recent concessions in occupied territories

[schricken]

could someone please explain the nature and objectives of recent concessions by israel in the occupied territories

thanks in advance, schricken

[NewsGuy]

Originally posted by schricken
could someone please explain the nature and objectives of recent concessions by israel in the occupied territories

Judea and Samaria are not "occupied territories." They belong to Israel under UN resolution 242, which guarantees Israel the right to live within secure borders. Besides the UN resolutions, these areas are historically part of the Jewish homeland and the Arabs living there currently are basically squatters who came over from the Arabian desert and stole the Jewish land.

In any event, Israel has offered the Palestinians huge concessions by already handing over all of the main Palestinian population centers to the full control of arch-terrorist Arafat. Furthermore, Israel was willing to offer the Palestinians most of the rest of Judea and Samaria, if only the Palestinians would stop their massacres of Jews for a mere 7 days.

However, to stop the massacres for 7 days proved to be too high of a price for the Palestinians to pay in exchange for control of the land, and so they rejected those terms. Instead, the Palestinians chose to build missile factories and training grounds for suicide bombers in Judea and Samaria.

[MGB8]

The United Nations is a big joke, and we all know that.

Judea and Samaria are Israeli land by virtue of the 1967 and 1973 wars in which Israel won the land in self defense.

Israel has historical claims to the land aside from this, as do others (Arabs, turks, mamaluks, long gone philistines and other canaanite tribes), but the bottom line is that Israel won the areas.



Originally posted by NewsGuy


Judea and Samaria are not "occupied territories." They belong to Israel under UN resolution 242, which guarantees Israel the right to live within secure borders. Besides the UN resolutions, these areas are historically part of the Jewish homeland and the Arabs living there currently are basically squatters who came over from the Arabian desert and stole the Jewish land.

In any event, Israel has offered the Palestinians huge concessions by already handing over all of the main Palestinian population centers to the full control of arch-terrorist Arafat. Furthermore, Israel was willing to offer the Palestinians most of the rest of Judea and Samaria, if only the Palestinians would stop their massacres of Jews for a mere 7 days.

However, to stop the massacres for 7 days proved to be too high of a price for the Palestinians to pay in exchange for control of the land, and so they rejected those terms. Instead, the Palestinians chose to build missile factories and training grounds for suicide bombers in Judea and Samaria.

[Vic]

Also a useful source: http://www.jcpa.org

[Iori Yagami]

Originally posted by MGB8

Israel has historical claims to the land aside from this, as do others (Arabs, turks, mamaluks, long gone philistines and other canaanite tribes), but the bottom line is that Israel won the areas.

You forgot the babylonians :)

[Mediocrates]

First off, they are not 'occupied'.

They are DISPUTED.

Never ever call them occupied because the only land Israelis are occupying is Israel.

[Erich]

Never ever call them occupied because the only land Israelis are occupying is Israel.

So, the Jewish settlers all got up and left? When, last night in the dark?

The Occupied Territories as spoils of war? Isn't that stretching things a bit? How about the following from:

http://themilitant.com/2002/6624/662449.html

After the 1967 conquests, the Israeli military administration began wholesale expropriations of Palestinians’ land. By 1981 one-third of the land in the West Bank had been taken out of Palestinian hands. The usual procedure was for the army to declare an area indispensable to security, seal it off, and force the farmers off the land. Fraudulent sales were engineered, taking advantage of the fact that incomplete record-keeping under the Ottoman Empire and British colonial rule often made it impossible for Palestinians to prove title even though their families had worked the land for generations. Israeli policies also blocked farmers from using their land. The military government then confiscated it because it had been left fallow. Some villages lost half their land to Israeli confiscations. Those farmers who resisted faced arrest for "terrorist activity," destruction of their homes, expulsion from the country, or spraying of their crops with defoliants.

Much of the confiscated land was turned over to Israeli settlements. By 1988 there were 130 in the West Bank and Gaza. In Gaza, one-third of the land had been turned over to some three thousand settlers. With military considerations in the forefront, the settlements are built on hilltops overlooking Palestinian villages. Surrounded by huge coils of barbed wire, they resemble forts more than farming communities, and are strategically located amid clusters of Palestinian villages to keep the latter separated and terrorized. The settlers, often right-wing émigrés from the United States, are armed. They get aid from the government and from Zionist organizations.

End of quote

If they were spoils of war, Israel would have legally annexed them and given citizenship to the occupants. That's how it is done with spoils of war. That's not what happened.

If you're going to steal their lands from them, at least be honest and admit it, instead of coming up with these fabulous fables.

And what is this laughable bit about squatters? Over 3 million squatters and 3 million more in refugee status? That has to be a world record for squatters, squatters in any situation usually running from a few to a few hundred. Where are you folks getting this stuff from? It wouldn't even make a believable comic book, or do you really think you can fool all of the world all of the time? Those days are long gone in an age of cell phones, internet and live news globally, even if you try to keep the reporters out.

How about some honesty and integrity out there instead of Grimm's fairy tales?

[Iori Yagami]

The russians have exiled pretty much that same number of chechnians. Why aren`t you whining about that too?

[Erich]

Iori,

again, total lack of style. You accuse me of whining, then assume without knowing me, that I'm not involved with the Chechnians. How could you know that? You assumed! And you know what happens when you assume.

Honestly, I expected a bit more of a counter argument than your schoolyard pat. It could be equally argued that legal annexation could still take place today. And it would make alot more sense. All of Israel and the Occupied Territories together make up such a pitifully small land mass that it is impossible to defend it from some serious outside threat. And instead of uniting, you want to chop this into two or more pieces because cousins can't learn to live together and trust one another? Now that's what I call insane. Unite and defend together, instead of dividing and destroying from both outside and within. Problem is, both Israelis and Palestinians would have to live and be treated equally, an awful big challenge for an Israel obsessed with demographic monotony.

[Mediocrates]

Ok trollboy - pick up a gun and sell your story in Cairo. By that reasoning I guess we should kick the Spaniards out of Spain too and give it back to its rightful owners, the Moors.

[Erich]

The schoolyard's alive tonight!

The Moors invaded and maintained their conquest for what, about eight hundred years? And were pushed back out again. Funny how that usually happens to invaders. Sort of what the Raza is doing in the US, pushing the Americans up and out by quietly displacing them. Watch out, they'll be in North Carolina before you know it and everything south of Canada will belong to Mexico.

Trollboy? C'mon, engage a few brain cells, you can do better than that.

[Mediocrates]

better yet - review the rest of this board you'll find several hundred discussion points that don't need to be repeated again, here.

[Erich]

Is that avoidance or denial you are practicing?

[Mediocrates]

that is reiteration - read and learn at your own peril, you have only your fear to lose, scrolling and reading is just as easy for you as it is for anyone else.

clearly you pose rhetorical questions in order to flame -

FWIW, you might just see an Hispanic seperatist movement in the south west US, though not here in Carolina in the next 30 years or so.

[Erich]

..and I don't think the Moors will be reinvading in the next thirty years or so, either. ;)

Rhetorical? Flame? Far from it. Just looking for intelligent discourse and exchange of ideas. What I get instead is tapdance. If you disagree with me, have at me with a good counter argument. I would appreciate it.

Erich

[MGB8]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Erich
[B]Never ever call them occupied because the only land Israelis are occupying is Israel.

So, the Jewish settlers all got up and left? When, last night in the dark?

The Occupied Territories as spoils of war? Isn't that stretching things a bit? How about the following from:

--------------------------------------------

First, quoting a "militant" magazine get you ZERO credibility.

Yes, the West Bank was won in a war. Came in handy in 73 when the Arab nations invaded on Yom Kippur (talk about integrity.) Saved Israel.

Israel gave back the Sinai and a large part of Syria.

As for "expropriation" - that's pretty much BS. The Arab villages in the West bank continue to stand. The land formerly owned by the Jordanian government - NOT by individual Palestinian Arabs, was used by Israel. Big whoop.

[MGB8]

If they were spoils of war, Israel would have legally annexed them and given citizenship to the occupants. That's how it is done with spoils of war. That's not what happened.

-------

It wasn't done because Israel, under Golda Meir, tried to give back parts of the west bank in a land for peace deal with Jordan.

----------------------



Over 3 million squatters and 3 million more in refugee status? That has to be a world record for squatters, squatters in any situation usually running from a few to a few hundred. Grimm's fairy tales? [/B][/QUOTE]

-----------------

Your numbers are misleading. Its 6 million NOW. Over 30 years after the fact. With a HUGE birthrate. With very questionable accounting.

Most of the West bank was barren, you should know that. The land belonged to no one but the state that governed. Also, in 48 there was a total poulation in Current Israel (Jews and Arabs) of about 800 thousand.

Nice try, though.

What the heck is a third or fourth generation refugee - can you still be a refugee at that point? Were they even really refugees, in the usual sense of the word, considering that the country that they came from was just invaded by their "allies."

[Erich]

Well, think of it this way. You own a nice farm outside of Chicago. The Canadians invade and kick your butt into Mexico, where you become a Refugee. Forget about the third or fourth generation ****. You still have mostly first and second generation. Do you want your farm back, or should you just drown your sorrows on a cheap bottle of tequila?

Your figures are bogus for 1947-1948. Try 600,000 Jewish and 1,300,000 Arabs, source:

http://www.jajz-ed.org.il/50/time/48.html

The population doubling and then doubling again in 50 years is not abnormal.

Lands unclaimed were barren, but lands owned and used were in Arab hands, frustrating for the Jewish immigrants who flooded in expecting to find a land of milk and honey with no inhabitants.

There has been alot of time since Golda Meir

[Erich]

What is hardest to stomach, is an argument that says it's perfectly okay for the Israeli side to grow from zero to millions, allowing selective immigration from all over the world, then trying to fantacize the original occupants into oblivion and their original ownership of the land, pretending the land was empty and unowned...while refusing right of return to the original occupants, even claiming the current population figures must be from some explosive birth rate or lousy record keeping. Too many facts and figures out there that counter this wishful rewrite of history, yet way too many have bought this fantasy, hook, line and sinker. Absolutely amazing. Does everyone just accept the first story that is most successfully promoted, or do they look behind the smoke and mirrors for the truth?

[elke]

One of the reasons the Jewish population was doubling and doubling again, are the actions of Europeans, including your compatriots, Erich, for generations and generations.

When much of the conflict, directly and indirectly, stems from various European nations' actions and/or promises to both sides, for Europeans to talk about "rights of conquest" and such is hypocritical at best. At worst, they are still trying to influence events to their advantage instead of to that of the parties.

[Erich]

Elke,

the doubling and doubling again was in reference to the 1,300,000 Palestinians in 1948, stating that such was not unreasonable for a fifty year period of time, refuting MGB8's claim that the Palestinians ballooned from nothing to six million.

My compatriots would be Americans, retired Army, front line Desert Storm veterans...and anyone interested in a peaceful solution to this conflict, based on facts, not fairytales.

[elke]

Originally posted by Erich
Elke,

the doubling and doubling again was in reference to the 1,300,000 Palestinians in 1948, stating that such was not unreasonable for a fifty year period of time, refuting MGB8's claim that the Palestinians ballooned from nothing to six million.

My compatriots would be Americans, retired Army, front line Desert Storm veterans.

Erich, the "doubling and doubling again" I referred to was that of the Jews.

I personally appreciate everything you and your comrades have done in Desert Storm and in other 20th century wars. But your location says "Spain", so Spain is what I was referring to, as far as the "compatriots" comment.

[Erich]

Elke,

understood when it comes to the location being Spain. Just didn't want the Spanish taking blame for my views. :rolleyes:

I was hoping the Americans could take a back seat in the 21st century when it comes to world police actions, time for other countries to share the load, but along comes this blasted terror thing.

[Mediocrates]

And of course you understand these two things:

The numbers pulled together by the Turks and others lump everyone into Jew and non Jew. Which means that they lumped Arabs (not palestinian, since there were no classifications that fit that - ), Armenians, Circassians, Copts, Greeks, Turks, Azerbijanis and others....

That arab populations into Israel tracked the growth of the Jewish population itself. That is, that arabs flocked IN to Israel after Jews developed a sustainable economy that paid and supported arabs better than anywhere else in the surrounding regions. Arabs were better off working with and for Jews than they were scrabbling under the dominion of all the other groups.

[Erich]

Back on topic

I'm going to throw a hypothetical peace plan out there and you folks are invited to rip me to shreads...if you can. Lots of folks are not going to like this one.

Israel relinguishes all control of the occupied territories and executes a complete withdrawal of the IDF from the Occupied Territories within thirty days.

Settlers in the occupied territories are also given thirty days to withdraw and have IDF supervision to execute such withdrawal. As an option, they can receive a one time payment for 200% of their settlement's fair market value and any structures or equipment left behind and a waiver of any future legal or civil claims attached to the properties. As a second option, the settlers may choose to apply for Palestinian citizenship, for those wishing to stay. Failing to accept either option, all properties are subject to nationalization by the Palestinian state with no compensation and full liability for future legal actions.

The Palestinian state has full sovereign rights within its borders without limitation or interference from outside entities. They have full right to field a military force to defend their national interests. The Palestinian state also has full ocean port and air traffic rights in support of their state.

Israeli Arab communities are given the option of free democratic referendum to decide whether they wish to become part of Israel or part of the Palestinian state, if their present communities share common borders with both states. At least a two thirds majority is recommended.

Israel maintains full sovereign rights within its borders without limitation or interference from outside entities. They have full right to maintain their military force to defend their national interests. The Israeli state also has full ocean port and air traffic rights in support of their state.

A UN peacekeeping force will man the "redline" between states until it is deemed no longer necessary. Costs of the peacekeeping forces will be borne equally by both Israeli and Palestinian states. Acts of aggression by either side of either military or terrorist nature will be dealt with by the UN peacekeeping force which will have the responsibility to maintain sufficient military and anti-terror forces to effectively deal with such acts of aggression.

Both states may exercise an option of later unification of both states if both states find it in their best interests. Such options will be open every fifth year from the establishment of seperate states.

How's that for a start?

[Mediocrates]

And what do the Israelis get in return? Oh yeah, nothing.

[Erich]

What do the Israelis get?

1. The end of a 54 year old conflict
2. A conscience they can live with
3. No more terror attacks
4. Full state recognition throughout the Arab world.
5. A chance to return to a stand of moral leadership

...just for a start

[Erich]

Israel might even pull out full amnesty for all accounts of alleged war crimes and defiance of UN resolutions.

[droberts1958]

Erich,

You are very right about one thing. Lots of folks are not going to like your idea. I however am not one of them.

My comments.

A payment of 200 percent of fair value for settlers property. Where does the money come from and why do you reward illegal settlements. It may keep some of the settlers happier but only a minority I suspect. The money is bending over backwards for the settlers but I don't think will achieve anything real.

Giving Israeli Arabs the right to join Palestine I think will only inflame Israel more. No way they would give up this land. Not many countries think kindly of any of their parts wanting to secede. I think it is generous to the Arab Israelis but not necessary. You will have many problems with other parts of your plan and this will make it only harder.

I think no need to have a 5 year re-unification plan. If any time later they want then they can. Codifying this idea I think would be inflamatory for both sides.

What about Jerusalem. What about the refugees. What do you propose here.

Palestine getting a port. I presume you mean in Gaza but this it has already.

I like you ideas but strongly suggest you keep your head low as the cross fire from the "This is not Occupied Territories, this is our ancestral Judia and Sameria" faction is going to be thick and vicious.

And in reference to Mediocrates's two things. The non-jews of the region may have had many different hats but they all shared a common desire to keep the land for themselves and not to give it to Zionist immigrants beginning to intrude on their lives. Secondly if the Jewish immigrants in the early 1900s were doing such wonderful things why was there such hostility towards them from the existing locals.


I suggest you read the following article which provides a very interesting perspective. It is absolutely not into finger pointing but makes many valid points about why optimism may be in order eventually. It works on a theory of to fix the problem make it bigger so that full world/US resources must be employed. Very worthwhile.

http://millercenter.virginia.edu/pdf/mcr0104/mcr_0104_20-40.pdf

[droberts1958]

Elrich,

Before getting into the details it would be nice to know if the direction you are heading in is desired.

The first question is putting aside how/when/if it can be done, "Would Israel give up all the occupied territories in return for real final peace"

Getting an answer on this one is vital before going into detail. Plenty in this forum would prefer the present killing to going pre-1967 even if it meant final real peace. For these people they would like the peace and but really want the land. It is pointless really to argue with them. It seems to me that many will not even answer the question and will not give you the courtesy of a "hypothetical"

Good luck.

[Erich]

droberts1958

I don't like the idea of rewarding illegal settlers either, but we need some practical compromise, here. Funds could be rounded up from various parts of the world who are also anxious to see this conflict deconflicted. Motivation for some of these settlers to stubbornly stick it out in their settlements is driven by huge mortgages they have yet to pay. As much as there was Israeli government assistance and pro-zionist funding of many of these settlements, reality is that many settlers are up to their neck in debt and that is their most forceful motivation.

Arab self determination is as much an inherent right as Israeli self determination. Some option should allow more hope than eternal second class citizen status.

Jerusalem should be owned by none, but ruled and regulated in mutual cooperation of all religions. This can be worked out.

The refugees. I don't have a solution, but believing in human rights, feel that their right of return has to be dealt with, by both states. Israel's obsession with a very limited demography and Jewish identity is the biggest stumbling block here, but there are workable solutions on a case by case basis, probably best investigated and decided by the UN. If anyone has some good ideas here, let's hear them.

If the Judia and Sameria folks don't want to recognize their semite cousins equal right to these lands, then they are too stupid to be part of any solution and should be ignored due to mental incompetance on their part.

[Mediocrates]

1. The end of a 54 year old conflict

Do you promise?

2. A conscience they can live with

We sleep just fine, thank you. Please don't worry yourself about it.

3. No more terror attacks

Do you promise?

4. Full state recognition throughout the Arab world.

I laughed so hard I wet myself.

5. A chance to return to a stand of moral leadership

If you're the benchmark, then no thanks.

[Mediocrates]

Israel might even pull out full amnesty for all accounts of alleged war crimes and defiance of UN resolutions.


That's a good one - maybe if they're really really good you'll get them all a puppy for Christmas.

[Mediocrates]

Arab self determination is as much an inherent right as Israeli self determination.


But you leave out the self part. All I've seen so far is gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme

or we'll kill you.

In my neighborhood that's called a mugging.

[Erich]

Mediocrates

Was that it?

I expected a much longer temper tantrum on your part.

You can be part of the problem or part of the solution. Looks like you're choosing to be part of the problem.

[Gatorade]

This is how I see it. Right now polls show the majority(actually more like 2/3) of Israelis are for the creation of a Palestinian state. However, the majority of Palestinians want to “liberate” all of Palestine, not just the “occupied terrorizes.”

You want the Israelis to go from point A, the current situation, to point C, the creation of a Palestinian state. This would leave Israel's borders vulerable to attack and also give rights to a people to form alliances and gain weapons to facilitate an attack who polls show want all of Israelis land.

You skip a big step when you fail to realize: (1) The UN has proven not to be an effective defensive force in the region. (2) If the land is given now, the is little doubt that terrorism will continue because it would appear that this deal was made to appease terrorist activity. Thus, it would only encourage more of it.

No, there must be a middle step from point A to point C. There must be a point B where the Palestinians actions show they can peacefully co-exist with Israel. The Oslo Accords were that step but they failed when Arafat’s bluff was called that he only wanted the “occupied terrorities.” The last 20 months show the current leadership of the Palestinians do not want peaceful coexistence with Israel.

Once the Palestinians get new leadership, negotiations can begin again to go from point A to point B and then to Point C. Only after Palestinians actions show they sincerely want peace and recognize Israelis right to exist, as a Jewish state, should a Palestinian state be created.

A question from you other comments, on what legal basis do you believe the settlements are illegal?

[Mediocrates]

Originally posted by Erich
Mediocrates

Was that it?

I expected a much longer temper tantrum on your part.

You can be part of the problem or part of the solution. Looks like you're choosing to be part of the problem.

(what did you have to edit?)

I understand fully what you mean when you say 'the solution'. Really, I do.

[Mediocrates]

This is how I see it. Right now polls show the majority(actually more like 2/3) of Israelis are for the creation of a Palestinian state.

I don't see that. I see a majority accepting its inevitability. How that happens is not at all clear. Even Sharon has said for a very long time:

1) We never expected to hold on to the WB so long in the shape its in today.

2) A separate Palestinian state is inevitable. The settlers in YESHA would argue with that though.

At any rate, that's not really the point is it. Not to the Erichs of the world. The difference is on what terms. The PLO sees it as a more than plausible jumping off point as another 30 years of aggression to acquire the rest of Israel. Their appologists, arabists, wannabes and cowards choose to ignore this.

The Israelis can't ignore this no matter now many Europeans sputter into their lattes and shake their tiny fists in the air. Inevitable all the same, but on what terms. What the Israelis are attempting to do is settle the issue on terms that are advantageous to them. Yet the whole world sees this as a bad faith effort. One would think that Europeans engage in a kind of global potlach where giving away the most makes you the winner. Which for them is fine when what you give away doesn't cost you anything.

[Erich]

Gatorade,

lots of excellent points here.

A responsible Palestinian government is an absolute requirement before any peace initiative can be executed. The current situation with Arafat in charge and his direct ties with terrorism or under the thumb of other terrorist groups is unacceptable. US determination to see him as part of the solution is a direct conflict with our current anti-terror orientation. Rewarding terrorism is also something we stand firmly against, but let's not assume that the majority of the Palestinian people are engaged in or support terror. One would think that the best solution is to weed out the terrorists and see who is left behind.

The UN has proven successful in just this type of dividing line mission elsewhere in the region. US participation should be kept small as possible, not exceeding our representative share. No one has forgotten Beirut or the lessons learned there through the horrendous loss of lives of American peacekeepers.

Like Mediocrates has stated, there has been alot of "gimme", also on the Israeli side, with the backing of a court system that has shown through investigation that it can be extremely fair, except when it comes to issues of the settlements, where it has sided almost without exception with the Israeli government in favor of the settlers. Land stolen, enforced with terror, like murder, arrest for unfair charges, destruction of property, and open threats...is just that, stolen land and constituting illegal settlements.

[Erich]

Mediocrates

something to think about. As long as the Palestinians do not have their own state and military to defend it, they have to resort to other methods to resist. Don't get me wrong. There is a simple difference between freedom fighters and terrorists. Freedom fighters attack invading military targets and do not intentionally murder civilians. Terrorists attack easy, soft civilian targets to promote terror. The terrorists acting in the Palestinians name have chosen the easier, terrorist methodology, hoping to swing Israeli civilian opinion. They couldn't have failed more miserably. One of the recent terror attacks on a bus managed to target mostly Israeli soldiers. One wonders if this was a change in intent or mere coincidence.
On the other hand, if the Palestinians do not have their own military, Israel can only target "civilians" and loses in the long run in world opinion, as if that had ever mattered to them. Truthfully, any outside criticism has been far too easily labeled anti-semitic within Israel and has even succeeded in furthering the military and political careers of many, including the current Prime Minister Sharon.

Just like all Palestinians are not terrorists, not all Israelis are super zionists willing to break all the rules. The majority of both peoples would appreciate being able to get on with normal lives, in peace and prosperity. The needs of the many need to now outweigh the needs of the few, on both sides of the conflict.

[Mediocrates]

The terrorists acting in the Palestinians name have chosen the easier, terrorist methodology, hoping to swing Israeli civilian opinion. They couldn't have failed more miserably. One of the recent terror attacks on a bus managed to target mostly Israeli soldiers. One wonders if this was a change in intent or mere coincidence.


a) The Palestinians ARE the terrorists in as much as any group with no history, language, culture, history, religion or other unique identifiable otherness can lay claim to the name. It's really more of a brand than a cultural or national identity.

b) There is NO intention to swing any civilian Israeli opinion. The point of murder mayhem and terrorism is twofold

1) Destroy Israeli morale
2) Swing the opinion of EVERYONE OTHER THAN THE ISRAELIS.

[Mediocrates]

On the other hand, if the Palestinians do not have their own military, Israel can only target "civilians"

That is wrong on its face. Terrorism requires an infrastructure like any organization. It requires

money
logistics
transportation
recruiting
indoctrination
materiel
enforcement
internal security
propaganda
command
control
communications

disrupt that - no matter who happens to be not wearing a uniform - and you disrupt terrorism. That is, whomever participates in those activities is a terrorist. Maybe not a commander or a senior officer or a political front but a terrorist all the same. To forgive them because they are small fish is like letting all the manslaughter convictions free because they're not felony-1, capital murder convictions. In a civil society you don't get to set rapists free because they didn't kill someone and you don't get to set small time terrorists free just because they don't have Christiane Amapour on speed dial.

[Erich]

a) The Palestinians ARE the terrorists in as much as any group with no history, language, culture, history, religion or other unique identifiable otherness can lay claim to the name. It's really more of a brand than a cultural or national identity.

Mediocrates,

it's obvious you've never met any Palestinians.

Erich

[Erich]

Mediocrates,

what is your estimate of the percentage of 3 million Palestinians and 3 million Palestinian refugees involved in any form of terrorism or support thereof. C'mon, make an even bigger fool of yourself than you have managed so far. Your last two replies indicate that you think all six million are terrorists.

I can't even think that you believe the extremist hot wind you are blowing. Are you really that paranoid?

And you missed the point entirely. Deny a people a nation and military and you have dictated that you will face either freedom fighters or terrorists.

[Mediocrates]

5-7% tops in terms of supporting actively or passively at one time or another. Including giving shelter, giving aid of some kind. But if you think that some OUTSIDE element is doing all the destruction in the Palestinians name you are sadly mistaken. If you think that the people doing this are not self professed Palestinians you are doubly mistaken. You had Venn diagrams once, yes? Draw an ellipse of terrorists committing acts of terror in israel. Virtually all of that ellipse is inside a greater ellipse labelled Palestinians in the disputed territories. Do you get it?

Actually you're numbers are off. About 2/3rds of ALL Palestinians live in camps under the dominion of Arab countries. About 1/3rd live inside Green Line Borders. A tiny minority live outside the Arab world. According to the PLA own numbers the tally is about 9M but that largely includes rough guesses that are several years old.


I understand what a determined enemy is no matter how many interviews they get on TV. Just because they are determined doesn't mean everyone has to feel bad for them. I don't care what label you attach to them. And you're not even reading the news right. It works like this:

People we -

sympathize with - Freedom Fighters
are afraid of - Resistance Fighters
sympathize with and who wear uniforms - Rebel Forces
can't find on a map but vaguely think wear cool hats - Oppressed
call terrorists - Jews or Americans

[Erich]

Mediocrates

Good calls.

Now what is your opinion of the 93-95% of the Palestinians that are not involved in terrorism? Do they have any rights...like human rights that should be respected? Or do we curse them beacuse a small minority crosses the line into criminal acts of terrorism. Seriously! Or do we just ignore them? Turn our backs if acts are committed against them?

I've let you push me into a corner of defending the majority of the Palestinians, but the identical truths hold for the other side as well, which I'm sure you'd agree with.

The Israelis have an absolute right to peace and security within their borders, if we can decide where the borders should end up. We have done an excellent job in the US of siding with, funding and even directly defending the Israelis, guaranteeing their right to existence. The newer President Bush declaring "We will not allow Israel to be crushed." A resounding majority vote in the House of Representatives, 352 to 21 in support of Israel. I don't think there is any doubt, anywhere in the world, of our absolute support for Israel.

Strangely enough, many within Israel feel that the only way that peace will be achieved is if the US strongarms Israel to the peace tables. Israel will not accomplish it on her own. I say strangely enough, because you would think that the people of the worlds oldest religion, sharing a common god with their semite cousins, would be able to find their own way to the peace tables. Maybe they can, but when? In anoother 54 years? Will anyone survive the process?

None of the leaders of either side seem interested in peace. Both sides appear to want to shove the other into the sea. And these peoples are in charge of the holy lands? I would say that their violence and greed have defiled the holy lands and that they should be expelled, at least until they get their heads collectively together again.

[Mediocrates]

Now what is your opinion of the 93-95% of the Palestinians that are not involved in terrorism? Do they have any rights...like human rights that should be respected?

Certainly they have rights. That's what governments are for to insure the rights that people can't deliver for themselves. Legitimate governments. This is what it means to be truly self determining and what it means to contruct a polity. This is what it means when we say that ultimately the Palestinians are responsible for themselves. The EU can't save them , the Israelis can't save them, international armies can't save them. Neither can Hamas, Hezbollah, PLFP, al-Aqsa, Fatah, Arafat or the other dozen security forces that operate there. They have to. They have to decide if they've had enough **** from their own dictators and what kind of world they want to live in. That has to arise from within the Palestinians and can't be imposed by forced or good intentions or all the UN/EU sanctions in the world. What outsiders seem to ignore (in as much as most Americans think Israel is the same size as the US) is that most Palestinians are middle class, educated and motivated to fix their lot in life and are furiously angry at what Arafat's latest 20 month war has wrought them.


Strangely enough, many within Israel feel that the only way that peace will be achieved is if the US strongarms Israel to the peace tables. Israel will not accomplish it on her own.

As Michael Oren says "It's not about Sharon because he is doing what most Israelis want him to do." One of the advantages of Parliamentary government is the near instant feedback. I think that if the US wants to be effective then it will have to own the problem and put troops in the field. Until then it's just an abstract concept. That is, no problem really exists until it happens in America.

I say strangely enough, because you would think that the people of the worlds oldest religion, sharing a common god with their semite cousins, would be able to find their own way to the peace tables. Maybe they can, but when? In anoother 54 years? Will anyone survive the process?

After 1300 years of dhimmi and dhumma laws singling out Jews for nearly slave status and a century of progroms among the peace loving people of Allah we have nothing in common with them. If anyone arrives at a peaceful solution it will be out of the grim determination of necessity.

None of the leaders of either side seem interested in peace. Both sides appear to want to shove the other into the sea.

Sharon wants a long term solution that won't need to be revisited in 10 years and 10 years after that and over and over. If that takes 10 years more than so be it. Sharon is also clear that the Israeli government, whomever is running it can't reliably deal with Arafat and can't pretend otherwise. Better to do nothing than the wrong thing with the wrong person.

[Erich]

Mediocrates,

Wow! Almost total agreement here. The one exception is that I perceive Sharon to be aiming at elimination of Palestinian society and economical infrastructure in an effort to encourage them all to leave, therefore resolving the issue of the Occupied Territories in Israel's ultimate and eternal advantage. Therefore the need for another ten years, more than enough time to starve them out.

[Mediocrates]

I view Sharon's policy the same that it was when he was a field commander in the 50's. Demolishing buildings is nothing new and something they did all the way back when. Certainly what Sharon wants to do is similar to what Nixon had in mind for the Christmas bombing of Hanoi: drag them to the table under the threat of a greatly expanded effort. I don't imagine for a second that Sharon worries too much about the state of the Palestinian economy or the cohesiveness of their society - his constituents didn't put him there for that nor is it his job to worry about it.

[Erich]

Mediocrates

I hope you're right. There is alot of evidence of systemic destruction with an obvious repeated pattern. The following is just a small example:

http://www.jerusalem.indymedia.org/news/2002/05/26096.php

[Mediocrates]

Originally posted by Erich
Mediocrates

I hope you're right. There is alot of evidence of systemic destruction with an obvious repeated pattern. The following is just a small example:

http://www.jerusalem.indymedia.org/news/2002/05/26096.php

I wish there were more concrete details and running tally - it's pretty difficult to evaluate the quality and scope of damage the way it's listed.

[MGB8]

The "explosive birth rate" is a fact. It was part of the 1970's "plan of phases" to out-populate jews, which was frustrated by the Russian alliyah, which in turn sparked the first antifadah.

Arab familes have many more children than Jewish Israeli ones. That is simply a fact.

As to the rest of it, you completely ignore the main point - most of the land in all of Israel was not owned by any individuals - it was national land. Even then, though, if there is a war between two countries, and one country loses some territory and the citizens in that territory had left it, or even where expelled during the fighting (here there are A LOT of conflicting claims), they simply have no right to come back. The land was lost in a war. Sh!t happens.

The words "right of return" are stylized to seem to be parrallel to the Israeli "right" of Jews to claim citizenship in Israel. That is not a right to land (anymore, at one point the government added land to encourage alliyah) but a right of citizenship.

As for "selective immigration" every nation on earth has selective immigration. That is why you have immigration departments in all these countries. That is why Jews couldn't leave Germany and Poland during the Holocaut, because the "quotas" were full (although often that wasn't true.) So don't give me that BS.



Originally posted by Erich
What is hardest to stomach, is an argument that says it's perfectly okay for the Israeli side to grow from zero to millions, allowing selective immigration from all over the world, then trying to fantacize the original occupants into oblivion and their original ownership of the land, pretending the land was empty and unowned...while refusing right of return to the original occupants, even claiming the current population figures must be from some explosive birth rate or lousy record keeping. Too many facts and figures out there that counter this wishful rewrite of history, yet way too many have bought this fantasy, hook, line and sinker. Absolutely amazing. Does everyone just accept the first story that is most successfully promoted, or do they look behind the smoke and mirrors for the truth?

[Erich]

As for "selective immigration" every nation on earth has selective immigration. That is why you have immigration departments in all these countries. That is why Jews couldn't leave Germany and Poland during the Holocaut, because the "quotas" were full (although often that wasn't true.) So don't give me that BS.

MGB8

I've checked out the immigration rules for Israel. I can immigrate in just about any country in this world and they'd be happy to have me, at least in most cases. ;) I'm an adult professional, former military experience, self supporting and most people consider me fairly likeable.
I do not meet the selective requirements for immigration to Israel and I feel those requirements are exceptionally selective...and exceptionally sad.

Erich

[Jorge]

From Mediocrates 06-12:

I don't imagine for a second that Sharon worries too much about the state of the Palestinian economy or the cohesiveness of their society - his constituents didn't put him there for that nor is it his job to worry about it.

Well, if he doesn't worry about the state of the economy or
the cohesiviness of the society in the occupied territories, he could be described as a short-sighted and narrow minded leader
and, certainly, an inept one. May be he is... An alternative hypothesis is that he does worry and his goverment is set to cripple the palestinian economy ad social organization. By doing precisely that, he can ensure that the peace process is a non-starter, which suits him fine. In my opinion his main objective
at present is to avoid giving up the settlements in the occupied territories. This aim is clearly inconsistent with the peace process,
hence it is in his best interests to ensure that there's little or none collective will or wish left, in the palestinian side, to negotiate a settlement.

Regarding the reasons why his constituents elected him:
he won over a plattform that promised " Peace and Security"
and he was put in his seat to deliver both. What the israelis got
is that security has never been worse and thaat we are further away from peace that at any period of the last decade. To this pretty record we may add that the israeli economy is in shambles,
it is dificcult to recall any other israeli government that brought so many calamities on the israeli heads.

[alexbmn]

Now I believe this argument has been repeated a million times. I happen to disagree almost completely with Erich but I didnt join this forum to get into these ort of arguments.

[Erich]

alexbmn

there must be something to the subject if it has been repeated a million times...and you couldn't resist at least your negative reply.

:D

[L@mplighterM]

Originally posted by Jorge
From Mediocrates 06-12:

I don't imagine for a second that Sharon worries too much about the state of the Palestinian economy or the cohesiveness of their society - his constituents didn't put him there for that nor is it his job to worry about it.

Well, if he doesn't worry about the state of the economy or
the cohesiviness of the society in the occupied territories, he could be described as a short-sighted and narrow minded leader
and, certainly, an inept one. May be he is... An alternative hypothesis is that he does worry and his goverment is set to cripple the palestinian economy ad social organization. By doing precisely that, he can ensure that the peace process is a non-starter, which suits him fine. In my opinion his main objective
at present is to avoid giving up the settlements in the occupied territories. This aim is clearly inconsistent with the peace process,
hence it is in his best interests to ensure that there's little or none collective will or wish left, in the palestinian side, to negotiate a settlement.

Regarding the reasons why his constituents elected him:
he won over a plattform that promised " Peace and Security"
and he was put in his seat to deliver both. What the israelis got
is that security has never been worse and thaat we are further away from peace that at any period of the last decade. To this pretty record we may add that the israeli economy is in shambles,
it is dificcult to recall any other israeli government that brought so many calamities on the israeli heads.


Sharon is a man seeking long time security and peace with his Arab neighbors and his initiatives to achieve that goal have been continuously thwarted by the Palestinian leadership.

The Palestinian leadership has systematically destroyed their own economy because of their actions. There isn’t one reason in this world that they couldn’t have laid down their arms and cohabitated side by side with the Jews. Together they could have developed a thriving economy and have enjoyed a high standard of living.

Instead they chose to embark on a destructive path with one goal in mind that being the destruction of Israel. Judging by a recent poll no one in his or her right mind in Israel would want a Palestinian for a neighbor.

For one thing the majority of Palestinians support suicide attacks against civilians. Further from time to time a structure suffers from premature detonation from a bomb being manufactured by Palestinians.

[Mediocrates]

Originally posted by Erich
As for "selective immigration" every nation on earth has selective immigration. That is why you have immigration departments in all these countries. That is why Jews couldn't leave Germany and Poland during the Holocaut, because the "quotas" were full (although often that wasn't true.) So don't give me that BS.

MGB8

I've checked out the immigration rules for Israel. I can immigrate in just about any country in this world and they'd be happy to have me, at least in most cases. ;) I'm an adult professional, former military experience, self supporting and most people consider me fairly likeable.
I do not meet the selective requirements for immigration to Israel and I feel those requirements are exceptionally selective...and exceptionally sad.

Erich

You couldn't immigrate to the US on your own say so. You can certainly apply but you would probably get turned down based on numerical quotas from each country.

[Jorge]

Quote from Erich:

Absolutely amazing. Does everyone just accept the first story that is most successfully promoted, or do they look behind the smoke and mirrors for the truth?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I agree that it is amazing. As they say: Increible pero cierto!.
A case in point is one related with my last above note.

I mentioned there that, judging from results, Sharon's government is one of the most disastrous in israeli history. Nevertheless, a substantial portion of public opinion is behind
Mr. Sharon. How could it be ? To use your words: "the story that
has been most succesfully promoted" by the political parties in power is that the main issue in the current conflict is the backing
of terrorism by the Palestinian Authority. Under the cover of this story, the goverment invaded palestinian towns and villages,
destroyed the(precarious) PA infrastructure and throwing the
territories into chaos.

"The story that has been most succesfully demoted "
is, in my view, the real story: the government intends to keep and expand the settlements in the occupied territories. These
very settlements are the main obstacle to peace (according
to succesive american governments) and,consequently, the least said about them the better. The israeli peace movement has been trying for quite a time to make the settlements the main issue, so far with little success.

In this contest for the conscience of the israelis,the right wing has a formidable ally: the palestinian terrorist organizations.
By their vicious murders they have managed to enrage public
opinion and fill the people with a desire of blind vengeance.
When people is blinded they cannot look "behind the smoke
and mirrors for the truth".

If we go trough the Looking Glass and ponder the situation of the palestinians who are suffering far more than the israelis,
we could also understand that they are easy prey of the most
succesfully promoted story of their side: that there is no hope at all of a peaceful settlement and the only course left is terrorism.

Let's hope that there's enough people around to focus on the real issues of the conflict so that the peace process may move on.

[Mediocrates]

Let's hope that there's enough people around to focus on the real issues of the conflict


What are they?

[Erich]

You couldn't immigrate to the US on your own say so. You can certainly apply but you would probably get turned down based on numerical quotas from each country.

Mediocrates

I'm not up on current figures, but from what I understood a few years ago, the quotas did not apply to anyone who showed up with $50,000 and the intent to start a business in the US. Stamp, stamp, next please. Many foreign immigrant slash new US business proprietors were give 1-5 years of tax breaks, considered by some unfair competition for established US companies.

Most european countries are the same. It's hell to get a work permit, but open a business and all the barriers disappear. In Europe, hard assets, like vehicles, office equipment, computers can be applied towards net worth figure required to open your business, in other words, it doesn't have to be all hard cash.

I guess my biggest amazement is the unrealistic dream of being able to create and defend a Jewish state over any great length of time. Already the percentage of non Jewish population is skyrocketing. Apparently not every non Jew is the supposed "anti-semitist", because they're marrying Jews in record numbers, a true sign that Jews are quite popular as marriage prospects. I've seen some quotes that recent marriages to non Jews was climbing to fifty percent or better. If this keeps up worldwide, Israeli law will have to consider anyone who had a great great great grandmother who was Jewish before long. Then I would qualify!!!

The size of Israel being about that of New Jersey makes it indefensible against weapons of mass destruction and if the predictions about the US are true, a terrorist nuke device eventually going off in some city, how secure do you think Israel is, and they have the best security in the world...still the terrorists slip through.

Concentrating half of the world's Jewish population in one very small place and trying to keep a fixation on certain demographics is certainly suicidal, if not outright antagonistic.

Besides, look at it this way. Concentrating half of the world's Jewish population in one place, isolated away from the rest of the world's population robs much of the world of first hand experience in the richness of the Jewish culture. And do you really think the rest of the world is going to get to know the Jewish culture on such short tourist visas, hassled by security forces...or by blocking immigration to what Israel has decided are "Non Jews"? (putting it much politer than the terms normally used)

[MGB8]

You are deliberatly confusing the "law of return" - the special rights given to Jewish immigrants, and general immigration law.

There are plenty of non-jewish immigrants in Israel, particularly from Asia. That doesn't mean that Jews are not granted special status...but there is a big difference between extra inclusion and exclusion. You imply the later, and you are lying.

Originally posted by Erich
As for "selective immigration" every nation on earth has selective immigration. That is why you have immigration departments in all these countries. That is why Jews couldn't leave Germany and Poland during the Holocaut, because the "quotas" were full (although often that wasn't true.) So don't give me that BS.

MGB8

I've checked out the immigration rules for Israel. I can immigrate in just about any country in this world and they'd be happy to have me, at least in most cases. ;) I'm an adult professional, former military experience, self supporting and most people consider me fairly likeable.
I do not meet the selective requirements for immigration to Israel and I feel those requirements are exceptionally selective...and exceptionally sad.

Erich

[MGB8]

link: http://www.cyberhaven.com/starchild/israel.html


BECOMING A CITIZEN OF ISRAEL

by

Adam Starchild

The number of U.S. citizens taking out Israeli citizenship is high. In fact in 1992 the number grew 35% over the year before, while the
number from the former Soviet Union declined.

Under Israeli law, the acquisition of nationality is one of the few areas in which the law differentiates between Jews and non-Jews.
The Law of Return grants every Jew the right to go to Israel as an oleh (Jewish immigrant), and the Israel Nationality Law
automatically confers Israeli nationality on every oleh upon entering the country unless he specifies otherwise. The law even provides
that a Jew who expresses his desire to settle in Israel may be granted nationality by virtue of the Law of Return even before he
physically immigrates, a clause which allows the Israeli government to issue travel documents to refugees in emergencies.

Article 4A of the Law of Return extends the Jewish rights to family members: "(a) The rights of a Jew under this Law and the rights of
an oleh under the Nationality Law, 5712-1952, as well as the rights of an oleh under any other enactment, are also vested in a child
and a grandchild of a Jew, the spouse of a Jew, and the spouse of a grandchild of a Jew, except for a person who has been a Jew
and has voluntarily changed his religion."

The next section makes it clear that the family member need not even be living: "(b) It shall be immaterial whether or not a Jew by
whose right a right under subsection (a) is claimed is still alive and whether or not he has immigrated to Israel."

Article 4B provides the definition of a Jew: "For the purposes of this Law, 'Jew' means a person who was born of a Jewish mother or
has become converted to Judaism and who is not a member of another religion."

Section 5 of the law allows the Minister of the Interior to grant visas and citizenship to minors without their parents consent, a section
that has recently been used for minors from Ukraine, Moldova, and former Yugoslavia who decided to flee without their families.

By contrast, an Arab or any other person not qualifying as a Jew under the Law of Return may acquire Israeli nationality in one of five
ways detailed in the Nationality Law and summarized below.

1. Nationality by residence in Israel

Subject to certain qualifications, this section of the law grants Israeli citizenship to former Palestinian citizens who are currently
residents of Israel and have lived in Israel since its creation on May 14, 1948, or have entered Israel legally between that time and
July 14, 1952, the date the Nationality Law went into effect.

2. Nationality by birth

Nationality by reason of birth is given to any person whose father or mother was an Israeli national at the time of his birth. This
provision holds true regardless of where the person in question may happen to have been born.

3. Naturalization by birth on Israeli territory in addition to 5 years immediate prior residence in Israel.

This provision grants Israeli nationality to persons who are born on Israeli territory who meet these qualifications: apply for Israeli
citizenship between their 18th and 21st birthdays, have 5 consecutive years of residence in Israel immediately prior to filing a
request for citizenship, have no criminal convictions for violation of security regulations, and have not been sentenced to jail for 5
years or more for violation of any other type of law.

4. Naturalization

A person 18 years of age or older may acquire Israeli nationality by naturalization if he meets these criteria: (1) is currently in Israel,
(2) has been in Israel for 3 of the 5 preceding years, (3) intends to settle in the country (4) has some knowledge of Hebrew (former
Palestinian citizens are exempt from this provision), (5) renounces any and all foreign nationalities, and (6) takes an oath of loyalty to
the State of Israel. Completion of all of the above requirements is not essential in all instances, however, as the Minister of the Interior
at his discretion has the power (for a special reason) to waive requirements (1), (2),(4), and (5) above.

5. By grant from the Minister of the Interior to certain categories of minors.

The law provides, in addition, for a discretionary grant of citizenship to minors who are not Israeli nationals but who are residents of
Israel.

It is important to note that the law discriminates in favor of Jews against all others only as to the method of acquiring nationality. In
theory at least, once nationality has been acquired all Israeli nationals are treated equally.

The Israeli passport provides visa-free travel to most countries in the world.

[Erich]

MGB8

How do you explain:

http://www.kedma.co.il/MiddleEast/states/israel/israel%20immigration/immigration_low.htm

[cerulean]

Are there any income tax consequences to taking out Israeli citizenship while retaining American citizenship if one subsequently leaves Israel?

I ask because Americans are subject to US tax law wherever they are in the world.

[MGB8]

Erich,

you reposted "The Militant's" ****?

LET ME REPEAT THIS: MOST OF THE WEST BANK AND GAZA WERE STATE (JORDANIAN) PROPERTY, NOT INDIVIDUALLY OWNED. Jordan was defeated and actually abdicated there claims to the land.

Regardless, there is a strong controversy over whether a title to individual land survives another countries takeover in a war - and this is the first attempt to impose that law - no country has had such a principle imposed on them.


Originally posted by Erich
Never ever call them occupied because the only land Israelis are occupying is Israel.

So, the Jewish settlers all got up and left? When, last night in the dark?

The Occupied Territories as spoils of war? Isn't that stretching things a bit? How about the following from:

http://themilitant.com/2002/6624/662449.html

After the 1967 conquests, the Israeli military administration began wholesale expropriations of Palestinians’ land. By 1981 one-third of the land in the West Bank had been taken out of Palestinian hands. The usual procedure was for the army to declare an area indispensable to security, seal it off, and force the farmers off the land. Fraudulent sales were engineered, taking advantage of the fact that incomplete record-keeping under the Ottoman Empire and British colonial rule often made it impossible for Palestinians to prove title even though their families had worked the land for generations. Israeli policies also blocked farmers from using their land. The military government then confiscated it because it had been left fallow. Some villages lost half their land to Israeli confiscations. Those farmers who resisted faced arrest for "terrorist activity," destruction of their homes, expulsion from the country, or spraying of their crops with defoliants.

Much of the confiscated land was turned over to Israeli settlements. By 1988 there were 130 in the West Bank and Gaza. In Gaza, one-third of the land had been turned over to some three thousand settlers. With military considerations in the forefront, the settlements are built on hilltops overlooking Palestinian villages. Surrounded by huge coils of barbed wire, they resemble forts more than farming communities, and are strategically located amid clusters of Palestinian villages to keep the latter separated and terrorized. The settlers, often right-wing émigrés from the United States, are armed. They get aid from the government and from Zionist organizations.

End of quote

If they were spoils of war, Israel would have legally annexed them and given citizenship to the occupants. That's how it is done with spoils of war. That's not what happened.

If you're going to steal their lands from them, at least be honest and admit it, instead of coming up with these fabulous fables.

And what is this laughable bit about squatters? Over 3 million squatters and 3 million more in refugee status? That has to be a world record for squatters, squatters in any situation usually running from a few to a few hundred. Where are you folks getting this stuff from? It wouldn't even make a believable comic book, or do you really think you can fool all of the world all of the time? Those days are long gone in an age of cell phones, internet and live news globally, even if you try to keep the reporters out.

How about some honesty and integrity out there instead of Grimm's fairy tales?

[Mediocrates]

I'm not up on current figures, but from what I understood a few years ago, the quotas did not apply to anyone who showed up with $50,000 and the intent to start a business in the US. Stamp, stamp, next please. Many foreign immigrant slash new US business proprietors were give 1-5 years of tax breaks, considered by some unfair competition for established US companies.


ummm maybe you're thinking of Canada, here there are hard quotas.

[Erich]

MGB8

I haven't reposted anything. What are you blabbering about?

[Erich]

I hate liars, Erich, and you've proven yourself one

MGB8

I'm not aware of anywhere that I have lied. I suggest you watch your mouth when it comes to such slander.

Your posting on immigration law is very informative, but I do not even see a loophole where I could immigrate. Please clarify.

There are a number of foreign nationals in Israel who have received "sponsorhip" to come into Israel to fill many of the jobs that the Palestinians used to be able to fill, many not the most desirable jobs. Are they being given full immigration and citizenship rights? Let's hear it from you.

[cerulean]

People who come to the US on H1-B visas do not have full citizenship rights either. Why would workers who come to Israel for a limited term?

[Erich]

MGB8

While we're at it, why don't you tell me that all religions in Israel are treated equally and fairly under the law?

Maybe you'll accept this source as more appealing to your obvious biases. You obviously don't like the site, but the report wws issued by the U.S. Department of State:

http://www.kedma.co.il/MiddleEast/states/israel/Israel%20Immigration/us_report.htm

[Erich]

cerulean,

I'm simply trying to find the route where an American Non-Jew could legally immigrate to Israel, without being "forced" to convert to Judaism. I have yet to find a way and for some crazy reason think that any conversion should be voluntary, not a legal prerequisite for immigration?

The official Israeli site for Immigration is about as opaque as opaque can get. Maybe they should become as transparent as what is being demanded of the Palestinians?

http://www.moia.gov.il/

[MGB8]

Under the law of return, any Jew, or close relative thereof, has a claim to Israeli citizenship by virtue of Israel being the Jewish homeland.

That has NOTHING TO DO with citizenship or immigration of all or any non-jews, which is covered by other laws.

Originally posted by Erich
MGB8

How do you explain:

http://www.kedma.co.il/MiddleEast/states/israel/israel%20immigration/immigration_low.htm

[MGB8]

The state department has a long history of pro-arab anti-Israeli bias, extending back to 48. Because officials there are mostly administrative, and not political, they for the most part do not turn over with administrations.

That said, there is a strong case to be made that Israel has not done enough for its arab citizenry, in terms of making sure that conditions are equal.

That said, there is less difference withing the spectrum of Israeli schools (in Jewish and Arab areas) versus American schools in the Ghetto versus Affluent suburbs - local funding has a lot to do with it also, as does self-selection of faculty.




Originally posted by Erich
MGB8

While we're at it, why don't you tell me that all religions in Israel are treated equally and fairly under the law?

Maybe you'll accept this source as more appealing to your obvious biases. You obviously don't like the site, but the report wws issued by the U.S. Department of State:

http://www.kedma.co.il/MiddleEast/states/israel/Israel%20Immigration/us_report.htm

[MGB8]

Originally posted by Erich




Your posting on immigration law is very informative, but I do not even see a loophole where I could immigrate. Please clarify.

. [/B]

3. Naturalization by birth on Israeli territory in addition to 5 years immediate prior residence in Israel.

This provision grants Israeli nationality to persons who are born on Israeli territory who meet these qualifications: apply for Israeli
citizenship between their 18th and 21st birthdays, have 5 consecutive years of residence in Israel immediately prior to filing a
request for citizenship, have no criminal convictions for violation of security regulations, and have not been sentenced to jail for 5
years or more for violation of any other type of law.

4. Naturalization

A person 18 years of age or older may acquire Israeli nationality by naturalization if he meets these criteria: (1) is currently in Israel,
(2) has been in Israel for 3 of the 5 preceding years, (3) intends to settle in the country (4) has some knowledge of Hebrew (former
Palestinian citizens are exempt from this provision), (5) renounces any and all foreign nationalities, and (6) takes an oath of loyalty to
the State of Israel. Completion of all of the above requirements is not essential in all instances, however, as the Minister of the Interior
at his discretion has the power (for a special reason) to waive requirements (1), (2),(4), and (5) above.

[Erich]

MGB8

Progress. Now, how does one accomplish 3 of the last 5 years in Israel? Tourist Visas?

[cerulean]

I suggest Erich speak to an immigration lawyer if he is seriously interested in immigrating to Israel.

[MGB8]

Student or Work Visas, or by permission of the minister of interior (In ISrael especially all things are done much more effectively via direct communication, phone calls get you nowhere.)


Originally posted by Erich
MGB8

Progress. Now, how does one accomplish 3 of the last 5 years in Israel? Tourist Visas?

[Erich]

Mediocrates

as far as hard quotas are concerned in the US there have been exceptions since 1921, but maybe the law has changed recently? I'm looking.

From:
http://www.ins.usdoj.gov/graphics/aboutins/statistics/legishist/468.htm

c. Actors, artists, lecturers, singers, nurses, ministers, professors, aliens belonging to any recognized learned profession, and aliens employed as domestic servants were placed on a nonquota basis.

[MGB8]

Probably the best idea. I'm sure that some Banks and International companies have in-house counsel that could also provide him with immediate, detailed answers.


Originally posted by cerulean
I suggest Erich speak to an immigration lawyer if he is seriously interested in immigrating to Israel.

[MGB8]

Its non-quota but you still have to get a visa, and that is very difficult. If you already have a job or a student position in the US, then its not that bad, but if you just wanted to move and look for a job, you'ld have probs.

Trust me, I have family in Argentina who are very much looking to move to the US right about now.



Originally posted by Erich
Mediocrates

as far as hard quotas are concerned in the US there have been exceptions since 1921, but maybe the law has changed recently? I'm looking.

From:
http://www.ins.usdoj.gov/graphics/aboutins/statistics/legishist/468.htm

c. Actors, artists, lecturers, singers, nurses, ministers, professors, aliens belonging to any recognized learned profession, and aliens employed as domestic servants were placed on a nonquota basis.

[L@mplighterM]

Originally posted by Erich
cerulean,

I'm simply trying to find the route where an American Non-Jew could legally immigrate to Israel, without being "forced" to convert to Judaism. I have yet to find a way and for some crazy reason think that any conversion should be voluntary, not a legal prerequisite for immigration?

The official Israeli site for Immigration is about as opaque as opaque can get. Maybe they should become as transparent as what is being demanded of the Palestinians?

http://www.moia.gov.il/

If you look at a country as if it was a big house shouldn?t the owners determine whom they let in?

Give me the name of a country where some form of protectionism doesn?t exist in industry. Laws like that are geared at protecting workers from unfair competition. Of course there?s a clear distinction between people and goods but it?s much the same.

I fully support tough immigration laws and as a matter of fact 9/11 was due in part to soft immigration laws in the US. Some countries in the EU are finally awakening to the fact that a grave error had clearly been made years ago by allowing immigration of undesirable individuals. Recent elections in the EU indicate that there?s a growing consensus among many citizens to eliminate/limit immigration.

Many countries throughout Europe have laws that allow for the return of offspring?s of former citizens. Laws and their conditions for reunification of individuals that fit this category are separate from other immigration laws.

I seem to recall that children of an American mothers are guaranteed entry into the US whereas the children of an American father are not.

I don?t know what you find so unusual about Israel?s immigration laws. In any event if you really want to immigrate to Israel why don?t you convert to Judeism.

[Erich]

response to other party's deleted offensive remark also deleted

[Erich]

I seem to recall that children of an American mothers are guaranteed entry into the US whereas the children of an American father are not.

L@mplighterM

American fathers overseas can process paperwork for translation of birth certificates, then apply for both social security numbers and passports for their children with foreign mothers through the US Consulate. I can't imagine that US Immigration would deny entry of passport holding children, but maybe you know something I don't. That's entirely possible.

US immigration regulations do appear a little but strange at times. Many US military meet potential foreign spouses and they usually wait until the last minute to inquire into necessary paperwork for fiances. A fiance visa can take about six months to process. Faced with a potential six month seperation, many do not apply for the fiance visa and simply have their fiance fly on a tourist visa to the US where they then marry. The US Immigration Service highly frowns on this practice, but in most cases cannot legally take any action. In essence the fiance visa requirement is unenforceable, but who wants to get on the bad side of the Immigration folks?

[Erich]

To all,

thanks for the immigration advice. I'll check into it.

L@mplighterM

In regard to your inquiry as to converting to Judaism, it is something I have considered, but believe as I earlier stated that it should be voluntary and not some state imposed prerequisite or requirement for immigration. You can't get much more into personal choice than choice of religion and for some silly reason I think it should be every state's responsibility to protect that human or civil right, instead of coercing such. But that's just silly "moron", "liar" me. :D

[MGB8]

But what you were asserting as fact was simply not true. Jews have special standing in Israel - they can claim citizenship. Non-jews have no claim, they must be naturalized. But that doesn't mean what you asserted it to mean, which is that non-jews cannot immigrate to Israel. Many have and do.



Originally posted by Erich
To all,

thanks for the immigration advice. I'll check into it.

L@mplighterM

In regard to your inquiry as to converting to Judaism, it is something I have considered, but believe as I earlier stated that it should be voluntary and not some state imposed prerequisite or requirement for immigration. You can't get much more into personal choice than choice of religion and for some silly reason I think it should be every state's responsibility to protect that human or civil right, instead of coercing such. But that's just silly "moron", "liar" me. :D

[Erich]

It was apparently misunderstanding, but for some reason, I'll believe it when I see it. :(

[elke]

Erich, I knew somebody who did just that - immigrated to Israel, - about 20 years ago. The lady in question was not Jewish, and to the best of my knowledge, did not convert (couldn't have been enough time: if memory serves me, the Orthodox conversion takes 7 years). I haven't one clue how she did it, though. She was from Canada, of Polish descent.

So, don't lose hope! ;)

[Erich]

Elke,

thanks.

Looks like some law firms are a bit more transparent:

http://www.rosok-law.com/memo5.htm

[elke]

Originally posted by Erich
Elke,

thanks.

Looks like some law firms are a bit more transparent:

http://www.rosok-law.com/memo5.htm

Law firms? Transparent? Is there such a thing? :D

Seriously though, are you considering immigrating to Israel?

[Erich]

Immigrating to Israel would be one way of getting to the "source" of many things. spiritual, political and knowledge. I have thought about it for some time, but there are serious reprocussions if I stepped over certain lines, like having to forfeit a military retirement, which I would rather not do.

There are employment opportunities, also, enough to at least make life affordable, even for outsiders like myself.

The violence is a definite deterent at this point in time, but for every swing in one direction, the future has a way of providing some equal swing in the other direction, giving me some faith that these cousins might find peace before blowing each other mutually from the map. The blank spot on Arab maps does not need to be prophetic.

From the Old Testament, a warning to Israel

"I will bring evil from the north, and a great destruction. The lion is come up from his thicket ... he is gone forth from his place to make thy land desolate; and thy cities shall be laid waste, without an inhabitant" (Jeremiah 4:6, 7)

A warning, by nature, usually implies alternatives to thwart the action in the warning. I don't see Israel seriously considering alternatives of peace, just practicing use of the sword. How do we turn this around? When will it be too late? Does anyone know...or care?

"The lion is come up from his thicket"

Assad in Arabic equals lion. The older lion now replaced by a younger lion, Bashar al-Assad. Syria to the north.

Iraq, also to the north, the lion of the Ishtar gate in the ancient city of Babylon, in what is now Iraq

Does anyone even bother to read the book anymore...or head its warnings?

[L@mplighterM]

Unless my memory fails me there are thousands of American/Vietnamese children that have been barred entry into the United States.

I think that it?s all but certain that they were fathered by the Americans during the Vietnam War.

Children whose mother was born in the US are guaranteed citizenship in America. Children of fathers that were born in the US don?t automatically qualify for status as an American.


THE KEY WORD IS GURANTEED!

I know that there are non Jews that are allowed to immigrate to Israel and I have a feeling that they have to show some indication that they would make good citizens of that country. I think that?s fair! Perhaps Israeli Immigration would want to see affidavits from a Rabbi or something along that line indication that individuals have shown indication that they have a genuine interest in living there. I think that?s fair!

[Gatorade]

Originally posted by Erich
As long as the Palestinians do not have their own state and military to defend it, they have to resort to other methods to resist. Don't get me wrong. There is a simple difference between freedom fighters and terrorists.

You present an either/or fallacy.

The Palestinians are not limited to the alternatives of freedom fighters or terrorists. When 2/3’s of Israelis accept the idea of a Palestinians state (as long as they are assured peaceful co-existence and secure borders) the Palestinians best strategy would be to go the negotiation table in peace. Why even suggest that violence is the only alternative when it clear that fighting a stronger military force is futile for the Palestinians and it will only bring more destruction to the Palestinian people?

The Israelis have shown that the can be quite accommodating when approached with a sincere offer peace. Just look at how much land Israel gave up (as well as settlements) when they gave the Sinai to Egypt for peace.

Originally posted by Erich
I don't see Israel seriously considering alternatives of peace, just practicing use of the sword. How do we turn this around?


Three points for you
1) Have the Palestinians looked at alternatives of peace instead of the sword? Has Arafat ever presented a reasonalbe peace proposal?

2) Just a couple of weeks ago the Labor Party had a variety of peace proposals that people discussed on this board.

3) From the Jewish Virtual Library (http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/myths/mf19a.html#a)

On May 22, 2001, Prime Minister Ariel Sharon declared a unilateral cease-fire in an effort to calm the situation, and in the hope the Palestinians would reciprocate by ending their violent attacks against Israelis. Instead the Palestinians intensified the level of violence directed particularly at Israeli civilians. More than 70 attacks were recorded in the next 10 days, during which Israel held its fire and eschewed any retaliation. The campaign of Palestinian terror during the Israeli cease-fire culminated with the suicide bombing at a Tel Aviv disco June 1 that killed 20 people and injured more than 90, mostly teenagers. In the face of overwhelming international pressure generated by the horrific attack, and the fear of an Israeli counterattack, Arafat finally declared a cease-fire.

[Jorge]

Quote from Erich:

I'm simply trying to find the route where an American Non-Jew could legally immigrate to Israel, without being "forced" to convert to Judaism.
Look Erich, my advice to you is to drop the idea, you don't stand a chance to succeed. Let me explain to you how the system works and you'll see why.

Suppose I'm a clerk at the Immigration Office and I have to examine your request. On reading it I become immediately suspicious; why a Gentile should want to become an Israeli citizen? I can see from your Application Form that you are a professional, living in a nice, quiet country like Spain, you are not destitute, you even own a computer; you want to change that for the uncertainties of a life here. Why?

Two explanations come to my mind :1) You're a bit "soft in the head". Of that kind we have more than our fair quota and I don't see why we should add another one. 2) You intend, Heavens forbid, to marry a nice Jewish girl and that's even worse. Without hesitation I use my large rubber stamp written Application
Denied all over you request and that's the end of it. No point in going further up the line because all my superiors will think the same as I do.

In case you think this unfair I'll tell you about two cases to comfort you. About two years ago an Israeli soldier died in action; papers here and there
and the pertinent authorities realized that the mother was not jewish and had somehow filtered through the barriers. She was notified shortly afterwards that she had to leave the country; the fact that the son had given his life for it was not enough reason to grant her citizenship. It took a near turmoil in the Knesset to make the Ministry to reverse the deportation order. Another one:
some months ago a woman was seriously wounded in a terrorist bombing, as a result she was paralyzed and incapable of taking care of her baby. Her mother, (non jewish)
came from Russia to take care of both, when she applied for citizenship she was refused and had to leave the country.

Prof. Amnon Rubinstein MK, described these and other similar cases as examples of "israeli paranoia". Somehow the Establishment feels that if we grant permits on exceptional cases, the exceptions may become the rule and the country will be flooded by Gentiles who may want to live here. He described this as paranoia because since we don't
manage the persuade jews all over the world to come up here, the probability of a flood of gentiles is minimal.

[Mediocrates]

Why be so defensive. Here's the way it works. You have to adhere to some standard anywhere you attempt to immigrate to.

Say you're attempting to enter the US. If they asked you "Will you you want to promote Stalinism in the US if we let you in?" If you say yes then they will turn you down. You are free to promote Stalinism but from that side of the border.

Non Jews don't seem to be able to digest this because when you say Jew to them all they see is a black hat. They don't see the totality of Jewishness. Conversion is one critical way that this cultural norm is recognized. Just like an American citizen being able to recite the Bill of Rights or swearing not to serve a foreign army or potentate.

[Jorge]

Quote from LampLighter 06-13

The Palestinian leadership has systematically destroyed their own economy because of their actions. There isn’t one reason in this world that they couldn’t have laid down their arms and cohabitated side by side with the Jews. Together they could have developed a thriving economy and have enjoyed a high standard of living.

They have at least two good reasons against "peaceful cohabitation" : They are subject to miltary occupation of their land and, at the same time, israeli settlements are slowly but effectively encroaching in between towns and villlages in the West Bank and Gaza.

" They could have developed a thriving economy ... but just didn't happen. The end result of more than 25 years of "peaceful cohabitation" (from 1967 up to
the first intifadah) was that the territories turned into a reservoir of cheap labor for israeli agriculture, industry and construction.
No industrial development took place and no infrastructure was
created. Israel, as the occcupying power, just wasn't interested in economic development.

The Palestinian leadership has systematically destroyed their own economy because of their actions .

I would rewrite it like this:

The israeli government has sistematically destroyed palestinian economy as a punishment for actions supposedly carried out by
the palestinian leadership.

I suppose we''ll agree that this is a better description of what has been taking place in the last 18 months. We might however disagree as to whether collective punishment may be justified. In my opinion it was neither just nor wise. Israel of course didn't invent it: the idea has been put into practice by armies fighting civilian populations for more than 2000 years.
I cannot recollect many examples that it ever worked except when it was taken to the extremes of genocide like with the natives of North and South America.

[Mediocrates]

I'd word it thus. In the complete absence of any support from the vast wealth and expertise of the Arab world, the only support available the Palestinians has been in the form of Western aid merely to the level of bare sufficiency to keep people fed. OTOH the actual real existance of a Palestinian middle class is evidence that they have the wherewithall to develop their own economy but like anything else in the world money is a coward and flees from violence and anarchy so there is no opportunity for capital investment in Palestine as long as there are no laws to protect investment nor is there any infrastructre to establish the use, regulation or the transfer of that capital according to commonly held concepts of debt, trade, collater and legal redress and contract law.

[L@mplighterM]

If I pissed my money away on weapons and foolishness I wouldn’t have dick and that’s exactly what the PA has done. Whatever difficulties they face is their own doing.

The military occupation in the WB and GS is only sporadic and with good cause. Any nation playing hardball would have eliminated Palestinians a long time ago. Israel’s good will is prolonging the problem with the Palestinians.

[Mediocrates]

The basic problem is that statements like "Free Palestine" "End the Occupation" "Jews out Peace In" don't do anything to develop the actual mechanism toward running that state. It's almost as if the Palestinians believe they're the first group in the history of the world who don't have to open a post office, pick up the trash, print money, collect taxes, pave the streets and all of those boring mundane things that don't involve the word BOOM.

That's what building an economy is: bills of lading, credit, banks that aren't the personal property of one man, shipments of toilets, property laws, exchange rates. The last time I checked there were no economies based on the exchange of Kalashnikovs for gasoline.

[MGB8]

What I find saddening about your opinion is that you divest the Palestinian Arabs of any responsibility for the consequences of their actions.

The economy in the territories has been destroyed by check points and closures.

These check points and closures are a direct, justified, and very minor response to suicide bombings coming from these locations.

Thus, the Palastinian Arab people, by encouraging and supporting these murders (about 3/4 support suicide bombings according to pollsters), much less acting to oppose them, they have brought the destruction of their economy on to themselves.

According to a recent poll, moreover, 51% of Palestinian Arabs believe that the ultimate goal is the "liberation of historic Palestine" ie. the destruction of Israel. This has been promised to them by Arafat and the PLO since its inception. It was still promised to them after Oslo.

Finally, the Palestinian's ARE NOT under military occupation. The west bank is under Israeli control, yes, but saying that it is "their" land is actually mistating the truth. The majority of the land was Jordanian, not under the ownership of individual local Arabs, before 1967. The occupation is a myth.


Originally posted by Jorge
Quote from LampLighter 06-13

The Palestinian leadership has systematically destroyed their own economy because of their actions. There isn’t one reason in this world that they couldn’t have laid down their arms and cohabitated side by side with the Jews. Together they could have developed a thriving economy and have enjoyed a high standard of living.

They have at least two good reasons against "peaceful cohabitation" : They are subject to miltary occupation of their land and, at the same time, israeli settlements are slowly but effectively encroaching in between towns and villlages in the West Bank and Gaza.

" They could have developed a thriving economy ... but just didn't happen. The end result of more than 25 years of "peaceful cohabitation" (from 1967 up to
the first intifadah) was that the territories turned into a reservoir of cheap labor for israeli agriculture, industry and construction.
No industrial development took place and no infrastructure was
created. Israel, as the occcupying power, just wasn't interested in economic development.

The Palestinian leadership has systematically destroyed their own economy because of their actions .

I would rewrite it like this:

The israeli government has sistematically destroyed palestinian economy as a punishment for actions supposedly carried out by
the palestinian leadership.

I suppose we''ll agree that this is a better description of what has been taking place in the last 18 months. We might however disagree as to whether collective punishment may be justified. In my opinion it was neither just nor wise. Israel of course didn't invent it: the idea has been put into practice by armies fighting civilian populations for more than 2000 years.
I cannot recollect many examples that it ever worked except when it was taken to the extremes of genocide like with the natives of North and South America.

[Mediocrates]

The economy in the territories has been destroyed by check points and closures.

On it's face this is true but it is indicative of:

1 The Palestinian economy is based on cheap labor moving through the Green Line. The Israelis have already begun to replace that with cheap Thai labor. Ergo that is a economic factor that has largely evaporated permanently for the Palestinians.

2 If the economy is based on labor then it is not based on something else like trade, finance, manufacturing, etc. And any economy worth its salt has to do that in the absence of a pure services based economy like Monaco, Lichtenstein, Las Vegas or the Cayman Islands.

3 A large piece of the operating budget for the PA came from Israel in the form of apportioned import duties. Now that that money gets converted into bullets shot back at Israelis they don't feel they should have to pay that money to them.

[elke]

Jorge,

It's very tempting to concentrate on the analysis of one's own actions, and all in all it's a very positive and commendable thing to do. One does need to be clear-sighted, however, and see the full picture as it actually is, in order to come up with viable solutions to problems.

The key, IMHO, is that BOTH parties need to take responsibility for their actions. Without Palestinian leadership's examination of own behavior and belief system, as at least some of the causes of their current plight, - any peace process is doomed.

[MGB8]

Less a mistake than not-having-a-plan. Because of the radical differences between the two parties, Israel never got together a coherent plan with dealing with the West Bank.

Israel COULD have formally annexed it. It might lead to some demographic problems, but it was an option. Doing so would have caused some outrage, but Israel would then at least have a position.

"we need this land and claim it, and while we understand the desires of the local Arabs to have their own state, we will not accomodate them. If they do not wish to live within a Jewish state, they are welcome to leave. If they want to stay, they can automatically become citizens."

OR Israel could have taken the position that a certain portion of the West Bank would become a Palestinian State. Then Israel would dictate the size of it - maybe some negotiations, later, and set certain conditions on statehood and a timetable, a long one like was given to Hong Kong.

But instead we tried to ignore the issue, and it blew up, literally.


Originally posted by elke
Jorge,

It's very tempting to concentrate on the analysis of one's own actions, and all in all it's a very positive and commendable thing to do. One does need to be clear-sighted, however, and see the full picture as it actually is, in order to come up with viable solutions to problems.

The key, IMHO, is that BOTH parties need to take responsibility for their actions. Without Palestinian leadership's examination of own behavior and belief system, as at least some of the causes of their current plight, - any peace process is doomed.

[elke]

Point conceded, MGB8. :) It was a strategic error not to have a long-term plan.

[Jorge]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by elke
Jorge,

It's very tempting to concentrate on the analysis of one's own actions, and all in all it's a very positive and commendable thing to do. One does need to be clear-sighted, however, and see the full picture as it actually is, in order to come up with viable solutions to problems.

The key, IMHO, is that BOTH parties need to take responsibility for their actions. Without Palestinian leadership's examination of own behavior and belief system, as at least some of the causes of their current plight, - any peace process is doomed. [/ QUOTE]

elke: Point taken! You're entirely right in saying that both parties need to take responsibility for their actions. If my comments seem a bit one-sided, it is merely because quite a number of our fellow
Forum members excel in pointing out the responsiblities of the palestinians but overlooking the ones of the israelis. I think therefore, that someone ought to present the other side of the medal. I am personally inclined to do it because, as many israelis
in the peace movement, I think that the present government is leading the country through a policy of collective punishment that has meant disaster for the palestinians and its proving itself disastrous for Israel at large.

[Mediocrates]

You're entirely right in saying that both parties need to take responsibility for their actions

Such as?

end the occupation
end the settlements

Anything else the Israelis are indebted to do in exchange for nothing?


Here's a scenario you can chew on. What if there is a a free and independent Palistan and as a free country it enters into a defense pact with Iraq and Syria such that any IDF reponse against acts of terrorism from within Palistan is construed to be an act of war against Bagdad and Damascus? And what if the response to that IDF response is missiles over Tel Aviv? Do you not think that each of those peaceful peaceloving rulers of peace in Syria and Iraq, who, having shown no compunction about using weapons of mass destruction against their own people would hesistate to use them against the Israelis as a bona-fide act of legal treaty sanctioned by the rule of law - blabbity blabbity blah blah???? Remember, the Jenin non event was taken as the mass destruction of the whole country, practically. What do you think the EU and the UN would interpret a military mobilization against a recognized arab nation. Can you picture NATO planes bombing Haifa? I can. They're itching for the chance and only need the lamest excuse to do so.


That's what an EU approved 'rule of international law and sanction' and the peace movement will have brought - maybe because you think people are basically good. But they're not. The normal state of mankind is either the flames of anarchy or the black pit of fascism. Anything else is rare exception. And one way or another; either throw the mass production of babies or the utilization of 'international law', the arab world is committed first and foremost to the destruction of Israel and I'm afraid if you don't see that then you will rue the day.

[elke]

Originally posted by Jorge
[B elke: Point taken! You're entirely right in saying that both parties need to take responsibility for their actions. If my comments seem a bit one-sided, it is merely because quite a number of our fellow
Forum members excel in pointing out the responsiblities of the palestinians but overlooking the ones of the israelis. I think therefore, that someone ought to present the other side of the medal. I am personally inclined to do it because, as many israelis
in the peace movement, I think that the present government is leading the country through a policy of collective punishment that has meant disaster for the palestinians and its proving itself disastrous for Israel at large. [/B]

Just don't beat yourself up into a pulp. You are there, so you have a much better idea as to what is really going on than I do; but from here it looks as though Israel can't do anything terribly different from what it's doing now. If the Palestinian leadership won't - or can't - control its populace's uglier impulses, someone else has to do it. As we all found out over the past 2000 years, that someone else has to be Israel, because no one else will.

[Jorge]

quote from Mediocrates (post 106)

Here's a scenario you can chew on. What if there is a a free and independent Palistan and as a free country it enters into a defense pact with Iraq and Syria such that any IDF reponse against acts of terrorism from within Palistan is construed to be an act of war against Bagdad and Damascus? And what if the response to that IDF response is missiles over Tel Aviv? Do you not think that each of those peaceful peaceloving rulers of peace in Syria and Iraq, who, having shown no compunction about using weapons of mass destruction against their own people would hesistate to use them against the Israelis as a bona-fide act of legal treaty sanctioned by the rule of law - blabbity blabbity blah blah????

The scenario you depict is quite a frightening one. It is also a plausible one, in the sense it might very well be the course of events in case a Palestinian State
comes into being. Problem is however, that there is a pretty large number of equally plausible scenarios that we can formulate and may be used in this particular decision making process in order to carry out an action or refrain from it.
I would go as far as to say that, in our context, scenarios are chosen, a posteriori, to justify a course of action that we feel is right or convenient. Sadly (or fortunately) we cannot asses the likelihood for various plausible scenarios, if we could, Foreign Relations would be a science and sadly ( or fortunately) Forums like this one would cease to exist. Imagine a world without discussions, uncertainities and doubts! We would be bored to death.

In the period before the withdrawal of the israel army from Lebanon, we heard a number of military experts depicting all sorts of frightening scenarios
mostly about a rainfall of shells and mortars falling upon Northern Israel. Mr. Barak's government took the withdrawal decision on the basis of entirely opposite scenarios. So far the decision has been proved the right one: the region has been
quieter than at any time during the occupation of the "security strip" inside Lebanon. No one can deny the possibility that shells might start falling tomorrow morning but, in the meantime, those frightening scenarios remain outside the stage.

In a similar vein I would say that the occupation of the territories ought to come to an end not on the basis of this or that scenario but because so far it has proved harmful to the interests of both the palestinian and the israeli people. I could also add that denying self-determination is unjust and that, as time goes on, this conflict gets more and more brutal and bloody.
Having declared my opinions beforehand, any likely scenario I could devise to reinforce my arguments will be nothing more than an educated guess used to lend them more credibility.

.The first thing you have to do is determine if you can tell the difference between success and failure.


Well, I think I can, provided is a clear cut case and not too ambiguous. Roughly I would go according to the following procedure:
Suppose a certain policy has been designed to achieve a certain goal or aim, after a reasonable time, one may evaluate whether the goal has been achieved or not. If Yes then success if Not, then failure. A clear cut case could be for instance: The policy of a Central Bank is to gradually raise interest rates with the
declared aim of reinforcing the local currency; if after a reasonable period, the local currency has been devaluated against dolar,euro or yen, then that policy is a Failure. You may blame it on the international situation or the unfavorable configuration of the stars but it's still a failure. Or, take for instance Mr.Sharon's declared aim of attaining Peace and Security for Israel; in order to do that certain policies were followed. Examining the local situation after 18 months, (a reasonable period), the inescapable conclusion is: Failure. Again, one could blame the Ides of March or a Moon eclipse or the unfavorable DNA of Mr. Arafat, but it's still a failure.

However, to judge a policy or action according to what may happen is not the correct procedure. Success or failure cannot be assessed regarding future events. This may be stating the obvious, but I mention it because throughout this
conflict some people tend to argue for or against policies mainly in the basis of what may happen while ignoring present factors. A case in point is your worst –case scenarios in connection with a future Palestinian State.

maybe because you think people are basically good. But they're not. The normal state of mankind is either the flames of anarchy or the black pit of fascism. Anything else is rare exception.

I'm not sure whether they are basically good or basically bad; this mainly because I don't think we have acceptable criteria to discern between basic goodness or badness. But I strongly disagree with you about regarding your
statement about " the normal state of mankind". I would say that, in spite of the many lapses, the present state is better than at any other point in history. I happen to be inclined towards historical determinism, but I feel that a discussion on the subject
might be outside the boundaries of this Forum so, I won't press the point.

[MGB8]

Not equally possible, Jorge.

It is almost a certainty that terror attacks would continue from a sovereign palestinian state. Why? Because groups like Hamas and Islamic Jihad have said so, 51% of Palestinian Arabs think ALL OF ISRAEL should be Palestine, and most members of the PLO agree.

Just like Hezbollah has not stopped terror attacks against Israel (rockets, ambushes, the kidnapping of soldiers, sending men to help the Palestinian terror groups), nothing would stop these new groups.

Do you think that Arafat or whoever else would risk a civil war in an established state to protect Israeli's?

Moreover, this new state would quickly gain stronger military capabilities, even weapons of mass destruction, with its open borders and tons of foreign aid (used to purchase weapons, of course, just like it was the past 9 years.) Previous conduct is the best indicator of future conduct.

Israel would have to declare war or suffer casualties. Israel would then have to invade this Palestinian State. Who knows what happens next...likely another mideast war, this time possibly nuclear.

That is not a plausible scenario - it is what WILL HAPPEN. Do you understand? There is almost zero chance of this NOT HAPPENING.

Unless these terrorist groups are destroyed and the concept of terrorism, and concept of destroying Israel, are CRUSHED, then this scenario is not a matter of it, not even of when, but of how many months...

But even if it was only a moderate chance, say 35%, that's a huge risk, and frankly, not worth Israel taking.

[Jorge]

quote from MGB8:

Israel would have to declare war or suffer casualties. Israel would then have to invade this Palestinian State. Who knows what happens next...likely another mideast war, this time possibly nuclear.

That is not a plausible scenario - it is what WILL HAPPEN. Do you understand? There is almost zero chance of this NOT HAPPENING .

No, I do not understand. Whether you write in full Capitals or in letter-size 20 it won't make a difference. I do not and cannot understand how can someone be so sure about what WILL HAPPEN and to say there is almost zero chance of the same said NOT HAPPENING. Did you gain that insight through divine revelation ? If that's the case, I won't discuss further because He knows all.

However, if you didn't arrive to your knowledge through revelation, I'm extremely curious to know which mental processes you use to divine the future with such assuredness. Is that the only thing you know or are their others? Could you tip me
off about the future value of United Steel shares? Or about the winning horse in the next Derby? Could you tell me if the US will invade Iraq this year? Or about the outcome of the Coca-Cola /Pepsi competition for market share? Do you know
about these future events? Or are the intricacies of palestinian minds and their reactions the only ones you know for sure?

If I sound furious, it's because I'm furious. Statements like yours infuriate me no end because they are so absurd and pretentious. Included in the same class are statements like "if Israel is not eliminated it will surely conquest the whole Middle East" and others of the kind.
Social scientists cannot predict elementary future trends with such confidence. Biologists cannot predict the
evolution of well studied ecosystems when one variable is changed, with such confidence. You should read some of their papers; when they dare to extrapolate into the future their
language is so guarded and cautious…

As far as I know, there are two kinds of persons that claim to know the future of social processes with absolute certainty: demagogues and fanatics. Their main role in social conflicts is to add wood to the fire and insure that the flames will spread.

Previous conduct is the best indicator of future conduct.

The statement is incomplete, that is so provided a.o.t.b.e. (all other things being equal). Since in practice all other things are seldom equal the above rule is useless
(Northcote Parkinson)

[MGB8]

No Jorge, The phrase is absolutely not useless. That's like saying that economic models are useless because we don't live with the perfect assumptions needed... no, models are useful because they describe trends, likelyhoods.

As for the fact that this would happen, and I am indeed sure that it would, let me enlighten you.

Arafat and the PA have sponsored terrorism in this intafada and before. That is known, if not accepted due to wilfull blindness. Fine. But EVERYONE agrees that arafat has not given "%100 effort" or even "%50 effort" to stop terrorism.

The common answer to the question, why not give even the effort, is because it would start a Palestinian civil war, between those that could accept Israel and those who want its destruction.

This environment WOULD NOT change if there was a Palestinian State. The only thing that would change would be that terrorist groups would have an easier time growing, training, building, and accessing more powerful weapons.

[elke]

Previous experience cannot predict what will happen in the future with certainty, but it can and does give good odds. So much so, that one of the most financially solid industries in the world, insurance industry, relies on the previous experience to run itself.

Having said that, any insurer worth its salt would have quite a bit of extra cash stocked away. Why? Because not only do conditions change, thus making "all other things being equal" an unrealistic assumption, but there is delay in gathering and processing information to determine just what those odds are. In other words, for a pattern to emerge, there has to be sufficient data to base your observations on.

Sounds schizophrenic, but you are both right, MGB8 and Jorge. Arafat & Co's past performance should indicate their future performance, at least to a degree. However, if there is a leadership change, then "all other things are no longer equal", so the result will be different, by definition. Given Arafat's "thugocracy" regime, it is entirely possible that a reasonable accommodation can be made with better, more peaceful leadership. "When shepherds lead, sheep follow".