Home | "However, since you have agreed with us that Islamists are facists "
Islamists, yes. Muslims, not necceserily.
But to equate a race (Arabs) with an ideology (Fascism) is enough for you to lose all credebility anyway. Besides, the issue here isnt of muslims, but on non-Jews.
Also, the issue isnt of "letting them come in", (immigration of citizens to-be), but of country men stay, (deportation of citizens).
You have yet to prove the arguments false. The issue is not of muslims, but non-Jews.
I have yet to hear a serious discussion of "deportation" of Israeli citizens, Arab or otherwise. When such an action is actively considered, and is approved by the Knesset and the Supreme Court, you may have a legitimate gripe - although such a situation still would not strictly fit the definition of "Fascism". However, since this is not even under discussion at this time, talking about Israel as a "Fascist" state is misleading and deceptive.
Zionism is a form of nationalism, it's true. Nationalism, however, is not a form of racism by its very nature, although it can be used that way. It is essential for all of us to quit swinging at windmills of non-existent "potential" problems, when there are so many things that are really broken and need fixing. Let's (at least try to) stop generalizing, inferring, mud-slinging, and other forms of bigotry and waste, and begin really looking at what's needed to resolve the painful issues at hand.
Elke:
Do you agree that:
1) A non-Jewish population of >50% in Israel constitutes a "security" threat? (Y/N).
Do you furthermore agree that:
2) The government of a country must eliminate security threats if they were to surface? (Y/N).
If you agree with both the above, then read on. If not, then you do not need to read on, and can begin explaining why you dont agree with the above.
--------------------
If you agree with the above statements, then it follows that:
Should the non-Jewish populus go over 50%, that the government of Israel is thereby warranted to make sure it remains under 50%...and stays there.
Like I said earlier, there are two ways this can be achieved. Outright Fascism, or Free-methods.
The free-methods are preventative - they cannot eliminate the possibility, only delay it, or make it less probable.
What option does the government of Israel have, if indeed the non-Jewish populus DOES go over 50%?
Originally posted by A-Palestinian
The only problem being conversed about at the moment, is the problem of non-Jews living in Israel would have should their population exceed 50%.
Thus For this particular issue, the problem is:
Non-Jewish population of a country, where the population must remain > 50% Jewish
Ok let's try this again - I live in a country that is overwhelmingly Christian/Protestant. Do I have to be that? No. Are the laws based on that ethic, on that value system, even that calendar? Yes they are. No matter how 'oppressive' I may find it, there it is. This is fundamentally the case and the same with Israel - you don't have to be Jewish but that how the laws and values and the basic structure of society originates.
Do you get it now?
Arabs are already a security threat. The moment israel lose it Jewish majority It will stop to be a Jewish state, end of Zionism.Originally posted by A-Palestinian
1) A non-Jewish population of >50% in Israel constitutes a "security" threat? (Y/N).
The very same way the it the french or Italian loose their Itlian or French majority, their country will not be Italian or French no more.
Yes! However, at the moment, only ARABS are the facist children killers. No one else. (for now)2) The government of a country must eliminate security threats if they were to surface? (Y/N).
As long as Israel has representation in the Knesset of Arabs, Arabs can appeal the high court, have a free press and so on... Israel is hardly a facist. The moment Israel becomes one, we'll handly things like Syria Iraq Jordan Egypt or Saudia...
I think this discussion focuses too much on ancient history and generalisations such as "Arabs and Muslims are such, Jews are so, etc.". Arabs are no mass-murderers in their nature, as Germans are no nazists in their nature, everything is dependant of certain historic/social conditions, which happen to be extremely bad in Palestine, as well as in some other arab/muslim countries.
however millions of muslims live in France without much problems, and more than a billion muslims live all over the world, they are not any worse people than Christians/Jews etc. , massmurdering happens even in Northern Ireland, in the core of North-Western Europe without any muslims in sight, and GOLDSTEIN wasn't an arab either.
Gilgamesh is clearly a fascist, belonging to a certain race/religion for him is enough to be condamned and discriminated/destroyed. THAT is fascism in its purest form. I agree many arabs/muslims are fascist/racist too, altough i would not say all of them, not even the majority. Islamism (NOT Islam!!!) is not fascism, it is fundamentalism, that exists as well in israel AND in the US (Christian Majority). Fascism and fundamentalism have one thing in common, they both are intolerant for people with a different culture/religion, but focused on religion instead of race.
Anyway, I think the best way to approach this topic is by making a comparison. As some people here mentioned: the US is a predominantly protestant/anglosaxon country, what if in a few decades latino's/blacks would become to majority in the US, and whites a minority, would you then favor laws to restrict immigration to "white countries" only, and consider a policy to change the etnic composition of the us? If you wOULd, it would make you a KKK, and a fascist, I think most Americans would agree with me. it was mentioned here that France is a "national" country, with a french caracter and clearly a french majority, as much as that corresponds to the truth, what if in a few decades Arabs or, why not, Jews, would threaten that French majority? would you then favor discrimination to remain a French majority? would you agree with laws to encourage jewish/arab emigration and punish jewish/ arab families (oNLY jewish/Arab) with too many children?
a historic example: before WWII some regions in poland had a jewish majority, and poland was certainly a polish national state, some polish politicians said that something had to be done about this jewish majority and to restore/remain the Polish caracter of Poland. Do you agree with them? if you don't, than of course you couldn't agree either with any measures taken by israel to limit the Arab percentage in Israel, unless you're a fascist who considers one race superior to the other.
I think the internal policy of israel is not fascist (yet), the policy in the occupied territories on the contrary is fascist. in theory, all races have the same rights in israel(clearly not so in the occupied territories, not even in theory), altough some laws and measures are clearly discriminatory and racist, for example limiting the rights of Arabs to buy land, or only allowing Jewish immigration, based on the race/religion, not on family-ties to the territory as in many other non-racist states. So in fact israel's laws are contradicting, and i think israel has never adopted a constitution in order to remain this confusion, and discriminate in some cases without making Israel a racist, fascist state in general. Without anti-discrimination mentioning in the constitution, as in many other western countries, no one can legally challenge those racist laws.
fascism is the superiority of one race above the other in a certain state, official state-sponsered discrimination against people from etnic minorities. Yes, some arab countries are fascist in their policies, is that a legitimation for Israel to apply the same policy? In that case Israel would admit to be on the same moral level of the worst arab regimes, and certainly not a "democratic, Western country belonging to the free world".
Anyway, to adress the original post by newsguy, as miriam said, the israeli Arab growth rate is dropping, and as you mentioned yourself, most Arab israeli are NOT involved in terrorism, i wouldn't worry too much. Yes, Arab israeli's support the Palestinians, as well as many left-wing Jewish israeli, that is their right to have this political opinion, and if Israel is really a western democratic country they would have the right to express their opinion by legal means, and they certainly have the right to vote for their own parties. They are also perfectly legal citizens, they have roots to the land for many generations, much longer than most Jewish israeli, and they are legal and, in theory, equal citizens of Israel. Most Arab Israeli I met are by the way quite succesfull, good citizens who do not support terrorism in any way, as they get affected the same way as jewish israeli, even worse because ithe israeli reaction always backfires on them, and they get fired not because of their political opinion/abilities but because of their etnic origin.
Anyway, the story of the arab israeli prooves that israel is making a tremendous error by treating the Palestinians in the occupied territories as subhuman animals, if israel would have given them the same opportunities as the israeli palestinians, the current situation would have never existed in the first place and the majority of palestinians would NOT have supported suicide-bombing. Extremism, fascism and desperation generates more extremism, desperation and fascism, examples can be found all over the world, to start with Northern Ireland or Yougoslavia.
a last note: is zionism fascism? Well, not necessarily, the original idea was a land for Jews but not for Jews exclusively, that fascist idea only devellopped later, helped by Arab hostility.
But the policy to expulse, ban and refuse return of millions of palestinian civilians in 1948 and 1949 who lived on the territory of israel was clearly a fascist policy, that undermined any effort to reach a peacefull situation in the Middle-East since then and encouraged fascism and extremism on both sides, AND gave new legitimation to repressive Arab regimes to stay in power.
According to polls most palestinians agree to a situation where some refugees could return and become israeli citizens, and the others would live in an independant palestinian state according to the borders recognised by the un and all thirth countries, so most do nOT any longer wish the destruction of Israel. However most do agree to use violence to achieve these legitimate goals supported by international law and the un, because they have no confidence in Israel, a country which never took the aspirations and rights of the Palestinian people seriously, and would never have done so without the huge pressure of international condemnation and Palestinian violence.
They didn't have to take them seriously in that context. They inherited your problem from you. On other words let's do nothing until it's the Jews responsibility. Then it's the world's calamity.
It's not really about rights in the end. It's about management. Like 'urban renewal'. One could make a case that 'urban renewal' is fascism but that would ring hollow. It's about management not intent.
BTW did you intend to form a sentence that said - 'supported by violence and international law'? That speaks volumes about how you think society's problems actually get solved. Get a referendum. Go to terroristic war. Lather rinse repeat. Is it any wonder we don't speak the same language?
(your sentence) 'However most do agree to use violence to achieve these legitimate goals supported by international law and the un,'
"They didn't have to take them seriously in that context. They inherited your problem from you. On other words let's do nothing until it's the Jews responsibility. Then it's the world's calamity."
Hey, that's a clear case of "denying responsability". Of course Israel has to take the Palestinian problem seriously, and not only for security reasons. Zionism and the establishment of Israel created a huge problem for the Palestinians, who were banned from/lost their own land (by israel), and Israel dealt with (or, if you prefere "managed") it in the worst possible way.
WWII has indeed accelerated zionism and the creation of Israel but it didn't create the problem, restoring the equal rights of Jews, purging the responsibles and restore property was a European problem, what happened in the Middle East was Israel's problem, one can not eternally transfer responsabilities to what happened almost 60 years ago.
anyway, according to the un the refugees and palestinian problem in general is clearly the responsability of Israel in the first place.
"BTW did you intend to form a sentence that said - 'supported by violence and international law'? That speaks volumes about how you think society's problems actually get solved. Get a referendum. Go to terroristic war. Lather rinse repeat. Is it any wonder we don't speak the same language?"
I support the use of violence if any other diplomatic or economic pressure to restore international law has failed, UNLIKE your own president.
israel had got decades of time to give back the occupied territories entirely and find a resolution for the refugees based on the unsc-resolution, it refused. Currently the PA is ready to open negociation to find another solution than a violent one, Israel refuses.
nevertheless, I reject any violence against innocent civilians, which is a crime.
(your sentence) 'However most do agree to use violence to achieve these legitimate goals supported by international law and the un,'
I disagree!. Fact is that the most of the world terrorism today, is made by Arabs or under arab influance. Fact is, that only the Germans committed the indusrial murder of millions of my people why the rest of the world stood idley by or offered the Natzis a substancial assistance in hunting my brotherens. Europeans who saved Jews are a uniqe and UN-characteristic extremist minority, which represent nothing but the heroism of these few. Anti semetism, however, just like Islamist fundemenalizm is not a fad nor a phenomena, its clutural characteristic, something that exists among these "people" from day one of their wretched existance. Thus, the majority of Arabs are racist and Facists, and the majority of Europeans are Natzis. Enough to read one of your x-up posts.Originally posted by takeo
Arabs are no mass-murderers in their nature, as Germans are no nazists in their nature
SOME arab counties? Why don't you try saying: ALL arab counties???
, everything is dependant of certain historic/social conditions, which happen to be extremely bad in Palestine, as well as in some other arab/muslim countries.
Wait and see... It's only a matter of time before suicide bomber will kill forgies all over frog land, same in former great britain and other places. One already done so in Helsinky Finland, that's the start...
however millions of muslims live in France without much problems, and more than a billion muslims live all over the world, they are not any worse people than Christians/Jews etc.
MD Goldstain, was not an extremist, he acted alone, not as part of an organization or some ideology. He was a dipressed individual who committed an insane act of vengeance, probably believeing, hopeing he self sacrifice will stop the arab terrorism how murdered his old friend Lapid, and the friend's child, few days earlier. MD Goldstein SAVED the lives of countless arabs. CAN you say the same about ARAB doctors?
, massmurdering happens even in Northern Ireland, in the core of North-Western Europe without any muslims in sight, and GOLDSTEIN wasn't an arab either.
Why?
Gilgamesh is clearly a fascist
Because I'm not a Jew-boy who thinks and does what the GOY orders him?
The problem is not race or religion, but culture. Self defense against hostial cultural characteristic is not facism, no matter who loud you claim it is.
, belonging to a certain race/religion for him is enough to be condamned and discriminated/destroyed.
Then I say it does, it is the majority. The terrorists are just the spear head, their vanguard. The rest of them are silent supporters (or idle resisters, where action is needed, which is just the same as support).
I agree many arabs/muslims are fascist/racist too, altough i would not say all of them, not even the majority.
Eitherway, it's a US problem. Spacific religion or spacific culture is not an official characteristic of the US, since the US is not a national state, but an immigrant state. As long a one respect the law and believe in American values, who cares what he's color or culture is? hack, he can EVEN be Jewish... (which for us, jews, it's a big thing).
As some people here mentioned: the US is a predominantly protestant/anglosaxon country, what if in a few decades latino's/blacks would become to majority in the US, and whites a minority, would you then favor laws to restrict immigration to "white countries" only, and consider a policy to change the etnic composition of the us?
Israel is the land of the Jews and should accepts only Jews as immigrants. Arabs have full Israeli citizenship by the force of our unability to kick them out, in democratic and peacful ways.
Again, it's a french problem. I would understand if the French will wake up one day and try to kick their Arabs to the back to the deserts that first spawened them.
it was mentioned here that France is a "national" country, with a french caracter and clearly a french majority, as much as that corresponds to the truth, what if in a few decades Arabs or, why not, Jews, would threaten that French majority? would you then favor discrimination to remain a French majority? would you agree with laws to encourage jewish/arab emigration and punish jewish/ arab families (oNLY jewish/Arab) with too many children?
As for Jews, unless some miracle would happen, there is no chace Jews would out number frenchies. Either way, Jews pose no threat to French existance or culture, Jews never murdered French woman and children as part of some crazed ideology, and Lastly, Jews will come over the Israel with Joy, there is nothing other then business that tie Jews to France.
1. I'm a "facist" who consider the preservation and existance of MY race in MY little corner of the world, above everything else.
a historic example: before WWII some regions in poland had a jewish majority, and poland was certainly a polish national state, some polish politicians said that something had to be done about this jewish majority and to restore/remain the Polish caracter of Poland. Do you agree with them? if you don't, than of course you couldn't agree either with any measures taken by israel to limit the Arab percentage in Israel, unless you're a fascist who considers one race superior to the other.
2. I wish the Polands were using the same tactics Israel seems by some to use against the Arabs.
3. Jews never threatens the existance or integrity of Polan, nor they had any intent in doing so. More importantly, Jews never mass murder Polish women and children, or supported such things... Jews hardly defended themselves when needed!!!
4. I think that any comparisons between world jewary and Arabs or other murderus minorities is racist and evil anti semetic. Jew always been model citizens, where ever they lived. Arabs were never like that, not in Israel and not in France.
Now that must've be the stupiest thing i ever read in this board!!!
I think the internal policy of israel is not fascist (yet), the policy in the occupied territories on the contrary is fascist.
Isn't Israel a democracy who elected Sharon and his goverment? Doesn't someone who elects some one else, also supports that man ideas and policies?
Don't The arabs in the occupaid territoris want to make their own rules? have indepdance from us, (or at least say so)? Wasn't Oslo all about that? Isn't there a palestinian authority? WHY ON EARTH should arabs have the same rules, as jews, in the "occupaid territoris, IF THEY ARE NOT EVEN ISRAEL CIVILIANS ACCORDING TO THEIR OWN WHISHES!!!!!!!
in theory, all races have the same rights in israel(clearly not so in the occupied territories, not even in theory)
How stupid can one gets? You need professional help, takeo. and soon!!
for such a "racism", I will die for, every day, every moment, togather with millions of other fighting Jews.
, altough some laws and measures are clearly discriminatory and racist, for example limiting the rights of Arabs to buy land, or only allowing Jewish immigration, based on the race/religion, not on family-ties to the territory as in many other non-racist states.
Arab israeli are NOT involved in terrorism
Arab israelis are involoved in terrorism, had killed jewish women and children and american civilians as well. The do endorse and support terrorism, publicly. Some of those terrorist supporters are also arab member fo Knesset. I admit, It israel undoing for being too democratic and too much tolerant to others "ideas". It is wrong of us.
Again, the Inifada is not about Arabs who want to become Israeli citizens but about arabs who want the Jews, all surviving jews that is, Palestinian citizens! (with no equal rights to begin with).
if israel would have given them [the "palestinains] the same opportunities as the israeli palestinians, the current situation would have never existed in the first place and the majority of palestinians would NOT have supported suicide-bombing.
If that is so, expalin me why Israel hadn't bombed gaza flat and why Israel hadn't deported all the arabs to the land they first came from? After TWO years of "desperation generate extremism", one could've expect a bit more extremism from our side. no?
Extremism, fascism and desperation generates more extremism, desperation and fascism, examples can be found all over the world
I, personaly quite desperate today, does it allow me to kill couple of hundrends arab civilans? Cause technicly I can, I know all about explosives and home made bomb making. Ask your self, what stops me? Maybe it has tp do with ME Jewish and an arab isn't ?
That is exactly what I've always said: The existance of Israel is an obstacle for peace, same as the existance of Jews is the reason for antisemtism.
But the policy to expulse, ban and refuse return of millions of palestinian civilians in 1948 and 1949 who lived on the territory of israel [...] that undermined any effort to reach a peacefull situation in the Middle-East since then and encouraged fascism and extremism on both sides, AND gave new legitimation to repressive Arab regimes to stay in power.
I must've to do with Israel being a Jewish state... and not another arab state...because they have no confidence in Israel, a country which never took the aspirations and rights of the Palestinian people seriously
There's a play from about 20 years ago called "The Best Little Whorehouse in Texas" and there is a character, a politician who has a song called "Doing the Sidestep". You could have been singing that song.Originally posted by takeo
I support the use of violence if any other diplomatic or economic pressure to restore international law has failed, UNLIKE your own president.
israel had got decades of time to give back the occupied territories entirely and find a resolution for the refugees based on the unsc-resolution, it refused. Currently the PA is ready to open negociation to find another solution than a violent one, Israel refuses.
nevertheless, I reject any violence against innocent civilians, which is a crime.
Originally posted by takeo
Hey, that's a clear case of "denying responsability". Of course Israel has to take the Palestinian problem seriously, and not only for security reasons. Zionism and the establishment of Israel created a huge problem for the Palestinians, who were banned from/lost their own land (by israel), and Israel dealt with (or, if you prefere "managed") it in the worst possible way.
Well that's your opinion. As we know their problems predate and existance of Israel and certainly any 'occupation'. For decades before they weren't even citizens of the countries they lived in.
[b]WWII has indeed accelerated zionism and the creation of Israel but it didn't create the problem, restoring the equal rights of Jews, purging the responsibles and restore property was a European problem, what happened in the Middle East was Israel's problem, one can not eternally transfer responsabilities to what happened almost 60 years ago.
anyway, according to the un the refugees and palestinian problem in general is clearly the responsability of Israel in the first place.
[B]
Oh it's not about WW2 - even you don't believe that when you say it. And of course according to the UN, you don't expect them to take responsibility for something they've had an active hand in managing for 5 decades, do you?
It just sad though in the end that not one single Arab state or person in power will ever not in 100 million years ever acknowledge even the tiniest bit of involvement or responsibility for their brother Palestinians. If I were the Palestinians I'd throw away my membership in the Arab world.
Mediocrates:
"Ok let's try this again - I live in a country that is overwhelmingly Christian/Protestant. Do I have to be that?"
No, and non-sequitor .
"Are the laws based on that ethic, on that value system, even that calendar? Yes they are. No matter how 'oppressive' I may find it "
Agreed, but non-sequitor .
"This is fundamentally the case and the same with Israel - you don't have to be Jewish but that how the laws and values and the basic structure of society originates "
Strawman. This is wrong. The issue, is not what menial traffic laws one must follow in the country. In fact, the issue isnt even about laws. Its about rights.
In your example, if the Christian/Protestant majority voted to cut your head off, would it be right, and just?
Similarly, if the majority decided to deport you because of you are non-Protestant citizen, would that be right, and just?
No. It would never be. THIS is the issue being talked about here.
----------------------
Gilgamesh, you amuse me. You have yet to put Racism aside, and give a rational counter-argument to why Israel has not implicitly accepted Facism.
Because Israelis find Islam facist and evil. That why we Israelis never implicited Facism.Originally posted by A-Palestinian
Gilgamesh, you amuse me. You have yet to put Racism aside, and give a rational counter-argument to why Israel has not implicitly accepted Facism.
If you like living under a facist ragime, go to any arab state you pick, you can ever live among the citizens of the Palestinain authority mob-cracy. I can't care less. However, Israel will always refuse to become one.
Originally posted by A-Palestinian
No, and non-sequitor .
Non Sequitor. But thanks for playing. And if you want to have a discussion by all means ask. Until then when you automatically discount anything said to you there's no point.
If you have a response to this post, it is of course a non sequitor.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by A-Palestinian
Agreed, but non-sequitor.
Then don't agree, clearly you are wasting your time
Strawman. This is wrong. The issue, is not what menial traffic laws one must follow in the country. In fact, the issue isnt even about laws. Its about rights.
It is about both - do you undertand the connection?
Actually what follows below from you is a strawman -
[b]In your example, if the Christian/Protestant majority voted to cut your head off, would it be right, and just?
Similarly, if the majority decided to deport you because of you are non-Protestant citizen, would that be right, and just?
If they wanted to deport me because my son murdered someone then:
That implies I am not a citizen to begin with since only non citizens can be deported.
Therefore INS procedure would dictate. If my son was a minor one could make a case for it.
but again, what you mention is a strawman and a non sequitor since you are comparing two completely distinct cases for rhetorical effect.
If you have any more strawmen and non sequitors I'd love to hear them. Thanks for playing!
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks