Lev

Isn’t the concept of a “Semitic” people actually derived from the same good book which gives orthodox Jews the idea that Israel was promised to them by god? Surely it makes just as much sense (or just as little) for all Celts to have a single national territory with sovereignty.

You shouldn’t be confused that I didn’t know you supported Kurdish nationalism. You spend all of you time on OLO trying to push your bizarre case for a single state solution. You cannot pretend that you disseminate your views regarding self determination in equal measure.

It’s interesting that you think that Semitic people should be able to draw their own borders. There is a long history of imperialist nations doing exactly that despite the wishes of the previous inhabitants.

In all honesty Lev, how many borders could be redrawn based upon your theoretical framework? Is it all of them or just most? Would you break apart all the countries which have “Semitic” inhabitants so that they could be incorporated in this new “Semitic” super state?

The idea that Lenin is authoritative on questions of self determination is patently ridiculous. He didn’t believe in nation states. The quote comes from a polemic. The League of Nations is confused but Lenin wasn’t? How convenient. Can you not accept that there are valid definitions of nationality which are diametrically opposed to the one which you are pushing?

What you are actually doing is dressing opinion up as fact, like Bushbred does, and in that case you can’t ever be wrong. The very idea that the concept of nationality is set in stone is a perfect example.

Lev,

Regarding Israel’s Supreme Court and Mihu Yehudi ... I made it clear that I was stunned that it was actually “successful” three times in the past 60 yrs ...

You have stated your opinion of my attributes, (and ... you rabbit on about “ad hominem”) so perhaps I should get down on bended knees and thank g-d that you metaphorically, at least, flagitate yourself by reading my posts. However, when you do, please read them word by word - even if this puts the imposition on you of moving you lips. I submit material , to which you do not, or are unable to respond. A specious way of avoiding your: .. “I immediately acknowledge error when I am shown to be factually incorrect.”

You talk glibly about “exclusion from political and civil rights”. Utter tosh, Lev. What about these for Druze, Bedoin, Baha’is, Gypsies, Christians ... even Israeli Arabs, indeed Palestinians, in other Arab states. These groups enjoy common political and civil rights alongside Jews in Israel. Groups, although do, may not appear in numbers in politics, suitable to your thinking, but perhaps this is by choice ... Gypsies are not noticeable in British parliament ...

I recall you argument about lack of civil rights in Israel being based on “civil marriage” ... “civil marriage” ! ... No civil marriages performed in Israel. For g-d’s sake Lev ... ! As Marilyn would state: ‘get a grip.” However, there is right of civil divorce in Israel for all ... which IS important.

I stand corrected about the last time UN peacekeepers were used there. The deployment of peacekeepers prior to the Six-Day War stuck with me - it embodied the elements of Theatre of the Absurd.

I agree, Lev, UN peacekeepers should be employed - to protect Gazan citizens from Hamas. But, Hamas wouldn’t accept UN peacekeepers - not even you - albeit, your PC comments about Hamas would be seen by them to be praise.

cont ...

In all honesty, Lev, you would not make an effecient EO UN peacekeeper; and if you were truly honest, you would agree with this observation.

“Mr Hamas, please acknowledge your error ...”

A gift from a beautiful Gazan child, then touchingly unwrapping it back at the UN post. Immediate participation of the entire UN post in a miracle play. All transported to heaven. Quite biblical really ...

I know I shouldn’t state such things, even if obviously true. I doubt if you have any sense of humour, Lev, which is the provence of those with a sense of proportion.

Recall the words by President Gusmão back in May 2003

... The people of Timor-Leste will never forget the grief and the pain felt by the loss of life of the brave peacekeepers on our soil, including some of our own people ...

Read Asia Report N°143 of 17 January 2008

As I stated: UN Peacekeepers are only successful when both sides want peace.

“Semitic people are the people who can determine, for themselves, what the borders of the semitic lands should be” .

A return to the pre-colonial period and devoid of their artificially imposed borders. Indeed, implementation, at least legal intent of, the Faisal-Weizmann Agreement, signed January 3, 1919. A still-legal Arab-Jewish agreement. The agreement identified two separate states, an Arab state and a Jewish state living in harmony and in mutual support. Two separate and distinct states, Lev, which colonial interests sank.

bushbred,

“... please remember that Israel has already got those nuclear weapons ... “

Evidence ... ? Please don’t tell us that you are clairvoyant ... What with Marilyn and her imaginary friends (a classic case of transference).

Also, like Paul, I would like to know the names of “your” philosophers; indeed historians ..

Cold admire the courage of the Israelis at one time, PaulL, but have never felt the same since they illegally joined the nuclear rocket brigade.

Israel should have been satisfied enough with most of the Western world behind her.

It is so sad that such is not now the case, because after all, Israel may have been better without her own nuclear defence, relying just on the help of the UN, one of the main reasons the UN was formed, to protect small nations without nuclear protection.

Paul,

A common first language is the best definition of a nationality. Religions, for example, can be chosen or left in a person's lifetime, but it is only the rarest of instances that one's first language changes. That is why the definition has changed; as time has gone on, it has become more precise.

It is almost unavoidable for states to have nationalistic tensions. Sometimes they regrettably turn into shooting wars. The best and easiest method to avoid this is to provide the people of each common first language determine their own future, including whether they have their own state. Let the Basque have their own state if they wish. Let the Kosovars have their own, or unite with Albania (except for the northern provinces, which wish to become part of Serbia). Let the Bretons have their own state, if they so wish. Let the Yorta Yorta and the Hebrews have their own state if they desire, although I'm not sure what regions the latter two groups are a majority of the population. Once such states are formed, an internationalist perspective recommends a gradual federation of such states based on common rights.

It is not for the first time you have claimed that I "spend all of [my] time on OLO trying to push your bizarre case for a single state solution." That is a repeated lie of epic proportions and does not say much for your character. I don't even spend the majority of my posts on OLO on this subject, although I heartily encourage you to engage in a post count if you wish.

It would do you better that you actually judged the content of Lenin's comments on national self-determination rather that condemning it out of hand

Danielle,

I overlooked your expression of surprise concerning the Supreme Court decision. Perhaps, according to your own statement, you can finally recognise that I do actually understand the political and civil rights of the inhabitants of Israel.

My opinions of the exclusion from political and civil rights in the other Arab states is of a magnitude of greater criticism those of Israel. On numerous occassions I have noted that Israel is certainly the most secular and most democratic state in the region. The fact that I criticise Israel in some instances in no way means I condone the practises of other states nearby. I'd probably write a lot more on those states except there seems to be very few people who seem prepared to debate the issue!

Your quote from Xanana does absolutely nothing to affirm you assertion indeed it points out the contrary. The fact that UN peacekeepers died should be the clearest indication that the pro-integration militia did not want peace. You also seem to forget that I was a regular visitor to the Palace of Ashes when the speech was made. I may have even been present when he made said speech. I used to see him at least twice a week in that period.

Faisal signed the agreement on behalf of the short-lived Arab Kingdom of Hedjaz, which was a strip of land adjacent to the Red Sea which survived for nine years and which barely touched open the Palestinian region. Not surprisingly, the the United Nations Special Committee On Palestine did not regard the Faisal-Weizmann agreement as EVER being valid. Citing it simply suggests a poverty of supporting arguments.

As bennie succinctly pointed out, Israel is a colonial creation. Sixty years ago some people had their land taken off them. They would like it back. That is the root cause of the problems that continue today. Resolve that to the satisfaction of all parties involved is only path to a dignified peace.