Why is it OK to transfer Jews, and not to transfer Arabs?
Please discuss.
Related Posts
The Desecration of a Gaza Memorial at Marquette University
April 23, 2024
Let All Who Are Hungry Come and Eat
April 18, 2024
Dicuss? That would just postpone the expulsion, which everyone knows is supported by some vast majority that can’t be trusted to democratically exercise its voice.
It’s a false analogy created by the repetition of the word “transfer.”
The Israeli government and people paid for the settlements, they can pay to unsettle them.
“The Israeli government and people paid for the settlements, they can pay to unsettle them”
What? This question is not about physical buildings (which may be burnt to the ground in the interest of both parties).
The Israeli government paid for beduine villages and Israeli Arab towns – rev up the D9 Sam.
Relocating relatively few Jews and compensating them for their loss is an unfortunate, but acceptable cost for peace. The alternatives are:
1. No relocation and no peace
2. Annexation and expulsion of the Arabs as Holy proposed in her post immediately below this one.
3. Annexation and retention of Arab populations.
4. Annexation and forced relocation to [?] with compensation.
Option 1 is unacceptable. Option two is evil and destructive, see Holy’s earlier post for more analysis. Option 3 would destroy Israel as a Jewish state. Option 4 would bankrupt Israel and weaken it tremendously economically. That is why we will relocate and compensate some settlers. It is no different than we take land and provide compensation to build roads or schools. It is unfortunate, but is required for peace.
One more thing, relocating thousands of people is better than relocating millions of people. Relocating Jews means relocating thousands, while relocating all Palestinians (to who know where) means relocating millions.
I’d really like to know your definition of evil.
My point was that Israel is responsible for the settlements and for putting the settlers there. It’s not responsible for putting the Palestinians there, they were born there, unless they fled there in ’48. See? Difference.
Are we gonna leave it to me to find the difference?
OK. The settlers are part of the Israeli polity, and are thus clearly subject to its government’s laws. West Bank/ Gaza Arabs, not so clearly subject.
BUT (you knew it was coming), I think Israel has the moral right to transfer the Arabs (the savagery of the Arabs has eroded their own rights to retain the land, and has given Israel the right in self-defense to transfer them). I don’t think Israel should excercise this right at this time, however, due to practical considerations – sanctions, American anger, volatility in Iraq, logistics, the possibility that with a tough stance, peace might someday be achieved without the transfer. I also don’t think Israel should transfer the settlers, but only on practical grounds – because it will make Israel look weak, which is like dangling bloody steak to a shark.
HOLY TERROR,
I don’t know if your serious or not. Lets look back to 1948 for a second which is central to what is going on now. Essentially, an entire society (made mostly up of Palestinian Arabs) was uprooted (transferred) and destroyed. 2/3 of the population, 870,000 people were driven out of their own land by design (check the Zionist records and notes). 472 villages were destroyed. Massacres and indescriminate killing took place. The descendants of those refugees are now nearly 4 and a half million people. Palestinians became dispossed in their own land and became a minority in their own country.
So, the historical record has shown that it has been OK for Jews to transfer Palestinian Arabs.
Holy Terror. Please don’t post rubbish or garbage. And do some reading and listening. Back it up with some substance.
http://www.counterpunch.org/sitta02122003.html
http://www.freespeech.org/fsitv/fscm2/contentviewer.php?content_id=723
http://racetraitor.org/massarttalk.html
BUT (you knew it was coming), I think Israel has the moral right to transfer the Arabs (the savagery of the Arabs has eroded their own rights to retain the land, and has given Israel the right in self-defense to transfer them).
That’s a truly remarkable statement. It seems that basic human rights are not intrinsic, but are rather a reward for good behavior. Bad behavior means you can be ethnically cleansed. Delightful.
“It seems that basic human rights are not intrinsic, but are rather a reward for good behavior. ”
Why do you find this remarkable? Virtually every right ever conceieved of comes with conditions. There’s a right to be free, but you go to prison if you commit crimes. A right to free speech, but if you abuse it (eg yelling “fire” in a crowded theater), you’ll be silenced. A right to swing your arm, but not into my face. If a piece of land becomes a base for unjustified aggression, why can’t it be confiscated?
“Bad behavior means you can be ethnically cleansed. ”
“Ethnically cleansed.” Trying to win an argument semantically? Invoking the Balkans – along with the murder and rape that occured there – is not quite relevant here. Forced transfer or expulsion is what I’m talking about. And I’m saying that self-defense trumps the otherwise justified aversion to expulsions. If your’e going to imply that I take the general immorality of expulsions lightly, or ignore it altogether, how will you like it when accuse you of disregarding self-defense?
daniel, what leads you to believe the most vile antiisraeli propaganda that israel drove out the arabs; yes, i know if you go to leftist sources and/or disaffected jews (noam chomsky, etc.), you can find pseudo historical analysis that makes that claim; but if you go to those same sources you will find holocaust deniers, jew=world domination conspiracy theories and the like. i assume you dont believe the latter, why not look to the mainstream sources for the truth of the palestinian situation.
J,
Your’re a breath of fresh air in a room full of farts.
Why do you find this remarkable? Virtually every right ever conceieved of comes with conditions. There’s a right to be free, but you go to prison if you commit crimes. A right to free speech, but if you abuse it (eg yelling “fire” in a crowded theater), you’ll be silenced. A right to swing your arm, but not into my face. If a piece of land becomes a base for unjustified aggression, why can’t it be confiscated?
When has this ever happened? Did the Allies take over Germany and expel the Germans after World War II? That aggression was far more unjustified than even violent Palestinian resistance to Israeli occupation. By this logic Britain should have invaded northern Ireland and expelled everyone.
“Ethnically cleansed.” Trying to win an argument semantically? Invoking the Balkans – along with the murder and rape that occured there – is not quite relevant here. Forced transfer or expulsion is what I’m talking about. And I’m saying that self-defense trumps the otherwise justified aversion to expulsions. If your’e going to imply that I take the general immorality of expulsions lightly, or ignore it altogether, how will you like it when accuse you of disregarding self-defense?
Oh, I’m sure there would be no murder. Of course not. Everyone would go quietly, without resistance, and it wouldn’t be a terrible bloodbath at all. But that’s not the point — you’re proposing moving everyone out of a territory on the basis of ethnicity. That’s what ethnic cleansing is. Rape has nothing to do with it.
Sorry, I didn’t mean to say you were proposing it, it’s clear above that you’re not proposing it. But you are saying that it wouldn’t be morally wrong.
daniel, what leads you to believe the most vile antiisraeli propaganda that israel drove out the arabs; yes, i know if you go to leftist sources and/or disaffected jews (noam chomsky, etc.), you can find pseudo historical analysis that makes that claim; but if you go to those same sources you will find holocaust deniers, jew=world domination conspiracy theories and the like. i assume you dont believe the latter, why not look to the mainstream sources for the truth of the palestinian situation.
Um, gimme a break. Let the ad Hominems fly! I’m a right leaning zionist who has no problem discussing the facts of what happened with the Arab flight between 1948 and 1967. Except for those who wish to bury their heads in the sand, the facts are clear and documented. It’s the context that these events happened in which is critical. Avi, pick up 2 of Benny Morris’s tomes, “Birth of the Palestinian Refugee Problem” as well as “Righteous Victims.” Before you bash Morris, I have heard him speak live and I have no problem with him, he is a Zionist and has provided IMHO the most authoratative history on the subject. ANd yes, I have read Ephraim Karsh as well. Not all of us who lean right still drink the Kool-Aid, you might want to think about giving that stuff up, it makes you a little wacky!
Moving everyone out of a territory on the basis of ethnicity. That’s what ethnic cleansing is.
That’s just what ethnic cleansing, “is”? Words have histories. I’ve never heard “ethnic cleansing” used widely to describe anything except the mutual massacres of ex-Yugoslavia.
Following which it made its inevitable migration over to the anti-Zionist crew anxious to conscript what words just “are”, and joined up with its friends “apartheid” and, ironically, “Zionism”.
that the palestinians have less right than the settlers to live where they do. the arabs originated from arabia, and by the sword they stormed out and conquered the area, dont kid yourselves about thinking that they are legitimately indigenous to the region. if the arabs can appear overnight like they did one day a couple of thousand years ago, so can the settlers.
dont drink
i heard that morris recently said that the jews shoulve expelled all the arabs in 48, b/c an existential problem trumps all previous considerations about rights.
sam
the arabs living there pose an existential problem to the state of israel on the basis of demographics and physical attacks. the germans did not and do not pose a direct challenge to the existence of Britain, they in fact wanted to sign a treaty w/ britain to end WWII and allow it to retain its empire. certainly northern ireland does not pose an existential threat like the arab population does.
its ironic that we all know that when the settlements are evacuated no one will fire a shot. and even if some nuts do use guns, there will be no bloodbath on the level that the palestinians would put up.
This just came out.
http://news.walla.co.il/?w=//662470
Basically a warning that the left and Sharon their puppet is leading us to a civil war.
Their hatred of the settlers is blinding normal rational instincts.
Ethnic cleansing does not refer specifically to the Balkans.
Merriam Webster English Dictionary:
Main Entry: ethnic cleansing
Function: noun
: the expulsion, imprisonment, or killing of ethnic minorities by a dominant majority group
I think its sad that people are talking about the forced transfer of a population considering what yesterday was. What ever happened to ‘Never Again’? Yes you can call me a bleeding heart liberal and an Arab lover and a self-hater and I’ll take it as a compliment. So you have to earn human rights? That way madness lies. Who decides whether you’ve earned them or not? What are the criteria for being eligible for a human right? Is a baby eligible for a human right, because surely a baby hasn’t lived long enough to commit any evil act? Or is a baby to be punished for what the man round the corner did while he/she was still in the womb? So it would have been ok to send the ‘evil’ people to the gas chambers would it? Maybe my family died becuase they were evil, they hadn’t earned their human rights? Or maybe its because they rejected Kaballah? So the people in Rwanda deserved to die because they were bad? People in Sudan deserved to be forced from their homes because they had committed some evil act? I’m sure the Sudanese who have forced them from their homes can justify it in some way. Some of these people may well have been bad, there is evil in every society but that doesn’t justify carrying out crimes against an entire population? Again that way madness lies.
Its not OK to MOVE ANYBODY!!! Why the heck would the world goverments stand for this when they are th one’s preachin that everyone should get along and then they don’t F**KIN stand in the way of shit like this
that the palestinians have less right than the settlers to live where they do. the arabs originated from arabia, and by the sword they stormed out and conquered the area, dont kid yourselves about thinking that they are legitimately indigenous to the region. if the arabs can appear overnight like they did one day a couple of thousand years ago, so can the settlers.
snarky answer 1: uh-huh. and the israelites originated from ur, and by the sword they stormed out and conquered the area, don’t kid yourselves about thinking that they are legitimately indigenous to the region.
snarky answer 2: that was FOURTEEN HUNDRED YEARS AGO. what a douchey argument.
So Jewschool has turned into LGF.
If people can’t see the difference between deciding to uproot our own citizens from a place they’ve lived in for at most 40 years, and deciding to uproot a separate population from a place they’ve lived in for a few hundred, then they clearly believe that living in a democratic state is less important than living in a Jewish one.
Forced migration is always unpleasant, but forced emigration of an entire people *is* ethnic cleansing. Evacuating settlements is the only way to stay both Jewish and democratic.
Yisroel….You are an idiot.
Peace…HAH!
Who’s this new Jewschooler?? I like it
Sam:
I said “If a piece of land becomes a base for unjustified aggression, why can’t it be confiscated?”
You responded: “When has this ever happened? Did the Allies take over Germany and expel the Germans after World War II? That aggression was far more unjustified than even violent Palestinian resistance to Israeli occupation. By this logic Britain should have invaded northern Ireland and expelled everyone. ”
First, “When has this ever happened?” Why would I need a precedent to make the case that expulsion would not be morally wrong? But there are in fact precedents. You may not agree that expulsion was proper in all cases (I might not either), but, let’s see, there’s the unlamented mass transfer of Germans out of Czechoslovakia following WWII; transfer on both sides during the splitting of India and Pakistan; and numerous expulsions of non-natives througout the third world during and after decolonialization. Each of these has its own facts and must be argued separately, but you can’t tell me that expulsions are rare or nonexistent.
“Did the Allies take over Germany and expel the Germans after World War II?”
They did take over Germany, and controlled it for several years, didn’t they? They didn’t expel the Germans, but unlike in our case, this would have been pointless (expel them to where?; and unnecessary because of the success of deNazification). (BTW, early in the war, Roosevelt and Churchill had some interesting ideas about what to do with Germany; had the Germans continued theur aggression following the war (through terrorism or rearmament, you would have seen an Allied response far harsher than expulsion.)
“violent Palestinian resistance to Israeli occupation. ”
What did I say about using semantics to win arguments? Are you referring to “indiscriminate Palestinian mass murder of children in response to legitimate Israeli actions?”
“By this logic Britain should have invaded northern Ireland and expelled everyone. ”
Did you get the idea that I said that any expulsion is legitimate? Are British claims to N. Ireland the same as Israeli claims to the West Bank? Is the Irish population as bloodthirsty as the Palestinians?
“Oh, I’m sure there would be no murder. Of course not. Everyone would go quietly, without resistance, and it wouldn’t be a terrible bloodbath at all. But that’s not the point — you’re proposing moving everyone out of a territory on the basis of ethnicity. That’s what ethnic cleansing is. Rape has nothing to do with it.”
Murder? Well, killing, anyway. If I wasn’t clear before, I’ll acknowledge here that yes, an expulsion would involve killing. That’s part of the moral calculation in deciding whether an expulsion is morally acceptable.
I objected to your use of the term “ethnic cleansing”, even though in a technical sense it might be appropriate, because the term inevitably is used as a condemnation of the act it describes (the “cleansing” implying that the people being cleansed are a type of filth) and because it conjures up images of Yugoslavia, which (apart from the immorality of the expulsion in that case) conjures up images of rape and sadism not appropriate to our case. (And see 80pus’ post above.) You know this as well as I do. The technical meanings of words are not their only meaning.
Regarding the settlers/ Palestinian claim argument, your’e in a bit of a bind, aren’t you? If being there first is what counts, the Jews have the superior claim. If possession is what counts, the Jews win on this one, too. It can’t be easy to argue that a 1400 year old conquest should stand against prior claims while denying that a 60 year old takeover is legitimate.
to J: re: being there first
The present-day Palestinians’ ancestral heritage
“But all these [different peoples who had come to Canaan] were additions, sprigs grafted onto the parent tree…And that parent tree was Canaanite…[The Arab invaders of the 7th century A.D.] made Moslem converts of the natives, settled down as residents, and intermarried with them, with the result that all are now so completely Arabized that we cannot tell where the Canaanites leave off and the Arabs begin.” Illene Beatty, “Arab and Jew in the Land of Canaan.”
More on Canaanite civilization
“Recent archeological digs have provided evidence that Jerusalem was a big and fortified city already in 1800 BCE…Findings show that the sophisticated water system heretofor attributed to the conquering Israelites pre-dated them by eight centuries and was even more sophisticated than imagined…Dr. Ronny Reich, who directed the excavation along with Eli Shuikrun, said the entire system was built as a single complex by Canaanites in the Middle Bronze Period, around 1800 BCE.” The Jewish Bulletin, July 31st, 1998.
John Brown:
Aren’t you forgetting some intervening history? Between the Jewish conquest (1200 B.C.?) and the Arab conquest (around 640 A.D.), there were so many expulsions, invasions, conquests and migrations that I don’t see how you can call the population on th eve of the Arab conquest “Canaanites” (unless that’s a name you want to give to anyone who lived on the land). How much pre-1200B.C. Canaanite blood could these people have had?
And doesn’t the relinquishing of “Canaanite” identity harm the claim of today’s “Canaanites” to the land?
And when I spoke about being there first, I meant first among still-existing people, of course.
Come to think of it, isn’t it likely that Jews have far more ancient Canaanite blood in them than the Palestinians (relevant if you reject my above argument about relinquishing identity)?
http://www.jtf.org has the solution.
i heard that morris recently said that the jews shoulve expelled all the arabs in 48, b/c an existential problem trumps all previous considerations about rights.
Hmmm, not sure your point but I agree with Morris when the existential problem at hand is one’s (individial or collective) existence.
i heard that morris recently said that the jews shoulve expelled all the arabs in 48, b/c an existential problem trumps all previous considerations about rights.
Hmmm, not sure your point but I agree with Morris when the existential problem at hand is one’s (individial or collective) existence.
I like Esther. She gets it.
You know what? Why does it have to be this or that? Nobody has to be expelled.
Let Israel disengage from the territories. Let the Palestinians stay. And let the settlers stay.
That’s right. Stay– have fun, you deserve no protection from the state of Israel. It’s blown too many resources on you already, and you’ve decided to repay by convincing your soldier-aged kids that it is moral and right to subvert a democratically elected government by refusing military orders.
So, if you’ve given up your stake in the democratic state of Israel by committing treason, go ahead, do what you want. I hope you have fun dealing with the Palestinians who will probably throw you in jail, or worse.
Good luck and good riddance. You’re a blight, and it will be nice to have some quiet without you around.
ronen, wheres the love. your fellow jews may be misguided, they may be wrong to build homes on the west bank in historical israel, they may be wrong to believe literally the biblical injunctions (and im not being sarcastic, from a geo-political perspective they probably are) but traitors? the most sincere, risk-taking jews of our nation; traitors? have you ronen put your life on the line for the sake of the jewish nation? ronen, critique their actions if you believe theyre wrong, but find it in your heart to understand them and emphasize with them as fellow jews who believe. its amazing ronen, the empathy expressed for the palestinians on this thread, even the ones who murder little jewish babies; yet when it comes to our fellow jews who have put themselves on the line for what they believe to be right for judaism, the distain of the jewish left is amazing.
I wouldn’t consider myself a member of the “Jewish Left,” but regardless…
I feel that the religious/nationalist settlers, as you say, are indeed sincere. But their actions are beyond misguided. They are distorting our religion into a brand of messianistic extremism. The fact that they place “Torah Law” above the democratic values of the state of Israel is not merely problematic– given the current situation, it is leading to, yes, a fundamental betrayal of the state (and, in my opinion, the people) of Israel.
I have plenty of love for the Jewish people (and not so much empathy for those Palestinians who cannot grasp the concept of accountablility), and with respect to being my brothers’ keeper, I am fully in favor of helping those Jews in the settlements find new homes and handing over generous compensation packages.
Those that reject a reasonable solution with an eye towards peace in favor of a messianic, extremist ideology are probably more trouble than they are worth. Their perception of Jewish priorities is completely skewed, and if they think they ought to stay in the territories, let them stay– they will probably be more trouble than they are worth inside the borders of the modern state of Israel.
Ronen –
Let’s talk about democracy in Israel, shall we? What I summarize below is more eloquently stated here
1) The Oslo accords were never passed with a Jewish majority of our Parliament – one of the most ambition and momentous undertakings was pushed through with the votes of Arab MKs (many of who have openly made treasonous statements) and passed by a single vote in the Knesset.
2) Oslo failed – miserably. The MINORITY, leftie dream that unilateral withdrawal would bring peace blew up in our face as the Pals used every scrap of autonomy and funding to build a violent terror apparatus unprecendented in its extremism and cruelty. An entire generation of Palestinians was radicalized and cast off any notion of Israeli inevitability – letting the underlying, enduring fantasy of tossing us into the see shine forth.
3) By the last elections, it was clear to most Israelis that unilateral concessions were a mistake. That there is nobody to talk to. Offered a plan for unilateral withdrawal by the MINORITY Labor party – the populace rejected the plan now being implemented with both hands, giving Sharon a landslide based on his hard line promises.
4) It is now emerging that Sharon has been blindsided/railroaded by the judiciary and media – which are both in the hands of the MINORITY leftie camp. Under their influence (and to save his son from prosecution for corruption) he has totally disregarded the DEMOCRATICALLY stated will of the people.
To get this far, he has run roughshod over every democratic safeguard and structure in our system – firing and threatening members of his own party that disagreed with him, etc.
The media has assisted by demonizing any dissent – while simultaneously whining about the “danger to democracy” from people defending their homes: a two-faced performance only Bolshevik lefties could pull off.
5) For all you posters who justified expulsion of Jews based on the promise of peace: The Army and intelligence community have repeatedly stressed that this withdrawal will do NOTHING to improve Israel’s security, and will actually make things more difficult and bring other southern cities within attack range.
6) The settler movement has repeatedly been able to draw huge crowds way beyond their core base of “messianic crazies” (as per self-hating Ronen) with up to 200,000 people participating at one time… petitions and other activities indicate a widespread opposition to the expulsion on the part of soldiers and reservists.
In other words – Ronen, please spare me the self-righteous leftie blather about how “messianic crazies” are stomping all over Israeli democracy – the only people tearing Israel’s democracy to shreds are the leftie (now suicidal) elite, who are trying to impose their will on a population that clearly rejected the “withdraw-and-beg” approach…
Ben-David
I am not a self-hater, you turdball. Have you ever read my posts here? I’m as serious a Zionist as they come, I love my traditions and I love my land. I just happen to believe that real politik trumps one group’s narrow understanding of halacha when it comes to the functions of a modern state.
You said we should talk about Israel’s democracy, and proceeded to trash the smooth functioning therein. Do you know anything about representative democracy? Newsflash: it’s not always about the “will of the people.”
But let’s look at the hypocrisy of some of your comments. See, Ben-David, the fact that Arab citizens can vote in Israel is DEMOCRATIC (while a racist focus on the “Jewish majority” is, at best, irrelevant, as the Jewish majority is de facto in Israel).
The fact that Ariel Sharon’s government has legally enacted its policies through various coalitions is DEMOCRATIC.
The media pointing out that soldiers refusing to fulfill their orders are a threat to democracy is also DEMOCRATIC.
I’m not self-righteous. This isn’t about me. This is about the future of the Jewish people. I want to see Judaism flourish in Israel, but insteady I see a growing radicalism among the religious which only repels and secularizes the majority of the community. I want to see Israeli mothers and fathers sleep at night without fear that their sons will die while protecting people who seem to receive an unfair share of state resources. I want to see a national project that recognizes the legitimacy of other national projects while maintaining a tough line on its own security– even by building a security fence if necessary. I want to see the realization of the Zionist dream: a normal and democratic life for the Jewish people in their own land, where they are free to celebrate their traditions as they see fit and live without the threat of violence.
If that sounds like self-hating to you, you need a fucking lobotomy.
Ronen you wimpy left wing surrender monkey
there are children involved here and its wrong to take away their foundation. it was wrong during the nakba and its wrong now. the settlers that raise their children in places that are going to be abandoned by the IDF are the ones to blame for their dire circumstances, and on top of that they threaten any potential unity among their own nation. on the one hand, leaving the settlers alone is a problem because kol israel arachim ze leze (all of israel is responsible for one another) but on the other hand, them demanding protection is a blatant disregard for that fundamental value. The IDF is trying to save the settlers lives, but the settlers are trying to destroy Israel.
Yes, Ronen, I have read your posts – and you constantly slide into totally irrelevant screeds about how the settlers are “biblical fundamentalists”.
The only messianism on the horizon is the blind bubble-dreams of the leftie MINORITY that still thinks withdrawal will bring peace – and are using totally undemocratic means to pound Israel’s already bloodied head against this brick wall.
The only people bringing up halacha in the context of the withdrawal are leftie losers who are desparetely trying to distract the populace from their goose-steping trashing of Israeli democracy.
The majority of Israelis rejected unilateral disengagement with both hands. The left wing has hamstrung the elected PM and – acting from the insular safety of totally undemocratic positions in the judiciary and media – have totally subverted the explicitly stated will of the Israeli people.
Except that now it is clear that the vast majority if Israelis are no longer going to act like serfs doing the bidding of (what remains of) the “etat-cest-moi” socialist elite. It’s unfortunate that the army is being used as the battlfield for this civil strife.
Ronen: if you think this situation can be described as the “smooth functioning” of Israeli democracy – you need to add a little more “reality” to your “realpolitik”….
You are invited to the Kessem junction near Rosh HaAyin to see the large numbers of cars emerging from the Shomron with the stickers of Motorola, Scitex, and other hi-tech firms… as I and others have observed before, the religious nationalists are under fire precisely because they are NOT fundamentalists, but because they present the most cogent challenge to the leftie hegemony that’s been crumbling since 73.
Your repeated attempts to cast these folks as fundamentalists and to claim that those running roughshod over Israel’s democracy are as pathetic as the parallel mewling and whining coming from America’s leftie fringe – and about as relevant.
The Rest Of Us – all the Israelis who see clearly that Oslo has failed, that it is folly to concede anything during the current instability (and with no quid pro quo) – THE REST OF US are not taken in by the Leftie’s generous claim to defend Israeli democracy from those bad, bad settlers.
The Rest of Us kinda admire them – and realize that lefties like you haven’t a truly democratic bone in their bodies. And The Rest Of Us understand that the protests now taking place are the sad-but-expected reaction of people who have had all democratic processes of descent stopped up and closed off.
When The Rest Of Us – the majority of Israelis – hear dark warnings about a “group of fanatics that are endangering Israeli democracy” we think not about the settlers, but about a different group (hint to lefties: got a mirror?).
Excuse the spelling mistakes in the previous, I am on lunch hour!
Wow– you’re actually arguing that the religious settlers aren’t motivated by a sense of G-d given privilege? Rather they are the true proponents of secular democracy? Are you on crack?
You might call me a leftist for believing that religious zealotry is tearing the fabric of Israeli society, but if you actually listen to what I have to say, you’ll realize that I don’t fit into any neat left/right boxes. I’m not hypnotized by the possibility of peace with Palestinians– I’ll believe that when I see it. But a) I do think that the best chance to ensure the security of Israelis is to build a big fucking security fence that will keep any terrorists out and b) I do think that the hilltop youth et al are racist thugs who don’t understand that if Zionism is to be a legitimate national project, it must also legitimize other national projects– therefore, Israel will not be able to rebuild its economy and lifestyle until the Palestinians establish a successful state.
Though you like to “quote” me, you need to be careful, because I’ve pretty much never used the words you are attributing to me. I don’t enjoy that. But then again, Ben-David, you’re pretty much delusional about everything else too, so why should you strive for accuracy?
Sharon’s disengagement plan in not undemocratic– it is a policy formulated by an elected leader. That’s how democracy works. If it really was anathma to a sizeable majority of Israelis, there is no way in hell Sharon’s government would be standing. But it is, because it’s a good idea.
You know what? Why does it have to be this or that? Nobody has to be expelled.
Let Israel disengage from the territories. Let the Palestinians stay. And let the settlers stay.
“That’s right. Stay– have fun, you deserve no protection from the state of Israel. It’s blown too many resources on you already, and you’ve decided to repay by convincing your soldier-aged kids that it is moral and right to subvert a democratically elected government by refusing military orders.
So, if you’ve given up your stake in the democratic state of Israel by committing treason, go ahead, do what you want. I hope you have fun dealing with the Palestinians who will probably throw you in jail, or worse.
Good luck and good riddance. You’re a blight, and it will be nice to have some quiet without you around.”
Baruch haShem yom yom!
Ethnic cleansing does not refer specifically to the Balkans. Merriam Webster English Dictionary
‘Cause God forbid anyone should disagree with the Merriam Webster English dictionary. What they do isn’t political at all; it’s neutral, right John?
In which contexts has ethnic cleansing been used apart from the Balkans and, of course, racist apartheid Zionism?
8opus foolishly wrote: “In which contexts has ethnic cleansing been used apart from the Balkans and, of course, racist apartheid Zionism?”
Oh, good question let’s take a quick look. Maybe if you lifted a finger yourself once in a while you would know the answer. These are all from the first page of Google results for “Ethnic cleansing in”
“DYING IN DARFUR. by SAMANTHA POWER. Can the ethnic cleansing
in Sudan be stopped? Issue of 2004-08-30 Posted 2004-08-23”
The New Yorker: Fact
Le Monde diplomatique. Ethnic cleansing in Cyprus. by Philippe Rekacewicz, January 2000.
Ethnic cleansing in Cyprus
Ethnic Cleansing in Sri Lanka. … Click here for the full reply. More information on the Ethnic Cleansing in Sri Lanka by LTTE Tamil Tigers…
Ethnic Cleansing in Sri Lanka
Ethnic Cleansing In Bangladesh. By Rahul Gupta. Vanishing Minority Population. Hindus … (Ref 3). Ethnic Cleansing In Bangladesh. Ethnic …
Ethnic Cleansing In Bangladesh- Rahul Gupta
Serbian efforts to force Bosnian Muslims from cities and villages throughout the Balkans have only recently lodged ethnic cleansing in the public mind. …
Foreign Affairs – A Brief History of Ethnic Cleansing – Andrew …
Interesting — they’re all written post-Balkans and they all involve the ongoing rape and murder that that war stood for. ‘Cept, of course, for M. Rekawicz, writing on Cyprus; he seems to be addicted to the term since his days covering Bosnia.
It’s kind of sexy when you call me “foolish”, though. Whisper away, my sweet brown babylonian …
I’m in rare agreement with a lot of this group that forced transfer is a lousy idea. Leave the Jews in the settlements but withdraw any Israeli support. Let the Palestinian Authority decide what to do with them and make it clear that Israel will not be stepping in to defend anyone.
The end result would probably be the same numbers transferred of their own free will and at no state expense.
John Brown:
I realize this is a couple days old now, but I would like a response regarding the Canaan issue above. Were you honestly unaware of the unlikelihood that today’s Palestinians have any significant descent from the pre-1200 B.C. Canaanites, or did you just toss out more items discrediting the Jewish claim to Israel in the hope that it would stick?
I went to Hevron for Shabbos
to the arab shuk
where at least fifteen soldiers were guarding us
on our leisurely shabbos strolll
so those poor oppressed arabs wouldn’t lynch us
and it was fascinating to see
their doorposts
many of which
had holes carved into the wall for mezuzot.
yay hilltop youth!!
root root root
1) The Palestinians are Arabs, and no one has ever proven to anyone’s satisfaction that they are descended from Canaanites.
Moreover, that opens quite the theological can of worms and I’m not sure why anyone would *want* to prove such a thing.
2) Hilltop youth have an attractive aesthetic. If I was a religious rightist instead of a religious leftist, I would totally be one of them. Oh well.