self-determination over their ancient homeland, no other First Nation can do the same, and neither can any European or Asian who came over after 1492.
> 
> Therefore, here we have the Arabs, who came into the land 2400 years after the Jewish People established their Nation, culture, etc, saying that They have exactly the same rights, or worse, they have more rights to self-determination over the land then the Jewish People.
> 
> And that is exactly what you and others cannot come to understand.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I completely understand and completely disagree. There are mutliple indiginous groups, not just one.  But you believe only one has rights to that region.  And that is the problem - each side only believes in the legitimacy of their side's position.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sadly, you have bought into the extremely new definition of the word "indigenous", which is only used where the Jewish People and the Arabs are concerned.
> 
> Nearly ALL the indigenous people of Ancient Canaan came to form the Jewish People 3000 years ago.
> 
> One cannot consider the Greeks, Romans, Turks, Arabs, British and others who came to stay and live on the land as Indigenous.
> 
> Yes, only ONE has the right to that region because it is their ancient homeland.  And let us NOT forget that they have already lost 80% of their ancient homeland to those who are claiming rights over ALL of the land, be it the Hashemite Arabs, or any other clan of Arabs.
> 
> No.  The Arab side "only" believes in the Muslim supremacy over the Jews, as taught by their "holy book".  And they teach it on a daily basis in their schools, their medias, etc.
> 
> It has absolutely nothing to do with the Jewish People's absolute right to declare Self-determination to what has been theirs for over 3000 years.
> 
> Part of their ancient homeland.
> Their language.
> Their culture.
> Their religion
> And everything else that basic law is about.
> 
> 
> Jews have never taken away the right of the Arabs to create their own State.  They simply cannot do it INSIDE of what is Israel proper.
> 
> Which is exactly what they have been trying to do for the past 100 years.
> 
> As long as there is no understanding of what the word indigenous actually means, what it has always meant before it became a bargaining chip in the war against Israel.........Israel will continue to do what it takes to strengthen it legal claim of what was left to the Jews out of the Mandate for Palestine.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well, that is a new twist on historical fact I have never heard before!
> 
> Would suggest you get a little education before trying to spout historical nonsense!
> 
> There are plenty of 3rd grade books that will show you the error of your ways!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Point those books out to me. Let us have some links.
> Make sure that they have not been written recently with the intent of taking away the land from the Jewish People.
> 
> Just make sure which part of all I wrote you are referring to.
> All of it? Some of it?  A paragraph?  A sentence?
> Which ones?
> 
> I am just waiting to see the new revised history 3rd graders are learning all over the world.
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Let me make it even easier for you... I know you would struggle with 3rd grade history books...
> 
> Canaanites were all but wiped out, (read exterminated, annihilated) by the Jews so, interesting that you believe they FORMED the Jewish people... How would that work exactly?
> 
> Something like 90% of genes of Lebanese come from Canaanites!
> 
> Now, toddle off and learn something before spouting your psychotic bullshit!
Click to expand...

You buy into anything that is said to you.

The Canaanites became part of the Jewish people.
The Jewish people did not grow in numbers just by themselves, but that is what you wish to believe in (the bible version of "killing everyone", so be it.

Good for the Lebanese.  Those are the Canaanites who moved to ancient Phoenicia (Lebanon for us today)

The Jewish people are the indigenous people of the land.
Then and now.

And you can cry all you like, as it is not going to change that fact once inch.

As for the Arabs.......Canaanites?  No
Phoenicians?  No
Assyrians ?  No
Babylonians?  No

Just "good ol' Arabs from Arabia"

Arabs cannot pass themselves for Canaanites or any other people they have never been.

The Self Determination is for the Indigenous people of the Land, the Jewish People.

It is DONE.

Cry a million rivers all you like, the Jewish people will continue to do whatever they need to do to defend their ancient homeland and protect all who live in it.


Am Israel Chai.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Humanity said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> We do not care about worthless accusations of being Nazis, Fascists, etc
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Accusations?
> 
> I would suggest you go see what your boyfriend has been saying...
> 
> If he is not the epitome of a racist Nazi I really do not know what is!
Click to expand...

Libels will never get you anywhere


----------



## Humanity

Sixties Fan said:


> You buy into anything that is said to you.



No, I call it historical fact... You should check it out sometime... Those fantasy books you read and fucking with your small, limited brain!



Sixties Fan said:


> The Jewish people did not grow in numbers just by themselves



No, god flew them into the 'promised land' on the back of a fucking pink unicorn!



Sixties Fan said:


> The Jewish people are the indigenous people of the land.



Make your mind up! See, I told you that your limited intelligence would catch you out... Canaanites were indigenous, thats what YOU said you fucking moron!


----------



## Humanity

Sixties Fan said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> We do not care about worthless accusations of being Nazis, Fascists, etc
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Accusations?
> 
> I would suggest you go see what your boyfriend has been saying...
> 
> If he is not the epitome of a racist Nazi I really do not know what is!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Libels will never get you anywhere
Click to expand...


SO FUCKING SUE ME!


----------



## Sixties Fan

Humanity said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> You buy into anything that is said to you.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No, I call it historical fact... You should check it out sometime... Those fantasy books you read and fucking with your small, limited brain!
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Jewish people did not grow in numbers just by themselves
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No, god flew them into the 'promised land' on the back of a fucking pink unicorn!
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Jewish people are the indigenous people of the land.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Make your mind up! See, I told you that your limited intelligence would catch you out... Canaanites were indigenous, thats what YOU said you fucking moron!
Click to expand...

Try getting this idea.

The Jewish People WERE Canaanites.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Humanity said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> We do not care about worthless accusations of being Nazis, Fascists, etc
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Accusations?
> 
> I would suggest you go see what your boyfriend has been saying...
> 
> If he is not the epitome of a racist Nazi I really do not know what is!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Libels will never get you anywhere
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> SO FUCKING SUE ME!
Click to expand...

I don't have to.

Your brain is frying like all the other Jew haters out there.

And.....We have Israel.

Am Israel Chai  !!


----------



## Sixties Fan

Expert: Argument against Nationality Law is 'contrived'


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Arab Palestinians have nationality rights in a hopefully if they can get their act together future state of Palestine.
> 
> Arab Israelis can exercise their Israeli nationality in Israel.
> 
> A nationality is formed around a culture. You aren't suggesting that Arab Israeli is a separate and distinct culture from Arab Palestinian, are you?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am to the degree that they've formed something of their own culture with regional differences including dialect, we did talk about that in other threads and doubtless don't agree .  But it's irrelevant.
> 
> Israel is a new state, imposed on a region with multiple ethnic groups already residing there.  It has since decided create a "nationality" law that only includes ONE of those groups despite the fact that most of those groups have been in that region since ancient history.  As a state does Israel have the right to do that?  Yes.  Any state does.  Does it make it right?  That is questionable.  How can you maintain equality?
> 
> Think about it - you are citizen of Israel.  You have served in the IDF, defended your country, supported it, and were born there.  But now - because you are NOT Jewish - you do not have any "national rights" there.  There is no way to look at that and not somehow see yourself as a different category of citizen.  As an outsider or somehow less than.  Why should you fight for Israel and defend it?
> 
> 
> 
> Nationality - Wikipedia
> _*Nationality* is a legal relationship between an individual person and a state.[1] Nationality affords the state jurisdiction over the person and affords the person the protection of the state. What these rights and duties are varies from state to state.[2]
> 
> By custom and international conventions, it is the right of each state to determine who its nationals are.[3] Such determinations are part of nationality law. In some cases, determinations of nationality are also governed by public international law—for example, by treaties on statelessness and the European Convention on Nationality.
> 
> Nationality differs technically and legally from citizenship, which is a different legal relationship between a person and a country. The noun national can include both citizens and non-citizens. The most common distinguishing feature of citizenship is that citizens have the right to participate in the political life of the state, such as by voting or standing for election. *However, in most modern countries all nationals are citizens of the state, and full citizens are always nationals of the state*.[1][4]
> 
> In older texts, the word nationality rather than ethnicity, often used to refer to an ethnic group (a group of people who share a common ethnic identity, language, culture, descent, history, and so forth). This older meaning of nationality is not defined by political borders or passport ownership and includes nations that lack an independent state (such as the Arameans, Scots, Welsh, English, Basques, Catalans, Kurds, Kabyles, Baloch, Berbers, Bosniaks, Kashmiris, Palestinians, Sindhi, Tamils, Hmong, Inuit, Copts, Māori, Sikhs, Wakhi and Székelys).[citation needed] _​
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sorry, but the delusion that :
> 
> The Jews seem to be "imposing" their will on all other "ancient people" of the land.
> 
> There is no such thing.
> 
> The Jewish People are the most ancient of those people.  The Palestinian Arabs are not.  Neither would be the Greeks, the Romans or any other people who stayed after they invaded and conquered the land after the Jewish People had established themselves over 3000 years ago.
> 
> There are no Philistines.
> There are no Amorites.
> There are no Hitites, etc.  to come and claim the land as the ancient people from that very place.
> There are no Romans, Greeks, Crusaders claiming anything over the Jewish People's rights to their ancient homeland.
> 
> Are you to tell me that all people who now inhabit Kurdistan (even though not allow to declare Independence) have the same National rights as the descendants of the ancient Kurds?
> Do the Yazidis who fled to that area have the right to demand some National rights to the land, which should only be for the Kurdish people?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We will have to agree to disagree on this, since I don't want to derail this into another thread on who is indiginous.  There are multiple indiginous groups there, and they all have rights.
> 
> The question is - how do you maintain equality?  In most modern countries citizenship confers nationality rights.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is a very simple example, which shows how the descendants of the Jewish People are the ones with the rights for any National self-determination definition on that land.
> 
> It does not take away one bit the rights of all of those who are not Jewish, and are either citizens or residents of Israel.
> 
> Their rights are written in the laws of the land.
> 
> What they do not have the right to do, as Arabs, etc, is to demand that Israel be their Ancestral national anything *in place of the Jewish People's rights*, which is Exactly what the Muslim Arabs have been doing in the past decades with their endless "The Jews are from Europe", "There was no Temple Mount", "There were no Jews in the area", etc, which continues to come hard and furious from the Arab side.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why does it have to be* in place of*?  Why can't any citizen of Israel have nationality rights in Israel?  If a Palestinian state is ever established, there will likely be Jewish communities within it.  Jewish communities in those areas should have every right to nationality rights within Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --------------
> Individual rights, Netanyahu said, are anchored in many of the Jewish state’s (existing) laws, but not so Jewish national rights. *No one was harmed by the Nationality Law and no one intends to to harm anyone’s individual rights.*
> 
> (full article online)
> 
> Netanyahu at Cabinet Meeting: Israel is the National State of the Jewish People, Exclusively
> -------------
> The only reason why so many are complaining is because it is the State of the Jews.
> 
> Any other place on the planet, they will never care less.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think that remains to be seen.  Most other modern countries do not confer nationality rights only to one ethnic group.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Arab Palestinians have nationality rights in a hopefully if they can get their act together future state of Palestine.
> 
> Arab Israelis can exercise their Israeli nationality in Israel.
> 
> A nationality is formed around a culture. You aren't suggesting that Arab Israeli is a separate and distinct culture from Arab Palestinian, are you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I am to the degree that they've formed something of their own culture with regional differences including dialect, we did talk about that in other threads and doubtless don't agree .  But it's irrelevant.
> 
> Israel is a new state, imposed on a region with multiple ethnic groups already residing there.  It has since decided create a "nationality" law that only includes ONE of those groups despite the fact that most of those groups have been in that region since ancient history.  As a state does Israel have the right to do that?  Yes.  Any state does.  Does it make it right?  That is questionable.  How can you maintain equality?
> 
> Think about it - you are citizen of Israel.  You have served in the IDF, defended your country, supported it, and were born there.  But now - because you are NOT Jewish - you do not have any "national rights" there.  There is no way to look at that and not somehow see yourself as a different category of citizen.  As an outsider or somehow less than.  Why should you fight for Israel and defend it?
> 
> 
> 
> Nationality - Wikipedia
> _*Nationality* is a legal relationship between an individual person and a state.[1] Nationality affords the state jurisdiction over the person and affords the person the protection of the state. What these rights and duties are varies from state to state.[2]
> 
> By custom and international conventions, it is the right of each state to determine who its nationals are.[3] Such determinations are part of nationality law. In some cases, determinations of nationality are also governed by public international law—for example, by treaties on statelessness and the European Convention on Nationality.
> 
> Nationality differs technically and legally from citizenship, which is a different legal relationship between a person and a country. The noun national can include both citizens and non-citizens. The most common distinguishing feature of citizenship is that citizens have the right to participate in the political life of the state, such as by voting or standing for election. *However, in most modern countries all nationals are citizens of the state, and full citizens are always nationals of the state*.[1][4]
> 
> In older texts, the word nationality rather than ethnicity, often used to refer to an ethnic group (a group of people who share a common ethnic identity, language, culture, descent, history, and so forth). This older meaning of nationality is not defined by political borders or passport ownership and includes nations that lack an independent state (such as the Arameans, Scots, Welsh, English, Basques, Catalans, Kurds, Kabyles, Baloch, Berbers, Bosniaks, Kashmiris, Palestinians, Sindhi, Tamils, Hmong, Inuit, Copts, Māori, Sikhs, Wakhi and Székelys).[citation needed] _​
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sorry, but the delusion that :
> 
> The Jews seem to be "imposing" their will on all other "ancient people" of the land.
> 
> There is no such thing.
> 
> The Jewish People are the most ancient of those people.  The Palestinian Arabs are not.  Neither would be the Greeks, the Romans or any other people who stayed after they invaded and conquered the land after the Jewish People had established themselves over 3000 years ago.
> 
> There are no Philistines.
> There are no Amorites.
> There are no Hitites, etc.  to come and claim the land as the ancient people from that very place.
> There are no Romans, Greeks, Crusaders claiming anything over the Jewish People's rights to their ancient homeland.
> 
> Are you to tell me that all people who now inhabit Kurdistan (even though not allow to declare Independence) have the same National rights as the descendants of the ancient Kurds?
> Do the Yazidis who fled to that area have the right to demand some National rights to the land, which should only be for the Kurdish people?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We will have to agree to disagree on this, since I don't want to derail this into another thread on who is indiginous.  There are multiple indiginous groups there, and they all have rights.
> 
> The question is - how do you maintain equality?  In most modern countries citizenship confers nationality rights.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is a very simple example, which shows how the descendants of the Jewish People are the ones with the rights for any National self-determination definition on that land.
> 
> It does not take away one bit the rights of all of those who are not Jewish, and are either citizens or residents of Israel.
> 
> Their rights are written in the laws of the land.
> 
> What they do not have the right to do, as Arabs, etc, is to demand that Israel be their Ancestral national anything *in place of the Jewish People's rights*, which is Exactly what the Muslim Arabs have been doing in the past decades with their endless "The Jews are from Europe", "There was no Temple Mount", "There were no Jews in the area", etc, which continues to come hard and furious from the Arab side.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why does it have to be* in place of*?  Why can't any citizen of Israel have nationality rights in Israel?  If a Palestinian state is ever established, there will likely be Jewish communities within it.  Jewish communities in those areas should have every right to nationality rights within Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --------------
> Individual rights, Netanyahu said, are anchored in many of the Jewish state’s (existing) laws, but not so Jewish national rights. *No one was harmed by the Nationality Law and no one intends to to harm anyone’s individual rights.*
> 
> (full article online)
> 
> Netanyahu at Cabinet Meeting: Israel is the National State of the Jewish People, Exclusively
> -------------
> The only reason why so many are complaining is because it is the State of the Jews.
> 
> Any other place on the planet, they will never care less.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think that remains to be seen.  Most other modern countries do not confer nationality rights only to one ethnic group.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That is exactly the point:'
> 
> There are NO OTHER INDIGENOUS PEOPLE with rights to the land and self determination but the Jewish People.
> 
> There never has been.
> 
> No other people has ever declared indigenous rights to the land of Israel before 1948.
> 
> Self Determination is different from "National Rights" to think of myself as an American.
> 
> I am not descendant from the First Nations of America.  Not one of them.
> I do not have the right to demand the same rights to self determination over their ancestral lands as they do.  I never will.
> 
> Therefore, if the Apaches choose to declare self-determination over their ancient homeland, no other First Nation can do the same, and neither can any European or Asian who came over after 1492.
> 
> Therefore, here we have the Arabs, who came into the land 2400 years after the Jewish People established their Nation, culture, etc, saying that They have exactly the same rights, or worse, they have more rights to self-determination over the land then the Jewish People.
> 
> And that is exactly what you and others cannot come to understand.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I completely understand and completely disagree. There are mutliple indiginous groups, not just one.  But you believe only one has rights to that region.  And that is the problem - each side only believes in the legitimacy of their side's position.
Click to expand...



Are people of European ancestry indigenous to the US, in your opinion?


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> You are oblivious to the fact that Israel has two rights systems. There are citizens rights where all citizens have (more or less) equal rights. Then there are nationality rights. Only the Jewish nationality has access to these rights
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Only the Jewish people have nationality rights IN ISRAEL.  Others have nationality rights elsewhere.  That is actually how the global system currently works.  Citizens have national rights in their nation.
> 
> Are you suggesting that the Jewish people should have nationality rights in Palestine?  Or not?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Arab Israeli citizens have nationality rights where?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Ever heard of the Arabian Peninsula?
> Being Arabs they would have the right to any of the nationalities
> created in the past century.  Saudi, Yemenite, etc, etc.
> It all depends on where their ancestors came from in the first place within that Peninsula, would it not?
> 
> Irish Americans are Americans, but their ancestral roots are in Ireland.
> 
> Arab Israelis are Israelis, but their ancestral roots are in Arabia.
> 
> One gets the gist.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> My grandparents are Scottish and German and I live in the US.
> 
> What is my nationality?
Click to expand...



Not enough information for us to determine. You may be a national of nearly any country and have residency in the US. To which country do you have obligations and can avail yourself the protection of?  That is your nationality. 

BUT the national rights of the Scots people are held in their ancestral homeland, which is Scotland. The national rights of the German people are held in Germany. The national rights of the Scots and German people are not held in the US. (The First Nations peoples of the Americas hold national rights there). 

"National rights" are the rights of a cultural or ethnic group (a people) to have self-determination - that is to determine the qualities which will make up their state. This usually entails building the state around and incorporating the culture of that particular peoples -- the language, the holidays, the life celebrations, sometimes the legal framework, social rules, symbols, religious ideals, customs, clothing, food, values, etc. 

If you self-identify as Scots and are accepted by them and wish to live ias culturally Scottish and be part of the the self-determination of the Scots people the place to do that is not in the US. No matter how long you or your ancestors have been living in the US, you will not have Scottish national rights in the US.  Those are in Scotland. (This does not in any way affect your US nationality. Or your rights as a national of the US). 

In fact, the entire point of rejecting "settler colonialism" is to prevent local indigenous cultures from being overrun, conquered, cleansed and disappeared. You wouldn't suggest that Scotland must stop being Scottish in order to accommodate her minorities, would you?  You wouldn't expect Scotland to proclaim Pakistani as an official language and write the Constitution of Scotland for the self-determination of the Pakistani people, would you?


----------



## Humanity

Shusha said:


> You wouldn't suggest that Scotland must stop being Scottish in order to accommodate her minorities, would you? You wouldn't expect Scotland to proclaim Pakistani as an official language and write the Constitution of Scotland for the self-determination of the Pakistani people, would you?



What a ridiculous argument!

You wouldn't expect the First Minister in Scotland to declare that Scotland is "exclusively" Scottish. Would you?


----------



## Sixties Fan

For many years, we have been disappointed by the court. The nation-state law is an attempt at redemption. Ironically, the forefathers of this law are in fact Aharon Barak and his faction. The citizens of Israel, by way of their elected representatives, are trying to restore some of the freedom they once had, before the court decided to educate us. I have reiterated this point many times: The Supreme Court justices, including Aharon Barak, are no better than we are at understanding values. Their job description does not include telling us what is good and what is bad, or defining for us what is true. All we've ever asked of them is to rule according to the law – to decide whether one act or another complies with or violates the existing, written law.

But they, in turn, adopted Plato's Republic, in which the philosopher king rules over the ignorant masses. They found a clever way to impose a tyranny of the minority over the majority. The nation-state law was designed to slightly rectify this gross imbalance. Judicial activism is guided by hubris and aggression – the belief that you understand better than others what is worthy and the aggressive tendency to dismiss the will of the voters. Basic Law: Israel as the Nation-State of the Jewish People, as it is known by its official name, offers the tools to restore some of the eroded Jewish identity.

(full article online)

http://www.israelhayom.com/2018/08/03/the-jews-deserve-justice-too/


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL

Humanity said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> You wouldn't suggest that Scotland must stop being Scottish in order to accommodate her minorities, would you? You wouldn't expect Scotland to proclaim Pakistani as an official language and write the Constitution of Scotland for the self-determination of the Pakistani people, would you?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What a ridiculous argument!
> 
> You wouldn't expect the First Minister in Scotland to declare that Scotland is "exclusively" Scottish. Would you?
Click to expand...


Yet it’s OK. To have a “ Palestinian State?”


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I am to the degree that they've formed something of their own culture with regional differences including dialect, we did talk about that in other threads and doubtless don't agree .  But it's irrelevant.
> 
> Israel is a new state, imposed on a region with multiple ethnic groups already residing there.  It has since decided create a "nationality" law that only includes ONE of those groups despite the fact that most of those groups have been in that region since ancient history.  As a state does Israel have the right to do that?  Yes.  Any state does.  Does it make it right?  That is questionable.  How can you maintain equality?
> 
> Think about it - you are citizen of Israel.  You have served in the IDF, defended your country, supported it, and were born there.  But now - because you are NOT Jewish - you do not have any "national rights" there.  There is no way to look at that and not somehow see yourself as a different category of citizen.  As an outsider or somehow less than.  Why should you fight for Israel and defend it?
> 
> 
> 
> Nationality - Wikipedia
> _*Nationality* is a legal relationship between an individual person and a state.[1] Nationality affords the state jurisdiction over the person and affords the person the protection of the state. What these rights and duties are varies from state to state.[2]
> 
> By custom and international conventions, it is the right of each state to determine who its nationals are.[3] Such determinations are part of nationality law. In some cases, determinations of nationality are also governed by public international law—for example, by treaties on statelessness and the European Convention on Nationality.
> 
> Nationality differs technically and legally from citizenship, which is a different legal relationship between a person and a country. The noun national can include both citizens and non-citizens. The most common distinguishing feature of citizenship is that citizens have the right to participate in the political life of the state, such as by voting or standing for election. *However, in most modern countries all nationals are citizens of the state, and full citizens are always nationals of the state*.[1][4]
> 
> In older texts, the word nationality rather than ethnicity, often used to refer to an ethnic group (a group of people who share a common ethnic identity, language, culture, descent, history, and so forth). This older meaning of nationality is not defined by political borders or passport ownership and includes nations that lack an independent state (such as the Arameans, Scots, Welsh, English, Basques, Catalans, Kurds, Kabyles, Baloch, Berbers, Bosniaks, Kashmiris, Palestinians, Sindhi, Tamils, Hmong, Inuit, Copts, Māori, Sikhs, Wakhi and Székelys).[citation needed] _​
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry, but the delusion that :
> 
> The Jews seem to be "imposing" their will on all other "ancient people" of the land.
> 
> There is no such thing.
> 
> The Jewish People are the most ancient of those people.  The Palestinian Arabs are not.  Neither would be the Greeks, the Romans or any other people who stayed after they invaded and conquered the land after the Jewish People had established themselves over 3000 years ago.
> 
> There are no Philistines.
> There are no Amorites.
> There are no Hitites, etc.  to come and claim the land as the ancient people from that very place.
> There are no Romans, Greeks, Crusaders claiming anything over the Jewish People's rights to their ancient homeland.
> 
> Are you to tell me that all people who now inhabit Kurdistan (even though not allow to declare Independence) have the same National rights as the descendants of the ancient Kurds?
> Do the Yazidis who fled to that area have the right to demand some National rights to the land, which should only be for the Kurdish people?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We will have to agree to disagree on this, since I don't want to derail this into another thread on who is indiginous.  There are multiple indiginous groups there, and they all have rights.
> 
> The question is - how do you maintain equality?  In most modern countries citizenship confers nationality rights.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is a very simple example, which shows how the descendants of the Jewish People are the ones with the rights for any National self-determination definition on that land.
> 
> It does not take away one bit the rights of all of those who are not Jewish, and are either citizens or residents of Israel.
> 
> Their rights are written in the laws of the land.
> 
> What they do not have the right to do, as Arabs, etc, is to demand that Israel be their Ancestral national anything *in place of the Jewish People's rights*, which is Exactly what the Muslim Arabs have been doing in the past decades with their endless "The Jews are from Europe", "There was no Temple Mount", "There were no Jews in the area", etc, which continues to come hard and furious from the Arab side.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why does it have to be* in place of*?  Why can't any citizen of Israel have nationality rights in Israel?  If a Palestinian state is ever established, there will likely be Jewish communities within it.  Jewish communities in those areas should have every right to nationality rights within Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --------------
> Individual rights, Netanyahu said, are anchored in many of the Jewish state’s (existing) laws, but not so Jewish national rights. *No one was harmed by the Nationality Law and no one intends to to harm anyone’s individual rights.*
> 
> (full article online)
> 
> Netanyahu at Cabinet Meeting: Israel is the National State of the Jewish People, Exclusively
> -------------
> The only reason why so many are complaining is because it is the State of the Jews.
> 
> Any other place on the planet, they will never care less.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think that remains to be seen.  Most other modern countries do not confer nationality rights only to one ethnic group.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I am to the degree that they've formed something of their own culture with regional differences including dialect, we did talk about that in other threads and doubtless don't agree .  But it's irrelevant.
> 
> Israel is a new state, imposed on a region with multiple ethnic groups already residing there.  It has since decided create a "nationality" law that only includes ONE of those groups despite the fact that most of those groups have been in that region since ancient history.  As a state does Israel have the right to do that?  Yes.  Any state does.  Does it make it right?  That is questionable.  How can you maintain equality?
> 
> Think about it - you are citizen of Israel.  You have served in the IDF, defended your country, supported it, and were born there.  But now - because you are NOT Jewish - you do not have any "national rights" there.  There is no way to look at that and not somehow see yourself as a different category of citizen.  As an outsider or somehow less than.  Why should you fight for Israel and defend it?
> 
> 
> 
> Nationality - Wikipedia
> _*Nationality* is a legal relationship between an individual person and a state.[1] Nationality affords the state jurisdiction over the person and affords the person the protection of the state. What these rights and duties are varies from state to state.[2]
> 
> By custom and international conventions, it is the right of each state to determine who its nationals are.[3] Such determinations are part of nationality law. In some cases, determinations of nationality are also governed by public international law—for example, by treaties on statelessness and the European Convention on Nationality.
> 
> Nationality differs technically and legally from citizenship, which is a different legal relationship between a person and a country. The noun national can include both citizens and non-citizens. The most common distinguishing feature of citizenship is that citizens have the right to participate in the political life of the state, such as by voting or standing for election. *However, in most modern countries all nationals are citizens of the state, and full citizens are always nationals of the state*.[1][4]
> 
> In older texts, the word nationality rather than ethnicity, often used to refer to an ethnic group (a group of people who share a common ethnic identity, language, culture, descent, history, and so forth). This older meaning of nationality is not defined by political borders or passport ownership and includes nations that lack an independent state (such as the Arameans, Scots, Welsh, English, Basques, Catalans, Kurds, Kabyles, Baloch, Berbers, Bosniaks, Kashmiris, Palestinians, Sindhi, Tamils, Hmong, Inuit, Copts, Māori, Sikhs, Wakhi and Székelys).[citation needed] _​
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sorry, but the delusion that :
> 
> The Jews seem to be "imposing" their will on all other "ancient people" of the land.
> 
> There is no such thing.
> 
> The Jewish People are the most ancient of those people.  The Palestinian Arabs are not.  Neither would be the Greeks, the Romans or any other people who stayed after they invaded and conquered the land after the Jewish People had established themselves over 3000 years ago.
> 
> There are no Philistines.
> There are no Amorites.
> There are no Hitites, etc.  to come and claim the land as the ancient people from that very place.
> There are no Romans, Greeks, Crusaders claiming anything over the Jewish People's rights to their ancient homeland.
> 
> Are you to tell me that all people who now inhabit Kurdistan (even though not allow to declare Independence) have the same National rights as the descendants of the ancient Kurds?
> Do the Yazidis who fled to that area have the right to demand some National rights to the land, which should only be for the Kurdish people?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We will have to agree to disagree on this, since I don't want to derail this into another thread on who is indiginous.  There are multiple indiginous groups there, and they all have rights.
> 
> The question is - how do you maintain equality?  In most modern countries citizenship confers nationality rights.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is a very simple example, which shows how the descendants of the Jewish People are the ones with the rights for any National self-determination definition on that land.
> 
> It does not take away one bit the rights of all of those who are not Jewish, and are either citizens or residents of Israel.
> 
> Their rights are written in the laws of the land.
> 
> What they do not have the right to do, as Arabs, etc, is to demand that Israel be their Ancestral national anything *in place of the Jewish People's rights*, which is Exactly what the Muslim Arabs have been doing in the past decades with their endless "The Jews are from Europe", "There was no Temple Mount", "There were no Jews in the area", etc, which continues to come hard and furious from the Arab side.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why does it have to be* in place of*?  Why can't any citizen of Israel have nationality rights in Israel?  If a Palestinian state is ever established, there will likely be Jewish communities within it.  Jewish communities in those areas should have every right to nationality rights within Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --------------
> Individual rights, Netanyahu said, are anchored in many of the Jewish state’s (existing) laws, but not so Jewish national rights. *No one was harmed by the Nationality Law and no one intends to to harm anyone’s individual rights.*
> 
> (full article online)
> 
> Netanyahu at Cabinet Meeting: Israel is the National State of the Jewish People, Exclusively
> -------------
> The only reason why so many are complaining is because it is the State of the Jews.
> 
> Any other place on the planet, they will never care less.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think that remains to be seen.  Most other modern countries do not confer nationality rights only to one ethnic group.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That is exactly the point:'
> 
> There are NO OTHER INDIGENOUS PEOPLE with rights to the land and self determination but the Jewish People.
> 
> There never has been.
> 
> No other people has ever declared indigenous rights to the land of Israel before 1948.
> 
> Self Determination is different from "National Rights" to think of myself as an American.
> 
> I am not descendant from the First Nations of America.  Not one of them.
> I do not have the right to demand the same rights to self determination over their ancestral lands as they do.  I never will.
> 
> Therefore, if the Apaches choose to declare self-determination over their ancient homeland, no other First Nation can do the same, and neither can any European or Asian who came over after 1492.
> 
> Therefore, here we have the Arabs, who came into the land 2400 years after the Jewish People established their Nation, culture, etc, saying that They have exactly the same rights, or worse, they have more rights to self-determination over the land then the Jewish People.
> 
> And that is exactly what you and others cannot come to understand.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I completely understand and completely disagree. There are mutliple indiginous groups, not just one.  But you believe only one has rights to that region.  And that is the problem - each side only believes in the legitimacy of their side's position.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Are people of European ancestry indigenous to the US, in your opinion?
Click to expand...


If they also have Native American ancestry yes.


----------



## Coyote

admonit said:


> 70 years after the establishment of a Jewish state was declared, now it became a basic (constitutional) law.
> 
> The full text of the law:
> 
> *Basic Law: Israel as the Nation State of the Jewish People*
> 
> *1 — Basic principles*
> 
> A. The land of Israel is the historical homeland of the Jewish people, in which the State of Israel was established.
> 
> B. The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people, in which it fulfills its natural, cultural, religious and historical right to self-determination.
> 
> C. The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Israel is unique to the Jewish people.
> 
> *2 — The symbols of the state*
> 
> A. The name of the state is “Israel.”
> 
> B. The state flag is white with two blue stripes near the edges and a blue Star of David in the center.
> 
> C. The state emblem is a seven-branched menorah with olive leaves on both sides and the word “Israel” beneath it.
> 
> D. The state anthem is “Hatikvah.”
> 
> E. Details regarding state symbols will be determined by the law.
> 
> *3 — The capital of the state*
> 
> Jerusalem, complete and united, is the capital of Israel.
> 
> *4 — Language*
> 
> A. The state’s language is Hebrew.
> 
> B. The Arabic language has a special status in the state; Regulating the use of Arabic in state institutions or by them will be set in law.
> 
> C. This clause does not harm the status given to the Arabic language before this law came into effect.
> 
> *5 — Ingathering of the exiles*
> 
> The state will be open for Jewish immigration and the ingathering of exiles
> 
> *6 — Connection to the Jewish people*
> 
> A. The state will strive to ensure the safety of the members of the Jewish people in trouble or in captivity due to the fact of their Jewishness or their citizenship.
> 
> B. The state shall act within the Diaspora to strengthen the affinity between the state and members of the Jewish people.
> 
> C. The state shall act to preserve the cultural, historical and religious heritage of the Jewish people among Jews in the Diaspora.
> 
> *7 — Jewish settlement*
> 
> A. The state views the development of Jewish settlement as a national value and will act to encourage and promote its establishment and consolidation.
> 
> *8 — Official calendar*
> 
> The Hebrew calendar is the official calendar of the state and alongside it the Gregorian calendar will be used as an official calendar. Use of  the Hebrew calendar and the Gregorian calendar will be determined by law.
> 
> *9 — Independence Day and memorial days*
> 
> A. Independence Day is the official national holiday of the state.
> 
> B. Memorial Day for the Fallen in Israel’s Wars and Holocaust and Heroism Remembrance Day are official memorial days of the State.
> 
> *10 — Days of rest and sabbath*
> 
> The Sabbath and the festivals of Israel are the established days of rest in the state; Non-Jews have a right to maintain days of rest on their Sabbaths and festivals; Details of this issue will be determined by law.
> 
> *11 — Immutability*
> 
> This Basic Law shall not be amended, unless by another Basic Law passed by a majority of Knesset members.



I am going to refer back to the OP...because I want to point out something which I think does make this basic law different than those constitutions of other countries with multi ethnic populations.

In Part 1, A and B I totally agree with, nothing wrong there, other nations do that.  C is problematic to me because It states that this national Right is unique to Jewish people in Israel.  Why is this needed given that A and B already enshrine the importance of Jewish people and culture to the state?

It is this particular clause that makes it markedly different then say Slovenia, which you used as an example:

_...the fundamental and permanent right of the Slovene *nation* to self-determination; and from the historical fact that in a centuries-long struggle for national liberation *we Slovenes have established our national identity and asserted our statehood.*_

It does not claim that this national right is unique to only Slovenes.  It refers not to a people but a nation albeit Slovene.  I think distinctions matter, one is inclusive (theoretically) the other is exclusive and very specifically in who among its people’s has national rights and self determination.  I think if this part had been left out, critics would not had much to stand on.


----------



## RoccoR

OFF TOPIC
※→  Coyote, et al,

The discussion centered on "indigenous peoples" is pretty  difficult unless you are prepared to define the meaning and terms of "indigenous."  It is a pretty loosely used description.



Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Are people of European ancestry indigenous to the US, in your opinion?
> 
> 
> 
> If they also have Native American ancestry yes.
Click to expand...

*(COMMENT)*

Conventional wisdom says that all humans (as a species) radiate from a central point in Ancient Ethiopia (southeast Africa), and started to migrate between 60-65 and 70-75 thousand years ago.  

Are the American Indians truly indigenous?  Or were they immigrants to a people that were there 14 thousa

From Who are we decended? 

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry, but the delusion that :
> 
> The Jews seem to be "imposing" their will on all other "ancient people" of the land.
> 
> There is no such thing.
> 
> The Jewish People are the most ancient of those people.  The Palestinian Arabs are not.  Neither would be the Greeks, the Romans or any other people who stayed after they invaded and conquered the land after the Jewish People had established themselves over 3000 years ago.
> 
> There are no Philistines.
> There are no Amorites.
> There are no Hitites, etc.  to come and claim the land as the ancient people from that very place.
> There are no Romans, Greeks, Crusaders claiming anything over the Jewish People's rights to their ancient homeland.
> 
> Are you to tell me that all people who now inhabit Kurdistan (even though not allow to declare Independence) have the same National rights as the descendants of the ancient Kurds?
> Do the Yazidis who fled to that area have the right to demand some National rights to the land, which should only be for the Kurdish people?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We will have to agree to disagree on this, since I don't want to derail this into another thread on who is indiginous.  There are multiple indiginous groups there, and they all have rights.
> 
> The question is - how do you maintain equality?  In most modern countries citizenship confers nationality rights.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is a very simple example, which shows how the descendants of the Jewish People are the ones with the rights for any National self-determination definition on that land.
> 
> It does not take away one bit the rights of all of those who are not Jewish, and are either citizens or residents of Israel.
> 
> Their rights are written in the laws of the land.
> 
> What they do not have the right to do, as Arabs, etc, is to demand that Israel be their Ancestral national anything *in place of the Jewish People's rights*, which is Exactly what the Muslim Arabs have been doing in the past decades with their endless "The Jews are from Europe", "There was no Temple Mount", "There were no Jews in the area", etc, which continues to come hard and furious from the Arab side.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why does it have to be* in place of*?  Why can't any citizen of Israel have nationality rights in Israel?  If a Palestinian state is ever established, there will likely be Jewish communities within it.  Jewish communities in those areas should have every right to nationality rights within Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --------------
> Individual rights, Netanyahu said, are anchored in many of the Jewish state’s (existing) laws, but not so Jewish national rights. *No one was harmed by the Nationality Law and no one intends to to harm anyone’s individual rights.*
> 
> (full article online)
> 
> Netanyahu at Cabinet Meeting: Israel is the National State of the Jewish People, Exclusively
> -------------
> The only reason why so many are complaining is because it is the State of the Jews.
> 
> Any other place on the planet, they will never care less.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think that remains to be seen.  Most other modern countries do not confer nationality rights only to one ethnic group.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry, but the delusion that :
> 
> The Jews seem to be "imposing" their will on all other "ancient people" of the land.
> 
> There is no such thing.
> 
> The Jewish People are the most ancient of those people.  The Palestinian Arabs are not.  Neither would be the Greeks, the Romans or any other people who stayed after they invaded and conquered the land after the Jewish People had established themselves over 3000 years ago.
> 
> There are no Philistines.
> There are no Amorites.
> There are no Hitites, etc.  to come and claim the land as the ancient people from that very place.
> There are no Romans, Greeks, Crusaders claiming anything over the Jewish People's rights to their ancient homeland.
> 
> Are you to tell me that all people who now inhabit Kurdistan (even though not allow to declare Independence) have the same National rights as the descendants of the ancient Kurds?
> Do the Yazidis who fled to that area have the right to demand some National rights to the land, which should only be for the Kurdish people?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We will have to agree to disagree on this, since I don't want to derail this into another thread on who is indiginous.  There are multiple indiginous groups there, and they all have rights.
> 
> The question is - how do you maintain equality?  In most modern countries citizenship confers nationality rights.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is a very simple example, which shows how the descendants of the Jewish People are the ones with the rights for any National self-determination definition on that land.
> 
> It does not take away one bit the rights of all of those who are not Jewish, and are either citizens or residents of Israel.
> 
> Their rights are written in the laws of the land.
> 
> What they do not have the right to do, as Arabs, etc, is to demand that Israel be their Ancestral national anything *in place of the Jewish People's rights*, which is Exactly what the Muslim Arabs have been doing in the past decades with their endless "The Jews are from Europe", "There was no Temple Mount", "There were no Jews in the area", etc, which continues to come hard and furious from the Arab side.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why does it have to be* in place of*?  Why can't any citizen of Israel have nationality rights in Israel?  If a Palestinian state is ever established, there will likely be Jewish communities within it.  Jewish communities in those areas should have every right to nationality rights within Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --------------
> Individual rights, Netanyahu said, are anchored in many of the Jewish state’s (existing) laws, but not so Jewish national rights. *No one was harmed by the Nationality Law and no one intends to to harm anyone’s individual rights.*
> 
> (full article online)
> 
> Netanyahu at Cabinet Meeting: Israel is the National State of the Jewish People, Exclusively
> -------------
> The only reason why so many are complaining is because it is the State of the Jews.
> 
> Any other place on the planet, they will never care less.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think that remains to be seen.  Most other modern countries do not confer nationality rights only to one ethnic group.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That is exactly the point:'
> 
> There are NO OTHER INDIGENOUS PEOPLE with rights to the land and self determination but the Jewish People.
> 
> There never has been.
> 
> No other people has ever declared indigenous rights to the land of Israel before 1948.
> 
> Self Determination is different from "National Rights" to think of myself as an American.
> 
> I am not descendant from the First Nations of America.  Not one of them.
> I do not have the right to demand the same rights to self determination over their ancestral lands as they do.  I never will.
> 
> Therefore, if the Apaches choose to declare self-determination over their ancient homeland, no other First Nation can do the same, and neither can any European or Asian who came over after 1492.
> 
> Therefore, here we have the Arabs, who came into the land 2400 years after the Jewish People established their Nation, culture, etc, saying that They have exactly the same rights, or worse, they have more rights to self-determination over the land then the Jewish People.
> 
> And that is exactly what you and others cannot come to understand.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I completely understand and completely disagree. There are mutliple indiginous groups, not just one.  But you believe only one has rights to that region.  And that is the problem - each side only believes in the legitimacy of their side's position.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Are people of European ancestry indigenous to the US, in your opinion?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If they also have Native American ancestry yes.
Click to expand...



I disagree. He ancestry is not the important element.

The elements to be measured (and this is in the UN Declaratiin of Indigenous Rights) are:

1.  Self identification with the peoples.
2. Acceptance by the collective as part of the peoples.
3.  Participation in the culture.


It's not about a blood test. It's about being part of the people.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> admonit said:
> 
> 
> 
> 70 years after the establishment of a Jewish state was declared, now it became a basic (constitutional) law.
> 
> The full text of the law:
> 
> *Basic Law: Israel as the Nation State of the Jewish People*
> 
> *1 — Basic principles*
> 
> A. The land of Israel is the historical homeland of the Jewish people, in which the State of Israel was established.
> 
> B. The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people, in which it fulfills its natural, cultural, religious and historical right to self-determination.
> 
> C. The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Israel is unique to the Jewish people.
> 
> *2 — The symbols of the state*
> 
> A. The name of the state is “Israel.”
> 
> B. The state flag is white with two blue stripes near the edges and a blue Star of David in the center.
> 
> C. The state emblem is a seven-branched menorah with olive leaves on both sides and the word “Israel” beneath it.
> 
> D. The state anthem is “Hatikvah.”
> 
> E. Details regarding state symbols will be determined by the law.
> 
> *3 — The capital of the state*
> 
> Jerusalem, complete and united, is the capital of Israel.
> 
> *4 — Language*
> 
> A. The state’s language is Hebrew.
> 
> B. The Arabic language has a special status in the state; Regulating the use of Arabic in state institutions or by them will be set in law.
> 
> C. This clause does not harm the status given to the Arabic language before this law came into effect.
> 
> *5 — Ingathering of the exiles*
> 
> The state will be open for Jewish immigration and the ingathering of exiles
> 
> *6 — Connection to the Jewish people*
> 
> A. The state will strive to ensure the safety of the members of the Jewish people in trouble or in captivity due to the fact of their Jewishness or their citizenship.
> 
> B. The state shall act within the Diaspora to strengthen the affinity between the state and members of the Jewish people.
> 
> C. The state shall act to preserve the cultural, historical and religious heritage of the Jewish people among Jews in the Diaspora.
> 
> *7 — Jewish settlement*
> 
> A. The state views the development of Jewish settlement as a national value and will act to encourage and promote its establishment and consolidation.
> 
> *8 — Official calendar*
> 
> The Hebrew calendar is the official calendar of the state and alongside it the Gregorian calendar will be used as an official calendar. Use of  the Hebrew calendar and the Gregorian calendar will be determined by law.
> 
> *9 — Independence Day and memorial days*
> 
> A. Independence Day is the official national holiday of the state.
> 
> B. Memorial Day for the Fallen in Israel’s Wars and Holocaust and Heroism Remembrance Day are official memorial days of the State.
> 
> *10 — Days of rest and sabbath*
> 
> The Sabbath and the festivals of Israel are the established days of rest in the state; Non-Jews have a right to maintain days of rest on their Sabbaths and festivals; Details of this issue will be determined by law.
> 
> *11 — Immutability*
> 
> This Basic Law shall not be amended, unless by another Basic Law passed by a majority of Knesset members.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am going to refer back to the OP...because I want to point out something which I think does make this basic law different than those constitutions of other countries with multi ethnic populations.
> 
> In Part 1, A and B I totally agree with, nothing wrong there, other nations do that.  C is problematic to me because It states that this national Right is unique to Jewish people in Israel.  Why is this needed given that A and B already enshrine the importance of Jewish people and culture to the state?
> 
> It is this particular clause that makes it markedly different then say Slovenia, which you used as an example:
> 
> _...the fundamental and permanent right of the Slovene *nation* to self-determination; and from the historical fact that in a centuries-long struggle for national liberation *we Slovenes have established our national identity and asserted our statehood.*_
> 
> It does not claim that this national right is unique to only Slovenes.  It refers not to a people but a nation albeit Slovene.  I think distinctions matter, one is inclusive (theoretically) the other is exclusive and very specifically in who among its people’s has national rights and self determination.  I think if this part had been left out, critics would not had much to stand on.
Click to expand...



I think you are trying to make a distinction where there is none. 

So you think that the Slovene declaration means that the Russian minority in Slovenia should have national rights in Slovenia?

You would have no problem with the declaration wording being:  ... the fundamental and permanent right of the Jewish nation to self-determination and from the historical fact of a millennia long struggle for national liberation,  we Jews have established our national identity and asserted our Statehood.


----------



## Olde Europe

Coyote said:


> It does not claim that this national right is unique to only Slovenes.  It refers not to a people but a nation albeit Slovene.  I think distinctions matter, one is inclusive (theoretically) the other is exclusive and very specifically in who among its people’s has national rights and self determination.  I think if this part had been left out, critics would not had much to stand on.



If that part 1C had been left out, it would have been better, but not that much.

1 — Basic principles

A. The land of Germany is the historical homeland of the Aryan people, in which the State of Germany was established.

B. The State of Germany is the national home of the Aryan people, in which it fulfills its natural, cultural, religious and historical right to self-determination.​
How would including the above into the German Constitution not constitute a mortal threat to Jews living in Germany?  It may not actualize itself right away, but you'd see Jews heading for ports nonetheless, quite understandably so.  At the very least, these provisions would tell them in no uncertain terms they are not welcome, not "at home" in Germany.

As much as I understand the Jews' determination never again to be a harassed (or worse) minority in their homeland, how they go about achieving this aim matters, and a great deal.

But, here's the thing I do not understand.  The Basic Law was passed, 1C included.  The determination to exclude Muslims and Druze from Israel's national self-determination, and the Druze, the Jewish majority's most loyal allies, are acrimonious over it.  Do you really think that would have been much different if the part 1C had been left out?  The intention that led to that law would still be there, just slightly less visible, and that intent is to confine the minorities to ever smaller portions of land, while grabbing the entirety of the Westbank, including the Bantustans there.  Which, of course, is a recipe for continuous, endless strife, and ultimate disaster.  So, why cling to "if only they had left out 1C"?

What I am trying to say is, I watch you arguing that law without ever seriously taking the perspective of those excluded from being at home in Israel, excluded from Israel's national self-determination.  That's puzzling, and that's why I repeatedly bring up Germany and Aryans, which sharpens the point somewhat unfairly, I guess.


----------



## Coyote

RoccoR said:


> OFF TOPIC
> ※→  Coyote, et al,
> 
> The discussion centered on "indigenous peoples" is pretty  difficult unless you are prepared to define the meaning and terms of "indigenous."  It is a pretty loosely used description.
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Are people of European ancestry indigenous to the US, in your opinion?
> 
> 
> 
> If they also have Native American ancestry yes.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> Conventional wisdom says that all humans (as a species) radiate from a central point in Ancient Ethiopia (southeast Africa), and started to migrate between 60-65 and 70-75 thousand years ago.
> 
> Are the American Indians truly indigenous?  Or were they immigrants to a people that were there 14 thousa
> 
> From Who are we decended?
> 
> Most Respectfully,
> R
Click to expand...

Exactly...well said.


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> We will have to agree to disagree on this, since I don't want to derail this into another thread on who is indiginous.  There are multiple indiginous groups there, and they all have rights.
> 
> The question is - how do you maintain equality?  In most modern countries citizenship confers nationality rights.
> 
> Why does it have to be* in place of*?  Why can't any citizen of Israel have nationality rights in Israel?  If a Palestinian state is ever established, there will likely be Jewish communities within it.  Jewish communities in those areas should have every right to nationality rights within Palestine.
> 
> 
> I think that remains to be seen.  Most other modern countries do not confer nationality rights only to one ethnic group.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> We will have to agree to disagree on this, since I don't want to derail this into another thread on who is indiginous.  There are multiple indiginous groups there, and they all have rights.
> 
> The question is - how do you maintain equality?  In most modern countries citizenship confers nationality rights.
> 
> Why does it have to be* in place of*?  Why can't any citizen of Israel have nationality rights in Israel?  If a Palestinian state is ever established, there will likely be Jewish communities within it.  Jewish communities in those areas should have every right to nationality rights within Palestine.
> 
> 
> I think that remains to be seen.  Most other modern countries do not confer nationality rights only to one ethnic group.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That is exactly the point:'
> 
> There are NO OTHER INDIGENOUS PEOPLE with rights to the land and self determination but the Jewish People.
> 
> There never has been.
> 
> No other people has ever declared indigenous rights to the land of Israel before 1948.
> 
> Self Determination is different from "National Rights" to think of myself as an American.
> 
> I am not descendant from the First Nations of America.  Not one of them.
> I do not have the right to demand the same rights to self determination over their ancestral lands as they do.  I never will.
> 
> Therefore, if the Apaches choose to declare self-determination over their ancient homeland, no other First Nation can do the same, and neither can any European or Asian who came over after 1492.
> 
> Therefore, here we have the Arabs, who came into the land 2400 years after the Jewish People established their Nation, culture, etc, saying that They have exactly the same rights, or worse, they have more rights to self-determination over the land then the Jewish People.
> 
> And that is exactly what you and others cannot come to understand.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I completely understand and completely disagree. There are mutliple indiginous groups, not just one.  But you believe only one has rights to that region.  And that is the problem - each side only believes in the legitimacy of their side's position.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Are people of European ancestry indigenous to the US, in your opinion?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If they also have Native American ancestry yes.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I disagree. He ancestry is not the important element.
> 
> The elements to be measured (and this is in the UN Declaratiin of Indigenous Rights) are:
> 
> 1.  Self identification with the peoples.
> 2. Acceptance by the collective as part of the peoples.
> 3.  Participation in the culture.
> 
> 
> It's not about a blood test. It's about being part of the people.
Click to expand...



You can have indiginous cultures.  And you can have indiginous people.  Palestinians, regardless of culture are indigninous - descended from indiginous.  Their rights are the same.


----------



## Coyote

Olde Europe said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> It does not claim that this national right is unique to only Slovenes.  It refers not to a people but a nation albeit Slovene.  I think distinctions matter, one is inclusive (theoretically) the other is exclusive and very specifically in who among its people’s has national rights and self determination.  I think if this part had been left out, critics would not had much to stand on.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If that part 1C had been left out, it would have been better, but not that much.
> 
> 1 — Basic principles
> 
> A. The land of Germany is the historical homeland of the Aryan people, in which the State of Germany was established.
> 
> B. The State of Germany is the national home of the Aryan people, in which it fulfills its natural, cultural, religious and historical right to self-determination.​
> How would including the above into the German Constitution not constitute a mortal threat to Jews living in Germany?  It may not actualize itself right away, but you'd see Jews heading for ports nonetheless, quite understandably so.  At the very least, these provisions would tell them in no uncertain terms they are not welcome, not "at home" in Germany.
> 
> As much as I understand the Jews' determination never again to be a harassed (or worse) minority in their homeland, how they go about achieving this aim matters, and a great deal.
> 
> But, here's the thing I do not understand.  The Basic Law was passed, 1C included.  The determination to exclude Muslims and Druze from Israel's national self-determination, and the Druze, the Jewish majority's most loyal allies, are acrimonious over it.  Do you really think that would have been much different if the part 1C had been left out?  The intention that led to that law would still be there, just slightly less visible, and that intent is to confine the minorities to ever smaller portions of land, while grabbing the entirety of the Westbank, including the Bantustans there.  Which, of course, is a recipe for continuous, endless strife, and ultimate disaster.  So, why cling to "if only they had left out 1C"?
> 
> What I am trying to say is, I watch you arguing that law without ever seriously taking the perspective of those excluded from being at home in Israel, excluded from Israel's national self-determination.  That's puzzling, and that's why I repeatedly bring up Germany and Aryans, which sharpens the point somewhat unfairly, I guess.
Click to expand...



I will have to think on this, you make good points.

But here is another question - if you exclude 1C - is it any different than what Slovenia has?  Part of the argument is that Israel is doing what other nations have done but were not criticized for it.  And they have a point there.  How do you counter this?


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> admonit said:
> 
> 
> 
> 70 years after the establishment of a Jewish state was declared, now it became a basic (constitutional) law.
> 
> The full text of the law:
> 
> *Basic Law: Israel as the Nation State of the Jewish People*
> 
> *1 — Basic principles*
> 
> A. The land of Israel is the historical homeland of the Jewish people, in which the State of Israel was established.
> 
> B. The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people, in which it fulfills its natural, cultural, religious and historical right to self-determination.
> 
> C. The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Israel is unique to the Jewish people.
> 
> *2 — The symbols of the state*
> 
> A. The name of the state is “Israel.”
> 
> B. The state flag is white with two blue stripes near the edges and a blue Star of David in the center.
> 
> C. The state emblem is a seven-branched menorah with olive leaves on both sides and the word “Israel” beneath it.
> 
> D. The state anthem is “Hatikvah.”
> 
> E. Details regarding state symbols will be determined by the law.
> 
> *3 — The capital of the state*
> 
> Jerusalem, complete and united, is the capital of Israel.
> 
> *4 — Language*
> 
> A. The state’s language is Hebrew.
> 
> B. The Arabic language has a special status in the state; Regulating the use of Arabic in state institutions or by them will be set in law.
> 
> C. This clause does not harm the status given to the Arabic language before this law came into effect.
> 
> *5 — Ingathering of the exiles*
> 
> The state will be open for Jewish immigration and the ingathering of exiles
> 
> *6 — Connection to the Jewish people*
> 
> A. The state will strive to ensure the safety of the members of the Jewish people in trouble or in captivity due to the fact of their Jewishness or their citizenship.
> 
> B. The state shall act within the Diaspora to strengthen the affinity between the state and members of the Jewish people.
> 
> C. The state shall act to preserve the cultural, historical and religious heritage of the Jewish people among Jews in the Diaspora.
> 
> *7 — Jewish settlement*
> 
> A. The state views the development of Jewish settlement as a national value and will act to encourage and promote its establishment and consolidation.
> 
> *8 — Official calendar*
> 
> The Hebrew calendar is the official calendar of the state and alongside it the Gregorian calendar will be used as an official calendar. Use of  the Hebrew calendar and the Gregorian calendar will be determined by law.
> 
> *9 — Independence Day and memorial days*
> 
> A. Independence Day is the official national holiday of the state.
> 
> B. Memorial Day for the Fallen in Israel’s Wars and Holocaust and Heroism Remembrance Day are official memorial days of the State.
> 
> *10 — Days of rest and sabbath*
> 
> The Sabbath and the festivals of Israel are the established days of rest in the state; Non-Jews have a right to maintain days of rest on their Sabbaths and festivals; Details of this issue will be determined by law.
> 
> *11 — Immutability*
> 
> This Basic Law shall not be amended, unless by another Basic Law passed by a majority of Knesset members.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am going to refer back to the OP...because I want to point out something which I think does make this basic law different than those constitutions of other countries with multi ethnic populations.
> 
> In Part 1, A and B I totally agree with, nothing wrong there, other nations do that.  C is problematic to me because It states that this national Right is unique to Jewish people in Israel.  Why is this needed given that A and B already enshrine the importance of Jewish people and culture to the state?
> 
> It is this particular clause that makes it markedly different then say Slovenia, which you used as an example:
> 
> _...the fundamental and permanent right of the Slovene *nation* to self-determination; and from the historical fact that in a centuries-long struggle for national liberation *we Slovenes have established our national identity and asserted our statehood.*_
> 
> It does not claim that this national right is unique to only Slovenes.  It refers not to a people but a nation albeit Slovene.  I think distinctions matter, one is inclusive (theoretically) the other is exclusive and very specifically in who among its people’s has national rights and self determination.  I think if this part had been left out, critics would not had much to stand on.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I think you are trying to make a distinction where there is none.
> 
> So you think that the Slovene declaration means that the Russian minority in Slovenia should have national rights in Slovenia?
> 
> You would have no problem with the declaration wording being:  ... the fundamental and permanent right of the Jewish nation to self-determination and from the historical fact of a millennia long struggle for national liberation,  we Jews have established our national identity and asserted our Statehood.
Click to expand...


_The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Israel is unique to the Jewish people_.

I think it is an important distiction to those who are excluded - the Israeli law explicitely states who is included in that national right.  The Slovenian law doesn't.

The second statement has the potential to include more than just Jews under the "Jewish nation".


----------



## rylah

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Only the Jewish people have nationality rights IN ISRAEL.  Others have nationality rights elsewhere.  That is actually how the global system currently works.  Citizens have national rights in their nation.
> 
> Are you suggesting that the Jewish people should have nationality rights in Palestine?  Or not?
> 
> 
> 
> Arab Israeli citizens have nationality rights where?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Arab Palestinians have nationality rights in a hopefully if they can get their act together future state of Palestine.
> 
> Arab Israelis can exercise their Israeli nationality in Israel.
> 
> A nationality is formed around a culture. You aren't suggesting that Arab Israeli is a separate and distinct culture from Arab Palestinian, are you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In a broader international legal context, the “Nationality law...showed that the Palestinians formed a nation, and that Palestine was a State, though provisionally under guardianship”.
> 
> The status of Palestine and the nationality of its inhabitants were finally settled by the Treaty of Lausanne from the international law perspective. In a report submitted to the League of Nations, the British Government rightly pointed out: “The ratification of the Treaty of Lausanne in Aug., 1924, finally regularised the international status of Palestine”. And, thereafter, “Palestine could, at last, obtain a separate nationality”.
> 
> https://doc.rero.ch/record/9065/files/these.pdf
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The problem with this is that there were two distinct nationalities within the territory.  Could not be more clear. Hence the conflict. The solution is to form two states. Always has been. Standard procedure globally in cases like this.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Indeed, natives and colonial settlers.
Click to expand...


Indeed, *"Palestinian"* in the native language means _*"colonial settlers". *_


----------



## Olde Europe

Coyote said:


> But here is another question - if you exclude 1C - is it any different than what Slovenia has?  Part of the argument is that Israel is doing what other nations have done but were not criticized for it.  And they have a point there.  How do you counter this?



I know of no Western state that would confine nationality, or national self-determination, to a portion of their citizenry, and the Slovenes certainly do not do that.  Their Constitution speak about "Slovenes" as citizens of Slovenia, and that includes the Hungarian and Italian minorities.  In other words, I'd counter it in (pretty much) the same way you did, above.  Moreover, the Slovenian Constitution then moves to, without a single doubt, establishing equality before the law for all citizens, regardless of ethnic, religious (etc.) differences; neither does it establish a "nationality" for ethnic Slovenes, from which it excludes all who are not.  And that's the whole point.


----------



## Coyote

rylah said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Arab Israeli citizens have nationality rights where?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Arab Palestinians have nationality rights in a hopefully if they can get their act together future state of Palestine.
> 
> Arab Israelis can exercise their Israeli nationality in Israel.
> 
> A nationality is formed around a culture. You aren't suggesting that Arab Israeli is a separate and distinct culture from Arab Palestinian, are you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In a broader international legal context, the “Nationality law...showed that the Palestinians formed a nation, and that Palestine was a State, though provisionally under guardianship”.
> 
> The status of Palestine and the nationality of its inhabitants were finally settled by the Treaty of Lausanne from the international law perspective. In a report submitted to the League of Nations, the British Government rightly pointed out: “The ratification of the Treaty of Lausanne in Aug., 1924, finally regularised the international status of Palestine”. And, thereafter, “Palestine could, at last, obtain a separate nationality”.
> 
> https://doc.rero.ch/record/9065/files/these.pdf
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The problem with this is that there were two distinct nationalities within the territory.  Could not be more clear. Hence the conflict. The solution is to form two states. Always has been. Standard procedure globally in cases like this.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Indeed, natives and colonial settlers.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Indeed, *"Palestinian"* in the native language means _*"colonial settlers". *_
Click to expand...


No it doesn't.


----------



## rylah

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> You are oblivious to the fact that Israel has two rights systems. There are citizens rights where all citizens have (more or less) equal rights. Then there are nationality rights. Only the Jewish nationality has access to these rights
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Only the Jewish people have nationality rights IN ISRAEL.  Others have nationality rights elsewhere.  That is actually how the global system currently works.  Citizens have national rights in their nation.
> 
> Are you suggesting that the Jewish people should have nationality rights in Palestine?  Or not?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Arab Israeli citizens have nationality rights where?
Click to expand...

Evidently in Israel,
they're the only minority with a 'special' status, their language has a special status, and one could even argue that Israel is the most free of 'Arab countries".


----------



## rylah

rylah said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> You are oblivious to the fact that Israel has two rights systems. There are citizens rights where all citizens have (more or less) equal rights. Then there are nationality rights. Only the Jewish nationality has access to these rights
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Only the Jewish people have nationality rights IN ISRAEL.  Others have nationality rights elsewhere.  That is actually how the global system currently works.  Citizens have national rights in their nation.
> 
> Are you suggesting that the Jewish people should have nationality rights in Palestine?  Or not?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Arab Israeli citizens have nationality rights where?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Evidently in Israel,
> they're the only minority with a 'special' status, their language has a special status and one could even argue that Israel is the most free of 'Arab countries".
Click to expand...


Israeli Nationality Law of 1952 - Wikipedia


----------



## rylah

P F Tinmore said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> You are oblivious to the fact that Israel has two rights systems. There are citizens rights where all citizens have (more or less) equal rights. Then there are nationality rights. Only the Jewish nationality has access to these rights
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Only the Jewish people have nationality rights IN ISRAEL.  Others have nationality rights elsewhere.  That is actually how the global system currently works.  Citizens have national rights in their nation.
> 
> Are you suggesting that the Jewish people should have nationality rights in Palestine?  Or not?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Arab Israeli citizens have nationality rights where?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Arab Palestinians have nationality rights in a hopefully if they can get their act together future state of Palestine.
> 
> Arab Israelis can exercise their Israeli nationality in Israel.
> 
> A nationality is formed around a culture. You aren't suggesting that Arab Israeli is a separate and distinct culture from Arab Palestinian, are you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I am to the degree that they've formed something of their own culture with regional differences including dialect, we did talk about that in other threads and doubtless don't agree .  But it's irrelevant.
> 
> Israel is a new state, imposed on a region with multiple ethnic groups already residing there.  It has since decided create a "nationality" law that only includes ONE of those groups despite the fact that most of those groups have been in that region since ancient history.  As a state does Israel have the right to do that?  Yes.  Any state does.  Does it make it right?  That is questionable.  How can you maintain equality?
> 
> Think about it - you are citizen of Israel.  You have served in the IDF, defended your country, supported it, and were born there.  But now - because you are NOT Jewish - you do not have any "national rights" there.  There is no way to look at that and not somehow see yourself as a different category of citizen.  As an outsider or somehow less than.  Why should you fight for Israel and defend it?
> 
> 
> 
> Nationality - Wikipedia
> _*Nationality* is a legal relationship between an individual person and a state.[1] Nationality affords the state jurisdiction over the person and affords the person the protection of the state. What these rights and duties are varies from state to state.[2]
> 
> By custom and international conventions, it is the right of each state to determine who its nationals are.[3] Such determinations are part of nationality law. In some cases, determinations of nationality are also governed by public international law—for example, by treaties on statelessness and the European Convention on Nationality.
> 
> Nationality differs technically and legally from citizenship, which is a different legal relationship between a person and a country. The noun national can include both citizens and non-citizens. The most common distinguishing feature of citizenship is that citizens have the right to participate in the political life of the state, such as by voting or standing for election. *However, in most modern countries all nationals are citizens of the state, and full citizens are always nationals of the state*.[1][4]
> 
> In older texts, the word nationality rather than ethnicity, often used to refer to an ethnic group (a group of people who share a common ethnic identity, language, culture, descent, history, and so forth). This older meaning of nationality is not defined by political borders or passport ownership and includes nations that lack an independent state (such as the Arameans, Scots, Welsh, English, Basques, Catalans, Kurds, Kabyles, Baloch, Berbers, Bosniaks, Kashmiris, Palestinians, Sindhi, Tamils, Hmong, Inuit, Copts, Māori, Sikhs, Wakhi and Székelys).[citation needed] _​
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> F, defended your country, supported it, and were born there. But now - because you are NOT Jewish - you do not have any "national rights" there. There is no way to look at that and not somehow see yourself as a different category of citizen.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Indeed, that is called apartheid.
Click to expand...


Only for propaganda purposes.
To cover the fact of Arabs openly demanding a Jew-free state.


----------



## rylah

Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Arab Palestinians have nationality rights in a hopefully if they can get their act together future state of Palestine.
> 
> Arab Israelis can exercise their Israeli nationality in Israel.
> 
> A nationality is formed around a culture. You aren't suggesting that Arab Israeli is a separate and distinct culture from Arab Palestinian, are you?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am to the degree that they've formed something of their own culture with regional differences including dialect, we did talk about that in other threads and doubtless don't agree .  But it's irrelevant.
> 
> Israel is a new state, imposed on a region with multiple ethnic groups already residing there.  It has since decided create a "nationality" law that only includes ONE of those groups despite the fact that most of those groups have been in that region since ancient history.  As a state does Israel have the right to do that?  Yes.  Any state does.  Does it make it right?  That is questionable.  How can you maintain equality?
> 
> Think about it - you are citizen of Israel.  You have served in the IDF, defended your country, supported it, and were born there.  But now - because you are NOT Jewish - you do not have any "national rights" there.  There is no way to look at that and not somehow see yourself as a different category of citizen.  As an outsider or somehow less than.  Why should you fight for Israel and defend it?
> 
> 
> 
> Nationality - Wikipedia
> _*Nationality* is a legal relationship between an individual person and a state.[1] Nationality affords the state jurisdiction over the person and affords the person the protection of the state. What these rights and duties are varies from state to state.[2]
> 
> By custom and international conventions, it is the right of each state to determine who its nationals are.[3] Such determinations are part of nationality law. In some cases, determinations of nationality are also governed by public international law—for example, by treaties on statelessness and the European Convention on Nationality.
> 
> Nationality differs technically and legally from citizenship, which is a different legal relationship between a person and a country. The noun national can include both citizens and non-citizens. The most common distinguishing feature of citizenship is that citizens have the right to participate in the political life of the state, such as by voting or standing for election. *However, in most modern countries all nationals are citizens of the state, and full citizens are always nationals of the state*.[1][4]
> 
> In older texts, the word nationality rather than ethnicity, often used to refer to an ethnic group (a group of people who share a common ethnic identity, language, culture, descent, history, and so forth). This older meaning of nationality is not defined by political borders or passport ownership and includes nations that lack an independent state (such as the Arameans, Scots, Welsh, English, Basques, Catalans, Kurds, Kabyles, Baloch, Berbers, Bosniaks, Kashmiris, Palestinians, Sindhi, Tamils, Hmong, Inuit, Copts, Māori, Sikhs, Wakhi and Székelys).[citation needed] _​
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sorry, but the delusion that :
> 
> The Jews seem to be "imposing" their will on all other "ancient people" of the land.
> 
> There is no such thing.
> 
> The Jewish People are the most ancient of those people.  The Palestinian Arabs are not.  Neither would be the Greeks, the Romans or any other people who stayed after they invaded and conquered the land after the Jewish People had established themselves over 3000 years ago.
> 
> There are no Philistines.
> There are no Amorites.
> There are no Hitites, etc.  to come and claim the land as the ancient people from that very place.
> There are no Romans, Greeks, Crusaders claiming anything over the Jewish People's rights to their ancient homeland.
> 
> Are you to tell me that all people who now inhabit Kurdistan (even though not allow to declare Independence) have the same National rights as the descendants of the ancient Kurds?
> Do the Yazidis who fled to that area have the right to demand some National rights to the land, which should only be for the Kurdish people?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We will have to agree to disagree on this, since I don't want to derail this into another thread on who is indiginous.  There are multiple indiginous groups there, and they all have rights.
> 
> The question is - how do you maintain equality?  In most modern countries citizenship confers nationality rights.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is a very simple example, which shows how the descendants of the Jewish People are the ones with the rights for any National self-determination definition on that land.
> 
> It does not take away one bit the rights of all of those who are not Jewish, and are either citizens or residents of Israel.
> 
> Their rights are written in the laws of the land.
> 
> What they do not have the right to do, as Arabs, etc, is to demand that Israel be their Ancestral national anything *in place of the Jewish People's rights*, which is Exactly what the Muslim Arabs have been doing in the past decades with their endless "The Jews are from Europe", "There was no Temple Mount", "There were no Jews in the area", etc, which continues to come hard and furious from the Arab side.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why does it have to be* in place of*?  Why can't any citizen of Israel have nationality rights in Israel?  If a Palestinian state is ever established, there will likely be Jewish communities within it.  Jewish communities in those areas should have every right to nationality rights within Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --------------
> Individual rights, Netanyahu said, are anchored in many of the Jewish state’s (existing) laws, but not so Jewish national rights. *No one was harmed by the Nationality Law and no one intends to to harm anyone’s individual rights.*
> 
> (full article online)
> 
> Netanyahu at Cabinet Meeting: Israel is the National State of the Jewish People, Exclusively
> -------------
> The only reason why so many are complaining is because it is the State of the Jews.
> 
> Any other place on the planet, they will never care less.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think that remains to be seen.  Most other modern countries do not confer nationality rights only to one ethnic group.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Arab Palestinians have nationality rights in a hopefully if they can get their act together future state of Palestine.
> 
> Arab Israelis can exercise their Israeli nationality in Israel.
> 
> A nationality is formed around a culture. You aren't suggesting that Arab Israeli is a separate and distinct culture from Arab Palestinian, are you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I am to the degree that they've formed something of their own culture with regional differences including dialect, we did talk about that in other threads and doubtless don't agree .  But it's irrelevant.
> 
> Israel is a new state, imposed on a region with multiple ethnic groups already residing there.  It has since decided create a "nationality" law that only includes ONE of those groups despite the fact that most of those groups have been in that region since ancient history.  As a state does Israel have the right to do that?  Yes.  Any state does.  Does it make it right?  That is questionable.  How can you maintain equality?
> 
> Think about it - you are citizen of Israel.  You have served in the IDF, defended your country, supported it, and were born there.  But now - because you are NOT Jewish - you do not have any "national rights" there.  There is no way to look at that and not somehow see yourself as a different category of citizen.  As an outsider or somehow less than.  Why should you fight for Israel and defend it?
> 
> 
> 
> Nationality - Wikipedia
> _*Nationality* is a legal relationship between an individual person and a state.[1] Nationality affords the state jurisdiction over the person and affords the person the protection of the state. What these rights and duties are varies from state to state.[2]
> 
> By custom and international conventions, it is the right of each state to determine who its nationals are.[3] Such determinations are part of nationality law. In some cases, determinations of nationality are also governed by public international law—for example, by treaties on statelessness and the European Convention on Nationality.
> 
> Nationality differs technically and legally from citizenship, which is a different legal relationship between a person and a country. The noun national can include both citizens and non-citizens. The most common distinguishing feature of citizenship is that citizens have the right to participate in the political life of the state, such as by voting or standing for election. *However, in most modern countries all nationals are citizens of the state, and full citizens are always nationals of the state*.[1][4]
> 
> In older texts, the word nationality rather than ethnicity, often used to refer to an ethnic group (a group of people who share a common ethnic identity, language, culture, descent, history, and so forth). This older meaning of nationality is not defined by political borders or passport ownership and includes nations that lack an independent state (such as the Arameans, Scots, Welsh, English, Basques, Catalans, Kurds, Kabyles, Baloch, Berbers, Bosniaks, Kashmiris, Palestinians, Sindhi, Tamils, Hmong, Inuit, Copts, Māori, Sikhs, Wakhi and Székelys).[citation needed] _​
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sorry, but the delusion that :
> 
> The Jews seem to be "imposing" their will on all other "ancient people" of the land.
> 
> There is no such thing.
> 
> The Jewish People are the most ancient of those people.  The Palestinian Arabs are not.  Neither would be the Greeks, the Romans or any other people who stayed after they invaded and conquered the land after the Jewish People had established themselves over 3000 years ago.
> 
> There are no Philistines.
> There are no Amorites.
> There are no Hitites, etc.  to come and claim the land as the ancient people from that very place.
> There are no Romans, Greeks, Crusaders claiming anything over the Jewish People's rights to their ancient homeland.
> 
> Are you to tell me that all people who now inhabit Kurdistan (even though not allow to declare Independence) have the same National rights as the descendants of the ancient Kurds?
> Do the Yazidis who fled to that area have the right to demand some National rights to the land, which should only be for the Kurdish people?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We will have to agree to disagree on this, since I don't want to derail this into another thread on who is indiginous.  There are multiple indiginous groups there, and they all have rights.
> 
> The question is - how do you maintain equality?  In most modern countries citizenship confers nationality rights.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is a very simple example, which shows how the descendants of the Jewish People are the ones with the rights for any National self-determination definition on that land.
> 
> It does not take away one bit the rights of all of those who are not Jewish, and are either citizens or residents of Israel.
> 
> Their rights are written in the laws of the land.
> 
> What they do not have the right to do, as Arabs, etc, is to demand that Israel be their Ancestral national anything *in place of the Jewish People's rights*, which is Exactly what the Muslim Arabs have been doing in the past decades with their endless "The Jews are from Europe", "There was no Temple Mount", "There were no Jews in the area", etc, which continues to come hard and furious from the Arab side.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why does it have to be* in place of*?  Why can't any citizen of Israel have nationality rights in Israel?  If a Palestinian state is ever established, there will likely be Jewish communities within it.  Jewish communities in those areas should have every right to nationality rights within Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --------------
> Individual rights, Netanyahu said, are anchored in many of the Jewish state’s (existing) laws, but not so Jewish national rights. *No one was harmed by the Nationality Law and no one intends to to harm anyone’s individual rights.*
> 
> (full article online)
> 
> Netanyahu at Cabinet Meeting: Israel is the National State of the Jewish People, Exclusively
> -------------
> The only reason why so many are complaining is because it is the State of the Jews.
> 
> Any other place on the planet, they will never care less.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think that remains to be seen.  Most other modern countries do not confer nationality rights only to one ethnic group.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That is exactly the point:'
> 
> There are NO OTHER INDIGENOUS PEOPLE with rights to the land and self determination but the Jewish People.
> 
> There never has been.
> 
> No other people has ever declared indigenous rights to the land of Israel before 1948.
> 
> Self Determination is different from "National Rights" to think of myself as an American.
> 
> I am not descendant from the First Nations of America.  Not one of them.
> I do not have the right to demand the same rights to self determination over their ancestral lands as they do.  I never will.
> 
> Therefore, if the Apaches choose to declare self-determination over their ancient homeland, no other First Nation can do the same, and neither can any European or Asian who came over after 1492.
> 
> Therefore, here we have the Arabs, who came into the land 2400 years after the Jewish People established their Nation, culture, etc, saying that They have exactly the same rights, or worse, they have more rights to self-determination over the land then the Jewish People.
> 
> And that is exactly what you and others cannot come to understand.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I completely understand and completely disagree. There are mutliple indiginous groups, not just one.  But you believe only one has rights to that region.  And that is the problem - each side only believes in the legitimacy of their side's position.
Click to expand...


*That is not true*, only one group demanded an indigenous nation, based on indigenous revival and independence. While the other one tried to cede the land to a King of Mecca.
Either way You look at it - if You consider Arabs to be indigenous people of the region, then they've already got most of the land in the region, before Israel's establishment.
Jews didn't fight against Iraq independence or Syria independence, or Morocco.
Arabs are fighting and subjugating each and every indigenous nation in the region that is a threat to Arab hegemony.


----------



## Coyote

rylah said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I am to the degree that they've formed something of their own culture with regional differences including dialect, we did talk about that in other threads and doubtless don't agree .  But it's irrelevant.
> 
> Israel is a new state, imposed on a region with multiple ethnic groups already residing there.  It has since decided create a "nationality" law that only includes ONE of those groups despite the fact that most of those groups have been in that region since ancient history.  As a state does Israel have the right to do that?  Yes.  Any state does.  Does it make it right?  That is questionable.  How can you maintain equality?
> 
> Think about it - you are citizen of Israel.  You have served in the IDF, defended your country, supported it, and were born there.  But now - because you are NOT Jewish - you do not have any "national rights" there.  There is no way to look at that and not somehow see yourself as a different category of citizen.  As an outsider or somehow less than.  Why should you fight for Israel and defend it?
> 
> 
> 
> Nationality - Wikipedia
> _*Nationality* is a legal relationship between an individual person and a state.[1] Nationality affords the state jurisdiction over the person and affords the person the protection of the state. What these rights and duties are varies from state to state.[2]
> 
> By custom and international conventions, it is the right of each state to determine who its nationals are.[3] Such determinations are part of nationality law. In some cases, determinations of nationality are also governed by public international law—for example, by treaties on statelessness and the European Convention on Nationality.
> 
> Nationality differs technically and legally from citizenship, which is a different legal relationship between a person and a country. The noun national can include both citizens and non-citizens. The most common distinguishing feature of citizenship is that citizens have the right to participate in the political life of the state, such as by voting or standing for election. *However, in most modern countries all nationals are citizens of the state, and full citizens are always nationals of the state*.[1][4]
> 
> In older texts, the word nationality rather than ethnicity, often used to refer to an ethnic group (a group of people who share a common ethnic identity, language, culture, descent, history, and so forth). This older meaning of nationality is not defined by political borders or passport ownership and includes nations that lack an independent state (such as the Arameans, Scots, Welsh, English, Basques, Catalans, Kurds, Kabyles, Baloch, Berbers, Bosniaks, Kashmiris, Palestinians, Sindhi, Tamils, Hmong, Inuit, Copts, Māori, Sikhs, Wakhi and Székelys).[citation needed] _​
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry, but the delusion that :
> 
> The Jews seem to be "imposing" their will on all other "ancient people" of the land.
> 
> There is no such thing.
> 
> The Jewish People are the most ancient of those people.  The Palestinian Arabs are not.  Neither would be the Greeks, the Romans or any other people who stayed after they invaded and conquered the land after the Jewish People had established themselves over 3000 years ago.
> 
> There are no Philistines.
> There are no Amorites.
> There are no Hitites, etc.  to come and claim the land as the ancient people from that very place.
> There are no Romans, Greeks, Crusaders claiming anything over the Jewish People's rights to their ancient homeland.
> 
> Are you to tell me that all people who now inhabit Kurdistan (even though not allow to declare Independence) have the same National rights as the descendants of the ancient Kurds?
> Do the Yazidis who fled to that area have the right to demand some National rights to the land, which should only be for the Kurdish people?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We will have to agree to disagree on this, since I don't want to derail this into another thread on who is indiginous.  There are multiple indiginous groups there, and they all have rights.
> 
> The question is - how do you maintain equality?  In most modern countries citizenship confers nationality rights.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is a very simple example, which shows how the descendants of the Jewish People are the ones with the rights for any National self-determination definition on that land.
> 
> It does not take away one bit the rights of all of those who are not Jewish, and are either citizens or residents of Israel.
> 
> Their rights are written in the laws of the land.
> 
> What they do not have the right to do, as Arabs, etc, is to demand that Israel be their Ancestral national anything *in place of the Jewish People's rights*, which is Exactly what the Muslim Arabs have been doing in the past decades with their endless "The Jews are from Europe", "There was no Temple Mount", "There were no Jews in the area", etc, which continues to come hard and furious from the Arab side.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why does it have to be* in place of*?  Why can't any citizen of Israel have nationality rights in Israel?  If a Palestinian state is ever established, there will likely be Jewish communities within it.  Jewish communities in those areas should have every right to nationality rights within Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --------------
> Individual rights, Netanyahu said, are anchored in many of the Jewish state’s (existing) laws, but not so Jewish national rights. *No one was harmed by the Nationality Law and no one intends to to harm anyone’s individual rights.*
> 
> (full article online)
> 
> Netanyahu at Cabinet Meeting: Israel is the National State of the Jewish People, Exclusively
> -------------
> The only reason why so many are complaining is because it is the State of the Jews.
> 
> Any other place on the planet, they will never care less.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think that remains to be seen.  Most other modern countries do not confer nationality rights only to one ethnic group.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I am to the degree that they've formed something of their own culture with regional differences including dialect, we did talk about that in other threads and doubtless don't agree .  But it's irrelevant.
> 
> Israel is a new state, imposed on a region with multiple ethnic groups already residing there.  It has since decided create a "nationality" law that only includes ONE of those groups despite the fact that most of those groups have been in that region since ancient history.  As a state does Israel have the right to do that?  Yes.  Any state does.  Does it make it right?  That is questionable.  How can you maintain equality?
> 
> Think about it - you are citizen of Israel.  You have served in the IDF, defended your country, supported it, and were born there.  But now - because you are NOT Jewish - you do not have any "national rights" there.  There is no way to look at that and not somehow see yourself as a different category of citizen.  As an outsider or somehow less than.  Why should you fight for Israel and defend it?
> 
> 
> 
> Nationality - Wikipedia
> _*Nationality* is a legal relationship between an individual person and a state.[1] Nationality affords the state jurisdiction over the person and affords the person the protection of the state. What these rights and duties are varies from state to state.[2]
> 
> By custom and international conventions, it is the right of each state to determine who its nationals are.[3] Such determinations are part of nationality law. In some cases, determinations of nationality are also governed by public international law—for example, by treaties on statelessness and the European Convention on Nationality.
> 
> Nationality differs technically and legally from citizenship, which is a different legal relationship between a person and a country. The noun national can include both citizens and non-citizens. The most common distinguishing feature of citizenship is that citizens have the right to participate in the political life of the state, such as by voting or standing for election. *However, in most modern countries all nationals are citizens of the state, and full citizens are always nationals of the state*.[1][4]
> 
> In older texts, the word nationality rather than ethnicity, often used to refer to an ethnic group (a group of people who share a common ethnic identity, language, culture, descent, history, and so forth). This older meaning of nationality is not defined by political borders or passport ownership and includes nations that lack an independent state (such as the Arameans, Scots, Welsh, English, Basques, Catalans, Kurds, Kabyles, Baloch, Berbers, Bosniaks, Kashmiris, Palestinians, Sindhi, Tamils, Hmong, Inuit, Copts, Māori, Sikhs, Wakhi and Székelys).[citation needed] _​
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sorry, but the delusion that :
> 
> The Jews seem to be "imposing" their will on all other "ancient people" of the land.
> 
> There is no such thing.
> 
> The Jewish People are the most ancient of those people.  The Palestinian Arabs are not.  Neither would be the Greeks, the Romans or any other people who stayed after they invaded and conquered the land after the Jewish People had established themselves over 3000 years ago.
> 
> There are no Philistines.
> There are no Amorites.
> There are no Hitites, etc.  to come and claim the land as the ancient people from that very place.
> There are no Romans, Greeks, Crusaders claiming anything over the Jewish People's rights to their ancient homeland.
> 
> Are you to tell me that all people who now inhabit Kurdistan (even though not allow to declare Independence) have the same National rights as the descendants of the ancient Kurds?
> Do the Yazidis who fled to that area have the right to demand some National rights to the land, which should only be for the Kurdish people?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We will have to agree to disagree on this, since I don't want to derail this into another thread on who is indiginous.  There are multiple indiginous groups there, and they all have rights.
> 
> The question is - how do you maintain equality?  In most modern countries citizenship confers nationality rights.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is a very simple example, which shows how the descendants of the Jewish People are the ones with the rights for any National self-determination definition on that land.
> 
> It does not take away one bit the rights of all of those who are not Jewish, and are either citizens or residents of Israel.
> 
> Their rights are written in the laws of the land.
> 
> What they do not have the right to do, as Arabs, etc, is to demand that Israel be their Ancestral national anything *in place of the Jewish People's rights*, which is Exactly what the Muslim Arabs have been doing in the past decades with their endless "The Jews are from Europe", "There was no Temple Mount", "There were no Jews in the area", etc, which continues to come hard and furious from the Arab side.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why does it have to be* in place of*?  Why can't any citizen of Israel have nationality rights in Israel?  If a Palestinian state is ever established, there will likely be Jewish communities within it.  Jewish communities in those areas should have every right to nationality rights within Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --------------
> Individual rights, Netanyahu said, are anchored in many of the Jewish state’s (existing) laws, but not so Jewish national rights. *No one was harmed by the Nationality Law and no one intends to to harm anyone’s individual rights.*
> 
> (full article online)
> 
> Netanyahu at Cabinet Meeting: Israel is the National State of the Jewish People, Exclusively
> -------------
> The only reason why so many are complaining is because it is the State of the Jews.
> 
> Any other place on the planet, they will never care less.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think that remains to be seen.  Most other modern countries do not confer nationality rights only to one ethnic group.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That is exactly the point:'
> 
> There are NO OTHER INDIGENOUS PEOPLE with rights to the land and self determination but the Jewish People.
> 
> There never has been.
> 
> No other people has ever declared indigenous rights to the land of Israel before 1948.
> 
> Self Determination is different from "National Rights" to think of myself as an American.
> 
> I am not descendant from the First Nations of America.  Not one of them.
> I do not have the right to demand the same rights to self determination over their ancestral lands as they do.  I never will.
> 
> Therefore, if the Apaches choose to declare self-determination over their ancient homeland, no other First Nation can do the same, and neither can any European or Asian who came over after 1492.
> 
> Therefore, here we have the Arabs, who came into the land 2400 years after the Jewish People established their Nation, culture, etc, saying that They have exactly the same rights, or worse, they have more rights to self-determination over the land then the Jewish People.
> 
> And that is exactly what you and others cannot come to understand.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I completely understand and completely disagree. There are mutliple indiginous groups, not just one.  But you believe only one has rights to that region.  And that is the problem - each side only believes in the legitimacy of their side's position.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That is not true, only one group demanded an indigenous nation, based on indigenous revival and independent. While the other one tried to cede the land to a King of Mecca.
> Either way You look at it - if You consider Arabs to be indigenous people of the region, then they've already got most of the land in the region, before Israel's establishment..
Click to expand...


I think we are going to have to agree to disagree here...we've been through this before and there has been an utter failure at changing minds...just saying.  If I go into it more, I'll derail the thread


----------



## rylah

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> You are oblivious to the fact that Israel has two rights systems. There are citizens rights where all citizens have (more or less) equal rights. Then there are nationality rights. Only the Jewish nationality has access to these rights
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Only the Jewish people have nationality rights IN ISRAEL.  Others have nationality rights elsewhere.  That is actually how the global system currently works.  Citizens have national rights in their nation.
> 
> Are you suggesting that the Jewish people should have nationality rights in Palestine?  Or not?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Arab Israeli citizens have nationality rights where?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Arab Palestinians have nationality rights in a hopefully if they can get their act together future state of Palestine.
> 
> Arab Israelis can exercise their Israeli nationality in Israel.
> 
> A nationality is formed around a culture. You aren't suggesting that Arab Israeli is a separate and distinct culture from Arab Palestinian, are you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Arab Israelis can exercise their Israeli nationality in Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Uhh, there is no Israeli nationality.
Click to expand...


66 years have passed since it was enshrined in a Basic Law.


----------



## Humanity

Sixties Fan said:


> For many years, we have been disappointed by the court. The nation-state law is an attempt at redemption. Ironically, the forefathers of this law are in fact Aharon Barak and his faction. The citizens of Israel, by way of their elected representatives, are trying to restore some of the freedom they once had, before the court decided to educate us. I have reiterated this point many times: The Supreme Court justices, including Aharon Barak, are no better than we are at understanding values. Their job description does not include telling us what is good and what is bad, or defining for us what is true. All we've ever asked of them is to rule according to the law – to decide whether one act or another complies with or violates the existing, written law.
> 
> But they, in turn, adopted Plato's Republic, in which the philosopher king rules over the ignorant masses. They found a clever way to impose a tyranny of the minority over the majority. The nation-state law was designed to slightly rectify this gross imbalance. Judicial activism is guided by hubris and aggression – the belief that you understand better than others what is worthy and the aggressive tendency to dismiss the will of the voters. Basic Law: Israel as the Nation-State of the Jewish People, as it is known by its official name, offers the tools to restore some of the eroded Jewish identity.
> 
> (full article online)
> 
> http://www.israelhayom.com/2018/08/03/the-jews-deserve-justice-too/



"We don't like what the Supreme Court of Israel says so we will override them with an apartheid law"...

Perfect, if you believe that fascism is the way forward and we ALL know how that turns out!


----------



## rylah

Coyote said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry, but the delusion that :
> 
> The Jews seem to be "imposing" their will on all other "ancient people" of the land.
> 
> There is no such thing.
> 
> The Jewish People are the most ancient of those people.  The Palestinian Arabs are not.  Neither would be the Greeks, the Romans or any other people who stayed after they invaded and conquered the land after the Jewish People had established themselves over 3000 years ago.
> 
> There are no Philistines.
> There are no Amorites.
> There are no Hitites, etc.  to come and claim the land as the ancient people from that very place.
> There are no Romans, Greeks, Crusaders claiming anything over the Jewish People's rights to their ancient homeland.
> 
> Are you to tell me that all people who now inhabit Kurdistan (even though not allow to declare Independence) have the same National rights as the descendants of the ancient Kurds?
> Do the Yazidis who fled to that area have the right to demand some National rights to the land, which should only be for the Kurdish people?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We will have to agree to disagree on this, since I don't want to derail this into another thread on who is indiginous.  There are multiple indiginous groups there, and they all have rights.
> 
> The question is - how do you maintain equality?  In most modern countries citizenship confers nationality rights.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is a very simple example, which shows how the descendants of the Jewish People are the ones with the rights for any National self-determination definition on that land.
> 
> It does not take away one bit the rights of all of those who are not Jewish, and are either citizens or residents of Israel.
> 
> Their rights are written in the laws of the land.
> 
> What they do not have the right to do, as Arabs, etc, is to demand that Israel be their Ancestral national anything *in place of the Jewish People's rights*, which is Exactly what the Muslim Arabs have been doing in the past decades with their endless "The Jews are from Europe", "There was no Temple Mount", "There were no Jews in the area", etc, which continues to come hard and furious from the Arab side.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why does it have to be* in place of*?  Why can't any citizen of Israel have nationality rights in Israel?  If a Palestinian state is ever established, there will likely be Jewish communities within it.  Jewish communities in those areas should have every right to nationality rights within Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --------------
> Individual rights, Netanyahu said, are anchored in many of the Jewish state’s (existing) laws, but not so Jewish national rights. *No one was harmed by the Nationality Law and no one intends to to harm anyone’s individual rights.*
> 
> (full article online)
> 
> Netanyahu at Cabinet Meeting: Israel is the National State of the Jewish People, Exclusively
> -------------
> The only reason why so many are complaining is because it is the State of the Jews.
> 
> Any other place on the planet, they will never care less.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think that remains to be seen.  Most other modern countries do not confer nationality rights only to one ethnic group.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry, but the delusion that :
> 
> The Jews seem to be "imposing" their will on all other "ancient people" of the land.
> 
> There is no such thing.
> 
> The Jewish People are the most ancient of those people.  The Palestinian Arabs are not.  Neither would be the Greeks, the Romans or any other people who stayed after they invaded and conquered the land after the Jewish People had established themselves over 3000 years ago.
> 
> There are no Philistines.
> There are no Amorites.
> There are no Hitites, etc.  to come and claim the land as the ancient people from that very place.
> There are no Romans, Greeks, Crusaders claiming anything over the Jewish People's rights to their ancient homeland.
> 
> Are you to tell me that all people who now inhabit Kurdistan (even though not allow to declare Independence) have the same National rights as the descendants of the ancient Kurds?
> Do the Yazidis who fled to that area have the right to demand some National rights to the land, which should only be for the Kurdish people?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We will have to agree to disagree on this, since I don't want to derail this into another thread on who is indiginous.  There are multiple indiginous groups there, and they all have rights.
> 
> The question is - how do you maintain equality?  In most modern countries citizenship confers nationality rights.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is a very simple example, which shows how the descendants of the Jewish People are the ones with the rights for any National self-determination definition on that land.
> 
> It does not take away one bit the rights of all of those who are not Jewish, and are either citizens or residents of Israel.
> 
> Their rights are written in the laws of the land.
> 
> What they do not have the right to do, as Arabs, etc, is to demand that Israel be their Ancestral national anything *in place of the Jewish People's rights*, which is Exactly what the Muslim Arabs have been doing in the past decades with their endless "The Jews are from Europe", "There was no Temple Mount", "There were no Jews in the area", etc, which continues to come hard and furious from the Arab side.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why does it have to be* in place of*?  Why can't any citizen of Israel have nationality rights in Israel?  If a Palestinian state is ever established, there will likely be Jewish communities within it.  Jewish communities in those areas should have every right to nationality rights within Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --------------
> Individual rights, Netanyahu said, are anchored in many of the Jewish state’s (existing) laws, but not so Jewish national rights. *No one was harmed by the Nationality Law and no one intends to to harm anyone’s individual rights.*
> 
> (full article online)
> 
> Netanyahu at Cabinet Meeting: Israel is the National State of the Jewish People, Exclusively
> -------------
> The only reason why so many are complaining is because it is the State of the Jews.
> 
> Any other place on the planet, they will never care less.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think that remains to be seen.  Most other modern countries do not confer nationality rights only to one ethnic group.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That is exactly the point:'
> 
> There are NO OTHER INDIGENOUS PEOPLE with rights to the land and self determination but the Jewish People.
> 
> There never has been.
> 
> No other people has ever declared indigenous rights to the land of Israel before 1948.
> 
> Self Determination is different from "National Rights" to think of myself as an American.
> 
> I am not descendant from the First Nations of America.  Not one of them.
> I do not have the right to demand the same rights to self determination over their ancestral lands as they do.  I never will.
> 
> Therefore, if the Apaches choose to declare self-determination over their ancient homeland, no other First Nation can do the same, and neither can any European or Asian who came over after 1492.
> 
> Therefore, here we have the Arabs, who came into the land 2400 years after the Jewish People established their Nation, culture, etc, saying that They have exactly the same rights, or worse, they have more rights to self-determination over the land then the Jewish People.
> 
> And that is exactly what you and others cannot come to understand.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I completely understand and completely disagree. There are mutliple indiginous groups, not just one.  But you believe only one has rights to that region.  And that is the problem - each side only believes in the legitimacy of their side's position.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That is not true, only one group demanded an indigenous nation, based on indigenous revival and independent. While the other one tried to cede the land to a King of Mecca.
> Either way You look at it - if You consider Arabs to be indigenous people of the region, then they've already got most of the land in the region, before Israel's establishment..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think we are going to have to agree to disagree here...we've been through this before and there has been an utter failure at changing minds...just saying.  If I go into it more, I'll derail the thread
Click to expand...


Jews didn't fight against Iraq independence or Syria independence, or Morocco.
They were alloted some 2% of the land in the middle east, and since that day they've been in negotiation with Arabs over another Arab state or two, in the heart of their historic homeland.
All while Arabs are fighting and subjugating each and every indigenous nation in the region that is a threat to their hegemony.

Only one group has been supporting the other, and enables expression of a variety of opinions in favor of the other competing group. *There's no equivalence.*


----------



## Humanity

Shusha said:


> So you think that the Slovene declaration means that the Russian minority in Slovenia should have national rights in Slovenia?



This is such a bad analogy and one that you keep repeating to try and make a point that is WAY off the mark!

Did Miroslav Cerar Jr. state that Slovenia is exclusively for Slovenians?

I live in an adopted country, I have the exact same rights as nationals, there is NO difference in the laws that apply to me! Why should there be? I am law abiding, pay my taxes, have the right to vote, can run for office, yet this is not my country! Imagine that... The prime minister here has made no declaration of "exclusivity"!


----------



## rylah

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> That is exactly the point:'
> 
> There are NO OTHER INDIGENOUS PEOPLE with rights to the land and self determination but the Jewish People.
> 
> There never has been.
> 
> No other people has ever declared indigenous rights to the land of Israel before 1948.
> 
> Self Determination is different from "National Rights" to think of myself as an American.
> 
> I am not descendant from the First Nations of America.  Not one of them.
> I do not have the right to demand the same rights to self determination over their ancestral lands as they do.  I never will.
> 
> Therefore, if the Apaches choose to declare self-determination over their ancient homeland, no other First Nation can do the same, and neither can any European or Asian who came over after 1492.
> 
> Therefore, here we have the Arabs, who came into the land 2400 years after the Jewish People established their Nation, culture, etc, saying that They have exactly the same rights, or worse, they have more rights to self-determination over the land then the Jewish People.
> 
> And that is exactly what you and others cannot come to understand.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I completely understand and completely disagree. There are mutliple indiginous groups, not just one.  But you believe only one has rights to that region.  And that is the problem - each side only believes in the legitimacy of their side's position.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Are people of European ancestry indigenous to the US, in your opinion?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If they also have Native American ancestry yes.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I disagree. He ancestry is not the important element.
> 
> The elements to be measured (and this is in the UN Declaratiin of Indigenous Rights) are:
> 
> 1.  Self identification with the peoples.
> 2. Acceptance by the collective as part of the peoples.
> 3.  Participation in the culture.
> 
> 
> It's not about a blood test. It's about being part of the people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You can have indiginous cultures.  And you can have indiginous people.  Palestinians, regardless of culture are indigninous - descended from indiginous.  Their rights are the same.
Click to expand...

It's not that complicated...
A nation claims to be indigenous but doesn't know the meaning of the nation's name and land?

RIDICULOUS.


----------



## rylah

Coyote said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Arab Palestinians have nationality rights in a hopefully if they can get their act together future state of Palestine.
> 
> Arab Israelis can exercise their Israeli nationality in Israel.
> 
> A nationality is formed around a culture. You aren't suggesting that Arab Israeli is a separate and distinct culture from Arab Palestinian, are you?
> 
> 
> 
> In a broader international legal context, the “Nationality law...showed that the Palestinians formed a nation, and that Palestine was a State, though provisionally under guardianship”.
> 
> The status of Palestine and the nationality of its inhabitants were finally settled by the Treaty of Lausanne from the international law perspective. In a report submitted to the League of Nations, the British Government rightly pointed out: “The ratification of the Treaty of Lausanne in Aug., 1924, finally regularised the international status of Palestine”. And, thereafter, “Palestine could, at last, obtain a separate nationality”.
> 
> https://doc.rero.ch/record/9065/files/these.pdf
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The problem with this is that there were two distinct nationalities within the territory.  Could not be more clear. Hence the conflict. The solution is to form two states. Always has been. Standard procedure globally in cases like this.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Indeed, natives and colonial settlers.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Indeed, *"Palestinian"* in the native language means _*"colonial settlers". *_
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No it doesn't.
Click to expand...


I don't see a refutation.


----------



## Humanity

rylah said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> Arab Israeli citizens have nationality rights where?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Arab Palestinians have nationality rights in a hopefully if they can get their act together future state of Palestine.
> 
> Arab Israelis can exercise their Israeli nationality in Israel.
> 
> A nationality is formed around a culture. You aren't suggesting that Arab Israeli is a separate and distinct culture from Arab Palestinian, are you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> In a broader international legal context, the “Nationality law...showed that the Palestinians formed a nation, and that Palestine was a State, though provisionally under guardianship”.
> 
> The status of Palestine and the nationality of its inhabitants were finally settled by the Treaty of Lausanne from the international law perspective. In a report submitted to the League of Nations, the British Government rightly pointed out: “The ratification of the Treaty of Lausanne in Aug., 1924, finally regularised the international status of Palestine”. And, thereafter, “Palestine could, at last, obtain a separate nationality”.
> 
> https://doc.rero.ch/record/9065/files/these.pdf
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The problem with this is that there were two distinct nationalities within the territory.  Could not be more clear. Hence the conflict. The solution is to form two states. Always has been. Standard procedure globally in cases like this.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Indeed, natives and colonial settlers.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Indeed, *"Palestinian"* in the native language means _*"colonial settlers". *_
Click to expand...


----------



## rylah

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry, but the delusion that :
> 
> The Jews seem to be "imposing" their will on all other "ancient people" of the land.
> 
> There is no such thing.
> 
> The Jewish People are the most ancient of those people.  The Palestinian Arabs are not.  Neither would be the Greeks, the Romans or any other people who stayed after they invaded and conquered the land after the Jewish People had established themselves over 3000 years ago.
> 
> There are no Philistines.
> There are no Amorites.
> There are no Hitites, etc.  to come and claim the land as the ancient people from that very place.
> There are no Romans, Greeks, Crusaders claiming anything over the Jewish People's rights to their ancient homeland.
> 
> Are you to tell me that all people who now inhabit Kurdistan (even though not allow to declare Independence) have the same National rights as the descendants of the ancient Kurds?
> Do the Yazidis who fled to that area have the right to demand some National rights to the land, which should only be for the Kurdish people?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We will have to agree to disagree on this, since I don't want to derail this into another thread on who is indiginous.  There are multiple indiginous groups there, and they all have rights.
> 
> The question is - how do you maintain equality?  In most modern countries citizenship confers nationality rights.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is a very simple example, which shows how the descendants of the Jewish People are the ones with the rights for any National self-determination definition on that land.
> 
> It does not take away one bit the rights of all of those who are not Jewish, and are either citizens or residents of Israel.
> 
> Their rights are written in the laws of the land.
> 
> What they do not have the right to do, as Arabs, etc, is to demand that Israel be their Ancestral national anything *in place of the Jewish People's rights*, which is Exactly what the Muslim Arabs have been doing in the past decades with their endless "The Jews are from Europe", "There was no Temple Mount", "There were no Jews in the area", etc, which continues to come hard and furious from the Arab side.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why does it have to be* in place of*?  Why can't any citizen of Israel have nationality rights in Israel?  If a Palestinian state is ever established, there will likely be Jewish communities within it.  Jewish communities in those areas should have every right to nationality rights within Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --------------
> Individual rights, Netanyahu said, are anchored in many of the Jewish state’s (existing) laws, but not so Jewish national rights. *No one was harmed by the Nationality Law and no one intends to to harm anyone’s individual rights.*
> 
> (full article online)
> 
> Netanyahu at Cabinet Meeting: Israel is the National State of the Jewish People, Exclusively
> -------------
> The only reason why so many are complaining is because it is the State of the Jews.
> 
> Any other place on the planet, they will never care less.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think that remains to be seen.  Most other modern countries do not confer nationality rights only to one ethnic group.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry, but the delusion that :
> 
> The Jews seem to be "imposing" their will on all other "ancient people" of the land.
> 
> There is no such thing.
> 
> The Jewish People are the most ancient of those people.  The Palestinian Arabs are not.  Neither would be the Greeks, the Romans or any other people who stayed after they invaded and conquered the land after the Jewish People had established themselves over 3000 years ago.
> 
> There are no Philistines.
> There are no Amorites.
> There are no Hitites, etc.  to come and claim the land as the ancient people from that very place.
> There are no Romans, Greeks, Crusaders claiming anything over the Jewish People's rights to their ancient homeland.
> 
> Are you to tell me that all people who now inhabit Kurdistan (even though not allow to declare Independence) have the same National rights as the descendants of the ancient Kurds?
> Do the Yazidis who fled to that area have the right to demand some National rights to the land, which should only be for the Kurdish people?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We will have to agree to disagree on this, since I don't want to derail this into another thread on who is indiginous.  There are multiple indiginous groups there, and they all have rights.
> 
> The question is - how do you maintain equality?  In most modern countries citizenship confers nationality rights.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is a very simple example, which shows how the descendants of the Jewish People are the ones with the rights for any National self-determination definition on that land.
> 
> It does not take away one bit the rights of all of those who are not Jewish, and are either citizens or residents of Israel.
> 
> Their rights are written in the laws of the land.
> 
> What they do not have the right to do, as Arabs, etc, is to demand that Israel be their Ancestral national anything *in place of the Jewish People's rights*, which is Exactly what the Muslim Arabs have been doing in the past decades with their endless "The Jews are from Europe", "There was no Temple Mount", "There were no Jews in the area", etc, which continues to come hard and furious from the Arab side.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why does it have to be* in place of*?  Why can't any citizen of Israel have nationality rights in Israel?  If a Palestinian state is ever established, there will likely be Jewish communities within it.  Jewish communities in those areas should have every right to nationality rights within Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --------------
> Individual rights, Netanyahu said, are anchored in many of the Jewish state’s (existing) laws, but not so Jewish national rights. *No one was harmed by the Nationality Law and no one intends to to harm anyone’s individual rights.*
> 
> (full article online)
> 
> Netanyahu at Cabinet Meeting: Israel is the National State of the Jewish People, Exclusively
> -------------
> The only reason why so many are complaining is because it is the State of the Jews.
> 
> Any other place on the planet, they will never care less.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think that remains to be seen.  Most other modern countries do not confer nationality rights only to one ethnic group.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That is exactly the point:'
> 
> There are NO OTHER INDIGENOUS PEOPLE with rights to the land and self determination but the Jewish People.
> 
> There never has been.
> 
> No other people has ever declared indigenous rights to the land of Israel before 1948.
> 
> Self Determination is different from "National Rights" to think of myself as an American.
> 
> I am not descendant from the First Nations of America.  Not one of them.
> I do not have the right to demand the same rights to self determination over their ancestral lands as they do.  I never will.
> 
> Therefore, if the Apaches choose to declare self-determination over their ancient homeland, no other First Nation can do the same, and neither can any European or Asian who came over after 1492.
> 
> Therefore, here we have the Arabs, who came into the land 2400 years after the Jewish People established their Nation, culture, etc, saying that They have exactly the same rights, or worse, they have more rights to self-determination over the land then the Jewish People.
> 
> And that is exactly what you and others cannot come to understand.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I completely understand and completely disagree. There are mutliple indiginous groups, not just one.  But you believe only one has rights to that region.  And that is the problem - each side only believes in the legitimacy of their side's position.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Are people of European ancestry indigenous to the US, in your opinion?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If they also have Native American ancestry yes.
Click to expand...


Depends on the tribe's rules of acceptance.


----------



## rylah

Humanity said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Arab Palestinians have nationality rights in a hopefully if they can get their act together future state of Palestine.
> 
> Arab Israelis can exercise their Israeli nationality in Israel.
> 
> A nationality is formed around a culture. You aren't suggesting that Arab Israeli is a separate and distinct culture from Arab Palestinian, are you?
> 
> 
> 
> In a broader international legal context, the “Nationality law...showed that the Palestinians formed a nation, and that Palestine was a State, though provisionally under guardianship”.
> 
> The status of Palestine and the nationality of its inhabitants were finally settled by the Treaty of Lausanne from the international law perspective. In a report submitted to the League of Nations, the British Government rightly pointed out: “The ratification of the Treaty of Lausanne in Aug., 1924, finally regularised the international status of Palestine”. And, thereafter, “Palestine could, at last, obtain a separate nationality”.
> 
> https://doc.rero.ch/record/9065/files/these.pdf
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The problem with this is that there were two distinct nationalities within the territory.  Could not be more clear. Hence the conflict. The solution is to form two states. Always has been. Standard procedure globally in cases like this.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Indeed, natives and colonial settlers.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Indeed, *"Palestinian"* in the native language means _*"colonial settlers". *_
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


It's basic knowledge of Hebrew, a simple word.
Coming from the root P-L -S(h) - meaning _invade_.
PLS(h)TI  - means simply _invader_.


*Philistine*: This has been used to mean "uneducated person" since the 19th century. That use in English originates with a conflict between university academics and the townsfolk of Jena, Germany, in the 17th century, apparently based on the Book of Judges phrase “the Philistines are upon you.” The Philistines - in Hebrew _plishtim _- were a coastal adversary of ancient Israel *whose name simply meant "invaders."*
Hebrew words in English you didn't even know you knew


----------



## Humanity

rylah said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> In a broader international legal context, the “Nationality law...showed that the Palestinians formed a nation, and that Palestine was a State, though provisionally under guardianship”.
> 
> The status of Palestine and the nationality of its inhabitants were finally settled by the Treaty of Lausanne from the international law perspective. In a report submitted to the League of Nations, the British Government rightly pointed out: “The ratification of the Treaty of Lausanne in Aug., 1924, finally regularised the international status of Palestine”. And, thereafter, “Palestine could, at last, obtain a separate nationality”.
> 
> https://doc.rero.ch/record/9065/files/these.pdf
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The problem with this is that there were two distinct nationalities within the territory.  Could not be more clear. Hence the conflict. The solution is to form two states. Always has been. Standard procedure globally in cases like this.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Indeed, natives and colonial settlers.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Indeed, *"Palestinian"* in the native language means _*"colonial settlers". *_
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's basic knowledge of Hebrew, a simple word.
> Coming from the root P-L -S(h) - meaning _invade_.
> PLS(h)TI  - means simply _invader_.
> 
> 
> *Philistine*: This has been used to mean "uneducated person" since the 19th century. That use in English originates with a conflict between university academics and the townsfolk of Jena, Germany, in the 17th century, apparently based on the Book of Judges phrase “the Philistines are upon you.” The Philistines - in Hebrew _plishtim _- were a coastal adversary of ancient Israel *whose name simply meant "invaders."*
> Hebrew words in English you didn't even know you knew
Click to expand...


What a crock of shit!

It MAY have been used in that way by racist Hebrew speakers in that way but how would you explain away the Latin and Greek name?

Nothing changes with them there Hebrew speakers eh!


----------



## rylah

Humanity said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> The problem with this is that there were two distinct nationalities within the territory.  Could not be more clear. Hence the conflict. The solution is to form two states. Always has been. Standard procedure globally in cases like this.
> 
> 
> 
> Indeed, natives and colonial settlers.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Indeed, *"Palestinian"* in the native language means _*"colonial settlers". *_
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's basic knowledge of Hebrew, a simple word.
> Coming from the root P-L -S(h) - meaning _invade_.
> PLS(h)TI  - means simply _invader_.
> 
> 
> *Philistine*: This has been used to mean "uneducated person" since the 19th century. That use in English originates with a conflict between university academics and the townsfolk of Jena, Germany, in the 17th century, apparently based on the Book of Judges phrase “the Philistines are upon you.” The Philistines - in Hebrew _plishtim _- were a coastal adversary of ancient Israel *whose name simply meant "invaders."*
> Hebrew words in English you didn't even know you knew
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What a crock of shit!
> 
> It MAY have been used in that way by racist Hebrew speakers in that way but how would you explain away the Latin and Greek name?
> 
> Nothing changes with them there Hebrew speakers eh!
Click to expand...


Did I say _foreign_ language?
I said in the "native", and in the native languages _'Palestinian' _means - *foreign invader.*

That's the meaning like it or not.


----------



## rylah

Humanity said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> So you think that the Slovene declaration means that the Russian minority in Slovenia should have national rights in Slovenia?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is such a bad analogy and one that you keep repeating to try and make a point that is WAY off the mark!
> 
> Did Miroslav Cerar Jr. state that Slovenia is exclusively for Slovenians?
> 
> I live in an adopted country, I have the exact same rights as nationals, there is NO difference in the laws that apply to me! Why should there be? I am law abiding, pay my taxes, have the right to vote, can run for office, yet this is not my country! Imagine that... The prime minister here has made no declaration of "exclusivity"!
Click to expand...


If it's Your adopted country, then by definition different laws apply to You.
Every Israeli citizen, normalized or other has the rights You've mentioned.


----------



## Humanity

rylah said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> Indeed, natives and colonial settlers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeed, *"Palestinian"* in the native language means _*"colonial settlers". *_
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's basic knowledge of Hebrew, a simple word.
> Coming from the root P-L -S(h) - meaning _invade_.
> PLS(h)TI  - means simply _invader_.
> 
> 
> *Philistine*: This has been used to mean "uneducated person" since the 19th century. That use in English originates with a conflict between university academics and the townsfolk of Jena, Germany, in the 17th century, apparently based on the Book of Judges phrase “the Philistines are upon you.” The Philistines - in Hebrew _plishtim _- were a coastal adversary of ancient Israel *whose name simply meant "invaders."*
> Hebrew words in English you didn't even know you knew
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What a crock of shit!
> 
> It MAY have been used in that way by racist Hebrew speakers in that way but how would you explain away the Latin and Greek name?
> 
> Nothing changes with them there Hebrew speakers eh!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Did I say _foreign_ language?
> I said in the "native", and in the native languages _'Palestinian' _means - *foreign invader.*
> 
> That's the meaning like it or not.
Click to expand...


Well, that's what one would call an own goal you idiot!

The first appearance of the term "Palestine" was from the Greeks NOT Hebrews!

So, those foreign invading Hebrews ... Care to finish the rest?


----------



## rylah

Humanity said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Indeed, *"Palestinian"* in the native language means _*"colonial settlers". *_
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's basic knowledge of Hebrew, a simple word.
> Coming from the root P-L -S(h) - meaning _invade_.
> PLS(h)TI  - means simply _invader_.
> 
> 
> *Philistine*: This has been used to mean "uneducated person" since the 19th century. That use in English originates with a conflict between university academics and the townsfolk of Jena, Germany, in the 17th century, apparently based on the Book of Judges phrase “the Philistines are upon you.” The Philistines - in Hebrew _plishtim _- were a coastal adversary of ancient Israel *whose name simply meant "invaders."*
> Hebrew words in English you didn't even know you knew
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What a crock of shit!
> 
> It MAY have been used in that way by racist Hebrew speakers in that way but how would you explain away the Latin and Greek name?
> 
> Nothing changes with them there Hebrew speakers eh!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Did I say _foreign_ language?
> I said in the "native", and in the native languages _'Palestinian' _means - *foreign invader.*
> 
> That's the meaning like it or not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well, that's what one would call an own goal you idiot!
> 
> The first appearance of the term "Palestine" was from the Greeks NOT Hebrews!
> 
> So, those foreign invading Hebrews ... Care to finish the rest?
Click to expand...

You can try and find me another meaning in the native languages of Canaan...oh but wait You'll have to go to Hebrew.


----------



## Natural Citizen

admonit said:


> *Basic Law: Israel as the Nation State of the Jewish People*
> 
> *1 — Basic principles*
> 
> A. The land of Israel is the historical homeland of the Jewish people, in which the State of Israel was established.



Today's Israel are not in any way representative of the Jews of the Bible. Far from it. Though, they are an arrogant bunch. I'm of the view that today's Israel will have much to answer for. Much.

So, no need in reading beyond point 1.


----------



## rylah

Natural Citizen said:


> admonit said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Basic Law: Israel as the Nation State of the Jewish People*
> 
> *1 — Basic principles*
> 
> A. The land of Israel is the historical homeland of the Jewish people, in which the State of Israel was established.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The jews of today's Israel are not in any way representative of the Jews of the Bible. Far from it.
> 
> So, no need in reading beyind point 1.
Click to expand...


In Israel that's called _"gave his professional opinion and walked away"._


----------



## Humanity

rylah said:


> If it's Your adopted country, then by definition different laws apply to You.



Oh? How so?

I can't wait for your response!!

Just for clarity, no, I don't live in Israel.


----------



## Humanity

rylah said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's basic knowledge of Hebrew, a simple word.
> Coming from the root P-L -S(h) - meaning _invade_.
> PLS(h)TI  - means simply _invader_.
> 
> 
> *Philistine*: This has been used to mean "uneducated person" since the 19th century. That use in English originates with a conflict between university academics and the townsfolk of Jena, Germany, in the 17th century, apparently based on the Book of Judges phrase “the Philistines are upon you.” The Philistines - in Hebrew _plishtim _- were a coastal adversary of ancient Israel *whose name simply meant "invaders."*
> Hebrew words in English you didn't even know you knew
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What a crock of shit!
> 
> It MAY have been used in that way by racist Hebrew speakers in that way but how would you explain away the Latin and Greek name?
> 
> Nothing changes with them there Hebrew speakers eh!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Did I say _foreign_ language?
> I said in the "native", and in the native languages _'Palestinian' _means - *foreign invader.*
> 
> That's the meaning like it or not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well, that's what one would call an own goal you idiot!
> 
> The first appearance of the term "Palestine" was from the Greeks NOT Hebrews!
> 
> So, those foreign invading Hebrews ... Care to finish the rest?
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You can try and find me another meaning in the native languages of Canaan...oh but wait You'll have to go to Hebrew.
Click to expand...


Here, let me try and help you before you end up looking like a complete fucking moron...

*The first appearance of the term "Palestine" was from the Greeks NOT Hebrews!*

Maybe it's bad light, maybe its your failing eyesight, maybe it is your 'Israel First' blinkers that stopped you reading that so I thought I would make the text bold for you!


----------



## rylah

Humanity said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> If it's Your adopted country, then by definition different laws apply to You.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh? How so?
> 
> I can't wait for your response!!
> 
> Just for clarity, no, I don't live in Israel.
Click to expand...


Did You get Spaniard nationality the day You were born?
You went through a discriminatory process of normalization.


----------



## Natural Citizen

rylah said:


> In Israel that's called _"gave his professional opinion and walked away"._
> Are You of the opinion that Jews are described as holy pink bunnies in the Bible?



I've read just about every Bible from the Ethiopian Bible, the Christian Bible including their variants, to the Jewish Bible. And many many more modern and ancient theologic works, including extra-biblical history and text. I'm competent linguistically as well as competent to compare and recall and to place into perspective with the times as well as the cirtcumstances of providing their writings. And I Iike to consider my geo-political awareness far beyond average.

Mine is an educated view.

Be thankful I stay out of these Israeli propaganda threads.


----------



## Humanity

rylah said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> If it's Your adopted country, then by definition different laws apply to You.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh? How so?
> 
> I can't wait for your response!!
> 
> Just for clarity, no, I don't live in Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Did You get Spaniard nationality the day You were born?
> You went through a discriminatory process of normalization.
Click to expand...


I don't live in Spain idiot! See, another fail!

You are suggesting that my adopted country, by definition, applies different laws to me, and I am telling you that the SAME laws apply to me as it does to natives...

As I said, I do NOT live in Israel where, yes, what you are saying would be right!

And that is the WHOLE point of this thread!!!


----------



## rylah

Humanity said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's basic knowledge of Hebrew, a simple word.
> Coming from the root P-L -S(h) - meaning _invade_.
> PLS(h)TI  - means simply _invader_.
> 
> 
> *Philistine*: This has been used to mean "uneducated person" since the 19th century. That use in English originates with a conflict between university academics and the townsfolk of Jena, Germany, in the 17th century, apparently based on the Book of Judges phrase “the Philistines are upon you.” The Philistines - in Hebrew _plishtim _- were a coastal adversary of ancient Israel *whose name simply meant "invaders."*
> Hebrew words in English you didn't even know you knew
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What a crock of shit!
> 
> It MAY have been used in that way by racist Hebrew speakers in that way but how would you explain away the Latin and Greek name?
> 
> Nothing changes with them there Hebrew speakers eh!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Did I say _foreign_ language?
> I said in the "native", and in the native languages _'Palestinian' _means - *foreign invader.*
> 
> That's the meaning like it or not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well, that's what one would call an own goal you idiot!
> 
> The first appearance of the term "Palestine" was from the Greeks NOT Hebrews!
> 
> So, those foreign invading Hebrews ... Care to finish the rest?
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You can try and find me another meaning in the native languages of Canaan...oh but wait You'll have to go to Hebrew.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Here, let me try and help you before you end up looking like a complete fucking moron...
> 
> *The first appearance of the term "Palestine" was from the Greeks NOT Hebrews!*
> 
> Maybe it's bad light, maybe its your failing eyesight, maybe it is your 'Israel First' blinkers that stopped you reading that so I thought I would make the text bold for you!
Click to expand...


And does that prove Greek to be the native language of Canaan or that 'Palestinian' does not mean _*invaders?
*_
You keep dancing about simple facts, but there's no substance.


----------



## rylah

Humanity said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> If it's Your adopted country, then by definition different laws apply to You.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh? How so?
> 
> I can't wait for your response!!
> 
> Just for clarity, no, I don't live in Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Did You get Spaniard nationality the day You were born?
> You went through a discriminatory process of normalization.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I don't live in Spain idiot! See, another fail!
> 
> You are suggesting that my adopted country, by definition, applies different laws to me, and I am telling you that the SAME laws apply to me as it does to natives...
> 
> As I said, I do NOT live in Israel where, yes, what you are saying would be right!
> 
> And that is the WHOLE point of this thread!!!
Click to expand...


So only in Israel a foreign national goes through normalization to get citizenship?
...the ridiculousness of the claims against Israel.


----------



## Humanity

rylah said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> What a crock of shit!
> 
> It MAY have been used in that way by racist Hebrew speakers in that way but how would you explain away the Latin and Greek name?
> 
> Nothing changes with them there Hebrew speakers eh!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Did I say _foreign_ language?
> I said in the "native", and in the native languages _'Palestinian' _means - *foreign invader.*
> 
> That's the meaning like it or not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well, that's what one would call an own goal you idiot!
> 
> The first appearance of the term "Palestine" was from the Greeks NOT Hebrews!
> 
> So, those foreign invading Hebrews ... Care to finish the rest?
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You can try and find me another meaning in the native languages of Canaan...oh but wait You'll have to go to Hebrew.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Here, let me try and help you before you end up looking like a complete fucking moron...
> 
> *The first appearance of the term "Palestine" was from the Greeks NOT Hebrews!*
> 
> Maybe it's bad light, maybe its your failing eyesight, maybe it is your 'Israel First' blinkers that stopped you reading that so I thought I would make the text bold for you!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And does that prove Greek to be the native language of Canaan or that 'Palestinian' does not mean _*invaders?
> *_
> You keep dancing about simple facts, but there's no substance.
Click to expand...


The simple facts are you are a proven liar...

Would you like to make the same lie, sorry, statement, that "Palestine" is a Hebrew word in face of the fact that it ISN'T?


----------



## Humanity

rylah said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> If it's Your adopted country, then by definition different laws apply to You.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh? How so?
> 
> I can't wait for your response!!
> 
> Just for clarity, no, I don't live in Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Did You get Spaniard nationality the day You were born?
> You went through a discriminatory process of normalization.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I don't live in Spain idiot! See, another fail!
> 
> You are suggesting that my adopted country, by definition, applies different laws to me, and I am telling you that the SAME laws apply to me as it does to natives...
> 
> As I said, I do NOT live in Israel where, yes, what you are saying would be right!
> 
> And that is the WHOLE point of this thread!!!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So only in Israel a foreign national goes through normalization to get citizenship?
> ...the ridiculousness of the claims against Israel.
Click to expand...


Oh dear... Here we go AGAIN...

Just so we can make sure we/YOU aren't moving the goalposts again...

You said that my adopted country applies different laws to me by definition.

I told you that the laws applied to me are exactly the same as those of the 'native' peoples of my adopted country.

Which part of that do you not understand?

What ever you are banging on about "normalization" really has nothing to the laws that apply to me or natives!

I sense a serious degree of squirming and utter bullshit coming from you!


----------



## Shusha

Humanity said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> If it's Your adopted country, then by definition different laws apply to You.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh? How so?
> 
> I can't wait for your response!!
> 
> Just for clarity, no, I don't live in Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Did You get Spaniard nationality the day You were born?
> You went through a discriminatory process of normalization.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I don't live in Spain idiot! See, another fail!
> 
> You are suggesting that my adopted country, by definition, applies different laws to me, and I am telling you that the SAME laws apply to me as it does to natives...
> 
> As I said, I do NOT live in Israel where, yes, what you are saying would be right!
> 
> And that is the WHOLE point of this thread!!!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So only in Israel a foreign national goes through normalization to get citizenship?
> ...the ridiculousness of the claims against Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh dear... Here we go AGAIN...
> 
> Just so we can make sure we/YOU aren't moving the goalposts again...
> 
> You said that my adopted country applies different laws to me by definition.
> 
> I told you that the laws applied to me are exactly the same as those of the 'native' peoples of my adopted country.
> 
> Which part of that do you not understand?
> 
> What ever you are banging on about "normalization" really has nothing to the laws that apply to me or natives!
> 
> I sense a serious degree of squirming and utter bullshit coming from you!
Click to expand...



Are you a national of your adopted country?  Or a permanent resident?


----------



## rylah

Natural Citizen said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> In Israel that's called _"gave his professional opinion and walked away"._
> Are You of the opinion that Jews are described as holy pink bunnies in the Bible?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've read just about every Bible from the Ethiopian Bible, the Christian Bible including their variants, to the Jewish Bible. And many many more modern and ancient theologic works, including extra-biblical history and text. I'm competent linguistically as well as competent to compare and recall and to place into perspective with the times as well as the cirtcumstances of providing their writings. And I Iike to consider my geo-political awareness far beyond average.
> 
> Mine is an educated view.
> 
> Be thankful I stay out of these Israeli propaganda threads.
Click to expand...


Yes we all know about that self accredited chest beating.
Let's pretend others haven't pretended for millennias to successfully "dispute" Jews about what's written in the Torah, in Hebrew.


----------



## rylah

Humanity said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Did I say _foreign_ language?
> I said in the "native", and in the native languages _'Palestinian' _means - *foreign invader.*
> 
> That's the meaning like it or not.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well, that's what one would call an own goal you idiot!
> 
> The first appearance of the term "Palestine" was from the Greeks NOT Hebrews!
> 
> So, those foreign invading Hebrews ... Care to finish the rest?
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You can try and find me another meaning in the native languages of Canaan...oh but wait You'll have to go to Hebrew.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Here, let me try and help you before you end up looking like a complete fucking moron...
> 
> *The first appearance of the term "Palestine" was from the Greeks NOT Hebrews!*
> 
> Maybe it's bad light, maybe its your failing eyesight, maybe it is your 'Israel First' blinkers that stopped you reading that so I thought I would make the text bold for you!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And does that prove Greek to be the native language of Canaan or that 'Palestinian' does not mean _*invaders?
> *_
> You keep dancing about simple facts, but there's no substance.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The simple facts are you are a proven liar...
> 
> Would you like to make the same lie, sorry, statement, that "Palestine" is a Hebrew word in face of the fact that it ISN'T?
Click to expand...


So what root in Greek does the word "Palestine" come from?
Give me those facts just try not to piss Your pants out of anger.


----------



## rylah

Humanity said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> If it's Your adopted country, then by definition different laws apply to You.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh? How so?
> 
> I can't wait for your response!!
> 
> Just for clarity, no, I don't live in Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Did You get Spaniard nationality the day You were born?
> You went through a discriminatory process of normalization.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I don't live in Spain idiot! See, another fail!
> 
> You are suggesting that my adopted country, by definition, applies different laws to me, and I am telling you that the SAME laws apply to me as it does to natives...
> 
> As I said, I do NOT live in Israel where, yes, what you are saying would be right!
> 
> And that is the WHOLE point of this thread!!!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So only in Israel a foreign national goes through normalization to get citizenship?
> ...the ridiculousness of the claims against Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh dear... Here we go AGAIN...
> 
> Just so we can make sure we/YOU aren't moving the goalposts again...
> 
> You said that my adopted country applies different laws to me by definition.
> 
> I told you that the laws applied to me are exactly the same as those of the 'native' peoples of my adopted country.
> 
> Which part of that do you not understand?
> 
> What ever you are banging on about "normalization" really has nothing to the laws that apply to me or natives!
> 
> I sense a serious degree of squirming and utter bullshit coming from you!
Click to expand...


In Spain, does normalization apply to natives? 

It's a simple question, don't mumble.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> That is exactly the point:'
> 
> There are NO OTHER INDIGENOUS PEOPLE with rights to the land and self determination but the Jewish People.
> 
> There never has been.
> 
> No other people has ever declared indigenous rights to the land of Israel before 1948.
> 
> Self Determination is different from "National Rights" to think of myself as an American.
> 
> I am not descendant from the First Nations of America.  Not one of them.
> I do not have the right to demand the same rights to self determination over their ancestral lands as they do.  I never will.
> 
> Therefore, if the Apaches choose to declare self-determination over their ancient homeland, no other First Nation can do the same, and neither can any European or Asian who came over after 1492.
> 
> Therefore, here we have the Arabs, who came into the land 2400 years after the Jewish People established their Nation, culture, etc, saying that They have exactly the same rights, or worse, they have more rights to self-determination over the land then the Jewish People.
> 
> And that is exactly what you and others cannot come to understand.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I completely understand and completely disagree. There are mutliple indiginous groups, not just one.  But you believe only one has rights to that region.  And that is the problem - each side only believes in the legitimacy of their side's position.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Are people of European ancestry indigenous to the US, in your opinion?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If they also have Native American ancestry yes.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I disagree. He ancestry is not the important element.
> 
> The elements to be measured (and this is in the UN Declaratiin of Indigenous Rights) are:
> 
> 1.  Self identification with the peoples.
> 2. Acceptance by the collective as part of the peoples.
> 3.  Participation in the culture.
> 
> 
> It's not about a blood test. It's about being part of the people.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You can have indiginous cultures.  And you can have indiginous people.  Palestinians, regardless of culture are indigninous - descended from indiginous.  Their rights are the same.
Click to expand...


But you are still using "blood tests" to determine indigeneity - descent from indigenous. That is the wrong measurement. 

An invading, conquering peoples who overtake convert, destroy, disappear another culture and then mix with the indigenous peoples and replace them will have the "right blood test" because they have intermingled with the indigenous peoples. But it's just another form of overwriting the invading culture onto the local, native culture. 

That said -- their rights ARE the same. Each individual national of each nation MUST have the same rights as all other nationals of that state. And they do. 

And each collective people has a right to self-determination and sovereignty and cultural expression in their own territory. 

There IS NO inequality here. The rights of individual nationals are protected and the rights of the collective nationality is protected.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> admonit said:
> 
> 
> 
> 70 years after the establishment of a Jewish state was declared, now it became a basic (constitutional) law.
> 
> The full text of the law:
> 
> *Basic Law: Israel as the Nation State of the Jewish People*
> 
> *1 — Basic principles*
> 
> A. The land of Israel is the historical homeland of the Jewish people, in which the State of Israel was established.
> 
> B. The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people, in which it fulfills its natural, cultural, religious and historical right to self-determination.
> 
> C. The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Israel is unique to the Jewish people.
> 
> *2 — The symbols of the state*
> 
> A. The name of the state is “Israel.”
> 
> B. The state flag is white with two blue stripes near the edges and a blue Star of David in the center.
> 
> C. The state emblem is a seven-branched menorah with olive leaves on both sides and the word “Israel” beneath it.
> 
> D. The state anthem is “Hatikvah.”
> 
> E. Details regarding state symbols will be determined by the law.
> 
> *3 — The capital of the state*
> 
> Jerusalem, complete and united, is the capital of Israel.
> 
> *4 — Language*
> 
> A. The state’s language is Hebrew.
> 
> B. The Arabic language has a special status in the state; Regulating the use of Arabic in state institutions or by them will be set in law.
> 
> C. This clause does not harm the status given to the Arabic language before this law came into effect.
> 
> *5 — Ingathering of the exiles*
> 
> The state will be open for Jewish immigration and the ingathering of exiles
> 
> *6 — Connection to the Jewish people*
> 
> A. The state will strive to ensure the safety of the members of the Jewish people in trouble or in captivity due to the fact of their Jewishness or their citizenship.
> 
> B. The state shall act within the Diaspora to strengthen the affinity between the state and members of the Jewish people.
> 
> C. The state shall act to preserve the cultural, historical and religious heritage of the Jewish people among Jews in the Diaspora.
> 
> *7 — Jewish settlement*
> 
> A. The state views the development of Jewish settlement as a national value and will act to encourage and promote its establishment and consolidation.
> 
> *8 — Official calendar*
> 
> The Hebrew calendar is the official calendar of the state and alongside it the Gregorian calendar will be used as an official calendar. Use of  the Hebrew calendar and the Gregorian calendar will be determined by law.
> 
> *9 — Independence Day and memorial days*
> 
> A. Independence Day is the official national holiday of the state.
> 
> B. Memorial Day for the Fallen in Israel’s Wars and Holocaust and Heroism Remembrance Day are official memorial days of the State.
> 
> *10 — Days of rest and sabbath*
> 
> The Sabbath and the festivals of Israel are the established days of rest in the state; Non-Jews have a right to maintain days of rest on their Sabbaths and festivals; Details of this issue will be determined by law.
> 
> *11 — Immutability*
> 
> This Basic Law shall not be amended, unless by another Basic Law passed by a majority of Knesset members.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am going to refer back to the OP...because I want to point out something which I think does make this basic law different than those constitutions of other countries with multi ethnic populations.
> 
> In Part 1, A and B I totally agree with, nothing wrong there, other nations do that.  C is problematic to me because It states that this national Right is unique to Jewish people in Israel.  Why is this needed given that A and B already enshrine the importance of Jewish people and culture to the state?
> 
> It is this particular clause that makes it markedly different then say Slovenia, which you used as an example:
> 
> _...the fundamental and permanent right of the Slovene *nation* to self-determination; and from the historical fact that in a centuries-long struggle for national liberation *we Slovenes have established our national identity and asserted our statehood.*_
> 
> It does not claim that this national right is unique to only Slovenes.  It refers not to a people but a nation albeit Slovene.  I think distinctions matter, one is inclusive (theoretically) the other is exclusive and very specifically in who among its people’s has national rights and self determination.  I think if this part had been left out, critics would not had much to stand on.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I think you are trying to make a distinction where there is none.
> 
> So you think that the Slovene declaration means that the Russian minority in Slovenia should have national rights in Slovenia?
> 
> You would have no problem with the declaration wording being:  ... the fundamental and permanent right of the Jewish nation to self-determination and from the historical fact of a millennia long struggle for national liberation,  we Jews have established our national identity and asserted our Statehood.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> _The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Israel is unique to the Jewish people_.
> 
> I think it is an important distiction to those who are excluded - the Israeli law explicitely states who is included in that national right.  The Slovenian law doesn't.
> 
> The second statement has the potential to include more than just Jews under the "Jewish nation".
Click to expand...



The second statement says explicitly, "we Slovenes" and you somehow take that to mean we Slovenes and those Russians who live here too. Yet when The Jewish people say, "we Jews" you take it to mean not only JUST the JEWS but also extend it to mean that even the rights of individuals are affected. 

Why doesn't "we Jews" mean the same to you as "we Slovenes"?  I think your answer is going to be that the Jews write it explicitly.  Why do you think the Jewish people felt it necessary to write it explicitly?


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> admonit said:
> 
> 
> 
> 70 years after the establishment of a Jewish state was declared, now it became a basic (constitutional) law.
> 
> The full text of the law:
> 
> *Basic Law: Israel as the Nation State of the Jewish People*
> 
> *1 — Basic principles*
> 
> A. The land of Israel is the historical homeland of the Jewish people, in which the State of Israel was established.
> 
> B. The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people, in which it fulfills its natural, cultural, religious and historical right to self-determination.
> 
> C. The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Israel is unique to the Jewish people.
> 
> *2 — The symbols of the state*
> 
> A. The name of the state is “Israel.”
> 
> B. The state flag is white with two blue stripes near the edges and a blue Star of David in the center.
> 
> C. The state emblem is a seven-branched menorah with olive leaves on both sides and the word “Israel” beneath it.
> 
> D. The state anthem is “Hatikvah.”
> 
> E. Details regarding state symbols will be determined by the law.
> 
> *3 — The capital of the state*
> 
> Jerusalem, complete and united, is the capital of Israel.
> 
> *4 — Language*
> 
> A. The state’s language is Hebrew.
> 
> B. The Arabic language has a special status in the state; Regulating the use of Arabic in state institutions or by them will be set in law.
> 
> C. This clause does not harm the status given to the Arabic language before this law came into effect.
> 
> *5 — Ingathering of the exiles*
> 
> The state will be open for Jewish immigration and the ingathering of exiles
> 
> *6 — Connection to the Jewish people*
> 
> A. The state will strive to ensure the safety of the members of the Jewish people in trouble or in captivity due to the fact of their Jewishness or their citizenship.
> 
> B. The state shall act within the Diaspora to strengthen the affinity between the state and members of the Jewish people.
> 
> C. The state shall act to preserve the cultural, historical and religious heritage of the Jewish people among Jews in the Diaspora.
> 
> *7 — Jewish settlement*
> 
> A. The state views the development of Jewish settlement as a national value and will act to encourage and promote its establishment and consolidation.
> 
> *8 — Official calendar*
> 
> The Hebrew calendar is the official calendar of the state and alongside it the Gregorian calendar will be used as an official calendar. Use of  the Hebrew calendar and the Gregorian calendar will be determined by law.
> 
> *9 — Independence Day and memorial days*
> 
> A. Independence Day is the official national holiday of the state.
> 
> B. Memorial Day for the Fallen in Israel’s Wars and Holocaust and Heroism Remembrance Day are official memorial days of the State.
> 
> *10 — Days of rest and sabbath*
> 
> The Sabbath and the festivals of Israel are the established days of rest in the state; Non-Jews have a right to maintain days of rest on their Sabbaths and festivals; Details of this issue will be determined by law.
> 
> *11 — Immutability*
> 
> This Basic Law shall not be amended, unless by another Basic Law passed by a majority of Knesset members.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am going to refer back to the OP...because I want to point out something which I think does make this basic law different than those constitutions of other countries with multi ethnic populations.
> 
> In Part 1, A and B I totally agree with, nothing wrong there, other nations do that.  C is problematic to me because It states that this national Right is unique to Jewish people in Israel.  Why is this needed given that A and B already enshrine the importance of Jewish people and culture to the state?
> 
> It is this particular clause that makes it markedly different then say Slovenia, which you used as an example:
> 
> _...the fundamental and permanent right of the Slovene *nation* to self-determination; and from the historical fact that in a centuries-long struggle for national liberation *we Slovenes have established our national identity and asserted our statehood.*_
> 
> It does not claim that this national right is unique to only Slovenes.  It refers not to a people but a nation albeit Slovene.  I think distinctions matter, one is inclusive (theoretically) the other is exclusive and very specifically in who among its people’s has national rights and self determination.  I think if this part had been left out, critics would not had much to stand on.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I think you are trying to make a distinction where there is none.
> 
> So you think that the Slovene declaration means that the Russian minority in Slovenia should have national rights in Slovenia?
> 
> You would have no problem with the declaration wording being:  ... the fundamental and permanent right of the Jewish nation to self-determination and from the historical fact of a millennia long struggle for national liberation,  we Jews have established our national identity and asserted our Statehood.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> _The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Israel is unique to the Jewish people_.
> 
> I think it is an important distiction to those who are excluded - the Israeli law explicitely states who is included in that national right.  The Slovenian law doesn't.
> 
> The second statement has the potential to include more than just Jews under the "Jewish nation".
Click to expand...


I think it's important to clarify what we are arguing here.

No one is arguing against the individual rights of anybody.

And no one is arguing against the collective rights of each national peoples. (Well, no one on the Israeli side anyway).

What we are arguing is that the Jewish people have collective national rights (self-determination, sovereignty, cultural expression) in Israel. Arab Palestinians have collective national rights in "Palestine" (and also in Jordan and also in Syria).

So there is no removal or denial of rights going in here (Well, on the Israeli side anyway).

It may help to think of national rights as being LIMITED by territory. People can only have national rights in the local territory where they had their cultural genesis. Everyone has collective, cultural, national rights. But those rights can only be exercised in limited territory. Thus the Scots people can not have a Scotland in Europe and another one in Africa and another one in Asia and another one off the coast of Australia. (This IS the essence of indigenous rights over colonization).


----------



## theliq

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> It absolutely makes a difference. Judaism IS a religion.  Slovene is not.  Kurd is not.  If you are creating a Slovene state, religion may or may not play role in it. The ethnic group is not defined by its religion.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Judaism IS a religion.  But the Jewish peoples ethnic and cultural collective is MORE than just their religion.  Just as MOST cultural groups have a religion but are MORE than their religion.  If you are creating a Slovene state you are taking the collective culture of being Slovene, which may, or may not include religious aspects.  You said it yourself -- the ethnic group is not defined by its religion.  The Jewish people are also NOT defined by their religion.  Their religion is a part of their culture, even a large part, but they are not defined by their religion.  They also have history, and language and all the other parts which make up a culture.
> 
> To disable the Jewish people from their culture because of the aspect of religion is to create separate rules for them.
> 
> (Btw, as a side note, I disagree that Judaism is a strictly a religion.  One can not simply adopt certain doctrines and become Jewish.  It doesn't work like that.  If you want to differentiate between the strict religion of the Jewish people as opposed to the fullness of their culture, I'd suggest you speak of B'Nei Noach as the religion and Judaism or Jewishness as the cultural collective).
Click to expand...

So you say,but it is only a ruse to hide,that you are converts only...the Zionist attempt to legitimise Non Semitic Jews will of course Fail,as for your New Laws,some crap about a Jews only State...what Jews...you mean Ziocrap  methinks

Anyhow it is Ilegal because in 1948,it clearly states "For Jews and others"...see you around


----------



## Humanity

Shusha said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh? How so?
> 
> I can't wait for your response!!
> 
> Just for clarity, no, I don't live in Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Did You get Spaniard nationality the day You were born?
> You went through a discriminatory process of normalization.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I don't live in Spain idiot! See, another fail!
> 
> You are suggesting that my adopted country, by definition, applies different laws to me, and I am telling you that the SAME laws apply to me as it does to natives...
> 
> As I said, I do NOT live in Israel where, yes, what you are saying would be right!
> 
> And that is the WHOLE point of this thread!!!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So only in Israel a foreign national goes through normalization to get citizenship?
> ...the ridiculousness of the claims against Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh dear... Here we go AGAIN...
> 
> Just so we can make sure we/YOU aren't moving the goalposts again...
> 
> You said that my adopted country applies different laws to me by definition.
> 
> I told you that the laws applied to me are exactly the same as those of the 'native' peoples of my adopted country.
> 
> Which part of that do you not understand?
> 
> What ever you are banging on about "normalization" really has nothing to the laws that apply to me or natives!
> 
> I sense a serious degree of squirming and utter bullshit coming from you!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Are you a national of your adopted country?  Or a permanent resident?
Click to expand...


Define your meaning for both before I respond please.


----------



## Shusha

Humanity said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Did You get Spaniard nationality the day You were born?
> You went through a discriminatory process of normalization.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't live in Spain idiot! See, another fail!
> 
> You are suggesting that my adopted country, by definition, applies different laws to me, and I am telling you that the SAME laws apply to me as it does to natives...
> 
> As I said, I do NOT live in Israel where, yes, what you are saying would be right!
> 
> And that is the WHOLE point of this thread!!!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So only in Israel a foreign national goes through normalization to get citizenship?
> ...the ridiculousness of the claims against Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh dear... Here we go AGAIN...
> 
> Just so we can make sure we/YOU aren't moving the goalposts again...
> 
> You said that my adopted country applies different laws to me by definition.
> 
> I told you that the laws applied to me are exactly the same as those of the 'native' peoples of my adopted country.
> 
> Which part of that do you not understand?
> 
> What ever you are banging on about "normalization" really has nothing to the laws that apply to me or natives!
> 
> I sense a serious degree of squirming and utter bullshit coming from you!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Are you a national of your adopted country?  Or a permanent resident?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Define your meaning for both before I respond please.
Click to expand...


Typical definition is a two fold relationship where you have obligations to your country of nationality  AND you can avail yourself of the protection of your country of nationality.

Permanent residency implies a nationality (with above obligations and protections) outside the state in which you happen to be living. You have already said you have dual citizenship so my assumption is that you have two nationalities and are living in one of them. Alternatively you could have two nationalities and be living in a third country.


----------



## Humanity

Shusha said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't live in Spain idiot! See, another fail!
> 
> You are suggesting that my adopted country, by definition, applies different laws to me, and I am telling you that the SAME laws apply to me as it does to natives...
> 
> As I said, I do NOT live in Israel where, yes, what you are saying would be right!
> 
> And that is the WHOLE point of this thread!!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So only in Israel a foreign national goes through normalization to get citizenship?
> ...the ridiculousness of the claims against Israel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oh dear... Here we go AGAIN...
> 
> Just so we can make sure we/YOU aren't moving the goalposts again...
> 
> You said that my adopted country applies different laws to me by definition.
> 
> I told you that the laws applied to me are exactly the same as those of the 'native' peoples of my adopted country.
> 
> Which part of that do you not understand?
> 
> What ever you are banging on about "normalization" really has nothing to the laws that apply to me or natives!
> 
> I sense a serious degree of squirming and utter bullshit coming from you!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Are you a national of your adopted country?  Or a permanent resident?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Define your meaning for both before I respond please.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Typical definition is a two fold relationship where you have obligations to your country of nationality  AND you can avail yourself of the protection of your country of nationality.
> 
> Permanent residency implies a nationality (with above obligations and protections) outside the state in which you happen to be living. You have already said you have dual citizenship so my assumption is that you have two nationalities and are living in one of them. Alternatively you could have two nationalities and be living in a third country.
Click to expand...


To be honest, in my adopted country, it matters not whether you are a "national" or "permanent resident". Both are treated equally.


----------



## Shazoomx4

Humanity said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So only in Israel a foreign national goes through normalization to get citizenship?
> ...the ridiculousness of the claims against Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh dear... Here we go AGAIN...
> 
> Just so we can make sure we/YOU aren't moving the goalposts again...
> 
> You said that my adopted country applies different laws to me by definition.
> 
> I told you that the laws applied to me are exactly the same as those of the 'native' peoples of my adopted country.
> 
> Which part of that do you not understand?
> 
> What ever you are banging on about "normalization" really has nothing to the laws that apply to me or natives!
> 
> I sense a serious degree of squirming and utter bullshit coming from you!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Are you a national of your adopted country?  Or a permanent resident?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Define your meaning for both before I respond please.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Typical definition is a two fold relationship where you have obligations to your country of nationality  AND you can avail yourself of the protection of your country of nationality.
> 
> Permanent residency implies a nationality (with above obligations and protections) outside the state in which you happen to be living. You have already said you have dual citizenship so my assumption is that you have two nationalities and are living in one of them. Alternatively you could have two nationalities and be living in a third country.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> To be honest, in my adopted country, it matters not whether you are a "national" or "permanent resident". Both are treated equally.
Click to expand...


I hope you know this law is mean nothing..  this law is the only declaration, in actuality is do nothing...

by the way, about the sentence "FREE PALESTINE" witch part of the land, you want to free from Israel?


----------



## Humanity

Shazoomx4 said:


> I hope you know this law is mean nothing.. this law is the only declaration, in actuality is do nothing...



Declaring Israel Exclusively Jewish is nothing more than declaring that Israel is an Apartheid state!


----------



## Shazoomx4

Humanity said:


> Shazoomx4 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I hope you know this law is mean nothing.. this law is the only declaration, in actuality is do nothing...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Declaring Israel Exclusively Jewish is nothing more than declaring that Israel is an Apartheid state!
Click to expand...

Far from it.. even not close to being Apartheid state... please tell me what so Apartheid in Israel?


----------



## Humanity

Shazoomx4 said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shazoomx4 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I hope you know this law is mean nothing.. this law is the only declaration, in actuality is do nothing...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Declaring Israel Exclusively Jewish is nothing more than declaring that Israel is an Apartheid state!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Far from it.. even not close to being Apartheid state... please tell me what so Apartheid in Israel?
Click to expand...


So, the prime minister of South Africa announces that South Africa is exclusively black... What you say?


----------



## Shazoomx4

Humanity said:


> Shazoomx4 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shazoomx4 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I hope you know this law is mean nothing.. this law is the only declaration, in actuality is do nothing...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Declaring Israel Exclusively Jewish is nothing more than declaring that Israel is an Apartheid state!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Far from it.. even not close to being Apartheid state... please tell me what so Apartheid in Israel?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So, the prime minister of South Africa announces that South Africa is exclusively black... What you say?
Click to expand...

What happens in actual?  I don't know what is happening there right now...


----------



## Humanity

Shazoomx4 said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shazoomx4 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shazoomx4 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I hope you know this law is mean nothing.. this law is the only declaration, in actuality is do nothing...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Declaring Israel Exclusively Jewish is nothing more than declaring that Israel is an Apartheid state!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Far from it.. even not close to being Apartheid state... please tell me what so Apartheid in Israel?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So, the prime minister of South Africa announces that South Africa is exclusively black... What you say?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What happens in actual?  I don't know what is happening there right now...
Click to expand...


Hypothetically, if the prime minister of South Africa declared South Africa "exclusively black" there would be outcry throughout the world of Apartheid... South Africa already uses 'positive discrimination', what is ever positive about discrimination I really don't know, but there are Team Israel members who support this kind of madness!


----------



## Sixties Fan

Humanity said:


> Shazoomx4 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shazoomx4 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I hope you know this law is mean nothing.. this law is the only declaration, in actuality is do nothing...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Declaring Israel Exclusively Jewish is nothing more than declaring that Israel is an Apartheid state!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Far from it.. even not close to being Apartheid state... please tell me what so Apartheid in Israel?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So, the prime minister of South Africa announces that South Africa is exclusively black... What you say?
Click to expand...

South Africa and Israel are two different countries with two totally different histories.

I really would like to see you stick to what the thread is about, but apparently you cannot.

In what way declaring the obvious, that Israel IS and always has been the State/country/Nation of the Jewish People has to do with the basic laws of the country which HAVE NOT changed at all about each citizen's and resident's civil RIGHTS?

You DO KNOW that there have been no changes at all, but have to cry like a baby to distract from the facts.

Israel IS the National Homeland of the Jewish People.  Always has been and always will be.


The Basic Law tells nothing new. Only to anti Israel, anti Jews like you.

No.....it is "Apartheid".


Keep making me laugh at to how hard you try to distort everything that happens in Israel as it continues to protect its population, all of it from morons like you.

No, Israel is NOT going to self-destruct.  EVER.

Smile, the People of Israel Live


----------



## Humanity

Sixties Fan said:


> I really would like to see you stick to what the thread is about, but apparently you cannot.



No problem...

Simply accept that the declaration of Israel as "exclusively Jewish" is an act of...

Racism
Fascism
Apatheid

Well, you choose!


----------



## Sixties Fan

Humanity said:


> Shazoomx4 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shazoomx4 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shazoomx4 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I hope you know this law is mean nothing.. this law is the only declaration, in actuality is do nothing...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Declaring Israel Exclusively Jewish is nothing more than declaring that Israel is an Apartheid state!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Far from it.. even not close to being Apartheid state... please tell me what so Apartheid in Israel?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So, the prime minister of South Africa announces that South Africa is exclusively black... What you say?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What happens in actual?  I don't know what is happening there right now...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Hypothetically, if the prime minister of South Africa declared South Africa "exclusively black" there would be outcry throughout the world of Apartheid... South Africa already uses 'positive discrimination', what is ever positive about discrimination I really don't know, but there are Team Israel members who support this kind of madness!
Click to expand...

Oh, no.  Blacks are discriminated against in South Africa in the economy, in jobs, housing, etc, etc  ????

Really?

Now, show me one country in the world which does not do the same .

I'll give you a few examples:

The USA
Brasil


Go on, finish giving all the other countries where blacks, Africans, are discriminated against, including in the continent of Africa.


----------



## Humanity

Sixties Fan said:


> In what way declaring the obvious, that Israel IS and always has been the State/country/Nation of the Jewish People has to do with the basic laws of the country which HAVE NOT changed at all about each citizen's and resident's civil RIGHTS?



I would not expect ANY Team Israel member to see anything wrong with the "exclusively Jewish" statement...

However, if any other country made a similar declaration there would be uproar!

Keep your blinkers and rose tinted zionut glasses firmly in place!


----------



## Sixties Fan

Humanity said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> I really would like to see you stick to what the thread is about, but apparently you cannot.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No problem...
> 
> Simply accept that the declaration of Israel as "exclusively Jewish" is an act of...
> 
> Racism
> Fascism
> Apatheid
> 
> Well, you choose!
Click to expand...

I choose the fact that you are a Jew/Israel hating racist, and you will never give the Jewish People what is rightfully theirs.  

Self Determination is a right they have and you are not going to take it away from them.

Period.

The only R/F and A around here is you with your endless false claims about Israel.

Smile, moron.


----------



## Humanity

Sixties Fan said:


> Oh, no. Blacks are discriminated against in South Africa in the economy, in jobs, housing, etc, etc ????



Well, thanks for showing everyone what a moron you are!

'Positive discrimination' does NOT discriminate against blacks you fool!


----------



## Humanity

Sixties Fan said:


> The only R/F and A around here is you with your endless false claims about Israel.



Buttandyahoo declares Israel "exclusively Jewish" and its MY fault?

Get the fuck outta here!!


----------



## Sixties Fan

Humanity said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> In what way declaring the obvious, that Israel IS and always has been the State/country/Nation of the Jewish People has to do with the basic laws of the country which HAVE NOT changed at all about each citizen's and resident's civil RIGHTS?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I would not expect ANY Team Israel member to see anything wrong with the "exclusively Jewish" statement...
> 
> However, if any other country made a similar declaration there would be uproar!
> 
> Keep your blinkers and rose tinted zionut glasses firmly in place!
Click to expand...

No, there would not be and you know it.

You keep attempting to make a tempest in a tea cup.

Your problem.

I posted an article above as to why it came to be that this basic law became necessary.

Go find it, read it, learn.

You do not wish to do it, no need to learn anything...then.....just continue to screw your brain.....it is almost at that perfect point where it is time to throw it away.  Just like burnt food.


----------



## Humanity

Sixties Fan said:


> No, there would not be and you know it.



You simply do not live in the real world... Your zionut world, attempting to defend the indefensible is expected.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Humanity said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, no. Blacks are discriminated against in South Africa in the economy, in jobs, housing, etc, etc ????
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well, thanks for showing everyone what a moron you are!
> 
> 'Positive discrimination' does NOT discriminate against blacks you fool!
Click to expand...

And what is the difference between Affirmative action in South Africa and Affirmative Action in the USA?  None.


South African President Jacob Zuma vows to transform the economy by involving more black business people sidelined for years by the oppressive apartheid regime that ended in 1994.

South Africa holds conference on positive discrimination for apartheid victims | DW | 04.10.2013


Just try to keep the conversation on the topic of the basic law, instead of derailing it towards what it has nothing to do with it.

Israel creates lots of jobs and opportunities to non Jews.
It is some Arabs who do not want to accept them and prefer to destroy them.
-----
Palestinian Rioters Bomb Jerusalem Light Rail
------------


In the Arab world, the answer usually is.....if it comes from the Israelis, from the Jews, where the Arabs demand ALL of the Mandate for Palestine for themselves, those Arabs will always find difficulty in assimilating into the Israeli society and want Israel gone.

Apartheid in South Africa did not allow Blacks good jobs.  That is not the case in Israel and you will never be able to find evidence to the contrary.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Humanity said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, there would not be and you know it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You simply do not live in the real world... Your zionut world, attempting to defend the indefensible is expected.
Click to expand...

Empty words, from a Jew hater who refuses to go to Israel to see how things really are around there.


----------



## Shusha

Humanity said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So only in Israel a foreign national goes through normalization to get citizenship?
> ...the ridiculousness of the claims against Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh dear... Here we go AGAIN...
> 
> Just so we can make sure we/YOU aren't moving the goalposts again...
> 
> You said that my adopted country applies different laws to me by definition.
> 
> I told you that the laws applied to me are exactly the same as those of the 'native' peoples of my adopted country.
> 
> Which part of that do you not understand?
> 
> What ever you are banging on about "normalization" really has nothing to the laws that apply to me or natives!
> 
> I sense a serious degree of squirming and utter bullshit coming from you!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Are you a national of your adopted country?  Or a permanent resident?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Define your meaning for both before I respond please.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Typical definition is a two fold relationship where you have obligations to your country of nationality  AND you can avail yourself of the protection of your country of nationality.
> 
> Permanent residency implies a nationality (with above obligations and protections) outside the state in which you happen to be living. You have already said you have dual citizenship so my assumption is that you have two nationalities and are living in one of them. Alternatively you could have two nationalities and be living in a third country.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> To be honest, in my adopted country, it matters not whether you are a "national" or "permanent resident". Both are treated equally.
Click to expand...



Probably not true. In Canada, where permanent residents have full access to all the services the government offers, such as medical care, education, etc, they are not permitted to vote, run for government office, etc.  So they are not "equal". 

The nationals have additional privileges and obligations that residents do not have. Do you think that is wrong?  In Canada?


----------



## rylah

Humanity said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> In what way declaring the obvious, that Israel IS and always has been the State/country/Nation of the Jewish People has to do with the basic laws of the country which HAVE NOT changed at all about each citizen's and resident's civil RIGHTS?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I would not expect ANY Team Israel member to see anything wrong with the "exclusively Jewish" statement...
> 
> However, if any other country made a similar declaration there would be uproar!
> 
> Keep your blinkers and rose tinted zionut glasses firmly in place!
Click to expand...


There was no such statement, he didn't use that word.

What he was talking about is the Law of Return, a law practiced in many Western nations, yet only in case of Israel You guys start nervously shaking, mumbling all kinds of accusation...Neurotic.


----------



## rylah

Humanity said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, there would not be and you know it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You simply do not live in the real world... Your zionut world, attempting to defend the indefensible is expected.
Click to expand...


Talk about automatic bias.


----------



## Humanity

Shusha said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh dear... Here we go AGAIN...
> 
> Just so we can make sure we/YOU aren't moving the goalposts again...
> 
> You said that my adopted country applies different laws to me by definition.
> 
> I told you that the laws applied to me are exactly the same as those of the 'native' peoples of my adopted country.
> 
> Which part of that do you not understand?
> 
> What ever you are banging on about "normalization" really has nothing to the laws that apply to me or natives!
> 
> I sense a serious degree of squirming and utter bullshit coming from you!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you a national of your adopted country?  Or a permanent resident?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Define your meaning for both before I respond please.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Typical definition is a two fold relationship where you have obligations to your country of nationality  AND you can avail yourself of the protection of your country of nationality.
> 
> Permanent residency implies a nationality (with above obligations and protections) outside the state in which you happen to be living. You have already said you have dual citizenship so my assumption is that you have two nationalities and are living in one of them. Alternatively you could have two nationalities and be living in a third country.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> To be honest, in my adopted country, it matters not whether you are a "national" or "permanent resident". Both are treated equally.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Probably not true. In Canada, where permanent residents have full access to all the services the government offers, such as medical care, education, etc, they are not permitted to vote, run for government office, etc.  So they are not "equal".
> 
> The nationals have additional privileges and obligations that residents do not have. Do you think that is wrong?  In Canada?
Click to expand...


Well, poor you in Canada!

Here I have the vote, can run for president should I wish!

So, yes Shusha, it IS true!


----------



## Humanity

Sixties Fan said:


> South African President Jacob Zuma vows to transform the economy by involving more black business people sidelined for years by the oppressive apartheid regime that ended in 1994.



Amazing how, when shown facts, you start mumbling and dribbling from the corner of you mouth and then contradict your earlier comment!

Hilarious!


----------



## Shusha

Humanity said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Are you a national of your adopted country?  Or a permanent resident?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Define your meaning for both before I respond please.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Typical definition is a two fold relationship where you have obligations to your country of nationality  AND you can avail yourself of the protection of your country of nationality.
> 
> Permanent residency implies a nationality (with above obligations and protections) outside the state in which you happen to be living. You have already said you have dual citizenship so my assumption is that you have two nationalities and are living in one of them. Alternatively you could have two nationalities and be living in a third country.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> To be honest, in my adopted country, it matters not whether you are a "national" or "permanent resident". Both are treated equally.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Probably not true. In Canada, where permanent residents have full access to all the services the government offers, such as medical care, education, etc, they are not permitted to vote, run for government office, etc.  So they are not "equal".
> 
> The nationals have additional privileges and obligations that residents do not have. Do you think that is wrong?  In Canada?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well, poor you in Canada!
> 
> Here I have the vote, can run for president should I wish!
> 
> So, yes Shusha, it IS true!
Click to expand...



So you are a national of two different countries and live in a third country where you are not a national but a permanent resident?


----------



## Humanity

Shusha said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> Define your meaning for both before I respond please.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Typical definition is a two fold relationship where you have obligations to your country of nationality  AND you can avail yourself of the protection of your country of nationality.
> 
> Permanent residency implies a nationality (with above obligations and protections) outside the state in which you happen to be living. You have already said you have dual citizenship so my assumption is that you have two nationalities and are living in one of them. Alternatively you could have two nationalities and be living in a third country.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> To be honest, in my adopted country, it matters not whether you are a "national" or "permanent resident". Both are treated equally.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Probably not true. In Canada, where permanent residents have full access to all the services the government offers, such as medical care, education, etc, they are not permitted to vote, run for government office, etc.  So they are not "equal".
> 
> The nationals have additional privileges and obligations that residents do not have. Do you think that is wrong?  In Canada?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well, poor you in Canada!
> 
> Here I have the vote, can run for president should I wish!
> 
> So, yes Shusha, it IS true!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> So you are a national of two different countries and live in a third country where you are not a national but a permanent resident?
Click to expand...


As I have stated, I live in a country that is not my birth country. Whether I am a "national" or "permanent resident" has NO restriction on my status. I have the exact same, EXACT same rights and laws applied to me as someone born in this country.


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> admonit said:
> 
> 
> 
> 70 years after the establishment of a Jewish state was declared, now it became a basic (constitutional) law.
> 
> The full text of the law:
> 
> *Basic Law: Israel as the Nation State of the Jewish People*
> 
> *1 — Basic principles*
> 
> A. The land of Israel is the historical homeland of the Jewish people, in which the State of Israel was established.
> 
> B. The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people, in which it fulfills its natural, cultural, religious and historical right to self-determination.
> 
> C. The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Israel is unique to the Jewish people.
> 
> *2 — The symbols of the state*
> 
> A. The name of the state is “Israel.”
> 
> B. The state flag is white with two blue stripes near the edges and a blue Star of David in the center.
> 
> C. The state emblem is a seven-branched menorah with olive leaves on both sides and the word “Israel” beneath it.
> 
> D. The state anthem is “Hatikvah.”
> 
> E. Details regarding state symbols will be determined by the law.
> 
> *3 — The capital of the state*
> 
> Jerusalem, complete and united, is the capital of Israel.
> 
> *4 — Language*
> 
> A. The state’s language is Hebrew.
> 
> B. The Arabic language has a special status in the state; Regulating the use of Arabic in state institutions or by them will be set in law.
> 
> C. This clause does not harm the status given to the Arabic language before this law came into effect.
> 
> *5 — Ingathering of the exiles*
> 
> The state will be open for Jewish immigration and the ingathering of exiles
> 
> *6 — Connection to the Jewish people*
> 
> A. The state will strive to ensure the safety of the members of the Jewish people in trouble or in captivity due to the fact of their Jewishness or their citizenship.
> 
> B. The state shall act within the Diaspora to strengthen the affinity between the state and members of the Jewish people.
> 
> C. The state shall act to preserve the cultural, historical and religious heritage of the Jewish people among Jews in the Diaspora.
> 
> *7 — Jewish settlement*
> 
> A. The state views the development of Jewish settlement as a national value and will act to encourage and promote its establishment and consolidation.
> 
> *8 — Official calendar*
> 
> The Hebrew calendar is the official calendar of the state and alongside it the Gregorian calendar will be used as an official calendar. Use of  the Hebrew calendar and the Gregorian calendar will be determined by law.
> 
> *9 — Independence Day and memorial days*
> 
> A. Independence Day is the official national holiday of the state.
> 
> B. Memorial Day for the Fallen in Israel’s Wars and Holocaust and Heroism Remembrance Day are official memorial days of the State.
> 
> *10 — Days of rest and sabbath*
> 
> The Sabbath and the festivals of Israel are the established days of rest in the state; Non-Jews have a right to maintain days of rest on their Sabbaths and festivals; Details of this issue will be determined by law.
> 
> *11 — Immutability*
> 
> This Basic Law shall not be amended, unless by another Basic Law passed by a majority of Knesset members.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am going to refer back to the OP...because I want to point out something which I think does make this basic law different than those constitutions of other countries with multi ethnic populations.
> 
> In Part 1, A and B I totally agree with, nothing wrong there, other nations do that.  C is problematic to me because It states that this national Right is unique to Jewish people in Israel.  Why is this needed given that A and B already enshrine the importance of Jewish people and culture to the state?
> 
> It is this particular clause that makes it markedly different then say Slovenia, which you used as an example:
> 
> _...the fundamental and permanent right of the Slovene *nation* to self-determination; and from the historical fact that in a centuries-long struggle for national liberation *we Slovenes have established our national identity and asserted our statehood.*_
> 
> It does not claim that this national right is unique to only Slovenes.  It refers not to a people but a nation albeit Slovene.  I think distinctions matter, one is inclusive (theoretically) the other is exclusive and very specifically in who among its people’s has national rights and self determination.  I think if this part had been left out, critics would not had much to stand on.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I think you are trying to make a distinction where there is none.
> 
> So you think that the Slovene declaration means that the Russian minority in Slovenia should have national rights in Slovenia?
> 
> You would have no problem with the declaration wording being:  ... the fundamental and permanent right of the Jewish nation to self-determination and from the historical fact of a millennia long struggle for national liberation,  we Jews have established our national identity and asserted our Statehood.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> _The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Israel is unique to the Jewish people_.
> 
> I think it is an important distiction to those who are excluded - the Israeli law explicitely states who is included in that national right.  The Slovenian law doesn't.
> 
> The second statement has the potential to include more than just Jews under the "Jewish nation".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think it's important to clarify what we are arguing here.
> 
> No one is arguing against the individual rights of anybody.
> 
> And no one is arguing against the collective rights of each national peoples. (Well, no one on the Israeli side anyway).
> 
> What we are arguing is that the Jewish people have collective national rights (self-determination, sovereignty, cultural expression) in Israel. Arab Palestinians have collective national rights in "Palestine" (and also in Jordan and also in Syria).
> 
> So there is no removal or denial of rights going in here (Well, on the Israeli side anyway).
> 
> It may help to think of national rights as being LIMITED by territory. People can only have national rights in the local territory where they had their cultural genesis. Everyone has collective, cultural, national rights. But those rights can only be exercised in limited territory. Thus the Scots people can not have a Scotland in Europe and another one in Africa and another one in Asia and another one off the coast of Australia. (This IS the essence of indigenous rights over colonization).
Click to expand...

What you are arguing is ONLY Jewish people have national rights in Israel.  There is a difference between saying Jewish people have national rights in Israel and saying national rights in Israel are UNIQUE to the Jewish people.


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> admonit said:
> 
> 
> 
> 70 years after the establishment of a Jewish state was declared, now it became a basic (constitutional) law.
> 
> The full text of the law:
> 
> *Basic Law: Israel as the Nation State of the Jewish People*
> 
> *1 — Basic principles*
> 
> A. The land of Israel is the historical homeland of the Jewish people, in which the State of Israel was established.
> 
> B. The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people, in which it fulfills its natural, cultural, religious and historical right to self-determination.
> 
> C. The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Israel is unique to the Jewish people.
> 
> *2 — The symbols of the state*
> 
> A. The name of the state is “Israel.”
> 
> B. The state flag is white with two blue stripes near the edges and a blue Star of David in the center.
> 
> C. The state emblem is a seven-branched menorah with olive leaves on both sides and the word “Israel” beneath it.
> 
> D. The state anthem is “Hatikvah.”
> 
> E. Details regarding state symbols will be determined by the law.
> 
> *3 — The capital of the state*
> 
> Jerusalem, complete and united, is the capital of Israel.
> 
> *4 — Language*
> 
> A. The state’s language is Hebrew.
> 
> B. The Arabic language has a special status in the state; Regulating the use of Arabic in state institutions or by them will be set in law.
> 
> C. This clause does not harm the status given to the Arabic language before this law came into effect.
> 
> *5 — Ingathering of the exiles*
> 
> The state will be open for Jewish immigration and the ingathering of exiles
> 
> *6 — Connection to the Jewish people*
> 
> A. The state will strive to ensure the safety of the members of the Jewish people in trouble or in captivity due to the fact of their Jewishness or their citizenship.
> 
> B. The state shall act within the Diaspora to strengthen the affinity between the state and members of the Jewish people.
> 
> C. The state shall act to preserve the cultural, historical and religious heritage of the Jewish people among Jews in the Diaspora.
> 
> *7 — Jewish settlement*
> 
> A. The state views the development of Jewish settlement as a national value and will act to encourage and promote its establishment and consolidation.
> 
> *8 — Official calendar*
> 
> The Hebrew calendar is the official calendar of the state and alongside it the Gregorian calendar will be used as an official calendar. Use of  the Hebrew calendar and the Gregorian calendar will be determined by law.
> 
> *9 — Independence Day and memorial days*
> 
> A. Independence Day is the official national holiday of the state.
> 
> B. Memorial Day for the Fallen in Israel’s Wars and Holocaust and Heroism Remembrance Day are official memorial days of the State.
> 
> *10 — Days of rest and sabbath*
> 
> The Sabbath and the festivals of Israel are the established days of rest in the state; Non-Jews have a right to maintain days of rest on their Sabbaths and festivals; Details of this issue will be determined by law.
> 
> *11 — Immutability*
> 
> This Basic Law shall not be amended, unless by another Basic Law passed by a majority of Knesset members.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am going to refer back to the OP...because I want to point out something which I think does make this basic law different than those constitutions of other countries with multi ethnic populations.
> 
> In Part 1, A and B I totally agree with, nothing wrong there, other nations do that.  C is problematic to me because It states that this national Right is unique to Jewish people in Israel.  Why is this needed given that A and B already enshrine the importance of Jewish people and culture to the state?
> 
> It is this particular clause that makes it markedly different then say Slovenia, which you used as an example:
> 
> _...the fundamental and permanent right of the Slovene *nation* to self-determination; and from the historical fact that in a centuries-long struggle for national liberation *we Slovenes have established our national identity and asserted our statehood.*_
> 
> It does not claim that this national right is unique to only Slovenes.  It refers not to a people but a nation albeit Slovene.  I think distinctions matter, one is inclusive (theoretically) the other is exclusive and very specifically in who among its people’s has national rights and self determination.  I think if this part had been left out, critics would not had much to stand on.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I think you are trying to make a distinction where there is none.
> 
> So you think that the Slovene declaration means that the Russian minority in Slovenia should have national rights in Slovenia?
> 
> You would have no problem with the declaration wording being:  ... the fundamental and permanent right of the Jewish nation to self-determination and from the historical fact of a millennia long struggle for national liberation,  we Jews have established our national identity and asserted our Statehood.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> _The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Israel is unique to the Jewish people_.
> 
> I think it is an important distiction to those who are excluded - the Israeli law explicitely states who is included in that national right.  The Slovenian law doesn't.
> 
> The second statement has the potential to include more than just Jews under the "Jewish nation".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> The second statement says explicitly, "we Slovenes" and you somehow take that to mean we Slovenes and those Russians who live here too. Yet when The Jewish people say, "we Jews" you take it to mean not only JUST the JEWS but also extend it to mean that even the rights of individuals are affected.
> 
> Why doesn't "we Jews" mean the same to you as "we Slovenes"?  I think your answer is going to be that the Jews write it explicitly.  Why do you think the Jewish people felt it necessary to write it explicitly?
Click to expand...


Because they are not saying we Jews.


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh dear... Here we go AGAIN...
> 
> Just so we can make sure we/YOU aren't moving the goalposts again...
> 
> You said that my adopted country applies different laws to me by definition.
> 
> I told you that the laws applied to me are exactly the same as those of the 'native' peoples of my adopted country.
> 
> Which part of that do you not understand?
> 
> What ever you are banging on about "normalization" really has nothing to the laws that apply to me or natives!
> 
> I sense a serious degree of squirming and utter bullshit coming from you!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you a national of your adopted country?  Or a permanent resident?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Define your meaning for both before I respond please.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Typical definition is a two fold relationship where you have obligations to your country of nationality  AND you can avail yourself of the protection of your country of nationality.
> 
> Permanent residency implies a nationality (with above obligations and protections) outside the state in which you happen to be living. You have already said you have dual citizenship so my assumption is that you have two nationalities and are living in one of them. Alternatively you could have two nationalities and be living in a third country.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> To be honest, in my adopted country, it matters not whether you are a "national" or "permanent resident". Both are treated equally.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Probably not true. In Canada, where permanent residents have full access to all the services the government offers, such as medical care, education, etc, they are not permitted to vote, run for government office, etc.  So they are not "equal".
> 
> The nationals have additional privileges and obligations that residents do not have. Do you think that is wrong?  In Canada?
Click to expand...

Nationals are citizens right? Permanent residents are not.


----------



## rylah

Humanity said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Humanity said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Typical definition is a two fold relationship where you have obligations to your country of nationality  AND you can avail yourself of the protection of your country of nationality.
> 
> Permanent residency implies a nationality (with above obligations and protections) outside the state in which you happen to be living. You have already said you have dual citizenship so my assumption is that you have two nationalities and are living in one of them. Alternatively you could have two nationalities and be living in a third country.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> To be honest, in my adopted country, it matters not whether you are a "national" or "permanent resident". Both are treated equally.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Probably not true. In Canada, where permanent residents have full access to all the services the government offers, such as medical care, education, etc, they are not permitted to vote, run for government office, etc.  So they are not "equal".
> 
> The nationals have additional privileges and obligations that residents do not have. Do you think that is wrong?  In Canada?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well, poor you in Canada!
> 
> Here I have the vote, can run for president should I wish!
> 
> So, yes Shusha, it IS true!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> So you are a national of two different countries and live in a third country where you are not a national but a permanent resident?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> As I have stated, I live in a country that is not my birth country. Whether I am a "national" or "permanent resident" has NO restriction on my status. I have the exact same, EXACT same rights and laws applied to me as someone born in this country.
Click to expand...


Are You now saying that there's a country in which a non-citizen during a naturalization process can vote and get into office?

Show me that country.


----------



## rylah

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> admonit said:
> 
> 
> 
> 70 years after the establishment of a Jewish state was declared, now it became a basic (constitutional) law.
> 
> The full text of the law:
> 
> *Basic Law: Israel as the Nation State of the Jewish People*
> 
> *1 — Basic principles*
> 
> A. The land of Israel is the historical homeland of the Jewish people, in which the State of Israel was established.
> 
> B. The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people, in which it fulfills its natural, cultural, religious and historical right to self-determination.
> 
> C. The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Israel is unique to the Jewish people.
> 
> *2 — The symbols of the state*
> 
> A. The name of the state is “Israel.”
> 
> B. The state flag is white with two blue stripes near the edges and a blue Star of David in the center.
> 
> C. The state emblem is a seven-branched menorah with olive leaves on both sides and the word “Israel” beneath it.
> 
> D. The state anthem is “Hatikvah.”
> 
> E. Details regarding state symbols will be determined by the law.
> 
> *3 — The capital of the state*
> 
> Jerusalem, complete and united, is the capital of Israel.
> 
> *4 — Language*
> 
> A. The state’s language is Hebrew.
> 
> B. The Arabic language has a special status in the state; Regulating the use of Arabic in state institutions or by them will be set in law.
> 
> C. This clause does not harm the status given to the Arabic language before this law came into effect.
> 
> *5 — Ingathering of the exiles*
> 
> The state will be open for Jewish immigration and the ingathering of exiles
> 
> *6 — Connection to the Jewish people*
> 
> A. The state will strive to ensure the safety of the members of the Jewish people in trouble or in captivity due to the fact of their Jewishness or their citizenship.
> 
> B. The state shall act within the Diaspora to strengthen the affinity between the state and members of the Jewish people.
> 
> C. The state shall act to preserve the cultural, historical and religious heritage of the Jewish people among Jews in the Diaspora.
> 
> *7 — Jewish settlement*
> 
> A. The state views the development of Jewish settlement as a national value and will act to encourage and promote its establishment and consolidation.
> 
> *8 — Official calendar*
> 
> The Hebrew calendar is the official calendar of the state and alongside it the Gregorian calendar will be used as an official calendar. Use of  the Hebrew calendar and the Gregorian calendar will be determined by law.
> 
> *9 — Independence Day and memorial days*
> 
> A. Independence Day is the official national holiday of the state.
> 
> B. Memorial Day for the Fallen in Israel’s Wars and Holocaust and Heroism Remembrance Day are official memorial days of the State.
> 
> *10 — Days of rest and sabbath*
> 
> The Sabbath and the festivals of Israel are the established days of rest in the state; Non-Jews have a right to maintain days of rest on their Sabbaths and festivals; Details of this issue will be determined by law.
> 
> *11 — Immutability*
> 
> This Basic Law shall not be amended, unless by another Basic Law passed by a majority of Knesset members.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am going to refer back to the OP...because I want to point out something which I think does make this basic law different than those constitutions of other countries with multi ethnic populations.
> 
> In Part 1, A and B I totally agree with, nothing wrong there, other nations do that.  C is problematic to me because It states that this national Right is unique to Jewish people in Israel.  Why is this needed given that A and B already enshrine the importance of Jewish people and culture to the state?
> 
> It is this particular clause that makes it markedly different then say Slovenia, which you used as an example:
> 
> _...the fundamental and permanent right of the Slovene *nation* to self-determination; and from the historical fact that in a centuries-long struggle for national liberation *we Slovenes have established our national identity and asserted our statehood.*_
> 
> It does not claim that this national right is unique to only Slovenes.  It refers not to a people but a nation albeit Slovene.  I think distinctions matter, one is inclusive (theoretically) the other is exclusive and very specifically in who among its people’s has national rights and self determination.  I think if this part had been left out, critics would not had much to stand on.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I think you are trying to make a distinction where there is none.
> 
> So you think that the Slovene declaration means that the Russian minority in Slovenia should have national rights in Slovenia?
> 
> You would have no problem with the declaration wording being:  ... the fundamental and permanent right of the Jewish nation to self-determination and from the historical fact of a millennia long struggle for national liberation,  we Jews have established our national identity and asserted our Statehood.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> _The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Israel is unique to the Jewish people_.
> 
> I think it is an important distiction to those who are excluded - the Israeli law explicitely states who is included in that national right.  The Slovenian law doesn't.
> 
> The second statement has the potential to include more than just Jews under the "Jewish nation".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> The second statement says explicitly, "we Slovenes" and you somehow take that to mean we Slovenes and those Russians who live here too. Yet when The Jewish people say, "we Jews" you take it to mean not only JUST the JEWS but also extend it to mean that even the rights of individuals are affected.
> 
> Why doesn't "we Jews" mean the same to you as "we Slovenes"?  I think your answer is going to be that the Jews write it explicitly.  Why do you think the Jewish people felt it necessary to write it explicitly?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because they are not saying we Jews.
Click to expand...


Now You're advocating for a more exclusive language than the one You criticize.


----------



## rylah

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> admonit said:
> 
> 
> 
> 70 years after the establishment of a Jewish state was declared, now it became a basic (constitutional) law.
> 
> The full text of the law:
> 
> *Basic Law: Israel as the Nation State of the Jewish People*
> 
> *1 — Basic principles*
> 
> A. The land of Israel is the historical homeland of the Jewish people, in which the State of Israel was established.
> 
> B. The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people, in which it fulfills its natural, cultural, religious and historical right to self-determination.
> 
> C. The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Israel is unique to the Jewish people.
> 
> *2 — The symbols of the state*
> 
> A. The name of the state is “Israel.”
> 
> B. The state flag is white with two blue stripes near the edges and a blue Star of David in the center.
> 
> C. The state emblem is a seven-branched menorah with olive leaves on both sides and the word “Israel” beneath it.
> 
> D. The state anthem is “Hatikvah.”
> 
> E. Details regarding state symbols will be determined by the law.
> 
> *3 — The capital of the state*
> 
> Jerusalem, complete and united, is the capital of Israel.
> 
> *4 — Language*
> 
> A. The state’s language is Hebrew.
> 
> B. The Arabic language has a special status in the state; Regulating the use of Arabic in state institutions or by them will be set in law.
> 
> C. This clause does not harm the status given to the Arabic language before this law came into effect.
> 
> *5 — Ingathering of the exiles*
> 
> The state will be open for Jewish immigration and the ingathering of exiles
> 
> *6 — Connection to the Jewish people*
> 
> A. The state will strive to ensure the safety of the members of the Jewish people in trouble or in captivity due to the fact of their Jewishness or their citizenship.
> 
> B. The state shall act within the Diaspora to strengthen the affinity between the state and members of the Jewish people.
> 
> C. The state shall act to preserve the cultural, historical and religious heritage of the Jewish people among Jews in the Diaspora.
> 
> *7 — Jewish settlement*
> 
> A. The state views the development of Jewish settlement as a national value and will act to encourage and promote its establishment and consolidation.
> 
> *8 — Official calendar*
> 
> The Hebrew calendar is the official calendar of the state and alongside it the Gregorian calendar will be used as an official calendar. Use of  the Hebrew calendar and the Gregorian calendar will be determined by law.
> 
> *9 — Independence Day and memorial days*
> 
> A. Independence Day is the official national holiday of the state.
> 
> B. Memorial Day for the Fallen in Israel’s Wars and Holocaust and Heroism Remembrance Day are official memorial days of the State.
> 
> *10 — Days of rest and sabbath*
> 
> The Sabbath and the festivals of Israel are the established days of rest in the state; Non-Jews have a right to maintain days of rest on their Sabbaths and festivals; Details of this issue will be determined by law.
> 
> *11 — Immutability*
> 
> This Basic Law shall not be amended, unless by another Basic Law passed by a majority of Knesset members.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am going to refer back to the OP...because I want to point out something which I think does make this basic law different than those constitutions of other countries with multi ethnic populations.
> 
> In Part 1, A and B I totally agree with, nothing wrong there, other nations do that.  C is problematic to me because It states that this national Right is unique to Jewish people in Israel.  Why is this needed given that A and B already enshrine the importance of Jewish people and culture to the state?
> 
> It is this particular clause that makes it markedly different then say Slovenia, which you used as an example:
> 
> _...the fundamental and permanent right of the Slovene *nation* to self-determination; and from the historical fact that in a centuries-long struggle for national liberation *we Slovenes have established our national identity and asserted our statehood.*_
> 
> It does not claim that this national right is unique to only Slovenes.  It refers not to a people but a nation albeit Slovene.  I think distinctions matter, one is inclusive (theoretically) the other is exclusive and very specifically in who among its people’s has national rights and self determination.  I think if this part had been left out, critics would not had much to stand on.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I think you are trying to make a distinction where there is none.
> 
> So you think that the Slovene declaration means that the Russian minority in Slovenia should have national rights in Slovenia?
> 
> You would have no problem with the declaration wording being:  ... the fundamental and permanent right of the Jewish nation to self-determination and from the historical fact of a millennia long struggle for national liberation,  we Jews have established our national identity and asserted our Statehood.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> _The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Israel is unique to the Jewish people_.
> 
> I think it is an important distiction to those who are excluded - the Israeli law explicitely states who is included in that national right.  The Slovenian law doesn't.
> 
> The second statement has the potential to include more than just Jews under the "Jewish nation".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think it's important to clarify what we are arguing here.
> 
> No one is arguing against the individual rights of anybody.
> 
> And no one is arguing against the collective rights of each national peoples. (Well, no one on the Israeli side anyway).
> 
> What we are arguing is that the Jewish people have collective national rights (self-determination, sovereignty, cultural expression) in Israel. Arab Palestinians have collective national rights in "Palestine" (and also in Jordan and also in Syria).
> 
> So there is no removal or denial of rights going in here (Well, on the Israeli side anyway).
> 
> It may help to think of national rights as being LIMITED by territory. People can only have national rights in the local territory where they had their cultural genesis. Everyone has collective, cultural, national rights. But those rights can only be exercised in limited territory. Thus the Scots people can not have a Scotland in Europe and another one in Africa and another one in Asia and another one off the coast of Australia. (This IS the essence of indigenous rights over colonization).
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What you are arguing is ONLY Jewish people have national rights in Israel.  There is a difference between saying Jewish people have national rights in Israel and saying national rights in Israel are UNIQUE to the Jewish people.
Click to expand...


The problem with the word is the one in the law has a different meaning and connotation.
'Exclusive' was specifically not used neither in Hebrew nor in English; unique' is none discriminatory and more in hand with the paragraph's historic context.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> admonit said:
> 
> 
> 
> 70 years after the establishment of a Jewish state was declared, now it became a basic (constitutional) law.
> 
> The full text of the law:
> 
> *Basic Law: Israel as the Nation State of the Jewish People*
> 
> *1 — Basic principles*
> 
> A. The land of Israel is the historical homeland of the Jewish people, in which the State of Israel was established.
> 
> B. The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people, in which it fulfills its natural, cultural, religious and historical right to self-determination.
> 
> C. The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Israel is unique to the Jewish people.
> 
> *2 — The symbols of the state*
> 
> A. The name of the state is “Israel.”
> 
> B. The state flag is white with two blue stripes near the edges and a blue Star of David in the center.
> 
> C. The state emblem is a seven-branched menorah with olive leaves on both sides and the word “Israel” beneath it.
> 
> D. The state anthem is “Hatikvah.”
> 
> E. Details regarding state symbols will be determined by the law.
> 
> *3 — The capital of the state*
> 
> Jerusalem, complete and united, is the capital of Israel.
> 
> *4 — Language*
> 
> A. The state’s language is Hebrew.
> 
> B. The Arabic language has a special status in the state; Regulating the use of Arabic in state institutions or by them will be set in law.
> 
> C. This clause does not harm the status given to the Arabic language before this law came into effect.
> 
> *5 — Ingathering of the exiles*
> 
> The state will be open for Jewish immigration and the ingathering of exiles
> 
> *6 — Connection to the Jewish people*
> 
> A. The state will strive to ensure the safety of the members of the Jewish people in trouble or in captivity due to the fact of their Jewishness or their citizenship.
> 
> B. The state shall act within the Diaspora to strengthen the affinity between the state and members of the Jewish people.
> 
> C. The state shall act to preserve the cultural, historical and religious heritage of the Jewish people among Jews in the Diaspora.
> 
> *7 — Jewish settlement*
> 
> A. The state views the development of Jewish settlement as a national value and will act to encourage and promote its establishment and consolidation.
> 
> *8 — Official calendar*
> 
> The Hebrew calendar is the official calendar of the state and alongside it the Gregorian calendar will be used as an official calendar. Use of  the Hebrew calendar and the Gregorian calendar will be determined by law.
> 
> *9 — Independence Day and memorial days*
> 
> A. Independence Day is the official national holiday of the state.
> 
> B. Memorial Day for the Fallen in Israel’s Wars and Holocaust and Heroism Remembrance Day are official memorial days of the State.
> 
> *10 — Days of rest and sabbath*
> 
> The Sabbath and the festivals of Israel are the established days of rest in the state; Non-Jews have a right to maintain days of rest on their Sabbaths and festivals; Details of this issue will be determined by law.
> 
> *11 — Immutability*
> 
> This Basic Law shall not be amended, unless by another Basic Law passed by a majority of Knesset members.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am going to refer back to the OP...because I want to point out something which I think does make this basic law different than those constitutions of other countries with multi ethnic populations.
> 
> In Part 1, A and B I totally agree with, nothing wrong there, other nations do that.  C is problematic to me because It states that this national Right is unique to Jewish people in Israel.  Why is this needed given that A and B already enshrine the importance of Jewish people and culture to the state?
> 
> It is this particular clause that makes it markedly different then say Slovenia, which you used as an example:
> 
> _...the fundamental and permanent right of the Slovene *nation* to self-determination; and from the historical fact that in a centuries-long struggle for national liberation *we Slovenes have established our national identity and asserted our statehood.*_
> 
> It does not claim that this national right is unique to only Slovenes.  It refers not to a people but a nation albeit Slovene.  I think distinctions matter, one is inclusive (theoretically) the other is exclusive and very specifically in who among its people’s has national rights and self determination.  I think if this part had been left out, critics would not had much to stand on.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I think you are trying to make a distinction where there is none.
> 
> So you think that the Slovene declaration means that the Russian minority in Slovenia should have national rights in Slovenia?
> 
> You would have no problem with the declaration wording being:  ... the fundamental and permanent right of the Jewish nation to self-determination and from the historical fact of a millennia long struggle for national liberation,  we Jews have established our national identity and asserted our Statehood.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> _The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Israel is unique to the Jewish people_.
> 
> I think it is an important distiction to those who are excluded - the Israeli law explicitely states who is included in that national right.  The Slovenian law doesn't.
> 
> The second statement has the potential to include more than just Jews under the "Jewish nation".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think it's important to clarify what we are arguing here.
> 
> No one is arguing against the individual rights of anybody.
> 
> And no one is arguing against the collective rights of each national peoples. (Well, no one on the Israeli side anyway).
> 
> What we are arguing is that the Jewish people have collective national rights (self-determination, sovereignty, cultural expression) in Israel. Arab Palestinians have collective national rights in "Palestine" (and also in Jordan and also in Syria).
> 
> So there is no removal or denial of rights going in here (Well, on the Israeli side anyway).
> 
> It may help to think of national rights as being LIMITED by territory. People can only have national rights in the local territory where they had their cultural genesis. Everyone has collective, cultural, national rights. But those rights can only be exercised in limited territory. Thus the Scots people can not have a Scotland in Europe and another one in Africa and another one in Asia and another one off the coast of Australia. (This IS the essence of indigenous rights over colonization).
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What you are arguing is ONLY Jewish people have national rights in Israel.  There is a difference between saying Jewish people have national rights in Israel and saying national rights in Israel are UNIQUE to the Jewish people.
Click to expand...



I'm not clear what the difference would be.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> admonit said:
> 
> 
> 
> 70 years after the establishment of a Jewish state was declared, now it became a basic (constitutional) law.
> 
> The full text of the law:
> 
> *Basic Law: Israel as the Nation State of the Jewish People*
> 
> *1 — Basic principles*
> 
> A. The land of Israel is the historical homeland of the Jewish people, in which the State of Israel was established.
> 
> B. The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people, in which it fulfills its natural, cultural, religious and historical right to self-determination.
> 
> C. The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Israel is unique to the Jewish people.
> 
> *2 — The symbols of the state*
> 
> A. The name of the state is “Israel.”
> 
> B. The state flag is white with two blue stripes near the edges and a blue Star of David in the center.
> 
> C. The state emblem is a seven-branched menorah with olive leaves on both sides and the word “Israel” beneath it.
> 
> D. The state anthem is “Hatikvah.”
> 
> E. Details regarding state symbols will be determined by the law.
> 
> *3 — The capital of the state*
> 
> Jerusalem, complete and united, is the capital of Israel.
> 
> *4 — Language*
> 
> A. The state’s language is Hebrew.
> 
> B. The Arabic language has a special status in the state; Regulating the use of Arabic in state institutions or by them will be set in law.
> 
> C. This clause does not harm the status given to the Arabic language before this law came into effect.
> 
> *5 — Ingathering of the exiles*
> 
> The state will be open for Jewish immigration and the ingathering of exiles
> 
> *6 — Connection to the Jewish people*
> 
> A. The state will strive to ensure the safety of the members of the Jewish people in trouble or in captivity due to the fact of their Jewishness or their citizenship.
> 
> B. The state shall act within the Diaspora to strengthen the affinity between the state and members of the Jewish people.
> 
> C. The state shall act to preserve the cultural, historical and religious heritage of the Jewish people among Jews in the Diaspora.
> 
> *7 — Jewish settlement*
> 
> A. The state views the development of Jewish settlement as a national value and will act to encourage and promote its establishment and consolidation.
> 
> *8 — Official calendar*
> 
> The Hebrew calendar is the official calendar of the state and alongside it the Gregorian calendar will be used as an official calendar. Use of  the Hebrew calendar and the Gregorian calendar will be determined by law.
> 
> *9 — Independence Day and memorial days*
> 
> A. Independence Day is the official national holiday of the state.
> 
> B. Memorial Day for the Fallen in Israel’s Wars and Holocaust and Heroism Remembrance Day are official memorial days of the State.
> 
> *10 — Days of rest and sabbath*
> 
> The Sabbath and the festivals of Israel are the established days of rest in the state; Non-Jews have a right to maintain days of rest on their Sabbaths and festivals; Details of this issue will be determined by law.
> 
> *11 — Immutability*
> 
> This Basic Law shall not be amended, unless by another Basic Law passed by a majority of Knesset members.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am going to refer back to the OP...because I want to point out something which I think does make this basic law different than those constitutions of other countries with multi ethnic populations.
> 
> In Part 1, A and B I totally agree with, nothing wrong there, other nations do that.  C is problematic to me because It states that this national Right is unique to Jewish people in Israel.  Why is this needed given that A and B already enshrine the importance of Jewish people and culture to the state?
> 
> It is this particular clause that makes it markedly different then say Slovenia, which you used as an example:
> 
> _...the fundamental and permanent right of the Slovene *nation* to self-determination; and from the historical fact that in a centuries-long struggle for national liberation *we Slovenes have established our national identity and asserted our statehood.*_
> 
> It does not claim that this national right is unique to only Slovenes.  It refers not to a people but a nation albeit Slovene.  I think distinctions matter, one is inclusive (theoretically) the other is exclusive and very specifically in who among its people’s has national rights and self determination.  I think if this part had been left out, critics would not had much to stand on.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I think you are trying to make a distinction where there is none.
> 
> So you think that the Slovene declaration means that the Russian minority in Slovenia should have national rights in Slovenia?
> 
> You would have no problem with the declaration wording being:  ... the fundamental and permanent right of the Jewish nation to self-determination and from the historical fact of a millennia long struggle for national liberation,  we Jews have established our national identity and asserted our Statehood.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> _The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Israel is unique to the Jewish people_.
> 
> I think it is an important distiction to those who are excluded - the Israeli law explicitely states who is included in that national right.  The Slovenian law doesn't.
> 
> The second statement has the potential to include more than just Jews under the "Jewish nation".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> The second statement says explicitly, "we Slovenes" and you somehow take that to mean we Slovenes and those Russians who live here too. Yet when The Jewish people say, "we Jews" you take it to mean not only JUST the JEWS but also extend it to mean that even the rights of individuals are affected.
> 
> Why doesn't "we Jews" mean the same to you as "we Slovenes"?  I think your answer is going to be that the Jews write it explicitly.  Why do you think the Jewish people felt it necessary to write it explicitly?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because they are not saying we Jews.
Click to expand...


What are they saying?  How is it different?

If the Basic Law was written, "we Jews" instead of the Jewish people it would be okay?


----------



## Coyote

rylah said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I am going to refer back to the OP...because I want to point out something which I think does make this basic law different than those constitutions of other countries with multi ethnic populations.
> 
> In Part 1, A and B I totally agree with, nothing wrong there, other nations do that.  C is problematic to me because It states that this national Right is unique to Jewish people in Israel.  Why is this needed given that A and B already enshrine the importance of Jewish people and culture to the state?
> 
> It is this particular clause that makes it markedly different then say Slovenia, which you used as an example:
> 
> _...the fundamental and permanent right of the Slovene *nation* to self-determination; and from the historical fact that in a centuries-long struggle for national liberation *we Slovenes have established our national identity and asserted our statehood.*_
> 
> It does not claim that this national right is unique to only Slovenes.  It refers not to a people but a nation albeit Slovene.  I think distinctions matter, one is inclusive (theoretically) the other is exclusive and very specifically in who among its people’s has national rights and self determination.  I think if this part had been left out, critics would not had much to stand on.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think you are trying to make a distinction where there is none.
> 
> So you think that the Slovene declaration means that the Russian minority in Slovenia should have national rights in Slovenia?
> 
> You would have no problem with the declaration wording being:  ... the fundamental and permanent right of the Jewish nation to self-determination and from the historical fact of a millennia long struggle for national liberation,  we Jews have established our national identity and asserted our Statehood.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> _The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Israel is unique to the Jewish people_.
> 
> I think it is an important distiction to those who are excluded - the Israeli law explicitely states who is included in that national right.  The Slovenian law doesn't.
> 
> The second statement has the potential to include more than just Jews under the "Jewish nation".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> The second statement says explicitly, "we Slovenes" and you somehow take that to mean we Slovenes and those Russians who live here too. Yet when The Jewish people say, "we Jews" you take it to mean not only JUST the JEWS but also extend it to mean that even the rights of individuals are affected.
> 
> Why doesn't "we Jews" mean the same to you as "we Slovenes"?  I think your answer is going to be that the Jews write it explicitly.  Why do you think the Jewish people felt it necessary to write it explicitly?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because they are not saying we Jews.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Now You're advocating for a more exclusive language than the one You criticize.
Click to expand...

How?


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> I am going to refer back to the OP...because I want to point out something which I think does make this basic law different than those constitutions of other countries with multi ethnic populations.
> 
> In Part 1, A and B I totally agree with, nothing wrong there, other nations do that.  C is problematic to me because It states that this national Right is unique to Jewish people in Israel.  Why is this needed given that A and B already enshrine the importance of Jewish people and culture to the state?
> 
> It is this particular clause that makes it markedly different then say Slovenia, which you used as an example:
> 
> _...the fundamental and permanent right of the Slovene *nation* to self-determination; and from the historical fact that in a centuries-long struggle for national liberation *we Slovenes have established our national identity and asserted our statehood.*_
> 
> It does not claim that this national right is unique to only Slovenes.  It refers not to a people but a nation albeit Slovene.  I think distinctions matter, one is inclusive (theoretically) the other is exclusive and very specifically in who among its people’s has national rights and self determination.  I think if this part had been left out, critics would not had much to stand on.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think you are trying to make a distinction where there is none.
> 
> So you think that the Slovene declaration means that the Russian minority in Slovenia should have national rights in Slovenia?
> 
> You would have no problem with the declaration wording being:  ... the fundamental and permanent right of the Jewish nation to self-determination and from the historical fact of a millennia long struggle for national liberation,  we Jews have established our national identity and asserted our Statehood.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> _The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Israel is unique to the Jewish people_.
> 
> I think it is an important distiction to those who are excluded - the Israeli law explicitely states who is included in that national right.  The Slovenian law doesn't.
> 
> The second statement has the potential to include more than just Jews under the "Jewish nation".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> The second statement says explicitly, "we Slovenes" and you somehow take that to mean we Slovenes and those Russians who live here too. Yet when The Jewish people say, "we Jews" you take it to mean not only JUST the JEWS but also extend it to mean that even the rights of individuals are affected.
> 
> Why doesn't "we Jews" mean the same to you as "we Slovenes"?  I think your answer is going to be that the Jews write it explicitly.  Why do you think the Jewish people felt it necessary to write it explicitly?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because they are not saying we Jews.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What are they saying?  How is it different?
> 
> If the Basic Law was written, "we Jews" instead of the Jewish people it would be okay?
Click to expand...

No, the issue is "unique to"


----------



## Sixties Fan

Nu — So Israel Is not the Jewish State?


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think you are trying to make a distinction where there is none.
> 
> So you think that the Slovene declaration means that the Russian minority in Slovenia should have national rights in Slovenia?
> 
> You would have no problem with the declaration wording being:  ... the fundamental and permanent right of the Jewish nation to self-determination and from the historical fact of a millennia long struggle for national liberation,  we Jews have established our national identity and asserted our Statehood.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Israel is unique to the Jewish people_.
> 
> I think it is an important distiction to those who are excluded - the Israeli law explicitely states who is included in that national right.  The Slovenian law doesn't.
> 
> The second statement has the potential to include more than just Jews under the "Jewish nation".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> The second statement says explicitly, "we Slovenes" and you somehow take that to mean we Slovenes and those Russians who live here too. Yet when The Jewish people say, "we Jews" you take it to mean not only JUST the JEWS but also extend it to mean that even the rights of individuals are affected.
> 
> Why doesn't "we Jews" mean the same to you as "we Slovenes"?  I think your answer is going to be that the Jews write it explicitly.  Why do you think the Jewish people felt it necessary to write it explicitly?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because they are not saying we Jews.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What are they saying?  How is it different?
> 
> If the Basic Law was written, "we Jews" instead of the Jewish people it would be okay?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No, the issue is "unique to"
Click to expand...



I'm not understanding what you believe is different about "unique to" that is not the same as, say, "we Jews".


----------



## rylah

Coyote said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think you are trying to make a distinction where there is none.
> 
> So you think that the Slovene declaration means that the Russian minority in Slovenia should have national rights in Slovenia?
> 
> You would have no problem with the declaration wording being:  ... the fundamental and permanent right of the Jewish nation to self-determination and from the historical fact of a millennia long struggle for national liberation,  we Jews have established our national identity and asserted our Statehood.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Israel is unique to the Jewish people_.
> 
> I think it is an important distiction to those who are excluded - the Israeli law explicitely states who is included in that national right.  The Slovenian law doesn't.
> 
> The second statement has the potential to include more than just Jews under the "Jewish nation".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> The second statement says explicitly, "we Slovenes" and you somehow take that to mean we Slovenes and those Russians who live here too. Yet when The Jewish people say, "we Jews" you take it to mean not only JUST the JEWS but also extend it to mean that even the rights of individuals are affected.
> 
> Why doesn't "we Jews" mean the same to you as "we Slovenes"?  I think your answer is going to be that the Jews write it explicitly.  Why do you think the Jewish people felt it necessary to write it explicitly?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because they are not saying we Jews.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Now You're advocating for a more exclusive language than the one You criticize.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> How?
Click to expand...


Let's exaggerate the effect on the minorities, say each country had so much diverse population that it was something like the Russian federation. Compared to Russia, "We Slovene" sounds very uncomfortable for 2 reasons:

a. In Russia a citizen of any nationality or ethnicity is _"Rossiyanin", _Russian citizenship does not change one's ethnicity into Russian. In Slovenia it's "We Slovenes" the ethnicity.
b. Ethnic Russians, Ukrainians and Belarus are Slav people, their church is called "Pravo-Slavna", they've been calling themselves Slov*a*ne, and here they hear "We Slov*e*ni nation... our national identity", but Russians and Belarus are not given a vote in Slovenia for some reason.


----------



## Coyote

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> _The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Israel is unique to the Jewish people_.
> 
> I think it is an important distiction to those who are excluded - the Israeli law explicitely states who is included in that national right.  The Slovenian law doesn't.
> 
> The second statement has the potential to include more than just Jews under the "Jewish nation".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The second statement says explicitly, "we Slovenes" and you somehow take that to mean we Slovenes and those Russians who live here too. Yet when The Jewish people say, "we Jews" you take it to mean not only JUST the JEWS but also extend it to mean that even the rights of individuals are affected.
> 
> Why doesn't "we Jews" mean the same to you as "we Slovenes"?  I think your answer is going to be that the Jews write it explicitly.  Why do you think the Jewish people felt it necessary to write it explicitly?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Because they are not saying we Jews.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What are they saying?  How is it different?
> 
> If the Basic Law was written, "we Jews" instead of the Jewish people it would be okay?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No, the issue is "unique to"
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not understanding what you believe is different about "unique to" that is not the same as, say, "we Jews".
Click to expand...

We Jews doesnt exclude, it leaves open room for the others.  Saying unique shuts out anyone else definitively and without question.  It is unique to this one group only and no cirizen not of that group, but still a national is excluded.


----------



## Shusha

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> The second statement says explicitly, "we Slovenes" and you somehow take that to mean we Slovenes and those Russians who live here too. Yet when The Jewish people say, "we Jews" you take it to mean not only JUST the JEWS but also extend it to mean that even the rights of individuals are affected.
> 
> Why doesn't "we Jews" mean the same to you as "we Slovenes"?  I think your answer is going to be that the Jews write it explicitly.  Why do you think the Jewish people felt it necessary to write it explicitly?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Because they are not saying we Jews.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What are they saying?  How is it different?
> 
> If the Basic Law was written, "we Jews" instead of the Jewish people it would be okay?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No, the issue is "unique to"
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not understanding what you believe is different about "unique to" that is not the same as, say, "we Jews".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> We Jews doesnt exclude, it leaves open room for the others.  Saying unique shuts out anyone else definitively and without question.  It is unique to this one group only and no cirizen not of that group, but still a national is excluded.
Click to expand...



But "We Jews" defines who is included, therefore excluding anyone who is not in the defined group.  There is no difference in concept.


----------



## Sixties Fan

[ Arab citizens, and possibly some non citizens of Israel protesting that Israel is a Jewish State.
Shall we protest that all of the Arabian Peninsula is an Arab Nation territory? How about all other territories all the way to North Africa?  ]


During a demonstration by Arabs and left-wing activists against the Nationality Law held Saturday night in Rabin Square, the song "Where are the Millions?" was played.

Participants in the rally brandished PLO flags.

The song, by singer Julia Boutros, was popular in the Palestinian Authority during the so-called 'stabbing Intifada' of 2015, and encourages violence against Israelis.

_Palestinian Media Watch_ posted a a translated video of the song.

(full article online)

'Song of the Intifada' in Rabin Square


----------



## Sixties Fan

[ Who could be steering Arab Israelis against the National Basic Law????   Do we need to guess the reason? ]

"Over the past weekend, the committee on interaction with the Israeli public, a committee subordinate to the PLO - at the behest of Abu Mazen (Mahmoud Abbas) - was working to bring the Israeli Arab public to the demonstration on Saturday night in Tel Aviv," Yedid said. When asked what sources he relies on, he said, "I rely on conversations I have had with officials in Ramallah, and members of the Interaction Committee do not deny or confirm this. Moreover, it should be noted that telephone calls were made from the committee in the PLO building to left-wing organizations from Israel."

When asked whether there was any PA funding for the demonstration, Yedid replied: "I cannot point to funding or to the flags that have become the focus of the controversy, but mainly to the need to reach a large audience for a demonstration against the Nationality Law. One of them even remembered the demonstrations that took place at the time on Rothschild and told me that they died as soon as political organizations rode on them."

(full article online)

Detailing PA involvement in anti-Nationality Law demonstration


----------



## Sixties Fan

As crazy and inaccurate as the reporting on Israel's Basic Law calling Israel the Nation State of the Jewish people has been, it is nothing compared to the Arab coverage of that law.

The most unhinged analysis I've seen yet comes from Salah Aldawoody in Arab Youm, where he claims that the Basic Law gives Israel the right to declare Jordan and Tunisia to be Jewish states, since there is some Jewish history in those states. In fact, it allows Israel to spread from Morocco to Saudi Arabia!

It gives legal weight to forcing Arab countries to normalize relations with Israel, somehow. Aldawoody quotes some Tunisian laws from the past few years and seems to claim that these laws are related to Israel's Basic Law and forces "normalization" and forces people to love Israelis against their will, or something like that.

(full article online)

Nation-State law derangement is even worse in the Arab world ~ Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News


----------



## Sixties Fan

Basic truths about the Basic Law


----------



## Sixties Fan




----------



## Mindful

Ahed Tamimi has called on "Palestinians to murder Israelis through 'martyrdom-seeking operations' (i.e., suicide bombings), stabbing attacks, and stone-throwing..." — Bradley Martin, researcher.



If Palestinian Arabs are stateless today, it is by their own choice. Their leaders have chosen to expend their energies on wiping Israel from the face of the earth rather than on establishing a state of their own next to Israel.



Palestinian Arabs keep rejecting offers to establish a state of their own, according to David Brog, with Israel, Britain and the UN having offered Palestinian Arabs the opportunity to build their own state on five separate occasions -- in 1936, 1947, 1967, 2000, and 2008.


Turkey, on the other hand, has never accepted the right to self-rule of any non-Turkish people living in Asia Minor and historic Armenia, which is today eastern Turkey.
In the meantime, Turkey is openly supporting and praising Ahed Tamimi, a brainwashed Palestinian teenaged girl who has incited and engaged in violence, and whose family members have murdered Israeli children. The Turkish government -- with its horrifying human rights record -- is doing what has come to be expected of it: supporting anti-Semites and jihadists that target non-Muslims in the region. Sadly, the only feature that is really shocking is that many self-proclaimed supporters of human rights, such as in the European Union, as well as journalists, support the same Jew-hating murderers and the genocidal ideology behind them.

The Turkish-Palestinian Hate Fest


----------



## member

Penelope said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cnm said:
> 
> 
> 
> Like the official implementation of apartheid to ensure Boer values were preserved.
> 
> 
> 
> Unlike the Dutch people, Jews originated in the land of Israel.
> Do You see any reference to skin color?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes they were once some sects of the Canaanites, and the bible says EKE: Your mother was a Hittite and your father an Amorite.
> 
> Lets face it, anyone from Judea was known as  a jew. Good now that that is settled we can take Judeo off of Christian.
Click to expand...




*..."Trump with his worshippers..."*



 ...I love him.....



​

...and you: 

 _mishpooka marinara......._


----------



## Sixties Fan

In 2011, a one-time Shin Bet security agency chief and minister of public security submitted a bill to the Knesset in his role as a member of the opposition Kadima Party. The rationale behind Avi Dichter’s bill was simple. Everyone knows Israel is the Jewish state. But shouldn’t there be a law that says so, to protect that status? And shouldn’t something so essential to the national character be a “Basic Law,” meaning, in Israeli terms, a building block of the state’s eventual constitution?

The Jewish Nation-State Bill “is especially necessary at a time in which there are those who seek to cancel the Jewish People’s right to a national home in its land and the recognition of Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish People,” Dichter wrote. It will “allow us to reach a broad agreement in the future over a full and comprehensive constitution.” The bill had been conceived in 2009 by the Institute of Zionist Strategies, a right-wing think tank especially alarmed by the way in which Israel’s unelected Supreme Court had been handling issues of Jewish nationhood.

(full article online)

The Jewish State Declares Itself a Jewish State - Commentary Magazine


----------



## Sixties Fan

The Misrepresentation of Israel’s Democracy - Commentary Magazine


----------



## Sixties Fan

The PLO Central Council, in cooperation with Israel’s Higher Arab Monitoring Committee, have agreed to mark July 19 every year, on the anniversary of the Knesset’s enacting of Basic Law: Israel as the Nation-State of the Jewish People, a.k.a. the Nationality Law, as a “day of the Struggle against Israeli Apartheid.”

The decision was approved at a meeting of the PLO Central Council held in Ramallah on Wednesday.


MK Ahmad Tibi (Joint Arab List) initiated the proposal, saying, “The Nationality Law creates a hierarchy of citizens by ethnic affiliation. Jews with rights and with Jewish superiority; and Arabs without equality, as second-class citizens.”

The Basic Law: Israel as the Nation-State of the Jewish People, enacted July 19 by a majority of 62 to 55 with 2 abstaining, establishes the constitutionality of the three historic Zionist principles: the free return of the Jews to the land of our fathers; the free settlement of Jews everywhere in Israel; and the miraculously revived Hebrew as the official language of the Jewish State. Calling these principles racist and part of an apartheid policy is tantamount to attacking the very existence of a Jewish State.

(full article online)

Treason: Arab MKs Join PA in Declaring July 19 ‘Israeli Apartheid Day’


----------



## Shusha

Sixties Fan said:


> The PLO Central Council, in cooperation with Israel’s Higher Arab Monitoring Committee, have agreed to mark July 19 every year, on the anniversary of the Knesset’s enacting of Basic Law: Israel as the Nation-State of the Jewish People, a.k.a. the Nationality Law, as a “day of the Struggle against Israeli Apartheid.”
> 
> The decision was approved at a meeting of the PLO Central Council held in Ramallah on Wednesday.
> 
> 
> MK Ahmad Tibi (Joint Arab List) initiated the proposal, saying, “The Nationality Law creates a hierarchy of citizens by ethnic affiliation. Jews with rights and with Jewish superiority; and Arabs without equality, as second-class citizens.”
> 
> The Basic Law: Israel as the Nation-State of the Jewish People, enacted July 19 by a majority of 62 to 55 with 2 abstaining, establishes the constitutionality of the three historic Zionist principles: the free return of the Jews to the land of our fathers; the free settlement of Jews everywhere in Israel; and the miraculously revived Hebrew as the official language of the Jewish State. Calling these principles racist and part of an apartheid policy is tantamount to attacking the very existence of a Jewish State.
> 
> (full article online)
> 
> Treason: Arab MKs Join PA in Declaring July 19 ‘Israeli Apartheid Day’




Responses like this just underscore the need for constitutional declarations like the Basic Law.  Those in government who are actively working to undermine their own State should be removed from office for treason.


----------



## rylah

Shusha said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> The PLO Central Council, in cooperation with Israel’s Higher Arab Monitoring Committee, have agreed to mark July 19 every year, on the anniversary of the Knesset’s enacting of Basic Law: Israel as the Nation-State of the Jewish People, a.k.a. the Nationality Law, as a “day of the Struggle against Israeli Apartheid.”
> 
> The decision was approved at a meeting of the PLO Central Council held in Ramallah on Wednesday.
> 
> 
> MK Ahmad Tibi (Joint Arab List) initiated the proposal, saying, “The Nationality Law creates a hierarchy of citizens by ethnic affiliation. Jews with rights and with Jewish superiority; and Arabs without equality, as second-class citizens.”
> 
> The Basic Law: Israel as the Nation-State of the Jewish People, enacted July 19 by a majority of 62 to 55 with 2 abstaining, establishes the constitutionality of the three historic Zionist principles: the free return of the Jews to the land of our fathers; the free settlement of Jews everywhere in Israel; and the miraculously revived Hebrew as the official language of the Jewish State. Calling these principles racist and part of an apartheid policy is tantamount to attacking the very existence of a Jewish State.
> 
> (full article online)
> 
> Treason: Arab MKs Join PA in Declaring July 19 ‘Israeli Apartheid Day’
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Responses like this just underscore the need for constitutional declarations like the Basic Law.  Those in government who are actively working to undermine their own State should be removed from office for treason.
Click to expand...


Shusha You voice the frustration of most Israelis.
Have You heard of Jewish comedy? It's mostly laughter through tears.
Like the 2 Jews who were caught on the streets in Nazi Germany, standing with their backs at the wall moments before the execution, one of them starts reciting "Shma'a Yisrael...", the other Jew immediately turns to him saying "shush Moishe, You'll get us in trouble!".

Now back to our topic, this is not different - we have MK's who were advisors to Arafat and who joined the Marmara, yet the courts keep their impunity, for what seems to be the only logical explanation a strange case of a Stockholm syndrome.


----------



## watchingfromafar

*Now it's a basic law: The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people*

The above is just not true. The Jews had no “homeland”; they were shepherds until Joseph moved all the Jews to Egypt.

_(Gen 47:1 KJV)  Then Joseph came and told Pharaoh, and said, My father [ISRAEL] and my brethren, and their flocks, and their herds, and all that they have, are come out of the land of Canaan; and, behold, they are in the land of Goshen._

_(Gen 47:3 KJV)  And Pharaoh said unto his brethren, *What is your occupation*? And they said unto Pharaoh, Thy servants are shepherds, both we, and also our fathers._

_(Gen 47:5 KJV)  And Pharaoh spake unto Joseph, saying, Thy father [*ISRAEL*] and thy brethren are come unto thee:_

_(Gen 47:6 KJV)  The land of Egypt is before thee; in the best of the land make thy father and brethren to dwell; in the land of Goshen let them dwell: and if thou knowest any men of activity among them, then make them rulers over my cattle._

_(Gen 47:11 KJV)  And Joseph placed his father [*ISRAEL*] and his brethren, and gave them a possession in the land of Egypt, in the best of the land, in the land of Rameses, as Pharaoh had commanded._

And then there is even more proof that “Israel” is NOT their true “homeland”: ~~~

Genesis 25:9 _His sons Isaac and Ishmael buried him in the cave of Machpelah near Mamre, in the field of Ephron son of Zohar the Hittite,_

Genesis 47:30 _but when I rest with my fathers, carry me out of Egypt and bury me [ Israel ] where they are buried."  "I will do as you say," he said. ;_

Genesis 50:14 _For his sons carried him [ Israel ] into the land of Canaan, and buried him in the cave of the field of Machpelah, which Abraham bought with the field for a possession of a buryingplace of Ephron the Hittite, before Mamre._

Genesis 25:9 _*His sons Isaac and Ishmael buried him* in the cave of Machpelah near Mamre, in the field of Ephron son of Zohar the Hittite,_

Genesis 47:30 _but when I rest with my fathers, carry me out of Egypt and bury me [ Israel ] where they are buried."  "I will do as you say," he said. ;_

Genesis 49:31 _There *Abraham and his wife Sarah were buried*, there *Isaac and his wife Rebekah were buried*, and there *I buried Leah*._

Genesis 50:10  _And they came to the threshingfloor of Atad, *which is beyond Jordan*, and there they mourned with a great and very sore lamentation:_

Genesis 50:14 _For his sons carried him [ Israel ] *into the land of Canaan*, *and buried him* in the cave of the field of Machpelah, which Abraham bought with the field for a possession of a buryingplace of Ephron the Hittite, before Mamre._

Genesis 50:14 _After burying his father, Joseph returned to Egypt, together with his brothers and all the others who had gone with him to bury his father._


You bury your great leaders in your own homeland

Which Is Not the land falsely called “Israel” today

The truth will set you free​


----------



## rylah

watchingfromafar said:


> *Now it's a basic law: The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people*
> 
> The above is just not true. The Jews had no “homeland”; they were shepherds until Joseph moved all the Jews to Egypt.
> 
> _(Gen 47:1 KJV)  Then Joseph came and told Pharaoh, and said, My father [ISRAEL] and my brethren, and their flocks, and their herds, and all that they have, are come out of the land of Canaan; and, behold, they are in the land of Goshen._
> 
> _(Gen 47:3 KJV)  And Pharaoh said unto his brethren, *What is your occupation*? And they said unto Pharaoh, Thy servants are shepherds, both we, and also our fathers._
> 
> _(Gen 47:5 KJV)  And Pharaoh spake unto Joseph, saying, Thy father [*ISRAEL*] and thy brethren are come unto thee:_
> 
> _(Gen 47:6 KJV)  The land of Egypt is before thee; in the best of the land make thy father and brethren to dwell; in the land of Goshen let them dwell: and if thou knowest any men of activity among them, then make them rulers over my cattle._
> 
> _(Gen 47:11 KJV)  And Joseph placed his father [*ISRAEL*] and his brethren, and gave them a possession in the land of Egypt, in the best of the land, in the land of Rameses, as Pharaoh had commanded._
> 
> And then there is even more proof that “Israel” is NOT their true “homeland”: ~~~
> 
> Genesis 25:9 _His sons Isaac and Ishmael buried him in the cave of Machpelah near Mamre, in the field of Ephron son of Zohar the Hittite,_
> 
> Genesis 47:30 _but when I rest with my fathers, carry me out of Egypt and bury me [ Israel ] where they are buried."  "I will do as you say," he said. ;_
> 
> Genesis 50:14 _For his sons carried him [ Israel ] into the land of Canaan, and buried him in the cave of the field of Machpelah, which Abraham bought with the field for a possession of a buryingplace of Ephron the Hittite, before Mamre._
> 
> Genesis 25:9 _*His sons Isaac and Ishmael buried him* in the cave of Machpelah near Mamre, in the field of Ephron son of Zohar the Hittite,_
> 
> Genesis 47:30 _but when I rest with my fathers, carry me out of Egypt and bury me [ Israel ] where they are buried."  "I will do as you say," he said. ;_
> 
> Genesis 49:31 _There *Abraham and his wife Sarah were buried*, there *Isaac and his wife Rebekah were buried*, and there *I buried Leah*._
> 
> Genesis 50:10  _And they came to the threshingfloor of Atad, *which is beyond Jordan*, and there they mourned with a great and very sore lamentation:_
> 
> Genesis 50:14 _For his sons carried him [ Israel ] *into the land of Canaan*, *and buried him* in the cave of the field of Machpelah, which Abraham bought with the field for a possession of a buryingplace of Ephron the Hittite, before Mamre._
> 
> Genesis 50:14 _After burying his father, Joseph returned to Egypt, together with his brothers and all the others who had gone with him to bury his father._
> 
> 
> You bury your great leaders in your own homeland
> 
> Which Is Not the land falsely called “Israel” today
> 
> The truth will set you free​



This makes sense to You?


----------



## ForeverYoung436

watchingfromafar said:


> *Now it's a basic law: The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people*
> 
> The above is just not true. The Jews had no “homeland”; they were shepherds until Joseph moved all the Jews to Egypt.
> 
> _(Gen 47:1 KJV)  Then Joseph came and told Pharaoh, and said, My father [ISRAEL] and my brethren, and their flocks, and their herds, and all that they have, are come out of the land of Canaan; and, behold, they are in the land of Goshen._
> 
> _(Gen 47:3 KJV)  And Pharaoh said unto his brethren, *What is your occupation*? And they said unto Pharaoh, Thy servants are shepherds, both we, and also our fathers._
> 
> _(Gen 47:5 KJV)  And Pharaoh spake unto Joseph, saying, Thy father [*ISRAEL*] and thy brethren are come unto thee:_
> 
> _(Gen 47:6 KJV)  The land of Egypt is before thee; in the best of the land make thy father and brethren to dwell; in the land of Goshen let them dwell: and if thou knowest any men of activity among them, then make them rulers over my cattle._
> 
> _(Gen 47:11 KJV)  And Joseph placed his father [*ISRAEL*] and his brethren, and gave them a possession in the land of Egypt, in the best of the land, in the land of Rameses, as Pharaoh had commanded._
> 
> And then there is even more proof that “Israel” is NOT their true “homeland”: ~~~
> 
> Genesis 25:9 _His sons Isaac and Ishmael buried him in the cave of Machpelah near Mamre, in the field of Ephron son of Zohar the Hittite,_
> 
> Genesis 47:30 _but when I rest with my fathers, carry me out of Egypt and bury me [ Israel ] where they are buried."  "I will do as you say," he said. ;_
> 
> Genesis 50:14 _For his sons carried him [ Israel ] into the land of Canaan, and buried him in the cave of the field of Machpelah, which Abraham bought with the field for a possession of a buryingplace of Ephron the Hittite, before Mamre._
> 
> Genesis 25:9 _*His sons Isaac and Ishmael buried him* in the cave of Machpelah near Mamre, in the field of Ephron son of Zohar the Hittite,_
> 
> Genesis 47:30 _but when I rest with my fathers, carry me out of Egypt and bury me [ Israel ] where they are buried."  "I will do as you say," he said. ;_
> 
> Genesis 49:31 _There *Abraham and his wife Sarah were buried*, there *Isaac and his wife Rebekah were buried*, and there *I buried Leah*._
> 
> Genesis 50:10  _And they came to the threshingfloor of Atad, *which is beyond Jordan*, and there they mourned with a great and very sore lamentation:_
> 
> Genesis 50:14 _For his sons carried him [ Israel ] *into the land of Canaan*, *and buried him* in the cave of the field of Machpelah, which Abraham bought with the field for a possession of a buryingplace of Ephron the Hittite, before Mamre._
> 
> Genesis 50:14 _After burying his father, Joseph returned to Egypt, together with his brothers and all the others who had gone with him to bury his father._
> 
> 
> You bury your great leaders in your own homeland
> 
> Which Is Not the land falsely called “Israel” today
> 
> The truth will set you free​




I don't know what you're blabbering about.  The Hebrews were nomadic shepherds, that is true.  But they were nomads within the Land of Canaan (Israel).  Jacob was telling Joseph before he died,  "Don't get too comfortable in Egypt.  Our land is still Canaan.  Bury me there."  The Cave of Machpelah, where the Patriarchs and their wives are buried, is in Hebron (also known as Mamre) in the Land of Israel.  Right now the Tomb is in the West Bank, which was won by Israel during the miraculous Six-Day War.  Israel hasn't officially annexed it yet but it will someday.  It's their homeland.


----------



## watchingfromafar

> ="ForeverYoung436, post: 20614188, member: 20411"]don't know what you're blabbering about. The Hebrews were nomadic shepherds, that is true.



Yes and being nomadic they had "no" homeland and there "never was a Jewish homeland".



> ="ForeverYoung436, post: 20614188, member: 20411]"But they were nomads within the Land of Canaan (Israel).



Calling Canaan "Israel" is false but I understand your need to justify the horrific deeds carried out under that false name.

I have even tried to find an ancient map showing the land falsly called Israel and this is what I found~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Where oh where is my Israel oh where are thee---






And No Land Called "Israel" could be found


----------



## watchingfromafar

rylah said:


> This makes sense to You?



Only to those who have an IQ above 10


----------



## rylah

watchingfromafar said:


> ="ForeverYoung436, post: 20614188, member: 20411"]don't know what you're blabbering about. The Hebrews were nomadic shepherds, that is true.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes and being nomadic they had "no" homeland and there "never was a Jewish homeland".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ="ForeverYoung436, post: 20614188, member: 20411]"But they were nomads within the Land of Canaan (Israel).
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Calling Canaan "Israel" is false but I understand your need to justify the horrific deeds carried out under that false name.
> 
> I have even tried to find an ancient map showing the land falsly called Israel and this is what I found~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> 
> Where oh where is my Israel oh where are thee---
> 
> View attachment 211497
> 
> And No Land Called "Israel" could be found
Click to expand...


This ^^^^^ is sheer idiocy, and You're not even shy about it.
In Arabic too it's called the "Jewish desert":

*Sahara Yahudin -*صحراء يهودا‎ 

The Judaean Desert or Judean Desert (Hebrew‎ _Midbar Yehuda_, both _Desert of Judah_ or _Judaean Desert_; Arabic: _Sahara Yahudan_) is a desert in Israel and the West Bank that lies east of Jerusalemand descends to the Dead Sea. It stretches from the northeastern Negev to the east of Beit El, and is marked by terraces with escarpments.


----------



## watchingfromafar

Oh I am looking for the ancient land of Israel looking.,.,..&.,.,looking,.,..&.,.,looking,.,..&.,.,looking,.,..&.,.,looking,.,..&.,.,looking
., nowhere could it be found---


----------



## rylah

watchingfromafar said:


> Oh I am looking for the ancient lad of Israel looking.,.,..&.,.,looking,.,..&.,.,looking,.,..&.,.,looking,.,..&.,.,looking,.,..&.,.,looking
> ., nowhere cfould it be found---
> View attachment 211513



* Map of Europe by Abraham Ortelius (Title:Europae), 1571*






Q. What is "IVDEA"?


----------



## watchingfromafar

rylah said:


> The Judaean Desert or Judean Desert



If you are claiming the Judaean Desert is the true homeland of the Israelites then by all means, claim it.


----------



## watchingfromafar

I believe I have found that map you were looking for. But regardless it means nothing today. The land of Israel today is within the land of Palestine and Palestine will reclaim it's rightfull name in short order, this I can assure you--------------------


----------



## rylah

watchingfromafar said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Judaean Desert or Judean Desert
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If you are claiming the Judaean Desert is the true homeland of the Israelites then by all means, claim it.
Click to expand...


Oh, I'd claim much more.
My tribal territory goes all the way to Tzur and Sidon.

But Jerusalem foremost before any place on earth!


----------



## watchingfromafar

rylah said:


> Q. What is "IVDEA"?



It is an outhouse in the Aribian desert


----------



## rylah

watchingfromafar said:


> I believe I have found that map you were looking for. But regardless it means nothing today. The land of Israel today is within the land of Palestine and Palestine will reclaim it's rightfull name in short order, this I can assure you--------------------
> View attachment 211517



You have just contradicted every one of Your posts in the previous page.
Congrats.

Now either go back to the topic or hit the highway.


----------



## rylah

watchingfromafar said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> But Jerusalem foremost before any place on earth.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, oh yes, Jerusalem.,.,. as I laugh myself to sleep
> 
> 24 _*Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD; Because ye have made your iniquity to be remembered, in that your transgressions are discovered, so that in all your doings your sins do appear*; because, I say, that ye are come to remembrance, ye shall be taken with the hand. _
> 
> 25 _*And thou, profane wicked prince of Israel, whose day is come*, when iniquity shall have an end, _
> 
> 27 _I will overturn, overturn, overturn, it: and it shall be no more, until he come whose right it is; and I will give it him._
> 
> 29 _Whiles they see vanity unto thee, whiles they divine a lie unto thee, to bring thee upon the necks of them that are slain, of the wicked, *whose day is come, when their iniquity shall have an end*. _
> 
> 30 _Shall I cause it to return into his sheath? I will judge thee in the place where thou wast created, in the land of thy nativity. _
> 
> 31 _And I will pour out mine indignation upon thee, I will blow against thee in the fire of my wrath, and deliver thee into the hand of brutish men, and skilful to destroy. _
> 
> 32 _Thou shalt be for fuel to the fire; thy blood shall be in the midst of the land; *thou shalt be no more remembered*: for I the LORD have spoken it._
> 
> bye, bye my sweet plump dumpling
Click to expand...


Boy You're really into shooting own foot today.
After bringing maps, later confirming they have no relevancy, now just to prove my point even further You bring Yehezkel, who mentions much bigger borders of Israel than they're today.

Try reading the whole book.


----------



## watchingfromafar

rylah said:


> who mentions much bigger borders of Israel than they're today.



There never was a land called "Israel" prior to 1947ad. Put, to my surprise I did find a map of "The Land Of Zion"


----------



## Coyote

*The topic is Israel's basic law - please try to stick to that in the discussion.*


----------



## P F Tinmore

*Israel Legislates Apartheid into Law*

**


----------



## Hollie

P F Tinmore said:


> *Israel Legislates Apartheid into Law*



You’re simply ignorant regarding terms and definitions. 

Doesn’t youtube have videos which can offer you some basic understanding of these things?


----------



## rylah

*Setting the Record Straight on Israel's Nation-State Law*


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL

rylah said:


> *Setting the Record Straight on Israel's Nation-State Law*




Good link.  However , to me the question/ answer is a lot more basic.  Why should there be a “ Palestinian State” but not a Jewish one?


----------



## montelatici

For the same reason that the U.S. cannot decide to be a Christian state, at the expense of Jews, Muslims, Hindus etc.


----------



## rylah

montelatici said:


> For the same reason that the U.S. cannot decide to be a Christian state, at the expense of Jews, Muslims, Hindus etc.



England, Greece, Bulgaria, Finland, Norway and Hungary
are just several examples of officially Christian western nations.


----------



## Shusha

montelatici said:


> For the same reason that the U.S. cannot decide to be a Christian state, at the expense of Jews, Muslims, Hindus etc.



And Palestine can't decide to be a Muslim State? Oops.


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL

montelatici said:


> For the same reason that the U.S. cannot decide to be a Christian state, at the expense of Jews, Muslims, Hindus etc.



But it’s O.K. To have Muslim Countries, Arab Countries, a “ Palestinian State”, etc?  You see nothing wrong with Abbas declaring not one Israeli in “ Palestine?” Typical Palestinian Mentality


----------



## Sixties Fan

Jewish Rights to Israel (Part 2): Israel’s Nation State Law (Forest Rain) ~ Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News


----------



## Sixties Fan

Israel’s Nationality Law, UN Resolution 181, and the Arab List


----------



## watchingfromafar

rylah said:


> Boy You're really into shooting own foot today.
> After bringing maps, later confirming they have no relevancy, now just to prove my point even further You bring Yehezkel, who mentions much bigger borders of Israel than they're today.



Israel was a person; not a place----

Get with the proigram=-====

Please -


----------



## Shusha

watchingfromafar said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> Boy You're really into shooting own foot today.
> After bringing maps, later confirming they have no relevancy, now just to prove my point even further You bring Yehezkel, who mentions much bigger borders of Israel than they're today.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Israel was a person; not a place----
> 
> Get with the proigram=-====
> 
> Please -
Click to expand...


Wait, what?  So, out of curiosity are you saying that places which are named after persons...um....don't exist?!


----------



## Wyatt earp

montelatici said:


> For the same reason that the U.S. cannot decide to be a Christian state, at the expense of Jews, Muslims, Hindus etc.



The US is a Christian state


----------



## member

Bleipriester said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bleipriester said:
> 
> 
> 
> Such is impossible in Syria.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why? There're plenty of examples in Syria, as in other countries with a variety of minorities (virtually every one) that don't suffer from civil war.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Diversity is actually a part of Syria´s pride and identity. Whether you are Jew, Muslim, Christian, socialist or right-winger, there is no difference before the law. "Oppressed" Sunnis can even apply Sharia law instead of regular law in a suitcase.
> 
> Civil War is also not the correct description. There is no Alawite vs Sunni. It is an attempted Islamist takeover, jihad.
Click to expand...




 ....like israel, too bad it isn't a BASIC law here in America to be .... an american while living here - instead of....._NOT_ being an american.  LoL....only in _look-the-other-way-free-for-all america.  _





*July, 2018*: _*". . .Diversity is actually a part of Syria´s pride and identity. Whether you are Jew, Muslim, Christian, socialist or right-winger, there is no difference before the law."*_


The law ?  *what laws in syria*?  it became a lawless evil hellhole where terrorists took over the country and killed a bunch of people, the gov't unleashed chemical weapons against Men, women & children, and barrel-bombed innocent M/W/C.  Pride ?

_Bleipreister_…… 




*Syrian pride*…all those  “diverse” people you just mentioned – that doesn't exist.  Even when you posted this …gunk -- all that dwells there now is EVIL terrorists and no real government.




*"Oppressed" Sunnis can even apply *

 *Sharia law instead of regular law in a suitcase."*

_
right, "R e g u l a r  L a w" .......in a suitcase...whaah?_























Syria is one big insane asylum. * like they all are*.


Bleipreister …. this wasn't that long ago... 

 _your feelings about syria_.....





 It’s


..one of the most hair-raising things I’ve read from someone about Syria after all the EVIL that has happened there - where this diverse world doesn't exist.  ....and how you've tried to paint a picture about _Syrian tolerancy and mentioning "laws"...._…..

 _you gotta be kidding_?.


----------



## P F Tinmore




----------



## rylah

P F Tinmore said:


>




In what way exactly?
Give me an objective parameter, one that doesn't turn Greece, Jordan, Slovenia or England, into the same perceived "apartheid".

How about PLO demanding a Jew-free state, is that apartheid?


----------



## Shusha

P F Tinmore said:


>




Having to resort to outright lies because facts elude you, huh?


----------



## Mindful

It is far from clear why the Palestinians living in the West Bank and Gaza Strip should be concerned about Israel's new Nation-State Law. The Palestinians living in these areas are not Israeli citizens and are not part of the Israeli political system. The Palestinians living in these areas have their own (Palestinian) citizenship, their own flag, their own parliament and their own government. They are not affected by the law in any way. This fact renders their opposition to the law little less than ridiculous.


This is the logic of Mahmoud Abbas and the Palestinians: Israel defining itself as a Jewish state is an act of "racism" and "apartheid," while, as a matter of course, the future Palestinian state will be an Islamic state governed by Sharia law, and that, presumably, is not an act of "racism" or "apartheid."


Before condemning Israel for seeking to preserve its character as a Jewish state, the world needs to explain why it is all right for the Palestinians to plan that their future state will be ruled by Islamic law.


We are witnessing yet another remarkable mirror image brought to us by the Palestinians: once again, they seek to deny Israel precisely what they believe should come to them on a silver platter.

It is far from clear, however, why the Palestinians living in the West Bank and Gaza Strip should be concerned about the new law. The Palestinians living in these areas are not Israeli citizens and are not part of the Israeli political system. The Palestinians living in these areas have their own (Palestinian) citizenship, their own flag, their own parliament and their own government. They are not affected by the law in any way. This fact renders their opposition to the law little less than ridiculous.

Because they have their own parliament and state institutions, the Palestinians are free to pass any laws they wish without seeking permission from Israel or any other party.

Most people are unaware that the Palestinians do have their own laws, including the "Palestinian Basic Law," which was passed by the Palestinian Legislative Council in 2002.

Israel's 'Nationality' Law and Palestinian Lies


----------



## P F Tinmore

Mindful said:


> It is far from clear why the Palestinians living in the West Bank and Gaza Strip should be concerned about Israel's new Nation-State Law. The Palestinians living in these areas are not Israeli citizens and are not part of the Israeli political system. The Palestinians living in these areas have their own (Palestinian) citizenship, their own flag, their own parliament and their own government. They are not affected by the law in any way. This fact renders their opposition to the law little less than ridiculous.
> 
> 
> This is the logic of Mahmoud Abbas and the Palestinians: Israel defining itself as a Jewish state is an act of "racism" and "apartheid," while, as a matter of course, the future Palestinian state will be an Islamic state governed by Sharia law, and that, presumably, is not an act of "racism" or "apartheid."
> 
> 
> Before condemning Israel for seeking to preserve its character as a Jewish state, the world needs to explain why it is all right for the Palestinians to plan that their future state will be ruled by Islamic law.
> 
> 
> We are witnessing yet another remarkable mirror image brought to us by the Palestinians: once again, they seek to deny Israel precisely what they believe should come to them on a silver platter.
> 
> It is far from clear, however, why the Palestinians living in the West Bank and Gaza Strip should be concerned about the new law. The Palestinians living in these areas are not Israeli citizens and are not part of the Israeli political system. The Palestinians living in these areas have their own (Palestinian) citizenship, their own flag, their own parliament and their own government. They are not affected by the law in any way. This fact renders their opposition to the law little less than ridiculous.
> 
> Because they have their own parliament and state institutions, the Palestinians are free to pass any laws they wish without seeking permission from Israel or any other party.
> 
> Most people are unaware that the Palestinians do have their own laws, including the "Palestinian Basic Law," which was passed by the Palestinian Legislative Council in 2002.
> 
> Israel's 'Nationality' Law and Palestinian Lies


Very misleading bunch of hogwash.


Mindful said:


> while, as a matter of course, the future Palestinian state will be an Islamic state governed by Sharia law, and that, presumably, is not an act of "racism" or "apartheid."


*Dr Mitri Raheb - Seven Things You Never Knew About Palestine And The Palestinians*

**
And much more than just that.


----------



## rylah

*Article Eleven:*
This is the law governing the land of Palestine in the *Islamic Sharia (law) *and the same goes for any land the* Moslems have conquered by force,* *because during the times of (Islamic) conquests, the Moslems consecrated these lands to Moslem generations till the Day of Judgement.*

The Avalon Project : Hamas Covenant 1988

And much more than that... look up what the 4 colors on the Palestinian flag represent.


----------



## rylah

P F Tinmore said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is far from clear why the Palestinians living in the West Bank and Gaza Strip should be concerned about Israel's new Nation-State Law. The Palestinians living in these areas are not Israeli citizens and are not part of the Israeli political system. The Palestinians living in these areas have their own (Palestinian) citizenship, their own flag, their own parliament and their own government. They are not affected by the law in any way. This fact renders their opposition to the law little less than ridiculous.
> 
> 
> This is the logic of Mahmoud Abbas and the Palestinians: Israel defining itself as a Jewish state is an act of "racism" and "apartheid," while, as a matter of course, the future Palestinian state will be an Islamic state governed by Sharia law, and that, presumably, is not an act of "racism" or "apartheid."
> 
> 
> Before condemning Israel for seeking to preserve its character as a Jewish state, the world needs to explain why it is all right for the Palestinians to plan that their future state will be ruled by Islamic law.
> 
> 
> We are witnessing yet another remarkable mirror image brought to us by the Palestinians: once again, they seek to deny Israel precisely what they believe should come to them on a silver platter.
> 
> It is far from clear, however, why the Palestinians living in the West Bank and Gaza Strip should be concerned about the new law. The Palestinians living in these areas are not Israeli citizens and are not part of the Israeli political system. The Palestinians living in these areas have their own (Palestinian) citizenship, their own flag, their own parliament and their own government. They are not affected by the law in any way. This fact renders their opposition to the law little less than ridiculous.
> 
> Because they have their own parliament and state institutions, the Palestinians are free to pass any laws they wish without seeking permission from Israel or any other party.
> 
> Most people are unaware that the Palestinians do have their own laws, including the "Palestinian Basic Law," which was passed by the Palestinian Legislative Council in 2002.
> 
> Israel's 'Nationality' Law and Palestinian Lies
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Very misleading bunch of hogwash.
> 
> 
> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> 
> while, as a matter of course, the future Palestinian state will be an Islamic state governed by Sharia law, and that, presumably, is not an act of "racism" or "apartheid."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *Dr Mitri Raheb - Seven Things You Never Knew About Palestine And The Palestinians*
> 
> **
> And much more than just that.
Click to expand...

*After Saturday comes Sunday*

*After Saturday comes Sunday* (Arabic: min sallaf es-sabt lāqā el-ḥadd qiddāmūh‎, lit. ''When Saturday is gone, one will find Sunday''), is a traditional Arab proverb. In the Arabic speaking Maronite community of Lebanon, the proverb has been current in the sense that *Muslims will do away with Christians after they have dealt with the Jews*.[3][4]


----------



## Mindful

From the Palestine National Charter:

*Article 20:* _The Balfour Declaration, the Mandate Document, and everything based upon them are deemed null and void. The claim of historical or religious ties between Jews and Palestine does not tally with historical realities, nor with the constituents of statehood in their true sense. Judaism, in its character as a religion, is not a nationality with an independent existence. Likewise, the Jews are not one people with an independent identity. They are rather citizens of the states to which they belong._

^Someone should have told Hitler  that last.


----------



## Hollie

P F Tinmore said:


>



Indeed, more of your endless befuddlement. Israel is not a “Jews only” nation. That seems obvious to thinking humans, not that I’m accusing you of that.  

How would you describe the Islamic terrorist enclave of Gaza’istan with regard to their status as _Judenrein? _


----------



## Mindful

Hollie said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeed, more of your endless befuddlement. Israel is not a “Jews only” nation. That seems obvious to thinking humans, not that I’m accusing you of that.
> 
> How would you describe the Islamic terrorist enclave of Gaza’istan with regard to their status as _Judenrein? _
Click to expand...


Yeah. All the Jews were kicked out of that place.

And what did they get for  their 'gesture'?


----------



## RoccoR

RE:  Now it's a basic law: The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people
※→  et al,

As I was writing my response today (*Posting #5350*), I was reminded of this thread and the underlying importance to the question.



Mindful said:


> From the Palestine National Charter:
> 
> *Article 20:* _The Balfour Declaration, the Mandate Document, and everything based upon them are deemed null and void. The claim of historical or religious ties between Jews and Palestine does not tally with historical realities, nor with the constituents of statehood in their true sense. Judaism, in its character as a religion, is not a nationality with an independent existence. Likewise, the Jews are not one people with an independent identity. They are rather citizens of the states to which they belong._
> 
> ^Someone should have told Hitler  that last.


*(COMMENT)*

The "Jewish State" was a documented idea behind the partition as it was envisioned by the UN in 1947.  It is not something that the Jewish People invented with the Basic Law (Posting #1).   

The basic conflict is now, as it has always been, and that is the disregard for the survival of the Jewish People.  Humanity has failed the Jewish People dozens and dozens of times in the last thousand years, using one pretext or another in order to strip the Jews of there wealth and property.  We must not fall into that same pit again.  We must not allow the Middle East Majority (Muslims) to trample the essential needs of the Jewish People _(a home → The Jewish National Home)_.  Behind all the major movements for human rights, the background story has always been the classic struggle of the Majority 'vs' Minority.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL

Hollie said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeed, more of your endless befuddlement. Israel is not a “Jews only” nation. That seems obvious to thinking humans, not that I’m accusing you of that.
> 
> How would you describe the Islamic terrorist enclave of Gaza’istan with regard to their status as _Judenrein? _
Click to expand...


Frankly I’m surprised he would make such a stupid and ignorant comment ( as opposeto the Pollack and other posters)  Let him
“ prove” that the Israelis want Arabs living in Israel get kicked out. 
   There is never any response to PA declaring No Israelis or denying them access to the Western Wall 
    What I noticed ( Surprised that nobody else commented) is that ALL of Israel is now “ Palestine “ but it’s the Israelis that are apartheid?!!!


----------



## Sixties Fan

Why All the Outrage over Israel’s Nation-State Law?


----------



## Sixties Fan

The seminar apparently called the law "racist" before the meeting occurred.

One of the "experts" who spoke at the seminar shows how "intellectual" the event was.

The President of the Solidarity Society of the Palestinian community in Tunisia said that the main aim of the law was to expel one and a half million Muslim and Christian Arabs to the West Bank. Phase 2 is to expand the border of Israel to reach from the Nile to the Euphrates.

It's a good thing we have Arab experts to explain things for us.

(full article online)

"Intellectual seminar" in Tunisia: Israel's Nation State law is meant to expand from the Nile to the Euphrates ~ Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News


----------



## Sixties Fan

4.

The truth is that the Law of Return and the nation-state law are simple, natural laws, because at their core lies the deep, moral foundation on which the state of Israel was established as the nation state of the Jewish people. There is one state in all the world that is the homeland of the people of Israel. It is where the Jews have the right to realize the prophecies of the Biblical prophets and to ingather the exiles after years of wandering outside our national home, under constant existential threat. Israel has a historical responsibility for every Jew, wherever they may be. You can't accuse a family of racism for preferring a family member over a stranger, particularly when the family has the kind of bloody history that the family of the Jews has. But regardless of all this, within the national confines, every individual has the right to equal citizenship, without exception. 

The critics of the law have a problem with the very meaning of the Jews' return to history. Establishing a state means having to use force. It means police and military action. In other words, it is a shift from being exclusively a cultural civilization and becoming a national entity, adding another dimension to the identity. This is difficult for some Jews, who would prefer to remain the victims rather than hold the sword - in their eyes, that's what Esau would do, not Jacob. Some of these Jews opted to remain in exile, where other people can handle the use of force and the Jews are free to focus on the spirit, commerce and culture. 

Schocken, Haaretz's publisher, told me that his problem with nationalism is that "Judaism has nothing to do with nationalism. Judaism is cool." As a rule, he argued, "all this nationalism that you people have stuffed into Judaism is a sign of serious regression." 

In short, Judaism is agreeable as long as it is nothing more than folklore, an intellectual amusement, fertile ground for academic research, general prophets' ethics, or even just a religion. But when nationalism becomes involved, it's a different story. 

But the truth is that Judaism has never been just a religion. We were a nation thousands of years ago. That is the unique character of our people, as it was recorded in the Bible. It is a national movement that centers around a moral idea that also manifests in a religious manner. It is the national aspect of Judaism that supports the spiritual, moral and religious dimensions not just in the lives of individuals, as righteous as they may be, but in the collective life of a nation comprising all walks of life. Anyone looking to remove the national dimension from Judaism, or sees it as a "serious regression," is trying to alter our identity. That is precisely what the debate is about.

(full article online)

http://www.israelhayom.com/2018/11/16/another-type-of-anti-semitic-incitement/


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Sixties Fan said:


> You have proven nothing about Israel being a religious State.


Their government being interwined with the Jewish religious institution shows they are not a secular state. No other proof is required, that is conclusive.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> You have proven nothing about Israel being a religious State.
> 
> 
> 
> Their government being interwined with the Jewish religious institution shows they are not a secular state. No other proof is required, that is conclusive.
Click to expand...

You are saying nothing.  Nothing.  Intertwined in what way.  What does that mean?

Or are you mainly saying that because Israel is a Jewish State, as defined by law, that it is a religious State?

Italy, Brazil, all of Europe and the Americas are Christian States?
Are they all religious, then?

Your issue is with Israel defining itself, and rightfully so, with being Jewish.  Is it not?


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Sixties Fan said:


> Fort Fun Indiana said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> You have proven nothing about Israel being a religious State.
> 
> 
> 
> Their government being interwined with the Jewish religious institution shows they are not a secular state. No other proof is required, that is conclusive.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You are saying nothing.  Nothing.  Intertwined in what way.  What does that mean?
> 
> Or are you mainly saying that because Israel is a Jewish State, as defined by law, that it is a religious State?
> 
> Italy, Brazil, all of Europe and the Americas are Christian States?
> Are they all religious, then?
> 
> Your issue is with Israel defining itself, and rightfully so, with being Jewish.  Is it not?
Click to expand...

Israel is, now officially by law, a Jewish supremacy state. On the ground, this means special status for Jews, promotion of new, Jewish only communities, and material sponsorship of Jewish places of worship. The secular forces in the Israeli government are stymied by the right wing and the haredi, and by a corrupt, authoritarian prime minister with an affinity for totalitarian states and their postures. His totalitarianism is for Jews and Judaism.

You do know Judaism is a religion....right?


----------



## Sixties Fan

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fort Fun Indiana said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> You have proven nothing about Israel being a religious State.
> 
> 
> 
> Their government being interwined with the Jewish religious institution shows they are not a secular state. No other proof is required, that is conclusive.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You are saying nothing.  Nothing.  Intertwined in what way.  What does that mean?
> 
> Or are you mainly saying that because Israel is a Jewish State, as defined by law, that it is a religious State?
> 
> Italy, Brazil, all of Europe and the Americas are Christian States?
> Are they all religious, then?
> 
> Your issue is with Israel defining itself, and rightfully so, with being Jewish.  Is it not?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Israel is, now officially by law, a Jewish supremacy state. On the ground, this means special status for Jews, promotion of new, Jewish only communities, and material sponsorship of Jewish places of worship. The secular forces in the Israeli government are stymied by the right wing and the haredi, and by a corrupt, authoritarian prime minister with an affinity for totalitarian states and their postures. His totalitarianism is for Jews and Judaism.
> 
> You do know Judaism is a religion....right?
Click to expand...

Ahhhhhh, we have finally arrived at your problem.

Understanding what you are talking about.

Which you do not.

You surely took the longest and most whidding road to come to what you actually wanted to say.

Israel is an "Apartheid State".

This is the wrong thread for this discussion, as I stated before.

But, No........Israel is not an Apartheid State, never has been and never will be.

But thank you for all the ignorance you managed to finally get out of yourself.  It was quite refreshing.

Finally !!!!

Want to start your own thread on Israel being an Apartheid State, although there is one or more of them around this community and possible the Middle East community, feel free.

Once one gets away from discussing how Israel was created and the Mandate for Palestine, the mods have this habit of getting quite upset, and letting posters know it.

So long Indiana, see you in any other thread but this one where Israeli Apartheid is actually the topic of the thread.


----------



## Shusha

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's there right to self determination.
> 
> 
> 
> And religion poisons it. As it does everything.
Click to expand...


And yet you fail to make a case explaining exactly HOW religion "poisons" self determination.

Please do.


----------



## Shusha

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Israel is, now officially by law, a Jewish supremacy state.



Ah.  I had suspected that was buried under there somewhere.  Didn't take too long to pluck that out, after all.

Tell me, what MAKES Israel a "supremacy" state?  Be specific.   

Also, how many "supremacy" states exist in the world, using your criteria?


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Sixties Fan said:


> Israel is an "Apartheid State"


Hmm, no , I don't really think that, to that extent. But it most surely is a Jewish supremacy state. And it should stop that immediately.

You do know Judaism is a religion, right?


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Shusha said:


> Tell me, what MAKES Israel a "supremacy" state? Be specific.


They have codified into law that institutionalizes and  enshrines the right of national self-determination as “unique to the Jewish people”, not to all its citizens. That was an error. And there are plenty of secular Israelites who agree with me 100%. They don't want you two thin skinned reactionaries defending their country from your imagined demons.

And you are both throwing little hissies for no reason. I am on israel's side. They are the country trying hardest, in that region, to live peacefully with its cultish, belligerent neighbors. The last thing Israel should do is move to being cultish, itself. I fear it has,and will.


----------



## Shusha

You didn't answer my second question.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Shusha said:


> Also, how many "supremacy" states exist in the world, using your criteria?


I am not sure.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Israel is an "Apartheid State"
> 
> 
> 
> Hmm, no , I don't really think that, to that extent. But it most surely is a Jewish supremacy state. And it should stop that immediately.
> 
> You do know Judaism is a religion, right?
Click to expand...

Yes.......I do know that Judaism is a religion.

Now, when in its history it has been about being superior to all others?  Because basically you are saying that Israel is an Apartheid country.  Keeping groups religiously separate from each other by force or by State law.

And since you have never been to Israel, you have no idea of what you are really saying.

Reading something like that somewhere, especially in sources bent on destroying Israel, does not make it true, does it?


----------



## Sixties Fan

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Tell me, what MAKES Israel a "supremacy" state? Be specific.
> 
> 
> 
> They have codified into law that institutionalizes and  enshrines the right of national self-determination as “unique to the Jewish people”, not to all its citizens. That was an error. And there are plenty of secular Israelites who agree with me 100%. They don't want you two thin skinned reactionaries defending their country from your imagined demons.
> 
> And you are both throwing little hissies for no reason. I am on israel's side. They are the country trying hardest, in that region, to live peacefully with its cultish, belligerent neighbors. The last thing Israel should do is move to being cultish, itself. I fear it has,and will.
Click to expand...

You do not know one secular Jew, especially one living in Israel.
And sadly, you have never been to Israel and do not know anything about it.

And belittling us both is not going to make your arguments correct.

We have been to Israel, you have not.

When you do take your trip to Israel and have really experienced it and learned about it, then let us know.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Sixties Fan said:


> Now, when in its history it has been about being superior to all others?


Since they passed the law i mentioned. That's rhe wording. Americans would not stand for such a law with any regard to religion. Because the United States is a secular state. And Israel is not. They should change that.

Sorry fellas, interrogation time is over. You got your answers. You tried -- and failed -- to undermine them with personal attacks and complete fantasy. So your time is up.


----------



## Shusha

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Also, how many "supremacy" states exist in the world, using your criteria?
> 
> 
> 
> I am not sure.
Click to expand...


Really?  So you haven't RESEARCHED this topic and applied it to any number of the 190-something OTHER States in the world and have ONLY tested and applied this "criteria" of yours to ONE state -- the Jewish State.  

You know there is a word for that, right?


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Shusha said:


> Fort Fun Indiana said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Also, how many "supremacy" states exist in the world, using your criteria?
> 
> 
> 
> I am not sure.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Really?  So you haven't RESEARCHED this topic and applied it to any number of the 190-something OTHER States in the world and have ONLY tested and applied this "criteria" of yours to ONE state -- the Jewish State.
> 
> You know there is a word for that, right?
Click to expand...

 My research of that, or lack of it, or your fantasies about either is irrelevant. This thread is about Israel. You will find my commentary on other countries in other threads.


----------



## Shusha

Let's try this one on for size:

Israel is the homeland of the Jewish people.  The Jewish people have the right to determine their destiny after achieving the liberation of their country in accordance with their wishes and entirely of their own accord and will.

Supremacy state or no?


----------



## Sixties Fan

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Now, when in its history it has been about being superior to all others?
> 
> 
> 
> Since they passed the law i mentioned. That's rhe wording. Americans would not stand for such a law with any regard to religion. Because the United States is a secular state. And Israel is not. They should change that.
> 
> Sorry fellas, interrogation time is over. You got your answers. You tried -- and failed -- to undermine them with personal attacks and complete fantasy. So your time is up.
Click to expand...

We are on the wrong thread to discuss your topic.

This is the right place for it.  Go there, read the posts, the articles.  Any questions, post there:

Now it's a basic law: The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people


----------



## Shusha

Here's another:

It asserts the national sovereignty of the Jewish people.

Supremacy or no?


----------



## Sixties Fan

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fort Fun Indiana said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Also, how many "supremacy" states exist in the world, using your criteria?
> 
> 
> 
> I am not sure.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Really?  So you haven't RESEARCHED this topic and applied it to any number of the 190-something OTHER States in the world and have ONLY tested and applied this "criteria" of yours to ONE state -- the Jewish State.
> 
> You know there is a word for that, right?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> My research of that, or lack of it, or your fantasies about either is irrelevant. This thread is about Israel. You will find my commentary on other countries in other threads.
Click to expand...

Each thread is about a different topic.

The community is about Israel and Palestine.

THIS thread, again, is not about anything Israel, it is about the Creation of Israel and the Mandate for Palestine.


----------



## Shusha

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fort Fun Indiana said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Also, how many "supremacy" states exist in the world, using your criteria?
> 
> 
> 
> I am not sure.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Really?  So you haven't RESEARCHED this topic and applied it to any number of the 190-something OTHER States in the world and have ONLY tested and applied this "criteria" of yours to ONE state -- the Jewish State.
> 
> You know there is a word for that, right?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> My research of that, or lack of it, or your fantasies about either is irrelevant. This thread is about Israel. You will find my commentary on other countries in other threads.
Click to expand...


Really?  Point me.  Name me threads where you have condemned another State as being "supremacy".  

Your lack of research points to a double standard applied only to Israel.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Shusha said:


> Let's try this one on for size:
> 
> Israel is the homeland of the Jewish people.  The Jewish people have the right to determine their destiny after achieving the liberation of their country in accordance with their wishes and entirely of their own accord and will.
> 
> Supremacy state or no?


No, I think we will ignore your lame attempt to chamge lanes, and, instead, address the wording of the law i mentioned. Well, you won't...you will throw a fit and try to change the subject.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Shusha said:


> Name me threads where you have condemned another State as being "supremacy


Hmm,no, what I had for breakfast has no bearing on the analysis presented. But you are free to sign up for my fanclub, which will provide you with regular updates and dick pics.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Sixties Fan said:


> THIS thread, again, is not about anything Israel, it is about the Creation of Israel and the Mandate for Palestine.


What embarrassing nonsense...read what you just wrote...


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Shusha said:


> Your lack of research points to a double standard applied only to Israel.


The lack of research was invented on your part. As anyone can see by scrolling up. I am simply not going to kowtow to your little hissy fit.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> THIS thread, again, is not about anything Israel, it is about the Creation of Israel and the Mandate for Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> What embarrassing nonsense...read what you just wrote...
Click to expand...

What is the title of this thread?
Where does it say "Anything on Israel" ?

Do you mean that you really do not want to go to the real thread where your subject was discussed and continue to discuss it there?
Did you miss reading the rules of the Community?

*The Official Discussion Thread for the creation of Israel, the UN and the British Mandate*


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Sixties Fan said:


> Fort Fun Indiana said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> THIS thread, again, is not about anything Israel, it is about the Creation of Israel and the Mandate for Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> What embarrassing nonsense...read what you just wrote...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What is the title of this thread?
> Where does it say "Anything on Israel" ?
> 
> Do you mean that you really do not want to go to the real thread where your subject was discussed and continue to discuss it there?
> Did you miss reading the rules of the Community?
> 
> *The Official Discussion Thread for the creation of Israel, the UN and the British Mandate*
Click to expand...

Great, your objection is noted, so shut up already...


----------



## Sixties Fan

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your lack of research points to a double standard applied only to Israel.
> 
> 
> 
> The lack of research was invented on your part. As anyone can see by scrolling up. I am simply not going to kowtow to your little hissy fit.
Click to expand...

No, we shall kowtow to YOUR little hissy fits.

Because your hissy fits show that you do not know what you are talking about and do not care to do any homework, not even one little research on the internet to emphasize the truth of what you are alleging.

The correct place to discuss the laws which passed is on the thread above.  Let us go there, or just finish this lame and empty discussion right here.


----------



## Shusha

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> .
> And you are both throwing little hissies for no reason. I am on israel's side.



I'm going to take a wild stab here and say, if Jewish people/supporters throw "little hissies" rather than belittling us, you might want to consider what we are saying.  You know, especially if you are "on Israel's side". 

Because your comments are very, very difficult to separate from those not on Israel's side who frequently use the saem antisemitic double standards that you do. 

Start with coming up with an OBJECTIVE list of criteria which defines a "supremacy" state and then apply it to a few dozens different States.  Do the work.  Then come back.  We'll wait.


----------



## Sixties Fan

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fort Fun Indiana said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> THIS thread, again, is not about anything Israel, it is about the Creation of Israel and the Mandate for Palestine.
> 
> 
> 
> What embarrassing nonsense...read what you just wrote...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What is the title of this thread?
> Where does it say "Anything on Israel" ?
> 
> Do you mean that you really do not want to go to the real thread where your subject was discussed and continue to discuss it there?
> Did you miss reading the rules of the Community?
> 
> *The Official Discussion Thread for the creation of Israel, the UN and the British Mandate*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Great, your objection is noted, so shut up already...
Click to expand...

You just proved it again.

Nothing but thin air.

So long ignoramus.


----------



## Shusha

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> No, I think we will ignore your lame attempt to chamge lanes, and, instead, address the wording of the law i mentioned. Well, you won't...you will throw a fit and try to change the subject.



The subject, which you brought up, is your claim that Israel is a "supremacy" state.  Your lack of defined criteria, combined with your lack of research demonstrates you are having a knee-jerk reaction to something you've heard, but clearly lack an understanding about.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Shusha said:


> Because your comments are very, very difficult to separate from those not on Israel's side who frequently use the saem antisemitic double standards that you do.


Only due to your own ignorance. My words mirror the words of many secular, leftist Jews in Israel. Every time the right wing religious nutballs pass another law like the one I mentioned, Israel strays further from its original mandate.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Shusha said:


> The subject, which you brought up, is your claim that Israel is a "supremacy" state.


Correct. It is now a Jewish supremacy state. It is literally codified into their laws, now. That was an error. Until it is uncodified, it will remain a Jewish supremacy state.


----------



## Shusha

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> Name me threads where you have condemned another State as being "supremacy
> 
> 
> 
> Hmm,no, what I had for breakfast has no bearing on the analysis presented. But you are free to sign up for my fanclub, which will provide you with regular updates and dick pics.
Click to expand...


Of course you are not going to link me to places where you have condemned other states as being "supremacy".  You know as well as I do that you have never done such a thing.  

Instead we get the usual insults and personal attacks because you can't have a decent, respectful, objective and discerning discussion about actual topics and valid criticism.

In fact, next your are probably going to whine that Jews shut down conversations when someone criticizes Israel.  For future reference, if you don't want to appear antisemitic, then you MUST apply the same standards to Israel which you apply to other states.  Not actually that hard.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Shusha said:


> Of course you are not going to link me to places where you have condemned other states as being "supremacy".


Correct, for two reasons. It is irrelevant to the analysis presented here, and I refuse to kowtow to your little hissy. It does all the work on undermining you as a nonserious, emotional, irrational actor for me.

If I gave you ONE, would you put the binky back in your mouth and shut up for a while?


----------



## Shusha

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> 
> The subject, which you brought up, is your claim that Israel is a "supremacy" state.
> 
> 
> 
> Correct. It is now a Jewish supremacy state. It is literally codified into their laws, now.
Click to expand...


It is codified into the laws, constitutions and charters of dozens, hundreds of countries.  Indeed, it is the international STANDARD for national liberation movements and self-determination of states. 

When you first came to this thread, why didn't you complain about the supremacy state of Palestine?  This board is about both Israel AND Palestine, you know.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Shusha said:


> It is codified into the laws, constitutions and charters of dozens, hundreds of countries.


Indeed. And nearly all of them worse than Israel.


----------



## Shusha

Bump for Fort Fun Indiana


----------



## Sixties Fan

4.

The truth is that the Law of Return and the nation-state law are simple, natural laws, because at their core lies the deep, moral foundation on which the state of Israel was established as the nation state of the Jewish people. There is one state in all the world that is the homeland of the people of Israel. It is where the Jews have the right to realize the prophecies of the Biblical prophets and to ingather the exiles after years of wandering outside our national home, under constant existential threat. Israel has a historical responsibility for every Jew, wherever they may be. You can't accuse a family of racism for preferring a family member over a stranger, particularly when the family has the kind of bloody history that the family of the Jews has. But regardless of all this, within the national confines, every individual has the right to equal citizenship, without exception. 

The critics of the law have a problem with the very meaning of the Jews' return to history. Establishing a state means having to use force. It means police and military action. In other words, it is a shift from being exclusively a cultural civilization and becoming a national entity, adding another dimension to the identity. This is difficult for some Jews, who would prefer to remain the victims rather than hold the sword - in their eyes, that's what Esau would do, not Jacob. Some of these Jews opted to remain in exile, where other people can handle the use of force and the Jews are free to focus on the spirit, commerce and culture. 

Schocken, Haaretz's publisher, told me that his problem with nationalism is that "Judaism has nothing to do with nationalism. Judaism is cool." As a rule, he argued, "all this nationalism that you people have stuffed into Judaism is a sign of serious regression." 

In short, Judaism is agreeable as long as it is nothing more than folklore, an intellectual amusement, fertile ground for academic research, general prophets' ethics, or even just a religion. But when nationalism becomes involved, it's a different story. 

But the truth is that Judaism has never been just a religion. We were a nation thousands of years ago. That is the unique character of our people, as it was recorded in the Bible. It is a national movement that centers around a moral idea that also manifests in a religious manner. It is the national aspect of Judaism that supports the spiritual, moral and religious dimensions not just in the lives of individuals, as righteous as they may be, but in the collective life of a nation comprising all walks of life. Anyone looking to remove the national dimension from Judaism, or sees it as a "serious regression," is trying to alter our identity. That is precisely what the debate is about.

(full article online)

http://www.israelhayom.com/2018/11/16/another-type-of-anti-semitic-incitement/


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Oh look, a right wing, Israeli tabloid op-ed.


----------



## The Original Tree

Prophecy being fulfilled 



admonit said:


> 70 years after the establishment of a Jewish state was declared, now it became a basic (constitutional) law.
> 
> The full text of the law:
> 
> *Basic Law: Israel as the Nation State of the Jewish People*
> 
> *1 — Basic principles*
> 
> A. The land of Israel is the historical homeland of the Jewish people, in which the State of Israel was established.
> 
> B. The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people, in which it fulfills its natural, cultural, religious and historical right to self-determination.
> 
> C. The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Israel is unique to the Jewish people.
> 
> *2 — The symbols of the state*
> 
> A. The name of the state is “Israel.”
> 
> B. The state flag is white with two blue stripes near the edges and a blue Star of David in the center.
> 
> C. The state emblem is a seven-branched menorah with olive leaves on both sides and the word “Israel” beneath it.
> 
> D. The state anthem is “Hatikvah.”
> 
> E. Details regarding state symbols will be determined by the law.
> 
> *3 — The capital of the state*
> 
> Jerusalem, complete and united, is the capital of Israel.
> 
> *4 — Language*
> 
> A. The state’s language is Hebrew.
> 
> B. The Arabic language has a special status in the state; Regulating the use of Arabic in state institutions or by them will be set in law.
> 
> C. This clause does not harm the status given to the Arabic language before this law came into effect.
> 
> *5 — Ingathering of the exiles*
> 
> The state will be open for Jewish immigration and the ingathering of exiles
> 
> *6 — Connection to the Jewish people*
> 
> A. The state will strive to ensure the safety of the members of the Jewish people in trouble or in captivity due to the fact of their Jewishness or their citizenship.
> 
> B. The state shall act within the Diaspora to strengthen the affinity between the state and members of the Jewish people.
> 
> C. The state shall act to preserve the cultural, historical and religious heritage of the Jewish people among Jews in the Diaspora.
> 
> *7 — Jewish settlement*
> 
> A. The state views the development of Jewish settlement as a national value and will act to encourage and promote its establishment and consolidation.
> 
> *8 — Official calendar*
> 
> The Hebrew calendar is the official calendar of the state and alongside it the Gregorian calendar will be used as an official calendar. Use of  the Hebrew calendar and the Gregorian calendar will be determined by law.
> 
> *9 — Independence Day and memorial days*
> 
> A. Independence Day is the official national holiday of the state.
> 
> B. Memorial Day for the Fallen in Israel’s Wars and Holocaust and Heroism Remembrance Day are official memorial days of the State.
> 
> *10 — Days of rest and sabbath*
> 
> The Sabbath and the festivals of Israel are the established days of rest in the state; Non-Jews have a right to maintain days of rest on their Sabbaths and festivals; Details of this issue will be determined by law.
> 
> *11 — Immutability*
> 
> This Basic Law shall not be amended, unless by another Basic Law passed by a majority of Knesset members.


----------



## The Original Tree

That’s never going to happen according to scripture.  After the return of Christ and Judgment day, and the beginning of the millennial reign of a Christ Jews and Christians become one people, one flock, one church.



Penelope said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cnm said:
> 
> 
> 
> Like the official implementation of apartheid to ensure Boer values were preserved.
> 
> 
> 
> Unlike the Dutch people, Jews originated in the land of Israel.
> Do You see any reference to skin color?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes they were once some sects of the Canaanites, and the bible says EKE: Your mother was a Hittite and your father an Amorite.
> 
> Lets face it, anyone from Judea was known as  a jew. Good now that that is settled we can take Judeo off of Christian.
Click to expand...


----------



## The Original Tree

*Zachariah 12-2

Behold, I will make Jerusalem a cup of trembling unto all the people round about, when they shall be in the siege both against Judah and against Jerusalem

Zachariah 12-3

And in that day will I make Jerusalem a burdensome stone for all people: all that burden themselves with it shall be cut in pieces, though all the people of the earth be gathered together against it.

Zachariah 12-6

In that day will I make the governors of Judah like an hearth of fire among the wood, and like a torch of fire in a sheaf; and they shall devour all the people round about, on the right hand and on the left: and Jerusalem shall be inhabited again in her own place, even in Jerusalem.

Zachariah 12-8

In that day shall the LORD defend the inhabitants of Jerusalem; and he that is feeble among them at that day shall be as David; and the house of David shall be as God, as the angel of the LORD before them.

Zachariah 12-9

And it shall come to pass in that day, that I will seek to destroy all the nations that come against Jerusalem.

Zachariah 12-10 (The Return of
Jesus who was crucified as Messiah Bin Joseph and is returning  as Messiah Bin David)

And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn.

Zachariah 13-1

In that day there shall be a fountain opened to the house of David and to the inhabitants of Jerusalem for sin and for uncleanness.

Zachariah 13-6

And one shall say unto him, What are these wounds in thine hands? Then he shall answer, Those with which I was wounded in the house of my friends.*

*


Sixties Fan said:



			4.

The truth is that the Law of Return and the nation-state law are simple, natural laws, because at their core lies the deep, moral foundation on which the state of Israel was established as the nation state of the Jewish people. There is one state in all the world that is the homeland of the people of Israel. It is where the Jews have the right to realize the prophecies of the Biblical prophets and to ingather the exiles after years of wandering outside our national home, under constant existential threat. Israel has a historical responsibility for every Jew, wherever they may be. You can't accuse a family of racism for preferring a family member over a stranger, particularly when the family has the kind of bloody history that the family of the Jews has. But regardless of all this, within the national confines, every individual has the right to equal citizenship, without exception. 

The critics of the law have a problem with the very meaning of the Jews' return to history. Establishing a state means having to use force. It means police and military action. In other words, it is a shift from being exclusively a cultural civilization and becoming a national entity, adding another dimension to the identity. This is difficult for some Jews, who would prefer to remain the victims rather than hold the sword - in their eyes, that's what Esau would do, not Jacob. Some of these Jews opted to remain in exile, where other people can handle the use of force and the Jews are free to focus on the spirit, commerce and culture. 

Schocken, Haaretz's publisher, told me that his problem with nationalism is that "Judaism has nothing to do with nationalism. Judaism is cool." As a rule, he argued, "all this nationalism that you people have stuffed into Judaism is a sign of serious regression." 

In short, Judaism is agreeable as long as it is nothing more than folklore, an intellectual amusement, fertile ground for academic research, general prophets' ethics, or even just a religion. But when nationalism becomes involved, it's a different story. 

But the truth is that Judaism has never been just a religion. We were a nation thousands of years ago. That is the unique character of our people, as it was recorded in the Bible. It is a national movement that centers around a moral idea that also manifests in a religious manner. It is the national aspect of Judaism that supports the spiritual, moral and religious dimensions not just in the lives of individuals, as righteous as they may be, but in the collective life of a nation comprising all walks of life. Anyone looking to remove the national dimension from Judaism, or sees it as a "serious regression," is trying to alter our identity. That is precisely what the debate is about.

(full article online)

http://www.israelhayom.com/2018/11/16/another-type-of-anti-semitic-incitement/

Click to expand...

*


----------



## flacaltenn

*Moved discussion about "Israel is a religious state" from Origins/History thread to this one.. *


----------



## flacaltenn

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> You have proven nothing about Israel being a religious State.
> 
> 
> 
> Their government being interwined with the Jewish religious institution shows they are not a secular state. No other proof is required, that is conclusive.
Click to expand...


Since I had to read thru these posts in order to keep topics clean, I just had to comment on this misconception of Israel not being a "secular" state. There are basic facts that need to be on table.  Secular has too many political implications to just be the OPPOSITE of a theocracy. And while Israel is deeply rooted in Jewish religious beliefs and tradition, it maintains little AUTHORITY to exclude other practices. A very UNIQUE situation for that corner of the world.
They do the "tolerance/inclusion" thingy FAR BETTER than we do in the USA... 

First, the identification of Jews as a PEOPLE is much stronger throughout the entire world than as a religion. Even in the USA, Judaism is split into 3 factions that don't really honor each other with equal "religious validity".. Those splits HERE are between the Orthodox, Conservative and Reform movements and span the entire spectrum from total religious authority to relatively complete secularism..

This is similar to the ways the Kurds and Yazidis ATTEMPT to associate "as a people" in the neighboring Arab countries but with a higher degree of difficulty, bias and govt suppression..

Secondly the CITIZENS of Israel include an almost 18% Arab Muslim portion, many of whom serve in the IDF and at my last count, occupied about 8 to 11% of the seats in the Knesset... This does NOT COUNT the Palestinian population in the West Bank or Gaza..

Secularism in Israel - Wikipedia

*The Jewish population of Israel can be divided into three groups: Orthodox, Traditional, and Secular. Secular Jews make up 41.4% of the Jewish population, followed by the Traditional Jews accounting for 38.5% of the population, with the remaining 20% populated by the Orthodox and ultra-Orthodox. In Israel, the Reform and Conservative movements are estimated to make up 7.6% of the Jewish population,[10] a significantly lower rate compared to the Jewish diaspora.

Israel legally recognizes thirteen non-Jewish religious communities, each of which practice their own religious family law. The largest religious minority population is the Muslim community of Israel, and it amounts to 17.3% of the overall population.[22] The Muslim communities live mostly in the northern part of the country. The Orthodox Jewish and the Orthodox Muslim population have the highest population growth of all communities in Israel.[23]They are free under the law to vote, practice religion, be members of the Israeli parliament, and can use the same Israeli education system as the rest of the country, although the education system is de facto mostly bifurcated into Jewish and non-Jewish schools (see Education in Israel). Many Arabs are a part of the Israeli government and politics.[24] Almost one 10th of the parliament are Arab, and there is a mosque in the parliament building (Knesset) for those who are Muslim. A Supreme Court justice and a minister of the Israeli cabinet are also Arab Muslims. Muslims, as well as most other religious minorities, are not required to serve in the army.

The next-largest minority population is the Christian population (2%), some of whom live with Jewish communities.[6] Rather than have their own education and medical institutions, they have integrated into state institutions. The Christian population in Israel is the only Christian population in the Middle East that has grown in the last half century. Christians choose to live in Israel because they have freedom of speech and the freedom to practice religion.[25]

How Religious are Israeli Jews?
*
All this makes Israel the MOST secular nation in the Middle East and FAR from any threat of being a theocracy in the mold of MOST of it's Arab neighbors..

It's a place where gay people can live openly and celebrate in parades. FAR more "inclusive" in that regard than MOST places in the world including OUR COUNTRY...


----------



## Sixties Fan

An official Guardian editorial (The Guardian view on the Israeli elections: Netanyahu debases his office – again, March 11) included the following accusation:

"Israel is not a state of all its citizens, Benjamin “Bibi” Netanyahu declared on Sunday. His words should be shocking, but in truth they made explicit the message of last year’s nation state law, *rendering Palestinians in Israel second-class citizens." *

This is completely untrue. 

The Jewish Nation-State Law merely codifies, within the country’s Basic Law (a de facto constitution), Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people – a principle which is the core of Zionism.  It also lists a number of manifestations of Israel’s status as a Jewish state, including the country’s flag, national anthem, calendar, language, and immigration policies.  

As even the head of the left-wing Israeli Democracy Institute conceded, the impact of the law is “largely symbolic”. 

Though some have criticised the law because it didn’t also affirm the equal rights of non-Jewish citizens, the protection of individual rights is already covered in the Basic Law on “Human Dignity and Freedom“, which, as constitutional law expert Eugene Kontorovich observed, the Israeli Supreme Court interprets as guaranteeing equality.

Kontorovich also explained that the law’s declaration of Israel as a uniquely Jewish state is not inconsistent with liberal democratic constitutions of Europe.

The Latvian Constitution declares the “unwavering will of _the Latvian nation to have its own State and its inalienable right of self-determination_ *in order to guarantee the existence and development of the Latvian nation*, its language and culture throughout the centuries.” Latvia’s population is about 25% ethnically and linguistically Russian.  And, the Slovak Constitution opens with the words, “*We the Slovak nation*,” possess “*the natural right of nations to self-determination*.”

(full article online)

Guardian lies in accusation that Israeli law codifies racism


----------



## Mindful

Sixties Fan said:


> An official Guardian editorial (The Guardian view on the Israeli elections: Netanyahu debases his office – again, March 11) included the following accusation:
> 
> "Israel is not a state of all its citizens, Benjamin “Bibi” Netanyahu declared on Sunday. His words should be shocking, but in truth they made explicit the message of last year’s nation state law, *rendering Palestinians in Israel second-class citizens." *
> 
> This is completely untrue.
> 
> The Jewish Nation-State Law merely codifies, within the country’s Basic Law (a de facto constitution), Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people – a principle which is the core of Zionism.  It also lists a number of manifestations of Israel’s status as a Jewish state, including the country’s flag, national anthem, calendar, language, and immigration policies.
> 
> As even the head of the left-wing Israeli Democracy Institute conceded, the impact of the law is “largely symbolic”.
> 
> Though some have criticised the law because it didn’t also affirm the equal rights of non-Jewish citizens, the protection of individual rights is already covered in the Basic Law on “Human Dignity and Freedom“, which, as constitutional law expert Eugene Kontorovich observed, the Israeli Supreme Court interprets as guaranteeing equality.
> 
> Kontorovich also explained that the law’s declaration of Israel as a uniquely Jewish state is not inconsistent with liberal democratic constitutions of Europe.
> 
> The Latvian Constitution declares the “unwavering will of _the Latvian nation to have its own State and its inalienable right of self-determination_ *in order to guarantee the existence and development of the Latvian nation*, its language and culture throughout the centuries.” Latvia’s population is about 25% ethnically and linguistically Russian.  And, the Slovak Constitution opens with the words, “*We the Slovak nation*,” possess “*the natural right of nations to self-determination*.”
> 
> (full article online)
> 
> Guardian lies in accusation that Israeli law codifies racism




The Guardian has become a rag.


----------



## rylah

flacaltenn said:


> Fort Fun Indiana said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> You have proven nothing about Israel being a religious State.
> 
> 
> 
> Their government being interwined with the Jewish religious institution shows they are not a secular state. No other proof is required, that is conclusive.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Since I had to read thru these posts in order to keep topics clean, I just had to comment on this misconception of Israel not being a "secular" state. There are basic facts that need to be on table.  Secular has too many political implications to just be the OPPOSITE of a theocracy. And while Israel is deeply rooted in Jewish religious beliefs and tradition, it maintains little AUTHORITY to exclude other practices. A very UNIQUE situation for that corner of the world.
> They do the "tolerance/inclusion" thingy FAR BETTER than we do in the USA...
> 
> First, the identification of Jews as a PEOPLE is much stronger throughout the entire world than as a religion. Even in the USA, Judaism is split into 3 factions that don't really honor each other with equal "religious validity".. Those splits HERE are between the Orthodox, Conservative and Reform movements and span the entire spectrum from total religious authority to relatively complete secularism..
> 
> This is similar to the ways the Kurds and Yazidis ATTEMPT to associate "as a people" in the neighboring Arab countries but with a higher degree of difficulty, bias and govt suppression..
> 
> Secondly the CITIZENS of Israel include an almost 18% Arab Muslim portion, many of whom serve in the IDF and at my last count, occupied about 8 to 11% of the seats in the Knesset... This does NOT COUNT the Palestinian population in the West Bank or Gaza..
> 
> Secularism in Israel - Wikipedia
> 
> *The Jewish population of Israel can be divided into three groups: Orthodox, Traditional, and Secular. Secular Jews make up 41.4% of the Jewish population, followed by the Traditional Jews accounting for 38.5% of the population, with the remaining 20% populated by the Orthodox and ultra-Orthodox. In Israel, the Reform and Conservative movements are estimated to make up 7.6% of the Jewish population,[10] a significantly lower rate compared to the Jewish diaspora.
> 
> Israel legally recognizes thirteen non-Jewish religious communities, each of which practice their own religious family law. The largest religious minority population is the Muslim community of Israel, and it amounts to 17.3% of the overall population.[22] The Muslim communities live mostly in the northern part of the country. The Orthodox Jewish and the Orthodox Muslim population have the highest population growth of all communities in Israel.[23]They are free under the law to vote, practice religion, be members of the Israeli parliament, and can use the same Israeli education system as the rest of the country, although the education system is de facto mostly bifurcated into Jewish and non-Jewish schools (see Education in Israel). Many Arabs are a part of the Israeli government and politics.[24] Almost one 10th of the parliament are Arab, and there is a mosque in the parliament building (Knesset) for those who are Muslim. A Supreme Court justice and a minister of the Israeli cabinet are also Arab Muslims. Muslims, as well as most other religious minorities, are not required to serve in the army.
> 
> The next-largest minority population is the Christian population (2%), some of whom live with Jewish communities.[6] Rather than have their own education and medical institutions, they have integrated into state institutions. The Christian population in Israel is the only Christian population in the Middle East that has grown in the last half century. Christians choose to live in Israel because they have freedom of speech and the freedom to practice religion.[25]
> 
> How Religious are Israeli Jews?
> *
> All this makes Israel the MOST secular nation in the Middle East and FAR from any threat of being a theocracy in the mold of MOST of it's Arab neighbors..
> 
> It's a place where gay people can live openly and celebrate in parades. FAR more "inclusive" in that regard than MOST places in the world including OUR COUNTRY...
Click to expand...


Thank You for the American perspective.
In my, Israeli perspective, this thing about conservative, reform and orthodox is not as clear as in the US.
Reform movement in Israel is a recent phenomena, prior to that it was a small unknown club, there was no friction or public awareness. All those terms are new, and not fit to describe the Haredi, Masorti and  Hiloni difference and commonality. Vast majority of hiloni are actually masorti, in diaspora terms, and a great portion of masorit and haredi youth are one and the same with the only difference in the kind of kippa we wear.
All our great great great great fathers were bearded Jews, deeply religious and Zionist to the core in its most original meaning - all were involved in supporting the Jewish community in Israel.

That said, "religious" communities vote for "secular" parties, not because it's a masorti, haredi or reform state, but because it's a Jewish state, rather a tribal perspective than religious.


----------



## flacaltenn

rylah said:


> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fort Fun Indiana said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> You have proven nothing about Israel being a religious State.
> 
> 
> 
> Their government being interwined with the Jewish religious institution shows they are not a secular state. No other proof is required, that is conclusive.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Since I had to read thru these posts in order to keep topics clean, I just had to comment on this misconception of Israel not being a "secular" state. There are basic facts that need to be on table.  Secular has too many political implications to just be the OPPOSITE of a theocracy. And while Israel is deeply rooted in Jewish religious beliefs and tradition, it maintains little AUTHORITY to exclude other practices. A very UNIQUE situation for that corner of the world.
> They do the "tolerance/inclusion" thingy FAR BETTER than we do in the USA...
> 
> First, the identification of Jews as a PEOPLE is much stronger throughout the entire world than as a religion. Even in the USA, Judaism is split into 3 factions that don't really honor each other with equal "religious validity".. Those splits HERE are between the Orthodox, Conservative and Reform movements and span the entire spectrum from total religious authority to relatively complete secularism..
> 
> This is similar to the ways the Kurds and Yazidis ATTEMPT to associate "as a people" in the neighboring Arab countries but with a higher degree of difficulty, bias and govt suppression..
> 
> Secondly the CITIZENS of Israel include an almost 18% Arab Muslim portion, many of whom serve in the IDF and at my last count, occupied about 8 to 11% of the seats in the Knesset... This does NOT COUNT the Palestinian population in the West Bank or Gaza..
> 
> Secularism in Israel - Wikipedia
> 
> *The Jewish population of Israel can be divided into three groups: Orthodox, Traditional, and Secular. Secular Jews make up 41.4% of the Jewish population, followed by the Traditional Jews accounting for 38.5% of the population, with the remaining 20% populated by the Orthodox and ultra-Orthodox. In Israel, the Reform and Conservative movements are estimated to make up 7.6% of the Jewish population,[10] a significantly lower rate compared to the Jewish diaspora.
> 
> Israel legally recognizes thirteen non-Jewish religious communities, each of which practice their own religious family law. The largest religious minority population is the Muslim community of Israel, and it amounts to 17.3% of the overall population.[22] The Muslim communities live mostly in the northern part of the country. The Orthodox Jewish and the Orthodox Muslim population have the highest population growth of all communities in Israel.[23]They are free under the law to vote, practice religion, be members of the Israeli parliament, and can use the same Israeli education system as the rest of the country, although the education system is de facto mostly bifurcated into Jewish and non-Jewish schools (see Education in Israel). Many Arabs are a part of the Israeli government and politics.[24] Almost one 10th of the parliament are Arab, and there is a mosque in the parliament building (Knesset) for those who are Muslim. A Supreme Court justice and a minister of the Israeli cabinet are also Arab Muslims. Muslims, as well as most other religious minorities, are not required to serve in the army.
> 
> The next-largest minority population is the Christian population (2%), some of whom live with Jewish communities.[6] Rather than have their own education and medical institutions, they have integrated into state institutions. The Christian population in Israel is the only Christian population in the Middle East that has grown in the last half century. Christians choose to live in Israel because they have freedom of speech and the freedom to practice religion.[25]
> 
> How Religious are Israeli Jews?
> *
> All this makes Israel the MOST secular nation in the Middle East and FAR from any threat of being a theocracy in the mold of MOST of it's Arab neighbors..
> 
> It's a place where gay people can live openly and celebrate in parades. FAR more "inclusive" in that regard than MOST places in the world including OUR COUNTRY...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Thank You for the American perspective.
> In my, Israeli perspective, this thing about conservative, reform and orthodox is not as clear as in the US.
> Reform movement in Israel is a recent phenomena, prior to that it was a small unknown club, there was no friction or public awareness. All those terms are new, and not fit to describe the Haredi, Masorti and  Hiloni difference and commonality. Vast majority of hiloni are actually masorti, in diaspora terms, and a great portion of masorit and haredi youth are one and the same with the only difference in the kind of kippa we wear.
> All our great great great great fathers were bearded Jews, deeply religious and Zionist to the core in its most original meaning - all were involved in supporting the Jewish community in Israel.
> 
> That said, "religious" communities vote for "secular" parties, not because it's a masorti, haredi or reform state, but because it's a Jewish state, rather a tribal perspective than religious.
Click to expand...


I like the "tribal" part. Part of the issue in America has been the friction between Reform, Conservative, Orthodox.. I grew up in a beach town with only about 80 Jewish families.. Split between a Reform and Conservative schul.. I led a REVOLT as a 17 yr old to ALLOW the 2 separate "youth groups" to have JOINT functions.    It seemed ridiculous to maintain "segregation" of the youth... LOL.... That might be changing with newer generations. Don't know. 

I understand the exactness of using the proper terms for classifying "observance" and tradition in Israel. But American gentiles just glaze over and freeze when you do not associate religiousity with a "denomination"... LOL.... 

Because that association as "a people" is so strong in Israel, *there is no clear threat of POLITICIZING the religious differences*.. And that's the point I wanted to make as it applies to how "secular" Israel is.. Politics is naturally in another realm from religious identity in Israel.. The bond is tradition and history, not different flavors of observance.  Like the Wiki says, many of the Russian asylum seekers have a "sketchy" Jewish pedigree according to religious law.. But --- it really did not matter --  did it??


----------



## rylah

flacaltenn said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fort Fun Indiana said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> 
> You have proven nothing about Israel being a religious State.
> 
> 
> 
> Their government being interwined with the Jewish religious institution shows they are not a secular state. No other proof is required, that is conclusive.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Since I had to read thru these posts in order to keep topics clean, I just had to comment on this misconception of Israel not being a "secular" state. There are basic facts that need to be on table.  Secular has too many political implications to just be the OPPOSITE of a theocracy. And while Israel is deeply rooted in Jewish religious beliefs and tradition, it maintains little AUTHORITY to exclude other practices. A very UNIQUE situation for that corner of the world.
> They do the "tolerance/inclusion" thingy FAR BETTER than we do in the USA...
> 
> First, the identification of Jews as a PEOPLE is much stronger throughout the entire world than as a religion. Even in the USA, Judaism is split into 3 factions that don't really honor each other with equal "religious validity".. Those splits HERE are between the Orthodox, Conservative and Reform movements and span the entire spectrum from total religious authority to relatively complete secularism..
> 
> This is similar to the ways the Kurds and Yazidis ATTEMPT to associate "as a people" in the neighboring Arab countries but with a higher degree of difficulty, bias and govt suppression..
> 
> Secondly the CITIZENS of Israel include an almost 18% Arab Muslim portion, many of whom serve in the IDF and at my last count, occupied about 8 to 11% of the seats in the Knesset... This does NOT COUNT the Palestinian population in the West Bank or Gaza..
> 
> Secularism in Israel - Wikipedia
> 
> *The Jewish population of Israel can be divided into three groups: Orthodox, Traditional, and Secular. Secular Jews make up 41.4% of the Jewish population, followed by the Traditional Jews accounting for 38.5% of the population, with the remaining 20% populated by the Orthodox and ultra-Orthodox. In Israel, the Reform and Conservative movements are estimated to make up 7.6% of the Jewish population,[10] a significantly lower rate compared to the Jewish diaspora.
> 
> Israel legally recognizes thirteen non-Jewish religious communities, each of which practice their own religious family law. The largest religious minority population is the Muslim community of Israel, and it amounts to 17.3% of the overall population.[22] The Muslim communities live mostly in the northern part of the country. The Orthodox Jewish and the Orthodox Muslim population have the highest population growth of all communities in Israel.[23]They are free under the law to vote, practice religion, be members of the Israeli parliament, and can use the same Israeli education system as the rest of the country, although the education system is de facto mostly bifurcated into Jewish and non-Jewish schools (see Education in Israel). Many Arabs are a part of the Israeli government and politics.[24] Almost one 10th of the parliament are Arab, and there is a mosque in the parliament building (Knesset) for those who are Muslim. A Supreme Court justice and a minister of the Israeli cabinet are also Arab Muslims. Muslims, as well as most other religious minorities, are not required to serve in the army.
> 
> The next-largest minority population is the Christian population (2%), some of whom live with Jewish communities.[6] Rather than have their own education and medical institutions, they have integrated into state institutions. The Christian population in Israel is the only Christian population in the Middle East that has grown in the last half century. Christians choose to live in Israel because they have freedom of speech and the freedom to practice religion.[25]
> 
> How Religious are Israeli Jews?
> *
> All this makes Israel the MOST secular nation in the Middle East and FAR from any threat of being a theocracy in the mold of MOST of it's Arab neighbors..
> 
> It's a place where gay people can live openly and celebrate in parades. FAR more "inclusive" in that regard than MOST places in the world including OUR COUNTRY...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Thank You for the American perspective.
> In my, Israeli perspective, this thing about conservative, reform and orthodox is not as clear as in the US.
> Reform movement in Israel is a recent phenomena, prior to that it was a small unknown club, there was no friction or public awareness. All those terms are new, and not fit to describe the Haredi, Masorti and  Hiloni difference and commonality. Vast majority of hiloni are actually masorti, in diaspora terms, and a great portion of masorit and haredi youth are one and the same with the only difference in the kind of kippa we wear.
> All our great great great great fathers were bearded Jews, deeply religious and Zionist to the core in its most original meaning - all were involved in supporting the Jewish community in Israel.
> 
> That said, "religious" communities vote for "secular" parties, not because it's a masorti, haredi or reform state, but because it's a Jewish state, rather a tribal perspective than religious.
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I like the "tribal" part. Part of the issue in America has been the friction between Reform, Conservative, Orthodox.. I grew up in a beach town with only about 80 Jewish families.. Split between a Reform and Conservative schul.. I led a REVOLT as a 17 yr old to ALLOW the 2 separate "youth groups" to have JOINT functions.    It seemed ridiculous to maintain "segregation" of the youth... LOL.... That might be changing with newer generations. Don't know.
> 
> I understand the exactness of using the proper terms for classifying "observance" and tradition in Israel. But American gentiles just glaze over and freeze when you do not associate religiousity with a "denomination"... LOL....
> 
> Because that association as "a people" is so strong in Israel, *there is no clear threat of POLITICIZING the religious differences*.. And that's the point I wanted to make as it applies to how "secular" Israel is.. Politics is naturally in another realm from religious identity in Israel.. The bond is tradition and history, not different flavors of observance.  Like the Wiki says, many of the Russian asylum seekers have a "sketchy" Jewish pedigree according to religious law.. But --- it really did not matter --  did it??
Click to expand...


Your rebellion sounds like the most common opinion in Israel,
all Jews should enjoy both their heritage and the Israeli revival of fulfilling the mitzvah of inheritance of the land.

In Israel, You'll see a huge number of Middle eastern Jews taking the road of the hardcore intellectual Ashkenazi approach, and being the majority of Hassidim who visit the tombs of the great sages in Ukraine, while Jews from former USSR and Caucasus feeling very comfortable in Sephardic synagogues.

We just say it's tribes, one studies, the other moves boats, another rules, and the other is the priests. It's the coolest vibrant culture in the world, the 60's gurus would not even dream of such a perfect groove


----------



## rylah

I remember reading a Jung book, where he compared western cultures
and cultures of the distant tribes he visited. Of course in his own unique manner of building a map of each culture's archetypal symbolism of the collective unconscious.

Specifically he mentioned a tiny relatively isolated Native American tribe, that was attached to a mountain.
This tribe lived under the mountain and believed it was their duty to make sure,  participate each day in the moving of the sun from one end of the sky to the other for the wellbeing of the whole world. Their mere dwelling under that mountain fulfilled their mission

It was not about sacrificing people, or religion, but a tiny community with a deep tribal culture.
So do Jews are a people of a book and a mountain, we don't try to convert anyone or spread to other continents..
 Our mountain eventually brings peace to the entire humanity and welcomes every nation to build it together with the tribe, to experience the greatest "nirvana" there can possibly be, of all uniting knowledge of the Creator that moves the same sun and moon in a much more holistic manner.

The world peace is a much Jewish Messianic idea, and there're certain tribes involved in the story, with their symbolic mission in the world, much more holistic and deep than the borders of religion.

On the other hand, with all that said, if we want to be sincere with ourselves, democratic system with its rituals, can be viewed as deeply religious in the most basic sense.
American politics and symbolism is very religious.

Here are Your "priests" so to speak...with Your own mountain.


----------



## Sixties Fan

The Nation-State Law under attack | Abu Yehuda


----------

