Lev

Countries identify themselves/or are identified ... as Christian, Muslim etc.

Israel, a Jewish state, is secular.

In Senate Committee hansard, the identity of Australia as Christian appears in over 350 documents, the latest 16 July 2007:

All Israelis enjoy the same legal rights - the vote, freedom of religion, and freedom of speech. Arabic, like Hebrew, is an official language.

The Knessett - 10% Arab membership. Arab posts: Diplomatic, Supreme Court, University, Ministerial, and top military positions.

The sole legal distinction between Arabs and other Israelis is that they are not required to serve in the army. However, Arabs can enlist - the first few months of this year saw them enlisting in record numbers. Bedouins have always served in paratroop units. At their own request, compulsory military sevice has been applied to the Druze and Circassian communities. Druze make up the majority of Border Police.

Right of Return: Israel's population is 7 million, Jews being 76%. If Israel took in 4.3 million Palestinian refugees, where would they live? Also Jews would be a minority in their own country.

The United Nations EXPRESSLY RULED THIS OUT in deciding on a partition of Palestine.

Current peace talks are based on UN Resolution 242, in which Palestinians are not mentioned, but only alluded to in clause 2, 2nd article which calls for “a just settlement to the refugee problem” - the generic “refugee” can just as well be applied to the 800,000 Jewish refugees expelled from Arab lands.

Respected Palestinian leaders and intellectuals, such as Sari Nusseibeh acknowledge that it is a mistake to insist millions of refugees return to Israel, they should be resettled in a future Palestinian state.

“but not in a way that would undermine the existence of the State of Israel as a predominantly Jewish state. Otherwise, what does a two-state solution mean?”
(Associated Press, October 22, 2001)

Ben Gurion said more than 50 yrs ago that in the context of a peace settlement, Israel should accept some refugees. Ironically, the Palestinian leadership has demonstrated little interest in taking refugees in the eventuality of a Palestinian state.

Paul

The reasoning behind the banning and your statement shows why Israel isn't a Liberal Democracy.

'I think Aussies would have a hard time understanding why we should allow some one to stand for our parliament who supported resistance to our troops and gov’t.'

So wrong, similar happens and has happened at numerous times in the history of our Liberal Democracy. We here all understand why we allow a plethora of views and allow anyone access to stand for office in our political system.

There are also many people like me, ie liberal and not leftie, who think the actions of Israel wrong. I don't need yo compare Israels misdeeds with the misdeeds of others to identify Israels wrongs.

It's the likes of the Israeli propagandists who continuasllly use that mechanism to defend Israels occupation, suppression and abuse of the Palestinians. A perfect example is in your last paragraph.

'There are two sets of victims and two perpetrators in the Arab Israeli conflict. Those who criticize Israel whilst ignoring Hamas or Hezbollah (who are both less democratic and more racist) are aggravating the loss of perspective which seems to plague the left when it comes to this conflict'

The Western Liberal democracies have often gone to war to defend it's freedoms. The difference between what Israel is doing and what the western Liberal Democracies is that after the conclusion of the wars we in the Liberal Democracies export our values of freedom, democracy, affluence and tolerance to the conquered nations...and we help rebuild them. Israel could do that but it doesn't do that.

'But the polling figures consistently show that that the majority of Israelis accept there must be a land-for-peace settlement.'

If Israel was a liberal democracy this desire would be reflected in elections and parliaments. Why hasn't that manifested itself in the Israeli Parliament and Government?

Danielle, make sure you protect that messenger. Don't go quoting Gurion in a discussion about Palestines borders. You'd only inflame emotions given his desire for the Zionists Greater Israel.

Paul,

What sort of opposition to the occupation you propose?. Harsh language? That might work with some occupiers, such as the British in India, but to the Israeli military that would be the equivalent of attempting non-violent resistance to Ceauşescu's government.

If you are looking for examples of candidates who accept military resistance to the Australian invasion of Iraq as legitimate you could probably start with members of the Socialist Alliance. I rather suspect that you will also across all political parties.

Whether or not many Israelis (or others) consider Jews "bound by a common history and culture" other than their religion is a testable proposition. I ask you then to show either a genetic cline by which all Jews can be identified, or a common set of shared symbolic values that independent of religious values.

I suggest to you that such identifiers do not exist; a Ugandan Jew, a American Jew and an Arabic Jew are as different as a Ugandan Christian, an American Christian and an Arabic Christian. As you have already stated: "The fact is there is ONE country on Earth where the state religion is Judaism."

I see no need to go over the "but the Islamic states are worse" argument, which is the same sort of argument used in the past by supporters of South African apartheid. My response to that is the same as I have already given. As for states themselves, you are correct, but you do not go far enough. In the long run we need to abolish *all* states, but that is another matter. What is important in the current context is not whether there are one, two or even thirteen states in Palestine but the *content* of those states. The same applies to any other state or proposed state; obviously including Hamas' suggestion.

I am interested in your claims of the "large number of UN resolutions" that Hamas, Fatah and the PA are in breach of. Perhaps you could cite them. Here is the full list. I suggest you read them.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_Nations_resolutions_concerning_Israel

Danielle,

It is true that countries identify themselves as having a dominant religion. But secular nations specify themselves as such in their Constitution or "Basic Laws". Australia does this in s116 of the Constitution. Israel does not; it is expressly a Jewish state and one cannot be a candidate for the Knesset if they wish to change this.

It is a demonstrable falsehood to claim that all Israeli's have the same legal rights. They do not have the same rights to land. They do not have the same rights under the law of entry. They do not have the same rights to acquire citizenship. They do not even have the same marriage laws. As you correctly recognise, yes there is also discrimination in the military service law. So any claim of equality is either through ignorance or a deliberate lie; I certainly hope you are engaging in the former.

I do not see the reason for your concern about being a religious minority in a secular state. Many people happily live with a minority religion, as I do now. What's the problem? If the state is secular in a practical day-to-day manner no religion has legal power over another.

Nota bene: I am, of course, very pleased that Arabic is now an official language of Israel from the Supreme Court ruling of 2000. This is a step in the right direction which will undoubtably be of great assistance to Mizrahi and Yemenite Jews and all other Arabs.

Ultimately the question is this; will Israeli attempt cleanse all non-Jews from the territory it rules or will it become a genuinely secular country? I know which option I prefer and which is feasible; which I support a "one state" solution; a two-state option is no longer preferable or feasible.

Lev

See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_religion

Latest report from the the Palestinian Centre for Human Rights
http://www.pchrgaza.org/files/PressR/English/2007/news/54-2007.html

Palestinians have been fleeing both the West Bank and Gaza due to terror and killings by Palestinian against Palestinian.

The exodus has been so bad the Palestinian Authority's mufti issued this Fatwa in June this year (2007)

"No Permission to Emigrate from Palestine"

"There has been much talk in Palestine about emigration, especially among the young people, due to the difficult security and economic situation. This is being done in search of a better life abroad. Many are continuing to rush to the gates of the embassies and consulates of the Western nations with requests for visas in order to reside permanently in those countries.

"We hereby declare that emigration from the blessed lands is not permitted according to religious law. The people living in these areas must remain in their homes and must not leave them to conquerors. Those who abide by this ruling will perform an honorable deed and will support the Aksa Mosque."

Tens of thousands have left or are trying to emigrate.

Middle Eastern journalist, Kaled Abu Toameh, stated that the Center for Opinion Polls and Survey Studies at An-Najah University in Nablus reported that 92% of respondents feel insecure because of the growing lawlessness in the PA-run areas.

Palestinian sources report that 80,000 people have departed the territories since the Palestinian War began in September 2000.

The PA Foreign Ministry confirmed 10,000 Palestinians have filed requests, and been approved to emigrate from the West Bank and the Gaza Strip since the beginning of 2007 ...

and:

"At least 45,000 emigration applications are being reviewed by different countries." The majority being the US, EU and Canada

PALESTINIANS HAVE ALSO MOVED TO ISRAEL because they would rather live in a democracy than a theocratic mobocracy.
(Larry Derfner, “Jerusalem Undivided” U.S.News & World Report, June 3, 2007).

Lev you said “? That might work with some occupiers, such as the British in India, but to the Israeli military that would be the equivalent of attempting non-violent resistance to Ceauşescu's government.”

That is absolute rubbish. The British were far less sensitive to their enemies. Think Islamic extremists beheaded and buried in pig fat so they couldn’t go to heaven. The British have a long history of putting down insurrections in India and elsewhere using very bloody tactics.

To even mention Ceausescu suggests you are really struggling. He killed 4000 protesters in a single week. Israel has the military ability to expel all Palestinians from inside its borders. It does not do this because that would not be politically acceptable. So to compare Israel to Ceausecu's Romania is an ABSOLUTE loss of perspective.

You say “What sort of opposition to the occupation you propose?.” I don’t support any opposition to the occupation that is violent. And I would not accept that anyone could serve as a MP and support the enemies of our country in their armed struggle against us. The Socialist alliance are a bunch of absolute idiots who seem not to have noticed the cataclysmic failure of global socialism, nor understood its devastating toll on the people who had to suffer it.

The PA are in breach of their requirements under the OSLO Accords to stop terrorists from arming, recruiting, financing and engaging in attacks against Israel.

To bring South Africa into the debate is ridiculous. Neither the Palestinians, nor the Jews want to live together in the same state if the other is governing.

I don’t need to show that a link exists between all Jews. It is enough that they believe that one exists. No one would deny Australian aborigines from different tribes (some of which were as different as chalk and cheese) are part of a greater whole.

In any case, to continually maintain that Israel should abide by standards which its neighbours ignore is discrimination. Either you hold all parties to the same standards or you don’t have a leg to stand on.