Sganot:
1) "SkidMarx wrote that - 90% of Israel's land was owned by the state since Ottoman times." Oh, that's agreement, is it?
2) My "surreal" para bears on your attitude of exclusive entitlement to your homeland, your failure to acknowledge that, until the Palestinian refugees are accorded their right to return, it is stolen land presided over by a regime based on expulsion (of the original inhabitants), apartheid legislation (affecting those who escaped ethnic cleansing) and occupation (of the rest). On the off chance that you're not a professional purveyor of Israeli hasbara, I recommend you read "wingnutter" Davis' 'Apartheid Israel' with an open mind.
3) You can make veiled accusations of anti-Semitism all you like, but remember, you're cheapening the coin.
4) "We agree that...all Jews fled or were forced out of areas that fell under Arab control." Do we? You'd better cite the areas first.
5) Re Jewish Arabs, I don't agree they "fled or were forced out of Arab countries." That's spinning a very complex issue, which, as I've already indicated, has nothing to do with the immediate events of 48-49.
6) Ben-Gurion: Tom Segev - The Seventh Million p28
7) Australia, inlike Israel, acknowledges its colonial origins and the place of its indigenous people. Whatever their level of socio-economic disadvantage, they are not living as stateless refugees beyond its borders, but as equal citizens with non-indigenous Australians. Nor are they subjected to occupation or carpet bombing.
8) "We Israelis owe you no explanation": Sorry, but the rest of the world can't help but notice here a yawning chasm between the way you portray yourselves and treat others and the reality paraded before us in our newspapers and on television. If you don't want to explain yourselves to the rest of us, give the attention-grabbing behaviour and the bull doo doo a rest.

Sganot,

I do value your opinion, however, the following article in Ha'aretz supports the view that the 'Dove's' did not properly think out the disengagement from Lebanon:

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/739500.html

Whilst the J'Post had this to say:

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1150886020519&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

althought they did point out that some 600 protestor's took place in an anti-war rally in Tel Aviv (may have been more effective if they protested in Safed?):

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1150886029321&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

But, this article does point out that the left is unable to present a concerted front.

Note however, that I did; and to an extent do; believe, that HAMAS presents as a better partner for peace than the corrupt and self interested PLO derivitives. But, this belief has been tested by their willingness to continue to support the 'armed struggle' which benefits neither themselves (or their constituency), nor Israel.

Perhaps the current violence may bring them to a more realistic view of the world, particularly with regard to the world of difference between 'Ambition & Ability', which they appear to be confusing at present.

Alekhem shalom,

Aharoni

Inshallah

2 bob

Ok..time to get Strewths views on something he has said little about.

STREWTH... you mention 'right of return' for exiles.

1/ Would you expand on exactly what is to happen to the Israelies now living in the acquired land ? Given that at various points in the emmigration process, Jews 'owned' as little as 6% of the land, do you wish to now 'deport/disperse' them ?

2/ Do you really think that a much larger population of Arab Muslims will contribute to long term stability and peace withIN Israel ?

3/ Do you have any reservations about the prospects for peace between the 2 communities given that when Ariel Sharon simply 'visited' the Temple Mount, it resulted in an inta fada ? How much more when the Mosque is removed and the Temple re-built (which is an Orthodox Jewish goal)?

4/ What would you "do" with the Orthodox Jews if they achieve a political and religious position which would enable them to carry out this goal ?

5/ Don't you think a better (more workable) solution is to provide alternative land outside Israel for the internally displaced Arab Muslims ?

6/ Is you cry against the 'aparthied state' of Israel not just an indirect grab for total power ? Somewhat like when Absolom asked King Solomon (His brother) for the hand in marraige of Abishag the Shunamite, he was in fact asking for the kingdom... you will have to research that one urself :)

LASTLY.. why are u so coy about the Jews expelled/driven out of Arab countries ? Why is this suddenly a 'complex issue' when the Issue of the Palestinian Muslims is so 'straightforward' (not a quote, just emphasis)

I await.

Strewth:

1) SkidMarx wrote ~90%; my figure: ~70%. That’s disagreement.

2) Your writing without connection to reality seems a result of relying on people like Davis. Oh well...

3) Palestinian property law is anti-Semitic, violations bring draconian punishment, and if Israel had anything like this, you’d call it “apartheid”. Is that veiled?

4) Throughout Palestine, wherever Jewish communities fell under Arab control, the residents were driven out. The “cleansing” was 100%, for example in Jerusalem’s Jewish Quarter, Kfar Etzion, Massuot Yitzchak, Ein Tzurim, Kfar Darom, and Beit Haarava. Invading Arab armies also drove Jews out of other areas, such as Yad Mordechai and Nitzanim, but these expulsions proved temporary, as the areas were liberated by Israel later in the war.

5) The flight of Jewish refugees from Arab countries was “complex”. So? Likewise the flight of Arab refugees from Israel. Regardless, it happened. Why say you “don’t agree”?

6) Segev is a secondary source, and you haven’t given a date or context for the quote. What does Segev say about the choices Jews in Palestine were facing, the policies Ben-Gurion was promoting when he made the statement, and alternative positions other Zionists supported? Also, what was Teveth’s interpretation of the remark?

7) A meaningful discussion comparing Australia and Israel is difficult because I see Zionist immigration as the return of an indigenous people to its homeland, while you view it as a colonial movement. We can agree to disagree about that.

Putting that aside, indigenous Australians were decimated by European diseases (perhaps that didn’t happen here because Jews and Palestinians have nearly identical genes and thus immune systems), dispossessed, and massacred. Entire communities were wiped out, and the population reduced to 10% of its previous numbers.

Indigenous Australians only got the vote in the mid-1960s, and included in counts for electoral representation since 1967. (Jews and Arabs always had equal voting rights in Israel.) Since then, Australia has slowly removed most of the remaining framework of legal discrimination, stopped the practice of removing indigenous children from their families, and taken small steps to restore some land to Indigenous Australians.

(continued...)

Strewth (continued from above…),

But of course the vast majority of land and the best land remain in the hands of colonists and their descendents, who also enjoy enormous advantages in terms of health, education, employment, etc. Australia acknowledges “the place of its indigenous people”? I suppose, but that place is on the bottom rung of society.

Indigenous Australians are not subject to occupation? For goodness sake, the entire continent is “occupied”, as are the Ashmore and Cartier Islands, Christmas Island, Cocos Islands, Coral Sea Islands, Heard Island and McDonald Islands, Norfolk Island, and the Australian Antarctic Territory.

Aboriginal Australians aren’t subject to carpet bombing? Neither are Jews or Palestinians in Israel/Palestine. (Apparently you don’t know what “carpet bombing” means.)

BTW, indigenous Australians living abroad for whatever reason have no “right of return” to Australia. And despite the recent acceptance of a few traditional land claims, there is no blanket “right of return” for the descendents of indigenous Australians who were dispossessed of their lands and displaced by colonists (which of course includes the vast majority of indigenous Australians today).

8) Yes, we Israelis owe you no explanation -- and no apology -- for our national existence.

---

2bob, shalom aleichem,

The Haaretz article is an opinion piece by a veteran senior Likud politician. He isn’t a dove, and opposed the withdrawal from Lebanon (2000) and Gaza (2005). The Jerusalem Post article quotes the opinions of rabbis who likewise were against the withdrawals, and now say “we told you so.” Whether they are right or wrong, I see no evidence that recent events have drastically changed the support of Israeli doves for the previous withdrawals. I’m sure there must be some shift of opinion on the margins. But do most previous supporters of those withdrawals now feel stupid/misled? I don’t see it.

Sganot,

I cannot fault your analysis of the first two articles, and don't seek to try. But, the third states that large sections of the left are divided over the need for this action. Which to me, given the semi-recent, still vivid, experience of many Israeli's of the previous years in Lebanon, I would have expected to give rise to a far larger, more vocal opposition than is reported to date. Although it is stated that the '82 demonstrations started small, this is a rather invalid analysis for mine, in '82 the ordinary israeli, whilst prone to disagree with political opinion and actions (LOL), where not likely to demonstrate all that quickly. The difference now, is that many israeli's now accept that people have a right to protest, whatever they damn well feel like protesting.

This analysis suggests that the initial reaction is far less than one would have expected, although I suspect that the bombardment of Haifa is responsible for much of this. I also suspect that many, like myself in fact, hoped that HAMAS would grow into a responsible neighbour, after the withdrawal, after all the Haganah and Irgun (to an extent) did. Oh well, trust is hard eh? Perhaps this is simply teething trouble, and they will mature yet.

Inshallah

2bob