Keith,

At the heart of the disagreement over how to move towards peace is the question of who should do what first. For me, the onus is on radical Palestinian groups to accept Israel and disarm. Then Israel will exchange land for a guarantee of security. You, on the other hand, want Israel to give back land first and then you feel that the Palestinians will live quietly next to Israel. I don't share your optimism. I've pointed to Gaza as an example of what happens when land is simply returned without first securing a guarantee of security. Why would it be any different with the West Bank?

"When Israel handed back Gaza there followed free elections. The results Israel objected to. There followed invasions, assisinations and arrests and detention (Ongoing)of the elected representatives of the Palestinians. Is that 'a sign of genuinely seeking peace' by Israel?"

Israel gave back Gaza. What did it get in return? It got Hamas as the elected government plus a barrage of rockets! In response to those rockets it defended itself (which is precisely what the original OLO article was about). You tell me what came first? You tell me you'd stand by quietly and do nothing if your neighbour was lobbing missiles at you?

Sorry Keith, the Palestinians had a great opportunity when they got Gaza. This was their trial run for a Palestinian state. Sadly that opportunity was hijacked by radical groups.

With the Gaza experience in mind would you simply hand back the West Bank and hope the Palestinians go about their business quietly? I wouldn't.

Lev,

You are member of a political party. You have political ambitions - you already admit to influencing party policy.

You argue against a Jewish homeland, a haven for the Jewish people, with all the sophistry of which Goebel’s would be proud.

When I provided substantiated information that Arabs enjoy equal civil rights with Israelis - education, welfare, membership of the Knesset, representation, freedom of the press, etc. you called me “a lying, immoral troll and a parody of a human being”.

You are a stated member of an anti-Israel group; undoubtedly canvas for them.

I remarked that Finklestein’s work is considered THE text for anti-Semites. I haven’t read it. I was warned off it by two academics - experts in the ME ... reviews of Finklestein’s work support their advice.

Obviously, you then trawled looking for information to use against me. You “hint” at something, not accurately. You attempt a comparison between myself and nazis, further “demolishing” me by stating I need psychological treatment.

OLO members will see an “historical” pattern.

Lev, are you the future face of Australian politics?

You never acknowledged my concern for Palestinians. I’ve stated that Israeli settlements should move back from the green line (an armistice line with Jordan incidentally; it’s not a border). You deny the right of Israel to defend itself (of different peoples), from anihiliation.

Palestinians are Arab and should have an independent state of their own. With cross-fertilisation of Israeli know-how and Palestinian energy, a Palestinian state could be the show-piece of all Arab states. Necessarily Palestinian and Israeli cultures are different - and should be celebrated. Palestinians are in a desparate situation. Both they and Israelis are suffering from the terrorists in their midst. You steadfastly ignore this.

The appalling consequences caused by colonial interests carving up territories, indiscriminately forcing disparate groups together, such as in Iraq, should be a salutory lesson to all.

Keith states

“Israel has nuclear weapons and the support of the largest military power the world has ever seen. “

Indeed. Israel could bring an immediate end to all its problems. Why doesn’t it?

Danielle,

It is true I am a member of a political party and have in the past been heavily involved in party policy both an executive member of policy committees and through State conference resolutions. However, I had little interest in political ambitions past that.

Contrary to your lie - and you know it is a lie - I have argued consistently for a Jewish homeland, but against a Jewish state. You seem mentally incapable of distinguishing between the two - and as a result erroneously claim that the ODSPI is an "anti-Israel" group.

Likewise you seem to think that I support a "One State Solution" in all circumstances, which is very wrong (I do however universally support secular democracy and civil rights). I support a one state solution in Palestine, in contrast to the colonialist two-state proposal, because that is a practical solution for the reasons Dr. Karmi has elaborated in "Married to Another Man: Israel's Dilemma in Palestine" (http://imeu.net/news/article006702.shtml). I have considered the arguments for and against one-state and two state solutions and found the former superior to the latter.

As the greatest Jewish social theorist of all time, Hannah Arendt, stated:

"A federated state, finally could be the natural stepping stone for any later, greater federated structure in the Near East and the Mediterranean area...The real goal of the Jews in Palestine is the building up of a Jewish homeland. This goal must never be sacrificed to the pseudo-sovereignty of a Jewish state."

Of course, Hannah Arendt, knew the difference between a Jewish homeland and a Jewish state.

When it was substantially shown to you that your claim that (non-Jewish) Arabs enjoy equal civil rights with Israeli's was plain wrong in both a formal legal and structural sense, you simply refused to acknowledge it. Instead you engaged in ad hominen complaints against the authors and publishers or - in the case of marriage - argued a "separate but (religiously) equal" line.

It is around that point that I start to question your ability to engage on a level of morally maturity and cognitive sanity.

cont...

cont...

I don't suggest therapy because you disagree with me; when it comes down to it, everyone disagrees with everyone on something. I recommend therapy because this is there is a point where you cease to act like a rational moral agent.

When you can't even admit to making even trivial errors, such as the claim that Israel was #1 in the world for press freedom. When you blatantly lie, such as claiming that Pappé "used only Arabic sources... He didn’t use any Israeli material, nor records from Israel." When you decide not to address the propositions of another, but rather attack their nationality or spiritual associations - such as the extraordinary bigotry you displayed towards Uzi Ornan. When you make remarkable trivially false claims like: "However, Israel, unlike terrorists from Gaza, never deliberately target civilians..."

What sort of person does this? Either someone who is deliberately wicked, or someone who has been harmed in some manner that distorts their thinking. I suspect the latter.

You explained to the world with your posts on OLO on July 7, 2007 what has happened to you. "My mother and I, a toddler, were arrested by the SS, placed in a camp...". Your father "was arrested, placed in a slave camp, then sent to Auschwitz and gassed on arrival" ... the "entire family, over 50 members, from babies, small children, to the elderly were gassed."

Seeking religious-ethnic purity in a State, establishing exclusive laws, regulations and practises which systematically empower one group over another, of engaging in 'collective punishment' against those who engage in terrorist activities... these actions will not protect Jews against what you mistakingly call "anti-semitism" (Arabs are Semites as are some Jews; the word you're stratching for is Judenhass). These are not the features of a 'homeland'; these are the features of bigotry, of apartheid and worse, and can only result in the most monstrous behaviour. Either human rights are universal or they are not rights at all. One day, before your death, I sincerely hope you come to that understanding.

Lev,

You made the point that Pappe used Arabic sources - why should you then require me to confirm it. Do you need a little pat on the head. Pappe, however, as a post-modernist historian, has misrepresented facts - these are well documented.

Uzi, whilst Jewish, is a member of the Cannanite movement - revisit what has been written OLO. He wants everything reverting back to the Cannanite "period" including borders. He wants ONLY the original Hebrew tongue spoken, he wants all things Jewish expunged. As Islam post-dated the Jews, this would also mean all matters Islamic. Also, he discussed Israel as it was quite some years ago - things have moved quite a lot forward since then.

Revisit the OLO discussion about Arab and ALL other's civil rights in Israel. Israel is #1 freedom of press in the MIDDLE EAST (oops); not 59th as YOU state. Where do you get 59th? I let that one pass without questioning you ...? "Freedom of press" is accorded by region. However, revisit Freedom House's discussion of Israel, its freedom of the press and civil rights ALL.

I still can't get your logic as the marriage being unequal in Israel. You get stuck on this, like a needle in a record groove. I can't understand from where you are coming. Nor can others. Israel recognises all religious marriages - be they Jew, Muslim, Christian, whatever. They don't have civil marriage - not even for Jews. However, "anyone" can go offshore and have a civil marriage and return, where it will be recognized. (I don't know the logic in this, but it is equal for all). Civil divorce for all, whether Muslim, Jew, Christian, whatever is recognised.

cont ...

Homosexuals/lesbians are recognised in Israel. Is this your problem, Lev? For g-d's sake don't answer ...

All issues debated on this site have been discussed and answered on those links provided. I am not going to repeat these ad nauseum. Nor would others here want it.

You omitted to add that my mother was an Australian Catholic; I was born in France; was raised and have a sound education in both Anglicanism and Catholicism.

My horror at what is occurring in Palestinian areas is due to my witnessing for seven years, the attrocities committed in Malay during the Communist Terrorist Emergency. Terrorists, are of the same ilk - they kill and terrorise their own, as readily as they kill any perceived enemy.

I taught Modern History at uni. during the time "restricted" records were released concerning the Holocaust from different countries. Jews MUST have a homeland of their own. British visas granted to German Jews (and Jews in other countries, later over-run by nazis) were overturned overnight when Britain entered the war; including Australian visas. These Jews went to gas-chambers still waiting for their visas to arrive. Britain was not the only country to do this. During the hysteria of "reds under the beds", Russian Jews being killed and persecuted, were denied entry to non-communist countries. Fortunately, Israel was there.

In times of emergency, political conflict, and war between nations, nationality will always supercede Jewish identity. Even when it is KNOWN that Jews are being persecuted and murdered in that particular country. History repeatedly shows that it is imperative that Jews, as a people, have a homeland, a haven, of their own. Every other peoples do.

I am not returning to this discussion.