From Ynet:
"It is silly to talk about a Jewish state," Sarkozy said while referring to the Israeli demand that the Palestinians recognize Israel as the Jewish state. "It would be like saying that this table is Catholic. There are two million Arabs in Israel."
These 2M Arabs are like the famous 6M Jews except that they were graciously allowed to remain, and not murdered at all, when they could just as well have been expelled (and expelled just as legally as the Arabs who WERE expelled in 1948). Lieberman — master politician and legal theorist — probably believes they can STILL be expelled. They are thus as good as gone. So they can properly be treated as already gone. So, you see, it IS ALREADY a Jewish state. (Darn those liberal crybabies who cannot see such an easy explanation without being led by the hand!)
The 2M Arabs should just count their blessings, surely, and not insist on injecting a non-Jewish tincture into what anyone can see was intended to be a “Jewish State” (even if it was never so-called until recently) (and whatever its declaration of independence may say about equality — declaration/schmeklaration).
(and whatever its declaration of independence may say about equality — declaration/schmeklaration).
The Israelis are generally either very dishonest or completely ignorant about the history of the two declarations contained in their 14 May 1948 announcement regarding the establishment of the State of Israel. The UN resolution mandated a declaration on religious and minority rights and stated:
So, the declaration about equality and non-discrimination was simply an acknowledgment of the published UN criteria. It was included to facilitate a weak claim of legitimacy and gain admission to the United Nations under the terms of the General Assembly resolution. Ben Gurion explained to the World Agudat Israel Organization that UN permission to establish the State could not be obtained without providing those assurances. See the text of the Status Quo Agreement. link to books.google.com
The UN criteria stood in opposition to the declaration about the Jewish nature of the State. For example, D. Lowenstein (Aguda) complained in the People’s Council debates:
Of course the Knesset simply ignored the declaration and expropriated Arab-owned land and gave persons of Jewish descent superior rights and access to the land and its natural resources. Despite the fact that the declaration was signed by the members of the Provisional Council of State and promulgated as law in the official gazette, the Supreme Court and Knesset eventually held that it does not have constitutional validity, and that it is not a supreme law which may be used to invalidate laws and regulations that contradict it. link to knesset.gov.il
Volumes have been written about Israel’s failure to honor its initial and on-going legal obligations to constitutionally protect the rights and properties of its religious and minority population. Israelis do not grasp the fact that resolution 181(II) recommended that each state should be established on the de facto conceptual basis of a bi-national state. See for example the section “Israel’s Initial Obligation To Enact a Constitution Including a Bill of Human Rights And The Issue of Judicial Review” in Yvonne Schmidt, “Foundations of Civil and Political Rights in Israel and the Occupied Territories”, GRIN Verlag, 2008, ISBN: 3638944506, page 98
link to books.google.com
The Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People reported to the Security Council that:
The 1988 PLO Algiers Declaration accepted resolution 181 (II) and its guarantees regarding religious and minority rights as the basis of international legitimacy. It implicitly recognized the division of Palestine into a “Jewish” and “Arab” state. That is the only recognition Israel is entitled to demand.
Thank you Hostage for this research. I guess Israel can no more be “held” to comply with its promises upon accepting UN Membership than it can be “held” to comply with (other elements of) international law.
But it’s nice to know about these promises.
If the UNGA-181 proposed division of Palestine into two states IDENTIFIED THEREIN as “Jewish” and “Arab”, then, at least, it also specified that they should respect the rights of all the citizens in their respective territories, and not EXPEL them or murder them, etc., etc.
Perhaps that cuts the “Gordian knot” regarding “recognition” of Israel as a “Jewish State” — recognize Israel as “a Jewish State existing under rthe provisions of UNGA-181 and thus under a permanent obligation to respect the civil and human rights of all its proper citizens including among these all persons who became refugees or stateless exiles during the wars of 1948 and 1967.” How’s THAT for a formula of “recognition”?
Perhaps that cuts the “Gordian knot” regarding “recognition” of Israel as a “Jewish State” — recognize Israel as “a Jewish State existing under the provisions of UNGA-181 and thus under a permanent obligation to respect the civil and human rights of all its proper citizens including among these all persons who became refugees or stateless exiles during the wars of 1948 and 1967.” How’s THAT for a formula of “recognition”?
That is exactly what happened in General Assembly resolution 273 (III). Here is an overview of the role of the declaration and undertaking in the so-called partition plan:
Plan Of Partition With Economic Union
Part I. – Future Constitution And Government Of Palestine
B. Steps Preparatory To Independence
The Constituent Assembly of each State shall draft a democratic constitution for its State and choose a provisional government to succeed the Provisional Council of Government appointed by the Commission. The Constitutions of the States shall embody Chapters 1 and 2 of the Declaration provided for in section C below
C. Declaration
A declaration shall be made to the United Nations by the Provisional Government of each proposed State before independence. It shall contain, inter alia, the following clauses:
General Provision
The stipulations contained in the Declaration are recognized as fundamental laws of the State and no law, regulation or official action shall conflict or interfere with these stipulations, nor shall any law, regulation or official action prevail over them.
Chapter 1: Holy Places, Religious Buildings and Sites …(enumerated list)
Chapter 2: Religious and Minority Rights …(enumerated list)
Chapter 4: Miscellaneous Provisions
The provisions of chapters 1 and 2 of the declaration shall be under the guarantee of the United Nations, and no modifications shall be made in them without the assent of the General Assembly of the United Nations.
F. Admission To Membership In The United Nations
When the independence of either the Arab or the Jewish state as envisaged in this plan has become effective and the declaration and undertaking, as envisaged in this plan, have been signed by either of them, sympathetic consideration should be given to its application for admission to membership in the United Nations in accordance with article 4 of the Charter of the United Nations.
OT but did anyone else have difficulty linking to comments in Lizzy Ratner’s post above?
No, I didn’t notice any glitches.
Am I totally nuts. I thought I saw a post from Ratner talking about the NY times obituary of a dead settler. One of the major points was that this settler was very pretty. What happened to the original article?
The shift in media and the words of various politicians is very encouraging. The shift it small, but with increasing encouragement from Jewish pundits, the fear seems to be fading. In the coming year it could snowball and like the Egyptians who lost their fear, the truth on Israel might come rushing forth. For the benefit of all sides. The dam was built in the early 1900s but truth is breaking through and the world’s concience will welcome the flood. Moral informed Jews will welcome the flood. Everyone will welcome the flood, and it might lift us all above this intractable conflict in time.
Surely you jest?
Sarkozy is a bit… unpredictable. I guess the most definitive thing you can say about him is he’s thoroughly secular.
Le Canard Enchaîné never gets comments “first hand”. The paper is usually trusted and widely read in the political class but whatever Sarkozy is quoted as saying, it is not public discourse. It may show that France will not join the US in a veto which is quite a relief.
idk chaos, he’s kind of a push over. One week he’s pro palestine, the next week he sounds like a bona fide zionist. I guess whoever is pressuring him more at the time is where he’ll lean. The fact that he’s unpredictable throws a wrench in the whole French recognition
Oh I think he will err on the side of recognition. France ultimately wants no part in Israel and the US vs the whole damn rest of the world.
It’s nice to see Sarkozy voicing contempt for Netanyahu and expressing some sympathy for the Palestinians, but he is confusing the issue as well, and his Catholic table analogy is inapt. Israel most certainly is a Jewish State, and it is the irreconcilable contradiction between that status and the fundamental principal of equality for the Palestinian citizens that should be stressed. It is reasonable to say it is “silly” to demand Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish State, especially from those who are victims of that characterization, but it is also silly to deny that Israel was created as a Jewish State and functions that way today. Maybe something was lost in the translation.
Jewish in what way? Jewish as a religion, or Jewish as an ethnicity? it almost seems as if the confusion is deliberate. what exactly are the Palestinians being asked to recognize? what exactly is my nation being asked to support? and does accepting that Israel is to be a safe haven for Jews mean accepting that it is not safe for everyone else?
“it almost seems as if the confusion is deliberate.”
How dare you! What kind of people would debase their religion and their identity (or that part of it) like that?
functions that way — A bald, and broad, assumption.
I have a Muslim foot stool. It’s an Ottoman.
Seriously though, the Jewish State thing is ridiculous and the world should be severely pushing back on. Israel doesn’t request the world to recognize them as the Jewish State. No country currently does. It was never a pre-condition for peace with Egypt or Jordan.
Since many people (including UK law) consider Jews a race, it’s not much different that ‘the white state’. It could have disastrous consequences on Israeli Arabs. It obviously would be used to deny any right of return for refugees (likely the main reason). Who knows what else it could mean. It might even mean Jewish sovereignty over the Temple Mount/Al Aqsa Mosque/Dome of Rock. The Crusaders would be rolling in their graves if the Holy Land was hijacked for Jews only.
Bibi telling the UN that Jews are called Jews because they are from Judea is a bit of a stretch. The religion is from “Judea” but so is Christianity. Christians used to be called Jews too. Making the Holy Land of antiquity into a “Jewish State” when it is important to three Abrahamic Religions, two of which make up nearly 50% of the world’s population and the third one is .2% (the ones who want it to be theirs), it’s not going to happen.
The PA, Fatah, and PLO already recognize Israel. They’ve recognized Israel for years. Demanding that they now recognize Israel as the “Jewish State” is a new precondition. Bibi is using it as an excuse to say “see, they don’t want to recognize Israel as the Jewish State! That means they don’t recognize us! They want to push us to the sea! Rockets! Hamas! Fogel murders! Suicide bombs! Iran! Suitcase nukes! (insert dictator) is Hitler! etc”
Abbas has already answered this precondition. He says they recognize Israel and don’t care what kind of state they call themselves. That’s a rational answer. The eees and DBGs of the world would disagree but that’s what they do. Then they bring up ages-old propaganda, a Palestinian terrorist incident, use rhetorical questions and tricks, smear the comments, reply based on a misinterpretation (deliberately), usual deal.
What I would like to know is exactly how much non-Catholic wood was used to make Sarkozy’s table, and what steps the majority Catholic wood has taken to assert the table’s inherent Catholic character (representing all of the world’s Catholic plant matter), and to ensure its recognition as such by all other furniture in the region.
Its not silly to talk about a French state, even though 10% of France is Arab.
An Israeli state is equally descriptive and more representative though, than a “Jewish” state, which lends itself to the confusion of “Catholic” vs “Jewish”.
“Jewish” has two intersecting meanings, religious and/or national.
Its not silly to talk about a French state, even though 10% of France is Arab.
I think you mean 10% (according to some estimates) Muslim, not Arab. No matter. One can easily be a French Muslim or a French Arab or a French Arab Muslim.
On the other hand, one cannot be a Jewish Muslim a Jewish Arab (unless a Jew by religion) or a Jewish Muslim Arab – although one may be an Israeli Muslim Arab.
It is thus not about “intersecting meanings,” but about the difference between a secular democratic republic and a religio-ethnocracy.
“On the other hand, one cannot be a Jewish Muslim a Jewish Arab (unless a Jew by religion) or a Jewish Muslim Arab — ”
I get part of your point but not this. Perhaps you are joking. There are a great many Jewish Arabs. Perhaps you are saying there are no secular Jewish Arabs? But that’s clearly not true either. Arab people with a Jewish upbringing cannot consider themselves Jewish if they feel like it just like the many other non-practicing Jewish people all over the world?
What do you mean “unless a Jew by religion?” What other kind of Jew is there?
link to bintjbeil.com — “Reflections by an Arab Jew”
Sorry, Emma. It was shorthand, the idea being that “Jewish” is not a nationality in the way that “French” or “Israeli” is. The parenthetic “unless a Jew by religion” was meant to exclude precisely the kind of Arab Jews you refer to, who of course exist.
An Israeli Palestinian Arab cannot be “Jewish” in that sense, simply by being a citizen of the”Jewish” state, or even by speaking Hebrew and participating in Jewish-Israeli culture. Amin Maalouf is a French Arab in a way that Sayed Kashua could never be a Jewish Arab, although the former is a French citizen who writes in French, and the latter is an Israeli citizen who writes in Hebrew.
“Arab” means a person whose (principal) native language is Arabic. Many Muslims are not Arabs. Some Jews are (or were) Arabs if born in Arabic-speaking countries. such as Palestine, in some cases, such as Yemen, Morocco. “Palestinian” by contrast is a territorial designation, now and formerly also a “nationality” declaration. For stateless exiles, it is the only nationality. Palestinian-Americans are hyphenated to show place of origin, as Jewish-Americans are hyphenated to show religion (or race or whatever). all these terms are flexible, though, allowing for maximum uncertainty of meaning.
“What other kind of Jew is there?”
Oh, that’s easy: the “atheist Jew”, of course! Just ask “eee”!
You can even ask Shmuel. Atheist Jews like me are very common. It is only you Mooser that can’t wrap your head around this simple concept.
“You can even ask Shmuel.”
“eee” if Shmuel lies or is wrong about everything else, why on earth should I believe him about that?
Okay, “eee” maybe there are a few (ha, ha, ha) “atheist Jews”. But let’s get one thing straight, damnit! There are no anti-Zionist Jews!!
Oh, maybe a few kapos and mosers, but certainly no good anti-Zionist Jews, huh?
eee, is being Jewish a nationality for you?
When you say you’re Jewish, don’t you mean Israeli?
I’m thinking being Jewish is being religious. Like belief
in the 10 commandments.
You can even ask Shmuel.
Since Shmuel‘s status as a Jew is still pending until he completes the licensing process, he’s obviously not a good source. Maybe we should ask your dog, instead.
I think what’s confusing, eee, is are Jews like you who are atheist and then assert a “right” to a God-given homeland in the Middle East.
Mooser,
Shmuel is sometimes wrong and sometimes correct. If you don’t want to believe him, that is your problem. But since there are hundreds of thousands if not millions of Jewish atheists, denying their existence only makes you look foolish.
if Shmuel lies or is wrong about everything else, why on earth should I believe him about that?
Good point, but I might lie or be wrong about everything except that – theoretically speaking of course.
Since Shmuel‘s status as a Jew is still pending until he completes the licensing process, he’s obviously not a good source.
I agree.
Shmuel is sometimes wrong and sometimes correct.
Thank you so much, eee, for not saying that I am “right”. It’s a word I try to avoid.
The fact is Shmulik that you explained to Mooser a few times that there are Jewish atheists. Can we agree on that?
Far be it from me to disabuse a half-tonne ungulate with palmate antlers, but yes, Virginia, there are Jewish atheists.
You can’t even get HIS NAME right, at least not the spelling he chooses. Eee, if we’d pointed out the sky is blue you’d shriek that we were anti-Semites/self-hating, and then sit outside until sunset, point to one patch of orange-purple and call us liars. There is no agreeing with you on ANYTHING. Not unless your screen name is hophmi, jon, DBG or Richard Witty, anyway.
To those with a closed mind as to what it means to be a Jew, I quote from one of the outstanding Jews of the last century, Sigmund Freud, in his preface to the Hebrew translation of “Totem and Taboo”:
No reader of this book will find it easy to put himself in the emotional position of an author who is ignorant of the language of holy writ, who is completely estranged from the religion of his fathers, as well as from every other religion, and who cannot take a share in nationalist ideals, but who has yet never repudiated his people, who feels that he is in his essential nature a Jew and who has no desire to alter that nature. If the question were put to him: “Since you have abandoned all these common characteristics of your countrymen, what is there left to you that is Jewish?” he would reply, “A very great deal and probably its very essence.” He could not now express that essence clearly in words, but some day, no doubt, it will become accessible to the scientific mind.
Chaos,
You are an ignoramus, I got his name right.
Shmuel‘s status as a Jew is still pending
The Trials Of Rabbi Eliezer Ben Hyrcanus and Baruch Spinoza prove that outward religious observance, personal religious beliefs, voices from Heaven, and excommunication aren’t necessarily dispositive.
Einstein confessed that he believed in Spinoza’s strange God, but he was still considered Jew-ish enough for the purposes of the Law of Return and fitness to hold a ceremonial office in Medinat Yisra’el. Some would say it is ludicrous to claim that some or all of these men were still Jews, while others would assert that it was ludicrous to suggest any of them were not. I subscribe to the latter view.
“Atheist Jews like me”.
Then whence this bizarre affinity for certain holy stones? You wouldn’t have survived in the original Judaea. Is Israel just a theme park for you?
Kapok,
I have affinity to people, not holy stones.
Why wouldn’t I have survived in Judea?
Why does it follow that if I have no affinity to holy stones that Israel is a theme park for me?
people not stones, ergo, one can build one’s zion anywhere
Survival: You may have a point here. Not sure, but I think openly declaring one’s lack of faith in your own tribe’s gods is usually frowned upon by other tribesmen.
not followed: you could just be in love with love without a clue about the object of your affection. Is Israel literally an extension in time and space of a land where burning bushes once spoke and patoralists conversed with the Supreme Being? Because that’s what’s being sold.
Unless you believe, it can’t be anything other than an amusement park ride: Jewy-land. And if you do believe, you won’t be needing these Uzis, Jehovah, Himself, will smite thy enemies!
I know English (or language generally) isn’t your strong suit but we can clearly see you used something other than his actual screen name. What was that, some sort of pseudo-Hebrew cognate?
Chaos,
Shmulik is a diminutive form of Shmuel. I don’t particularly like it and its use in this context is a little too familiar, but it’s not quite as bad as calling Richard “Dick”.
well you’ll have to admit it is a rather hard thing to understand how one can be two mutually exclusive things at the same time. no if you were to call yourself what you are in such a case an athiest pretending he is jewish their is no problem. but the simple truth is jewish is not a nationality nor an ethnicity.
well you’ll have to admit it is a rather hard thing to understand how one can be two mutually exclusive things at the same time. no if you were to call yourself what you are in such a case an athiest pretending he is jewish their is no problem. the simple truth is jewish is not a nationality nor an ethnicity.
You are overlooking the social, national, and international legal foundations of various Jewish communities. In Greco-Bulgarian Communities (Opinion No. 17) and Minority Schools in Albania (Opinion A/B 64) the Permanent Court of International Justice had occasion to state that the legal definition of a community is:
There hasn’t been a practicing Jew in my family for generations, but most of them nonetheless think of themselves as Jew-ish. Many of them even instruct their children about the history, the law, the traditions, and the customs of the Jews. Zionists claim people like this are assimilated and “lost”, but in reality most Zionists are secular Jews too.
A multitude of countries (e.g. Germany) adopted public laws in the mid-19th century which treated atheist Jews as members of a national ethnic minority group on the principle of parentage, or jus sanguinis. If you had not converted to Christianity, your career possibilities were still legally limited. For example, you were excluded from civil service and other high state positions in the army, diplomacy, and the university on the basis of your ethnicity – not on the basis of your actual theological beliefs. Local German Jewish “communities” remained a corporate body by law. Atheist Jews were still obliged to pay community taxes collected by the local government and no Jew was free to leave without officially renouncing his or her religion. In time people were allowed to renounce their religion while maintaining their connection with the community.
At one and the same time other countries a few miles away (e.g. France) adopted laws which said that Jews were citizens just like everyone else under the principle of jus soli , the law of the soil. So some states viewed them as a legal ethnicity, while others did not. The argument that Jews speak different languages or dialects, and have adopted cosmopolitan customs applies with equal force to Chinese ethnic minority groups scattered throughout Asia and the Western world. They also ceased to be members of a single religion or nationality a long time ago.
“Baruch Spinoza”
Benedict.
He was given the name “Baruch” when he was born, but as far as I can tell his family called him by a nickname, and he took the name “Benedict” when hw was still a young man. That is the name he published under.
That last sentence is another Witty masterpiece of obfuscation. I guess he is trying to divide his cake and eat it. Or should that be and/or eat it? It seems he is as one with the leaders of his benighted nation and uses alice in wonderland logic to justify whatever he wants to justify. Witty has gone down the rabbit hole.
Where is our translator when we need him?
How about a White State? Is it silly to talk about, oh say, the United States as a White State? Or maybe as a Christian State, if you prefer. That’s the door you’re opening, Witty.
Exactly Chaos.
This is the dangerous side of the Zionist Ideology. When you say that Jews are a separate people from the rest of humanity and can only be self determined in a state of their own, you are saying that this is true for all “peoples.” All of a sudden there is no “human kind” but just disparate groups of “people” that have nothing holding them together other than basic physiological commonalities. Not only is this idea deeply anti-semitic, as it relates to Jews – it also reinforces the idea of international fascism. Every people for themselves, with big walls in between.
The other thing that has always confused me about zionism is the “retroactive Israelification” of world jewry. By nationalizing judaism, the zionists in a way are stripping away the history and national roots of jews everywhere. So, jews who have lived and died without ever stepping foot in what is now Israel, are Israeli. This also seems very dangerous to me.
“When you say that Jews are a separate people from the rest of humanity and can only be self determined in a state of their own” “you are saying that this is true for all “peoples.””. Nah, just for Jews. No-one else is so daft.
The opposite is true as well.
Many people that have long abandoned religion, identify themselves as Jewish culturally, and by association, nationally.
To externally deny the identity is to suppress.
There certainly are inconsistencies in the definitions of what makes someone Jewish nationally or religiously, and those inconsistencies are used opportunistically by proponents and opponents alike.
I dont see how a jewish dude from boston can identify himself as jewish nationally and not consider himself Israeli. Identifying himself culturally as jewish is a far cry from a nationalist identification.
And what constitutes “cultural” identification? Pastrami on Rye? Potato based pastries? Pretty sure gentiles get down on all of this – I for one love me some latkas. My grandmother (from Poland) cooks THE SAME stuff as my friends mothers and grandmothers who are Ashkenazi, minus the kosher part.
Identity itself defines who is Jewish. Its different for different people.
Ask Phil why he describes himself as Jewish. I’m certain that it’s not any objective particular cultural theme, but a subjective self-description.
According to you Witty, the definition of who’s Jewish is COMPLETELY arbitrary. Is that it? Because if you hadn’t noticed, people who aren’t Jews don’t have this problem. My religious upbringing is Catholic. My ethnicity is German/Polish. My sexual orientation is homosexual. My nationality is US citizen. Not only are these aspects of my identity distinct, none of them overlap, and better yet, reflect any internal conflict of interest.
You make your “Jewishness” your nationality, Witty. What does that make your US citizenship? You have no Israeli ID card, but if you did it would list your nationality as Jewish. Does that mean you believe that ALL Jewish Americans are dual citizens?
But I would venture to say that the vast majority of Jewish Americans don’t treat their Jewish identity the same way you do, so really, this isn’t a problem that’s specific to Jews, it’s a problem that’s specific to ZIONISTS Jews, and Zionist Jews alone.
Chaos OBLITERATES Zionism.
A gay american from German/Polish descent says if you dont like it – go F yourself. My man isnt running from ANYONE. Standing Tall. Awesome.
Now how much cooler would it have been if European Jews after WWII stood tall in Europe and said ” We AINT GOIN NOWHERE – IF YOU DONT LIKE IT, F YOU”
Now THAT would be the kind of self determination EVERYONE could get down with.
Fckin A, Chaos.
Some Jewish Europeans did, Dan. Israelis and Zionists tend to denigrate them as “Hellenistic Jews,” “race traitors,” etc. They’re treated the same way as Iranian Jews, Lebanese Jews, Moroccan Jews, etc. — alternately, that they either don’t exist at all, or that they have one foot in some imaginary Arab-run concentration camp.
Here is one really important example of a Jewish European, for instance.
Crowther,
You don’t know that Jews trying to go back to their homes in Europe after WWII were murdered?
Start with this link:
link to en.wikipedia.org
And by the way, I accept what you are saying but about Israel:
“We AINT GOIN NOWHERE – IF YOU DONT LIKE IT, F YOU”
And just so that you understand, the “F YOU” part means that we don’t care if you are behind this self determination or not.
Chaos,
for sure. good point. I was just imagining a mass movement that was the inverse of Zionism. My point being that standing tall and not apologizing for who you are engenders a whole lot more respect than “we need to be protected/leave her immediately”
I mean, your admitting German ancestory – thats got to be tough to do!! haha jus kiddin
LOL, what on earth are you talking about Chaos? you made ever part of that up didn’t you?
Wow, Chaos4700 is now a scholar of Jewish history LOL!
yeah, there is no conflict of interest being a gay Catholic is there Chaos?
link to americancatholic.org
why should Israelis have to apologize for who they are? the majority were born in Israel, could they help that? asking them to go back to Europe is like asking Chaos to go back to Europe.
That happened to Jews in one instance you cite, eee. Which is ironic because that’s EXACTLY what your parents/grandparents did to Palestinian homes that you stole — shot and killed survivors who tried to return after you stole their property.
DBG,
Your chiding Chaos is pretty telling, especially in the sense that you think Catholicism is something you are born with and can never shake. Let me first say, THANK GOD this is not the case. Im a recovering Catholic myself. This is how the two of us can say, we were RAISED catholic – but dont have to “belong” to the catholic cohort for all of eternity.
As for my buddy eee, – WWII saw, what 100 million killed? Your saying 40 jews killed in 46 was the final straw? All the efforts of jews to go back to their homes was ended with this pogrom? Thats sad. But I can understand, I really can. What I cant understand is doing to the Palestinians what was done in the instance you cite.
My coming out as homosexual didn’t magically alter my history, and BAMF!ed my past self out of Catholic school and into public school, DBG. I said I was RAISED Catholic.
Is this the way you treat people at your phony “interfaith” group?
How is conquest and theft self determination. only a complete idiot can honestly believe that Israel is self determination.
sorry but being born on ston land doesn’t make it yours. the simple fact is those vast majority of those “Israelis” born in “Israel” were actually born in palestine. they were born in property that legall they have no valid claim to.
and unlike the thing EEE likes to cite they weren’t still occupied by a foriegn power at the time when they did that.
sorry but being born on ston land doesn’t make it yours. the simple fact is those vast majority of those “Israelis” born in “Israel” were actually born in palestine.
Many countries do observe jus soli, or the law of the soil. The major human rights covenants also respect the right of children to a nationality and the right of every person to leave and return to their country of origin. The Zionists are aware of that. That’s why everyone refers to the establishment of settlements as “creating facts on the ground.” So there are two conflicting legal principles at play: No one may profit from their own wrongdoing; and the sins of the parents are not attributable to their children. For example, no one accepts that the children in Waco or Guyana were bad people because their parents were members of the Branch Davidian or People’s Temple movements. The same may be true of the children of illegal Israeli settlers.
Let’s take your argument where it goes Witty. Everyone whose parents are French has the right to be a French citizen. Everyone born in France of parents resident there has the right to be a French citizen – at majority. Anyone living in France for five years can apply for French citizenship. If I have to spell it out that means, among other things, that any dispossessed Palestinian whose parents were born there would have the right to be a citizen of this “Jewish State”. Go along with that?
Straightline,
It’s clearly an ambiguity, a critical one relative to the criteria of Israel as a Jewish state.
As I said, I prefer the national definition of Israeli, rather than Jewish, in international definition of relationships.
The definition of French includes origin but also cultural factors. I’ve known Cajuns that describe themselves as French (secondarily to Cajun, but still part of it, more like Arab relative to Palestinian – most Palestinians would say both). I’ve met French descendents that had lived in Vietnam for two or more generations, that still described themselves as French.
I allow for varying self-definitions. You?
“Jewish” is only an ambiguity for you because you deliberately conflate it with almost every aspect of your identity. Ethnicity? Cultural identity? Religion? Nationality? I’ve seen you don and doff those hats vis-a-vis your “Jewishness” whenever it suits you, Witty.
For the rest of us there is no ambiguity. Do you honestly think Cajuns consider France their homeland?
It is silly to talk about a Jewish state because the definition of Jewish requires an encyclopedia to explain. Nobody calls France ‘the French state’ or ‘the state of the French people’ because that also sounds silly.
What about America? Nobody calls it the American state. The American people would be all American citizens or it could refer to the indigenous native Americans. Speaking of indigenous, the vast majority of Israel’s Jewish population is not. Since Israel really does consider the WB as theirs unofficially, that means half its citizens are not Jews and are descended from all the peoples who have lived their for millenia. It belongs to them far more than the Zionists who have only lived their for decades.
Sarkozy is a member of Hamas and a follower of the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, he wants to see all the Jews driven into the sea, he denies the holocaust and the suffering of the jewish people. I also heard that his grandfather is Adolf Hitler.
Sarkozy’s maternal grandfather was a Jew from Salonika who converted to Catholicism. A Greek book on Nicolas Sarkozy.
lysias,
cheers, i did know that – i was merely trying to pre-empt our “friends” from the hasbara patrol
A surprise to hear that knowing that in the media it’s generally referred to Israel as «L’État juif» (the Jewish state), especially on national TV. For Sarkozy to challenge this “accepted” (because massively enforced) notion is extraordinary.
A surprise to hear that knowing that in the media it’s generally referred to Israel as «L’État juif» (the Jewish state), especially on national TV. For Sarkozy to challenge this “accepted” (because massively enforced) notion is extraordinary.
One of the members of the original Palestine Commission, Sylvain Levi of France, had similar objections to the idea during the Versailles Peace Conference:
So who will decide who is a Jew if Israel is declared a “Jewish” state.
Whoa some strong words about Israel on the Diane Rehm shows international round up hour. Just reported that Panetta had strong words about Israel this week. That Israel “is more isolated than ever” They reported that Gates has said the same thing. That both of these individuals have said that Israel is more and more “at risk”
Yochi Dreazen senior national security correspondent, National Journal magazine said that Netanyahu “hates and does not trust Obama” And Obama “hates and does not trust Netanyahu” Very strong words
What is the point of this? If there are any nazi camp guards left they are at least 90 years old now. And this also bring up the argument about military members carrying out orders from superiors vr. those who instituted the orders. Should all IDF soldiers serving in the occupation some day be hunted down and executed for war crimes? How much responsibility does a soldier in war time bear for carrying out orders? Can the Iraqis hunt down and kill all the guards who tortured at Abu Ghriab? What will the nazis hunters do in 10 years when there is no possibility of any nazis still being alive? This seems sor of sick in light of what the holocaust people are doing to Palestines.
link to haaretz.com
Published 00:53 06.10.11
Latest update 00:53 06.10.11
Israel and Germany to jointly hunt down thousands of Nazis
“We’re talking about an estimated 4,000 people, to round it off,” Zuroff said. “Even if only 2 percent of those people are alive, we’re talking 80 people – and let’s assume half of them are not medically fit to be brought to justice – that leaves us with 40 people, so there is incredible potential.”
“What is the point of this? If there are any nazi camp guards left they are at least 90 years old now.”
I, for one, have no problem at all with tracking down and prosecuting anyone who murdered anyone or committed these crimes, even if they are 90 years old. I have a problem with convicting people without establishing that they committed any wrongful act, however. That, in my mind, converts justice to injustice.
Wow, true words. I didn’t have Sarkozy down as a common sense-guy on I/P. Guess I was wrong.
Gee, I wonder which classification “eee” is in : “Jewish” or a “person without religion”?
I am a Jewish atheist, just one among many. That you cannot face reality is not my problem.
A Jewish “atheist” who believes God gave him Israel. Riiiiight.
A Jewish atheist??? You have to be kidding.
Get a grip; Jews are NOT a nation. This is idea is a recent construct (like all nations). Jews in France, Jews in Argentina, Jews in Germany, Jews in Ethiopia, Jews in the US…the ONLY thing they have in common is religion (and maybe an overbearing mother!), but they have ZERO cultural traits in common, and certainly have ZERO cultural traits in common with Israeli Jews.
Time to deconstruct the idea of “nation.”
Dex,
You are a bigot. Who are you to tell millions of Jews that we are not a nation?
Chaos,
You are lying again. Where did I ever say I believe that God gave Israel to me or to the Jews? The Israeli Jews hold Israel because we were lucky enough to win the war of 1947-1948. Otherwise, we would be dead.
A Jewish atheist??? You have to be kidding.
Horatio: O day and night, but this is wondrous strange!
Hamlet: And therefore as a stranger give it welcome. There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
Some say it is neither a nation nor a religion, but a culture or an international society: link to shj.org
Yeah, sure pal; I’ve seen you posting here, and I think the consensus is that you and your Zionist ilk are the bigots. That is a pretty uncontroversial statement.
Tens of millions of Jews have been duped into believing that are a nation. You seem to not understand the history of your own racist ideology (Zionism), but also have no understanding of identity politics and nationalism.
Can you tell us all what a Jew from Argentina and a Jew from Germany have in common, other than religious culture/tradition? The answer is NOTHING.
eee, Jews are not a nation. Ashkenazi is arguably a nationality… of German descent. Jews are comprised of many nationalities. Converting to Judaism does not make one a part of the ‘Jewish nation’
That’s absurd. It isn’t bigoted to point this out. Luck played no part into winning those wars either. Israel won because only Jordan had a real trained military. The Zionists received their weapons from then Czechoslovakia. They never won the war, nobody surrendered. They agreed to a cease-fire. This ‘we won the war’ garbage is something only you people believe and it doesn’t entitle you to land either (in 1967 I mean) because that is illegal since WWII. 63 years later, no borders. No peace. No end to the constant war. Israel won NOTHING
Eee, here you go again with the toxic mix of religion and ideas of nationalism. Sprinkled with the self pity of victimhood:
“Otherwise, we would be dead.”
Did anyone feel sorry for the boy who cried “Wolf,” in the old fable? I didn’t.
Dex,
You are a bigot. Who are you to tell millions of Jews that we are not a nation? well for starters he understands the concept of nation something you don’t. a nation is linked through culture primarely not religion like jews.
The Israeli Jews hold Israel because we were lucky enough to win the war of 1947-1948. Otherwise, we would be dead. really lucky there was no luck its was a well planned out war of conquest. the jews had ALL THE ADVANTAGES. and if you didn’t start a war of agression and theft you still would be alive. no wanted to kill the jews in palstine untill they waged a war against the native population.
Here is the fundamental difference between Israel and other “Western” countries it pretends to be part of: Israel is the only country that distinguishes between “nationality” and “citizenship.”
This means that only Jews can formally be both citizens and nationals of Israel, whereas Palestinians can only be citizens and NOT nationals. This means they are granted civic rights (like voting), but are prevented from other rights that are only reserved for nationals, much of which has to do with land purchases.
So for the poster above who claimed there is no difference between France as a state for “French” people, and Israel as a state for “Jewish” people, you couldn’t be more incorrect.
In France every citizen is also a national and feels the country belongs to him/her. Would any Palestinian citizen of Israel say he/she feels the country belongs to him/her???
Israel is the only country that distinguishes between “nationality” and “citizenship.”
Not at all. American Samoans are US nationals, but they are not US citizens. That’s where the parallels end. We obviously don’t discriminate against them on the basis of their nationality. They have the option of joining the union; remaining autonomous; or pursuing independence. Individuals can become naturalized citizens. They aren’t considered a demographic threat. They aren’t treated as aliens in their own homeland. No one would consider legislation that deprived them of basic human rights or displaced or deported them to be legally enforceable.
Well, if Israel has American Somoa to use as its threshold, notwithstanding the stark differences you pointed out, it is in BIG trouble.
“American Samoans are US nationals, but they are not US citizens.”
I don’t understand the distinction. Could you explain it , please?
Wikipedia has an article on US nationality law that covers the topic. They do not vote in federal elections and are not represented in the federal government. So, the UN considers them non-self-governing people. They can live and work anywhere in the US, but none of the states permits them to vote in state elections.
link to en.wikipedia.org
They do vote in elections for their own autonomous government in Samoa.
Thanks.
Under the Nuremberg Laws, German Jews were deutsche Staatsangehörige [German nationals, or perhaps better German state subjects], but not deutsche Reichsbürger [German citizens].
In mandated Palestine every citizen of Palestine was “Palestinian” regardless of ethnicity or religion. “Jewish” or “Arab” wasn’t a nationality (=citizenship) but a “nationality WITHIN citizenship”. In France it’s the same. Every citizen of France is of “french” nationality. If “jewish” isn’t the NATIONALITY of every Israeli citizen and just a “nationality in citizenship” then Israel as a “jewish state” is a rascist concept.