Dear, oh dear:another survey which failed to consult me. Probably because I am in Sydney, am over 60, and am an orphan through the effluxion of time. Oddly I object to being referred to as an "Australian Jew". If there need be a description at all by way of religious identification, [akin to "of Mediterranean appearance"],then let it be a"Jewish Australian". I am no less an Australian by reason of my membership of the Jewish faith; I am no less a member of the Jewish faith by reason of my being an Australian. I am part of no triangle.

Why is it that in this never ending dialogue about Israel noone asks: why doesn't the Muslim community do something to resolve the Palestinian refugee problem?

Since 1948 Israel has absorbed hundreds of thousands Jews expelled from Arab countries not to mention millions from the late Soviet Union.

"Adherents hold to a viewpoint opposing Israel’s existence specifically and Jewish national rights more broadly which is beyond rational debate, and unconnected to contemporary or historical reality."

Argumentum ad lapidem.

In other words, the very concept is so opposed to the author's point of view they dismiss it out of hand without attempting to deal with the substance of the debate. I guess the author just doesn't want to deal with the problems raised by voices as diverse as Hannah Arendt to Noam Chomsky.

Israel, for all its attempts to be democratic and secular, still faces the problem of being a colonial state which was imposed on the indigenous population of Palestine. Until it deals with that issue - and thus gives up any pretense of being a "Jewish" state - it will lack popularity among the left.

Likewise the debate over "national" rights. There are of course, many definitions of nationality, from self-identification, to ethno-linguistic familiarity, to religion. In my considered opinion, lest the subject collapse into relativistic nonsense, the correct definition in terms of deciding statehood is first-language membership. Under this definition religions have no right to an independent state. A claim for a "Jewish state for a Jewish people" has as much veracity as the Protestant separatists in Ireland who wanted a "Protestant state for a Protestant people". No secular or democratic person should entertain such a proposition.

It is unable to be disputed that the cause of much of the worlds problems lies in the palistei/israel issue ,further that both parties use the dispute to rally its own voter base ,

This clear divide enshures a 'tough on drugs' style of approach , where weak leaders are able to get re-elected with the minimum of effort ,[just by making sure there is not ever a solution enshures these weak leaders stay in power]

It is time to face the two state issue as being unviable [if only because rightwing extreemists on both side will collude to ensure rocket attacks [or settlements] will allways be able to set their adjenda simply by doing [and saying] the same things.

Isralie leaders cant afford to alianate the settlers getting free land ,and hammas cant be seen to allow this invasion of palistein lands ;catch22.

There is a solution ,and it is based on turning the land into a shared homeland for the one god ,[noting one god gives all life , all life must be seen as sacred ,;if only to honour god]

Make one god land ,not two homelands but one [god's]

adminesterd by one govt and two parties ,who divide the govt income between their own people equally looking after their own peoples needs[traditional rules and dress to enter certain areas ,that allow freely true respects to be paid to god] with a joint army and police force ,where peace partners act to serve the peace.
GODS PEACE not mans

‘The motion recognised the democratic tradition shared by Australia and Israel as reflected in a common commitment to civil and human rights and cultural diversity, and pledged Australia’s friendship, commitment and enduring support to the people of Israel.’
What planet would you have to be on?

A single, secular, democratic state, one vote one person is the only possible way to resolve this issue. Many Israelis may not like it, but it is probably the only realistic option that they have.
I understand that the population of Israel is approximately 10.8 million, with the population being almost a 50/50 split, Israelis, Palestinians.

Outside principally due the behaviour of the Israelis, they have any ever growing number of people who do not like their attitudes. Look at the map, if enough people get annoyed enough to organise there is no need for the use of nukes to destroy Israel. A mass attack of ordinary , common garden variety rockets launched from 1500 ks out, in to 20 or 30 ks would overwhelm any defence and be impossible to destroy.

From day one the mistake was assuming the the Israelis could push the Palestinians off their land, and call it ‘Israel’. How much better off would everyone have been if they had merely chose to settle, and become part of the community mm- a community where Palestinians and Jews had lived together for eons.

To the first correspondent, I would say if I don't represent your "Jewish" views however you define yourself, please express them. Let's hear you loud and clear.

Lev, who I suspect is a well-known figure in the Victorian ALP Left, is still stuck with the early 20th marxist rejection of Jewish national identity. According to Lenin and Stalin, Jewish nationalism was a reactionary idea designed to divert the Jewish masses from the class struggle. Influenced by the legacy of the enlightenment, marxists argued that a progressive solution to the "Jewish question" lay in the complete assimilation of the Jews in the future classless society in which all racial, religious and ethnic differences would become irrelevant.

As atheists, Marxists narrowly constructed the Jews as a religious group lacking a common history, language, culture or territory (rather than a nation) whose distinctiveness and persecution would disappear with the triumph of socialism. This narrow advocacy of Jewish assimilation has rightly been criticized as displaying tremendous insensitivity to, and ignorance of, Jewish culture, tradition and identity.

Ditto today. Lev needs to understand that Jews are a nation, not a religious group like Protestants. When he understands this, he will realize that a Jewish state of Israel is no different to a state of Palestine or a state of East Timor or a state of Croatia.

Philip Mendes

Amongst all the hyperbole about Israel being a "colonialist state" with few "natives to the region" at least two things are forgotten. One is that a relatively small number of "Palestinians" are native to the region either, being fairly recent descendants of immigrants from Egypt, Syria and other Arabs regional states. Secondly, the "Palestinian question" is being pushed by "Palestinians" in part though religious motivation, in that territory once conquered always remains "Islamic land". I do also wonder too whether "Palestinians" of today are representative of whatever "Palestinians" inhabited the region in 1948, given the way Muslims have pushed Christians out of the region, to the extent that towns like Nablus and Bethlehem, in 1948 having a distinct Christian majority are now something like 90% Muslim.

Lastly, given the dhimmi status of Jews under Islam, and their treatment for centuries by various Islamic regimes, one wonders about the logic of calling for a "single state solution" especially given the supremacist bent of fundamentalist Islam.

Phillip,

My opinions are quite regardless of Lenin's debates with the Bund (best expressed in and "To the Jews" (1905) "Critical Remarks on the Jewish Question" (1913)) or Stalin's approach to provide a an independent oblast in Birobidzhan or the Soviet Union being the second state to recognise Israel.

Rather I am being specific in a social scientific sense. There is no common Jewish identity apart from Judiasm. There is no common first-language, there is no common genetic basis, or anything else that is not a subset of the religious identity and heritage. Likewise the people of Timor-Leste are not a nationality either, rather that state is a federation of different nations (the Tetum, the Makasae, Fataluku etc).

I am not advocating assimilation; people have every right to practise their faith and profess those symbolic representations. Indeed, like Arendt, Einstein and a host of other people of similar ilk I have often argued strongly in favour of a Jewish *homeland* in Palestine. I'm not exactly why, but I personally feel a strong connection with those of the Judiac faith and heritage.

What I reject is the special right to a specific Jewish *state* just as I reject the right to a Catholic state, a Muslim state or any other rule of religion over secularlism. This also applies to the requirement that the English head of state must be an Anglican, the recognition of various Lutheran churches as state religions ni the Scandanavian countries etc.

Moreover, I have great difficulties in supporting any state (including Australia) which has been established by colonial imposition over indigenous people and continues occupations and invasions contrary to international law (let alone human decency)

If Israel manages to resolve these two issues (religious exclusivity and colonialism) they may find that the left become strong supporters of what is a country with significant democratic institutions, quite notable for the region.

Your suspicions btw, are correct, not that I make any attempt to hide these affiliations.

Regards,

Lev

To Philip Mendes,

Can you please tell me why believing in the one-state solution to teh Israeli/Palestinian conflict is "akin to religious fanatacism", "beyond rational debate" and "unconnected to contemporary or historical reality"?

I personally believe in the one-state solution. That is, don't have a Jewish state. Don't have a Palestinian state either. Just have a democratic state where they can all live together in peace and equality. No discrimination, no favouritism, no repression. Can you please tell me what is wrong with this position?

Meanwhile, can you please tell me how it is possible to have a state established to favour one particular religious group over everyone else and have a fair system in place? Because I, for one, can't see it.

Phillip says:

"A third perspective - held mainly, but no longer exclusively, by the far Left sects - regards Israel as a racist and colonialist state which has no right to exist. This perspective reflects what may be called a position of anti-Zionist fundamentalism that is akin to religious fanaticism. Adherents hold to a viewpoint opposing Israel’s existence specifically and Jewish national rights more broadly which is beyond rational debate, and unconnected to contemporary or historical reality."

That's it? That's the refutation of the one state solution? The refutation of likening Israel to South Africa? Seeing the question in terms of colonisation and racism? Seeing the establishment of the State of Israel itself as an act of genocide against the Palestinians? No refutation at all. Just bile dismissing an idea Phillip does not want to address. That will not do at all Phillip. It is intellectually dishonest.

I agree with Lev's analysis. Unfortunately, whether deliberate or not, Phillip's response failed to address his comments. To put it simply, like South Africa, the way forward is for a rainbow nation of Palestine.

Reply to Seneca:

Yes,I have to agree with what you say.It disappoints me and mystify me why Muslim states havent done more to help the millions of displaced Palestinian refugees. They are consigned to dreadful refugee camps in Lebanon. Muslims are heard to boast that they practice a principle of brotherhood unparalleled in the civilized world. A close look at the Palestinian problem makes you think again! They have been exploited and used as political pawns. What has Syria done for them?What has Turkey,Pakistan,Iran, Malaysia,Indonesia, Morocco,Algeria, Tunisia, Egyptand the UAE states where is mind-blowing wealth for all in the Emirates? Jordan tried to accomodate thousands of them and look what happened!The Palestinians tried to overthrow the Kingdom to establish a Palestinian state.If the Hashemite Bedouins hadnt ridden in from the deserts to overthrow them the Kingdom would have been lost and they would have captured Jordan as their own.

When have Muslim states raced to help the poor in Thailand and Bangladesh when they have been hit by the ravages of nature?

Meanwhile the Palestinian state languishes in the hands of the usurpers whose occupation has been legalised and validated by the UN under the conspiracies of the US and its allies.

Socratease

socratease says:

"Jordan tried to accommodate thousands of them and look what happened!The Palestinians tried to overthrow the Kingdom to establish a Palestinian state.If the Hashemite Bedouins hadn't ridden in from the deserts to overthrow them the Kingdom would have been lost and they would have captured Jordan as their own."

My memory is a little hazy on this so no doubt I stand to be corrected but I thought the PLO could have taken power in Jordan - it was a popular uprising - but refused to do so on the mistaken basis that they were not to interfere in the politics of host nations. This reflected the PLO's top down approach to liberation, and the fact they didn't want to upset the ruling elite in those countries or their so called support for the Palestinian cause.

If their approach had been more bottom up than top down then the whole face of the Middle East could have changed in and from 1970.

And by the way Phillip, for some time the PLO had a policy of a democratic and secular Palestine - ie a one state solution. Hardly a policy confined to far left sects, as you sneeringly describe us. And hardly an example of the ideal of searching for truth and the possible resolution of issues through rational debate, discourse and discussion.

WHEN DID HISTORY BEGIN?

It seems for some, it began in 1948.

That was the day the EVIL JEWS did their dastardly deed against the 'HELPLESS PALESTINIANS'....

Well..thats one view of history. Do the Facts support it? (Lev thinks so.)

Jews were massacred in "Palestine" long b4 1948, by Arabs.

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/hebron29.html

Putere... THAT is the reason the Jews could never just 'settle' as you suggest.

<<Israel, ...was imposed on the indigenous population of Palestine.>>

REALLY? Why is your historical view myopic? How about the EXILE OF JEWS by the Romans which was IMPOSED on them in AD 70?

WHY is it less valid to point to "THAT" point in history than to point to 1948 which was the 'REVERSAL' of one of the greatest crimes against humanity in all history. i.e. the Destruction and Exile in AD70.

SHOW me by what moral 'beam balance' you determine 1948 to be more relevant than AD70? Oh..I know.. 'that was a longggggg time ago'..duh.

Makes not a SCRAP of difference.

INDIGENOUS Palestinians? My head just exploded.. I've booked my next therapy appointment... The "Palestinians" are NOT 'indigenous' they are the combined result of Islamic conquest..and coerced conversions.

Refer Hamas Charter PART 3 Article 11
<<This is the status [of the land] in Islamic Shari’a, and it is similar to all lands conquered by Islam by force, and made thereby Waqf lands upon their conquest, for all generations of Muslims until the Day of Resurrection.>>

Indigenous my foot! read.... READ what they themselves say!x100

Which part of ISLAMIC CONQUEST do you not understand?

Which part of BY FORCE do you not 'get'?

Why is ISLAMIC conquest Ok. But "Jewish re-conquest" not ok ? sounds very racist and Islamist to me.

I wish all these 'racist' and xenophobic anti semites would crawl back into their holes under their blood stained rocks.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G71PSF2qCI8&feature=related PRE 1948

Open your blind eyes people.

To Petere, fungus, passy, and Lev: I would point out the obvious.

Israel exists as a thriving nation state in reality. Any theorizing around Israel not existing means denying that reality. So this is how anti-Zionist fundamentalists fantasize to address that basic problem.

Israelis and their Jewish supporters are depicted as inherently evil oppressors by the simple process of denying the historical link between the Jewish experience of oppression in both Europe and the Middle East and the creation of Israel. Conversely, Palestinians are depicted as intrinsically innocent victims. In place of the fundamental and objective centrality of the State of Israel to contemporary Jewish identity, anti-Zionist fundamentalists portray Israel as a mere political construct, and utilize ethnic stereotyping of all Israelis and all Jewish supporters of Israel in order to justify their claims.

The purpose of negating the reality of Israel's existence is to overcome the ideological barrier posed by the Left's historical opposition to racism. Any objective analysis of the Middle East would have to accept that Israel could only be destroyed by a war of partial or total genocide which would inevitably produce millions of Israeli Jewish refugees, and have a catastrophically traumatic effect on almost all Jews outside Israel. But advocacy of genocide means endorsing the most virulent form of racism imaginable. So instead anti-Zionist fundamentalists construct a subjective fantasy world in which Israel is detached from its specifically Jewish roots, and then miraculously destroyed by remote control free of any violence or bloodshed under the banner of anti-racism. And of course the perpetrators cannot reasonably be accused of antisemitism because they deny holding any prejudices towards Jews. Problem solved.

For further discussion of the fallacy of a one-state position, see my "One state is no solution", New Matilda online, 4 March 2008.

By the way Fatah never advocated a bi-national state, rather an Arab State of Palestine in which the Jews would be allowed to remain as a tolerated religious community.

Philip Mendes

Guess the time will come when Israelis either accept that their period of dominance is over, and negotiate a single, secular, democratic state, or wind up with nothing.
As for being concerned about the: Any objective analysis of the Middle East would have to accept that Israel could only be destroyed by a war of partial or total genocide which would inevitably produce millions of Israeli Jewish refugees, and have a catastrophically traumatic effect on almost all Jews outside Israel.
One, destruction or not is their choice, two: as for the: inevitably produce millions of Israeli Jewish refugees, and have a catastrophically traumatic effect on almost all Jews outside Israel bit, after Israels 60 odd years of brutal treatment of the Palestinians, -- I really care!

David,

Your accusations might be offensive if there was any veracity to them.

I am well aware of the sectarian conflicts prior to 1948 and, even most grimly, between non-Jewish and Jewish Palestinians. Likewise I am well aware of the diaspora form Roman times and the history the Jews after that, perhaps even more so than yourself. If you can however, derive a objective connection between the Jews expelled by the Romans in 70 AD and those who moved into Palestine after the formation of Israel, you're doing better than any geneticist on the planet.

You do appear unaware that Herodotus referred to the Palestinians some 2500 years ago and of course, they are mentioned as the the Hebrew (Plishtim) and in their quasi-historical sources (e.g., 1 Samuel 17:26, 17:36; 2 Samuel 1:20; Judges 14:3), "people of P'lesheth", "Philistia").

I am surprised that you raise the issue of the Hamas charter as if we haven't all already read it. I am yet to see a single person on OLO who supports Hamas' Charter, although that is very different to those who oppose them without thinking of the causes and reasons for their continued existence. In case there is something you've missed, I utterly oppose the replacement of a somewhat secular, somewhat democratic Jewish state of Israel with a theocratic and dictatorial Islamic state of Palestine.

There is a preferred option: A country which justly resolves the dispossesion of its original inhabitants, a country which is a homeland to Christian, Jew and Muslim without being a state for any and with no religious laws, a country which respects civil liberties and democratic traditions. However, such as country is only possible if people give up both their sectional interests and the self-fulfilling prophecy that it cannot be achieved. Whoever supports such a proposition will receive the support of "the left".

To Philip,

Not once have I ever believed that genocide or ethnic cleansing of Jews - or anyone else - was justified. What I believe is justified is the changing of Israeli laws in order to make it, instead of a Jewish state, a state for all of its citizens, regardless of religion or lack of religion. I don't see how this would require genocide or ethnic cleansing. Nor do I how this elides Jews' religious and historical connection to the land, or their persecution over the centuries.

You still haven't answered my question as to how it is possible to have a nation designed for one particular religious group and have a fair system in place.

Jewish people, like everyone else, should be able to live anywhere they feel like in the world in peace, prosperity and equality. Yet having a nation established to favour them over everyone else is fundamentally discriminatory.

If you really want to see what's wrong with the concept of a state designed for one particular religious group, check out the websites www.adalah.org and www.arabhra.org

Peter e: Good to see you being honest about your prejudices. No more pseudo leftism, just the bigotry of a far right position.

To Fungus, I would point out that Israel provides a refuge for Jews who have historically been victims of racism. Affirmative action policies for Jews or women or homosexuals or those who grew up in State care etc. discriminate in favour of a persecuted group. I realize many who come from the dominant majority culture don't understand this because they think that opportunities are equal for all. But in reality they aren't.

The same logic applies to a Palestinian State when such is formed. They will have the right to discriminate in favour of their own people because they have been oppressed.

Philip

Phil,

I do not how you are suggesting that anyone here is denying that Israel exists; that is a rather bizarre comment on your part. Also, your assumption of anti-Zionism is quite misplaced. As you should know Zionism also includes those who support a Jewish homeland in Palestine, not just those want to impose a Jewish state on others. Further, criticising Israeli colonialism in no way suggests that Jews are inherently evil. It is quite despicable that you could even make such an implication. Contrary to your claim, we are well aware of the historical reasons for the creation of Israel. As Lowenstein and Shaik correctly pointed out in the OLO article published alongside yours:

'To realise the dream, he insisted, the Jews must be willing to seize the reigns of history by renouncing the classical Jewish tradition of pacifism and collaborating with European anti-Semites who supported the Zionist movement as a means of ridding Europe of its "Jewish problem".'

More so, nobody has claimed that Palestinians are entirely blameless in the conflict, but they are certainly the people who have had their land taken off them, who have had suffered illegal occupations and invasions and who suffer the daily indignity of hafrada. Where do you get these claims from? It would be greatly preferable that if you going to make accusations about a group of people that you at least reference them accurately.

I have read your article in New Matilda (http://www.newmatilda.com/2008/03/04/one-state-no-solution). You make particularly gross (and surprising) generalisations that the "overwhelming majority" of Jews in Israel are somehow incapable of living in an Israel/Palestine where they are no longer are a numerical majority with special political authority. Further you claim that Jewish Israelis are incapable of living alongside non-Jewish Palestinians due to past conflicts. It begs the question on how the Afrikaans have managed so well; are they really less prone to ethnic chauvinism than Israeli Jews?

Israel's days are numbered. An overwhelming weight of numbers, Palestinian numbers, will see an over-running of the Jewish state. No amount of US funding nor nuclear weapons can prevent the onslaught.

Seeking a just peace, returning lands stolen after '67 and fair recompense for those and the families of those dispossed in '48 might stall the over-run but nothing can stop Israeli Palestinians from eventually out-numbering Israeli Jews.

So ... if Israel truely has 'the democratic tradition shared by Australia and ... as reflected in a common commitment to civil and human rights and cultural diversity, ...' then the Australian Government might, in future, be dealing with a Palestinian Israeli government ... instead of a Jewish one ... but then again pigs might fly eh?

Philip:
I have had Jewish friends all of my life. A fair percentage of whom back in the 60's gave their two years to Israel,. You ought to hear the views of some of them on the behaviour of the Israelis.
There was a time when my sympathies lay with the Israelis, but like a kid who trades too long on fact that they were ‘cute’, the continual whinge from the Israelis that they are the victims wears thin. Like attitudes to their supporter and mainstay, the US, not too many believe the crap they dish out, anymore.
For the rest, reality eventually overrides bigotry, religious fanaticisms and such.
Faced with a major issue, such as the Israelis are facing it is smart to negotiate while you have room to manoeuver rather than tough it out until the choice is flee or die.
Note that the use of Jew and Jewish as opposed to Israeli/Israelis is both intentional and deliberate.

Dear_Lev

I am encouraged by your rather well thought out response to my 'enthusiastic' last post:)

1/ PROTO PALESTINIANS... indeed ie.. "Philistines". They were the enemies of Israel then, and they are now, nothing has changed.

<<the Philistines were an immigrant culture which appeared in the Levant at the beginning of the Iron Age I period (c.a. 1200, B.C.) The Bible first mentions this culture in Genesis 10:14, stating that the Philistines came from “Caphtorim,” which scholars now believe to be the island of Crete or another island in the Aegean>>

I'd replace the word 'Immigant' with 'INVADER'.. they established a beach head at Gaza, and developed further coastal cities at Ashkelon,Ashdod and Ekron.

The fact of the existence of those cities today, should give 'bible skeptics' a very serious SHAKE about it's historicity.
So, there is nothing 'indigenous' about the few Palestinians who might remotely be able to trace ancestry back to them. The ebb and flow of history since has been such that the likelihood is extremely remote.
I re-affirm that most of them are more likely resulting from Arab Muslim colonialism after conquest, in the same way that the Janjaweed' forces in Sudan are described as 'Arab'.....

2/ CONNECTION BETWEEN ISRAEL of AD70 and THOSE RETURNING.
Not relevant. Mainly because in the days of Israel, a non Isrealite could become one by conversion. Even Jewish blood, of Christ himself has been mixed. One of Jesus ancestors was a Moabite.(Ruth) another was Rahab,a Canaanite.
Now..I CAN however assure you, that geneticists have no trouble identifying everyone with YOUR name. "Levi, Lewi etc and COHEN" as biological descendants of Aaron brother of Moses and/or the Jewish tribe of Levi. They are the only 2 names which have remained.

CONCLUSION. My other point would be, that aside from any of those issues, ANY group of people, has as much 'right' (or non right) to a chunk of land that they can carve out by the use of power. This debate always forgets that, and the Arabs/Muslims invaded, now the Jews have. 6 of one, half dozen of the other.

I find it glaringly obvious that there is a real hatred for Israel and the Israelis among the left. That they would first attempt to destroy the single, democratic, state for Jews, before the dozens of racist, theocratic or dictatorial Muslim countries; indicates that bigotry and racism is OK if it’s against Jews.

The one state solution is a fantasy land for the ideologically challenged leftists. It just isn’t going to happen. Israel has the legitimacy of both The League of Nations and the UN. It’s people are fully prepared to fight for their existence and reasonably believe that their lives and livelihoods are at stake. There is much support within Israel and globally for a two-state solution. This solution, as long as it is fair to the Palestinians, is the best chance of peace.

The one-state supporters should be aware that it is also the preferred solution of Hamas. No matter what your opinion is of Hamas (eg Lev) you will have no influence over their behavior once they get this one state. Your UN resolutions will be worthless.

Petere,

There is no way Israel will be militarily defeated without nuclear weapons. That’s a fact. The three major wars of the last century have shown us that. You are a bigot and I take solace in the fact that you have no idea what you are talking about.

Passy,

I was laughing my ass off when I read your post complaining about being called a “far leftist”. Don’t tell me, you’re really a centrist?

Lev

You say >>” However, such as country is only possible if people give up both their sectional interests… . Whoever supports such a proposition will receive the support of "the left".

Just for starters what good is the support of the left? Can it prevent violence or genocide? No absolutely and categorically not. The support of the left is irrelevant except as an empty feel good gesture.

Islamic extremism has a life of its own, outside of any supposed oppression by the west. It won’t go away just because Israel surrenders its state.

Why do we have to continue on endlessly talking about Israel and Palestine?

There are 198 other more worthy nations on the planet that we could surely dedicate some time to.

I suggest the zionist pap just be silenced. It is all lies and propoganda denied by most jews around the world.

Now let's ask this question. If being jewish is so damn wonderful why are there so few still? And if Israel is so wonderful why do only 40% of the 14 million jews want to live there?

I do not believe that Israel's treatment of its Gentile citizens is comparable to affirmative action. Affirmative action was created to make things more equal between people in society. Israel's discriminatory laws makes things less equal in its society.

Israel's Palestinian Arab citizens have, and continue to be, subjected to discriminatory laws, land expropriation, home demolition, funding unequal to that of Jewish Israelis, denial of government services and denial of government benefits.

My original post for this was way more detailed and thus ended up being way too long.

In a nutshell, Israel's treatment of its Palestinian Arab citizens is abhorrent and unacceptable.

Marilyn,

What percentage of Muslims actually live in Saudi Arabia, for example. I think you are clearly illustrating that there is only 1 Israel, 1 homeland for Jewish people, whereas there are dozens of countries for Muslims to call home, same for Christians.Also there might be a few more Jews around if Hitler hadn’t killed 6,000,000 of them. The other reason that Jews might feel uncomfortable living in Israel is that they are entirely surrounded by people trying to kill them.

We already know you hate Jews. Tell me why it is you feel the need to contribute to the thread if it is all so tiring for you. You go dedicate your time to whatever mindless pap that interests you and let the adults do their thing, there’s a dear.

Keith,

You say >>” Israel's days are numbered. An overwhelming weight of numbers, Palestinian numbers, will see an over-running of the Jewish state.”

It’s funny that the left, whom seem so often to proclaim peace at all costs, would be quite happy to see the Israelis militarily defeated. Not that it will happen of course. Those fantasist, actually bigots, of the left have no idea about the military realities of the situation.

You are right in one respect. The Israelis will demographically be dwarfed by the Palestinians in the not to far off future. What most on the left seem entirely ignorant of is that exactly the same thing is happening in the West. Within 30 years Muslims will be a majority in France and hold the balance of power in a number of other European countries, including Britain. The left had better pray that the Islamic fundis aren’t actually winning their battle against moderate Islam. Because if they are, the civil rights movements will all have been for nothing. Anyone who thinks that an Islam dominated west is going to be as amenable to minorities as we are today, has had a brain bypass.

Israel, at least, knows it is fighting for its existence. The left are rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic.

Paul,

You assertions are in contradiction what has previously been written here.

Nobody has supported the replacement of the somewhat secular, somewhat democratic Jewish state of Israel with a theocratic and dictatorial Islamic state of Palestine.

Your claim that the one state solution suggested here implies what Hamas wants for a single state is just idiotic and contemptible.

It is a simple fact that Israel/Palestine has already been a single state de facto since 1967, albeit with the apartheid system of hafrada, effectively splitting the country in two.

The suggestion is to provide equal rights for Palestinians currently under occupation and control as the preferred resolution of the conflict and improved rights for everyone in the country.

It is a repeated lie on your part to suggest that the one state solution proposed by those here represents the destruction of Israel, Israeli democracy and Israeli secularism. Rather they are a furthering of those institutions. Israel would (legally!) be a larger state, it would be more democratic and it would be more secular.

I am absolutely certain if the Palestinian National Authority and the Israelis approve of such means of resolution, it will also be accepted by the United Nations.

Phillip,

I find it utterly extraordinary that you support the idea of discrimination against others by a group on the basis the experience of said group receiving discrimination in the past. I hope you can see that will just lead to a unending cycle of oppression.

Affirmative action, by the way, are policies used to promote access to employment and education - not the systematic institution of advantage by the State for a ethno-religious group. That sir, is discrimination - exactly what affirmative action seeks to overcome.

It is high time the Palestinians got over it. Different groups command different territories right throughout history. The Muhammadans kept re-rolling the dice 'double or nothing' from the mid 1930s onwards. Each time they lost. Until they learn to suck it up their plight will remain dire. Only themselves to blame.

The Palestinians might 'get over it" if the Israeli's would stop slaughtering them and leave their lands.

Jesue weeping you blokes are so damn harsh.

And Paul, does it occur to you that the reason there are so many arabs is because it is arabia and always has been?

And being Jewish is just another dopey religion, it is not a nationality, or ethnic block or anything of the kind so why on earth should they have a state for their religion.

Christians, hindus, muslims and so on don't have all muslims and if they do it is because the dumb west interefered and made artificial borders for them so they could grab all that lovely oil.

Marilyn

War's a bitch. People get killed all the time. There are no "Palestinian" lands for the Israelis to leave. Palestine ceased to exist the day Jordan illegally annexed Samari and Judea and renamed it the West Bank.

And sorry to break it to ya hun but the Jews have a unique language, religion, genetic lineage, and state. That's 3/3 - religion, ethinicity, nationality.

In fact, if we are honest, there really is no such thing as the "Palestinians." It is a convenient political decoy to try and establish legitimacy during the 1970s. Sure, there are now millions who claim to be "Palestinian" but it has nothing like the legitimacy of "Jew" or "Israeli."

Harsh perhaps. But fair. And most importantly, True.

Marilyn, you need to start chasing park cars elsewhere. You have done all you can on this issue.

Lev,

Your utter naivety never fails to astound me. It is a fact that Hamas want a one state solution. It is a fact that Palestinians make up a majority of the population within the land proposed for a one state solution. It is a fact that in Gaza, Hamas are the ruling party. Indeed it could be considered that they should run the Palestinian Authority.

So tell me Lev, how YOU are going to prevent Hamas from controlling this new one state once you have handed the Palestinians the keys to the country? It is absolute fairytale nonsense to suggest that somehow we could impose upon the Palestinians a civil code which would protect Israelis, and for that matter other Palestinians, from Hamas and the other head hackers.

It’s a fantasy. The Israelis will NEVER go for it because they cannot trust that Hamas and the other militant groups won’t gain power. And you can’t tell me that you have a means of preventing it from happening. Certainly the UN has no ability to ensure it.

The pathetic, yet neverending attempts to compare Israel with South Africa are entirely without merit. Israel’s separation fence is vital for its security. It has prevented hundreds of would be suicide bombers killing women and schoolchildren inside Israel. Every state has the right to protect itself.

South Africa’s apartheid was designed to keep the black population separate from the white community for economic and political benefit. Israel is keeping the Palestinians at arms length because they are at WAR. Hamas has a charter which commits it to Israel’s destruction. It is an obvious distinction, but the soft left refuse to see it, preferring instead the sloganism of imagined apartheid.

The soft-left love to bandy about the terrible events of 1967, always ignoring the fact that the Arab armies were invading Israel for the second time in 20 years. It was only 6 years later that the Arabs had another go. That’s three wars of national survival in less than 30 years, four in you count WW2.

Marilyn your give away lines are so incredibly naive and stupid, I think you are a stand up comedian out of work.

You toss Israel and Judaism aside as unimportant. Israel produces more Noble prizes per capita than any other nation, particularly in science and medicine. In fact the Jewish intellectual output is incredible, there must be something good in that faith/culture. If you ever have the misfortune to have a serious medical condition and survive it is a dead on certainty that something developed by Israel or at least by Jews will be needed for the procedure.

I think the intelligent working section of the world realises that, which is why Israel has so many friends outside of that pathetic academic group which calls itself the left and wouldn't get a square meal if someone else hadn't provided it. Microsoft and Motorola both have major research centres in Israel, they wouldn't do that if they did not realise the excellence of Israeli work. Windows XP and the cell phone are both products of Israel ingenuity.

Israel takes part in the growth of the world, and yes headscarf wearing Arab women receive PHDs in Israeli Universities, tell me, in how many other countries in the Middle East does that happen?

With all this talk about the "rights" of "Palestinians", many seem to forget that Jordan took much of the territory mandated to the new state in 1949, and from which (including the historical state of Judaea) many Jews were expelled. Why is the world community not expecting Jordan to hand this territory back? Why is it that Israel is forever the bogeyman?

John,

Jews do not have a unique language. Neither Hebrew and Yiddish are not exclusively Jewish - either historically or in a contemporary sense, and only a minority Jews speak either as their first language, the cultural-linguistic and etymologically correct definition of 'nation'. Further, Jews most certainly do not have a unique genetic lineage (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2001/nov/25/medicalscience.genetics).

There is no characteristic which all Jews have in common except their religion. Whilst no religion deserves its own state. Least of all those which have been imposed on the lands of others, all should have the right to practise their faith within any state.

As for the Palestinians, they are an Arabic people who inhabit the region of Palestine. Strictly speaking it is correct to state there is no such thing as a Palestinian nationality, rather they are Arabs who inhabited the country of Palestine. They include Christians, Jews, Muslims and those with no religion. I'm sure there's probably a handful of Canaanite or Egyptian pagan revivialists among them as well.

(The confusion between country, nation and state is one of the great bugbears of any such debate)

I also must say that attempts at childish abuse certainly serve as no cover for a lack or knowledge on a subject. Personally I respect people with a civil tongue more than those without.

Logic,

I don't think anyone in this discussion would disagree (let along Marilyn) that there is a profound intellectual tradition among the Jews and and there are excellent democratic and secular institutional orientations within Israel. This does not change the fact that an exclusive state has been imposed on a population without their consent, or the moral rightness of advocating on their behalf. This is not a football match where there can only be one winner; Israel or Palestine - but rather an issue which we can hopefully reach a just and equal result for all.

Viking13,

Check your maps. The lands which Jordan took in 1949 that were part of UN-mandated Palestine and controlled until 1967 are now Israeli-occupied territory.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fe/1947-UN-Partition-Plan-1949-Armistice-Comparison.png

Marilyn,

You might have noticed that when the Israelis unilaterally withdrew from Gaza Hamas and the other head hackers and human bombs used the opportunity to more effectively attack Israel. Is it any wonder then, that they aren’t keen on pulling out of the west bank. The hundreds of missiles aimed at Israel every day need to stop. The suicide bombings need to stop. Then there can be a peaceful settlement and the Palestinians can have their land back. Land for peace. Israel has form on this. When they made peace with Egypt they gave back the Sinai. Same with Jordan. Israel can be trusted to give back the land in return for peace.

Most Israeli Jews are secular, and if you ask them, they believe that there is such a thing as Jewish ethnicity. That is, that a Jew is defined by more than just adherence to Judaism.

You say>> “Christians, hindus, muslims and so on don't have all muslims... ”

Muslims don’t have all Muslims?? Do you mean Muslim countries aren’t entirely made up of Muslims? Because Israel is nearly 20% Muslim. Palestine, on the other hand is 99.4% Muslim.

Tell me when is a border not artificial? Have you ever seen a line drawn in the sand demarcating states? As for grabbing the oil, if you care so much you should protest by not using petrol. But you should remember that it has made the oil producing countries rich beyond all belief, so I don’t think you’ll find too many of them complaining.

And it hasn’t always been Arabia. Look it up.The Jewish-Roman wars led to the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD and the exile of the Jews. A second Jewish revolt in 135 led to the renaming of Jerusalem to Aelia Capitolina and Judah became known as Palaestina. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Israel

Finally, in 1917, when the League of Nations decided to give Britain the protectorate and charged them with creating a Jewish State in Palestine, you would have been very hard pressed to find anyone who considered themselves a Palestinian. That is a relatively recent construct.

This prettymuch reflects my view of Israelis.

A recently discovered diary of President Harry S. Truman indicates that the former president may have had a strongly negative opinion of Jews. In the diary, which includes 42 entries written in 1947, Truman recounts a conversation he had with Henry Morgenthau, the Secretary of the Treasury, who had phoned to discuss the fate of Jewish refugees. In criticizing the approach of Morgenthau, who was Jewish, Truman wrote in a July 21 passage,

“The Jews, I find are very, very selfish. They care not how many Estonians, Latvians, Finns, Poles, Yugoslavs or Greeks get murdered or mistreated as D[isplaced] P[ersons] as long as the Jews get special treatment. Yet when they have power, physical, financial or political neither Hitler nor Stalin has anything on them for cruelty or mistreatment to the under dog.”

Either the rational Israelis who realise that the present road leads to disaster, take over, or things continue on until enough people get really pissed off and Israel falls.

the choice is simple, but stark.

Petere,

Sadly anti semitism was rife in the US and in Europe in that era. It doesn't make it right. The Jews lost 6 million people in WW2, although I am willing to bet you don't believe that either.

Why don't you take your racist views and join storm front or national action. Then you can rant all you like about Jews and n|ggers and nips and all the rest.

Brainless moron

petere

I am ignoring Paul.Ls post and assuming, which I think I can, that you are a rational decent person.

Israel has allowed within its borders members of the Druze, the Samaritans and the Baha'i faiths who were being badly treated in their own Middle Eastern countries, and allowed them legal equality with the Jews, Christians and Muslims in Israel. That is they are all entitled to a vote and to stand for Parliament, and subject to the same laws. It also gives equal rights to women, and homosexuals, which I think you would be hard pushed to find amongst its neighbours. It has no laws preventing the building of Mosques and Churches which are taller or bigger than the Synagogues. c.f. other ME countries. Saudi Arabia is only now considering allowing Churches at all.

Jewish groups such as B'nai B'rith have done a lot of work combating prejudice against Blacks in the US and Aborigines in Australia.

None of this sounds like selfishness to me. I suggest you forget the stereotypes and study what is actually there, you will be pleasantly surprised. In this country there are a lot of Jews below the poverty line and large numbers in unselfish occupations such as teaching and social work.

You and Harry S. Truman are totally wrong on that point, anyone engaged in secular charities is well aware of the Jewish contribution.

Logic:
There was a time that my sympathy lay with the Israelis. No longer, and I am not uninformed.
The behaviour of the Israeli state is intolerable.
More than that, history teaches --- or ought too ---- that states that oppress others and attempt to subjugate others by brutality, force of arms, and such measures inevitably fail.
Certainly some survive too long. Far to long!
Here in Australia we suffered under the heel of the Howard regime for eleven hundred long years. (There are those say it was only eleven years, but nobody, no regime could do the damage that they did in eleven years!)
History is against the status quo. Either Israel embraces real change, or it will fail, one way or the other.
Note that I see a clear distinct ion between Jews and Israelis!

petere

Who oppresses who? Israel was attacked from day one. In fact Jews (and Christians and others) were subject to pressures to leave Middle Eastern Islamic states all through the last century.

Israel was attacked and threatened with annihilation - remember the statement about throwing them into the sea. Children were brain washed into becoming suicide bombers and kill Israelis, which they were told would give them a place in heaven. The published Hamas charter is to destroy the Israeli state.

As you must well know Israel does give everyone including Muslims and women a right to vote. Has Hamas given a timetable for its next election? After they threw Fatah supporters off the tops of buildings do you have any confidence that they will? The Palestinians are not the only people in the world to have been colonized or to have been defeated in a war after they attacked another state. Who else has behaved that way?

What go you expect Israel to do? Just be nice, or to share a single state with religious fanatics who have shown no interest in democracy or peoples rule? Would you choose Sharia law or place women in hijabs?

What would the land have been had the Jews not settled there and brought with them Western technology? For starters the land would still have been a partial desert with low agricultural productivity and there would not have been the influx of Arabs from Egypt and Jordan now regarding themselves as Palestinians. And the Islamists would be destroying the lives of Arabs somewhere else.

Israel does not know what to do with these fanatics any more than the UK or Spain or India whose citizens were brutally murdered by bombs produced by thoroughly evil men and women. Like the allies during the war they hope to contain the slaughter of their Arab and Jewish number by force. What else can they do? It is the Islamists who are the murderers. Will there have to be a bomb in the MCG or in Australia Square before you get the message?

Logic,

Nice logic. Petere sounds rational to me, NOT! Your a better man than I to talk reason to the unreasonable. Petere hasn't offered any evidence to back up his view. Its just a rant. All it deserves in reply is a rant.