Middle East conflict: Need for credible mediator

[dexterm]

 

 

 

...at the same time with the rockets reduced to a trickle (2 in 2 weeks),

You still trying to sell that shtick? As you have been told many times. There were plenty of rockets before and after. You don't seem to realize that honesty is the best policy. 

 

 

 

I didn't say before and after [that fortnight](your words nor mine).. I said 2 weeks before 12th June, the date all this mayhem started. That's a fact.

 

Up to that date there were the beginnings of a detente, rockets had reduced to a trickle (2 that fell harmlessly), with PA on board a unity government Hamas's polemic could have been moderated in any peace negotiations.

 

 

You mean the same Hamas who said nothing about recognizing Israel or stopping the armed fight against Israel, as part of

this reconciliation effort? Or are you talking about the Hamas who refused to relinquish control over its military wing?

Did the Hamas mention anything about participating in peace negotiations with Israel?

 

Perhaps it would have been the PA's getting more radicalized,eh?
 

 

 

I'm talking about this Hamas. Why doesn't Israel seize the chance for peace if that's what it truly wants. 

 

Hamas have in the past offered an indefinite truce and a Palestinian state within the 1967 borders.

 

http://www.haaretz.com/news/haniyeh-hamas-willing-to-accept-palestinian-state-with-1967-borders-1.256915

[Morch]

 

 

Of course there was no Palestine.

Now you've got it. If the Arabs had not starting attacking the Jews, everyone would be living where they started, but the UN had to step in and come up with a two state solution, which the Jews accepted and the Arabs refused. They have caused most of their problems themselves and they seem to never learn from their mistakes.

 

 

Out comes the propaganda & lies again.

 

If the Jews had not slaughtered and driven out millions of Palestinians, there would have been no reason for any of the wars. The two-state 'solution' accepted by Israel was never accepted by the Arabs (irrelevant) nor the Palestinians (relevant) because the UN proposal was never used by any of the pro-Israel 'negotiators'.

 

The US has never been an honest go-between with the AIPAC extremists looking over their shoulder. It was nearly there when Jimmie Carter actually ignored them and almost got a final solution. But he had the advantage of having a much less racist Israeli leadership to deal with.

 

There was also no Israel too before 1948 which you dishonestly clipped from my post.
 

 

 

The correct order of events was more along the lines of UN resolution announced and accepted by Israel, rejected by the Palestinians. The Palestinians started a war, backed by a few Arab armies from neighboring countries.

 

So far, no slaughtering and no-one driven away.

 

During the war, for a verity of reasons (some of them definitely to do with Israeli armed forces, but definitely not all) a lot of Palestinians fled. There were no millions (as looking in the population of the land at the time can tell), more like under one million. In the same way, there weren't millions slaughtered.

 

Trying to present a slaughter that did not happen, and of millions who did not exist, or millions who were driven off, or to claim that this was all Israel's doing is not too bad - it's the part where you call other people's post, propaganda and lies.

 

 

 

 

[Morch]

 

 

If the Jews had not slaughtered and driven out millions of Palestinians, there would have been no reason for any of the wars.

You mean after the Palestinians declared war on them and attacked with 5 huge Arab armies helping them out? Shame on the Israelis for fighting back and winning decisively. 

 

 

Yep those 5 Palestinian armies were soooooo powerful. The Palestinians were slaughtered and kicked out of their lands before any of the wars. The wars happened after - or is this too hard for you to take? Why distort history? Israeli propaganda from some hateful site?
 

 

 

Arab armies, do try to get your facts straight.

The wars (plural?!) happened after the Palestinians were slaughtered? Are you for real?

Which wars are you talking about then? It looks like your timeline is quite askew.

 

[Morch]

 

A substantial number of the so called settlers and right wingers are newcomers to Israel under its so called right to return.

If you listen to some of the spokesmen you will identify an American accent as they or their parents were previously US nationals

Now I ask the pro Zionists why is it OK for a a person with Jewish ancestry to return to Israel but not one with Arab roots?

Where I come from that is discrimination akin to the Boers in South Africa.

 

Israel apologists often boast that Israel is a democracy with 20% Israeli Arab citizens, but they don't tell you that Israeli Jews can marry who they like  even non Jews and bring them to live in Israel, but Israeli Arabs cannot under the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizenship_and_Entry_into_Israel_Law

 

which the editor of Haaretz found very disquieting

 

http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/opinion/citizenship-law-makes-israel-an-apartheid-state-1.248635

 

 

Again with the same misrepresentation of the same links.

 

Arab Israelis can marry whomever they like. What it not allowed is immigration of Palestinians spouses to Israel. Not quite the same thing. It does apply to, say, EU countries (something which I know for a fact and from first hand experience).

 

Israelis Jews marrying non-Jews are in for a whole lot of issues, mostly to do with lack of proper religion-state separation, a situation many secular Israelis moan about, regardless of most other things. The other set of issues might have to do with the home country of the foreign spouse, much in the way that immigration services all over the world do (example, Thai spouses may run into more difficulties than EU citizens).
 

[Morch]

 

 

 

 

You still trying to sell that shtick? As you have been told many times. There were plenty of rockets before and after. You don't seem to realize that honesty is the best policy. 

 

 

 

I didn't say before and after [that fortnight](your words nor mine).. I said 2 weeks before 12th June, the date all this mayhem started. That's a fact.

 

Up to that date there were the beginnings of a detente, rockets had reduced to a trickle (2 that fell harmlessly), with PA on board a unity government Hamas's polemic could have been moderated in any peace negotiations.

 

 

You mean the same Hamas who said nothing about recognizing Israel or stopping the armed fight against Israel, as part of

this reconciliation effort? Or are you talking about the Hamas who refused to relinquish control over its military wing?

Did the Hamas mention anything about participating in peace negotiations with Israel?

 

Perhaps it would have been the PA's getting more radicalized,eh?
 

 

 

I'm talking about this Hamas. Why doesn't Israel seize the chance for peace if that's what it truly wants. 

 

Hamas have in the past offered an indefinite truce and a Palestinian state within the 1967 borders.

 

 

http://www.haaretz.com/news/haniyeh-hamas-willing-to-accept-palestinian-state-with-1967-borders-1.256915

 

 

Because, like a lot of your "factual" and "linked" posts, this too is a repeated misrepresentation of the truth.

 

A truce is not a peace, and in this context it's even less than the way most people comprehend the word:

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

A truce in this sense is more of a breather to rearm and wait for better conditions under which the fight can

be renewed.

 

The offer said nothing about Israel, it talks about accepting a Palestinian state within 1967 borders, and that

too just as long as the truce suits Hamas. What lies beyond these borders is not referred to as Israel, and

the implicit (and later, explicit) notion is that it will be taken at a later date (pretty much what Yassin said as

well).

 

If Hamas wanted peace, it could start by changing the parts of its charter calling for the destruction of Israel,

and announce its intention to get on with peace talks, not an iffy truce.
 

[dexterm]

 

Israeli Jews can marry who they like  even non Jews and bring them to live in Israel

Jewish Israelis are subject to the exact same law and have the exact same restrictions.

 

What a blatant LIE. I suggest you read the link. YOU are the one deliberately deceiving. The old trick...if debunked, deflect or deny.

 

"The Citizenship and Entry into Israel Law (Temporary Order) 5763 is an Israeli law first passed on 31 July 2003 and most recently extended in June 2008.^[1] The law makes citizens of Iran, Afghanistan, Lebanon, Libya, Sudan, Syria, Iraq, Pakistan, Yemen, the West Bank and Gaza Strip ineligible for the automatic granting of Israeli citizenship and residency permits that is usually available through marriage to an Israeli citizen (i.e. family reunification)."

 

Obviously there is a reason for this law, which clearly discriminates against Israeli Arabs. Please tell us what it is, rather than dishonestly denying it exists.

 

The editor of Haaretz seems to disagree with you too..

 

"In effect, the law prevents young Israeli citizens from marrying the spouse of their choice and living with this spouse in Israel"

 

http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/opinion/citizenship-law-makes-israel-an-apartheid-state-1.248635

[dexterm]

Morch,

 

isn't yours a silly approach to negotiatiing peace...Hamas offers Israel an olive branch, but Israel's response is ..yes, yes, but .... but..you don't really mean it, so I'm not even going to listen.

 

Why not give peace a chance..the thing that Israel is always accusing Palestinian negotiators of failing to do.

 

Israel seems to have a problem for every solution.

[dexterm]

 

I’ll be the mediator. I’ll have peace there in 12 months...

 

What if on 12^th June Israeli had chosen the diplomatic rather than military option?

 

...when the 3 Israeli teens were kidnapped and murdered, police had launched a regular homicide investigation, as they did when the Israeli Arab boy was kidnapped and burnt to death ...they had 2 suspect in mind already on day one, because they bulldozed part of their homes..

 

...at the same time with the rockets reduced to a trickle (2 in 2 weeks), Israel had turned to the new unity PA/Hamas government, and said “Look, if no more rockets fall in the next month, we will ease the Gaza blockade allowing an increase in XYZ goods. If no more rockets fall over the next 3 months, we will ease the blockade further and release some Palestinian prisoners. If no more rockets fall over the next 6 months, we will release more prisoners, ease the blockade further and sit down to discuss peace without preconditions; may be a long haul, but lets make a start. If no more rockets fall over the next 12 months, we will lift the blockade completely, but reserve the right to inspect goods entering Gaza.”

 

..and 1600 Palestinians and 63 young Israeli soldiers would have been sitting down for a meal with their families and loved ones on a peaceful, balmy Mediterranean summer's evening.

 

Shalom.

 

 

More to do with Jurisdiction, the Arab boy's body was found within Israel's borders. The kidnapping of the Israeli boys was in the West Bank, which is not part of Israel.

 

The houses of suspects were not bulldozed on day one.

 

There was no unity PA/Hamas government. Trying to present the reconciliation deal as anything resembling a done deal is plain misleading. In fact, part of the Hamas eagerness for a fight had to do with the crisis the reconciliation deal got into - and this was mostly over PA unwilling to pick up Hamas's tab and pay its bills (mostly salaries).

 

Hamas does not accept Israeli inspections of all goods and does not agree to monitoring of dual use materials in the Gaza Strip.

 

Making up an idiosyncratic course of events with fantasy details is not going to produce any solution to the conflict.

 

 

So Israel goes to war killing 1740 Palestinians, including hundreds of innocent children, while sacrificing the lives of 66 Israeli soldiers on a technicality of police jurisdiction! Give us a break! 

 

There was nothing worse for Israel than a rapprochement between Hamas and PA and the gradual detente that preceded 12 June, because Israel would then have to sit down, discuss peace and make concessions. So in whose interest was it to disrupt that process...Israel’s ...by starting a war on the flimsiest of pretexts.

Another of your distortions of the truth..

 

Hamas have no say in the matter. If a truck passes through an Israeli crossing, of course Israel can and will inspect it, whether Hamas likes it or not. Duh! 

[boomerangutang]

A lot more than a mediator is needed there. How about a big dose of common sense, particularly for the Palestinians. When you get your nose bloodied time after time, perhaps it's time to try a different tact.

[dexterm]

 

Well you would say that wouldn't you.

Yes I would, because I can prove it. Here is just one of your many dishonest posts and my response to it.
 

 

If we are talking about broken  promises. Israel promised to release 100s of Palestinian prisoners in return for the release of the Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit. They did but a month ago Israel promptly rearrested them all

This is another example of distorting the truth. Do you ever provide accurate information? 1,027 prisoners were released three years ago in return for Gilad Shalit. 51 of them were recently rearrested for belonging to a terror group and thereby violating the terms of their release. Do the allegations of these criminals going back to terrorism really shock anyone?

 

 

 

Deflection...I challenge you to prove that Israel's law of citizenship does not discriminate against Israeli Arabs and you rabbit on about Gilad Shalit. Can we please stay on the same page.

[dexterm]

A lot more than a mediator is needed there. How about a big dose of common sense, particularly for the Palestinians. When you get your nose bloodied time after time, perhaps it's time to try a different tact.

 

The Palestinians have repeatedly offered peace. When there's a whiff of tranquility and detente, Israel is always the one to provoke trouble again.... as it did in 2008, 2012, and now 2014..it's like deja vu all over again!

 

Israel doesn't want peace. It just wants a managed conflict while it grabs more land illegally in the West Bank. Foolish...because it will one day inherit a huge demographic time bomb of Palestinian citizens outbreeding them.

[Ulysses G.]

 

 

Israeli Jews can marry who they like  even non Jews and bring them to live in Israel

Jewish Israelis are subject to the exact same law and have the exact same restrictions.

 

 
What a blatant LIE. I suggest you read the link. YOU are the one deliberately deceiving. The old trick...if debunked, deflect or deny.

 

Really? Your dishonest posts have been pointed out to you repeatedly - and not just by me - yet you keep insisting that they are true.

You said, "Israel apologists often boast that Israel is a democracy with 20% Israeli Arab citizens, but they don't tell you that Israeli Jews can marry who they like even non Jews and bring them to live in Israel, but Israeli Arabs cannot" and Morch corrected you, but here you are making the same claim yet again.
 

Again with the same misrepresentation of the same links.
 
Arab Israelis can marry whomever they like. What it not allowed is immigration of Palestinians spouses to Israel. Not quite the same thing. It does apply to, say, EU countries (something which I know for a fact and from first hand experience).
 
Israelis Jews marrying non-Jews are in for a whole lot of issues, mostly to do with lack of proper religion-state separation, a situation many secular Israelis moan about, regardless of most other things. The other set of issues might have to do with the home country of the foreign spouse, much in the way that immigration services all over the world do (example, Thai spouses may run into more difficulties than EU citizens).

[carmine]

A lot more than a mediator is needed there. How about a big dose of common sense, particularly for the Palestinians. When you get your nose bloodied time after time, perhaps it's time to try a different tact.

 

Perhaps i might correct you on a "minor" item.

 

1850 civilians murdered is not a bloody nose as you put it.  Its genocide.  This Israeli government are war criminals as should be judged as such.  

[coma]

 

What is needed it a total ceasation of support for Israel until they stop the onslaught of Palestinians' withdraw out of and end the blockade of Gaza. Mediators are useless until this occours. However we still have clowns trying to stoke the fire from the otherside of the planet.

"Meanwhile, the US Congress approved $US225 million ($A243 million) on Friday to restock the Iron Dome systems with interceptor missiles. The measure awaits Obama's signature".

It worked in South Africa and in the end it will work with Israel.

In the UK the CoOp supermarkets no longer stock West Bank products and Tesco, the UKs largest supermarket chain, says it will no longer sell products originating from the West Bank, starting this September.
 

 
Wonder how this ban will effect Palestinians working in Israeli factories on the West Bank....
 

All looking childishly tit for tat if you ask me.

[Scott]

Off-topic posts have been deleted along with replies.   There is a lot of bickering with other posters which has more to do with personal feelings than the topic.  

 

Please keep it civil. 

[Morch]

 

 

Israeli Jews can marry who they like  even non Jews and bring them to live in Israel

Jewish Israelis are subject to the exact same law and have the exact same restrictions.

 

What a blatant LIE. I suggest you read the link. YOU are the one deliberately deceiving. The old trick...if debunked, deflect or deny.

 

"The Citizenship and Entry into Israel Law (Temporary Order) 5763 is an Israeli law first passed on 31 July 2003 and most recently extended in June 2008.^[1] The law makes citizens of Iran, Afghanistan, Lebanon, Libya, Sudan, Syria, Iraq, Pakistan, Yemen, the West Bank and Gaza Strip ineligible for the automatic granting of Israeli citizenship and residency permits that is usually available through marriage to an Israeli citizen (i.e. family reunification)."

 

Obviously there is a reason for this law, which clearly discriminates against Israeli Arabs. Please tell us what it is, rather than dishonestly denying it exists.

 

The editor of Haaretz seems to disagree with you too..

 

"In effect, the law prevents young Israeli citizens from marrying the spouse of their choice and living with this spouse in Israel"

 

http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/opinion/citizenship-law-makes-israel-an-apartheid-state-1.248635

 

 

Where does it say these restrictions apply only to Arab Israelis?  Unless I am greatly mistaken most, if not, all the countries mentioned are either at a state of war with Israel, or openly hostile  to it. Afghanistan may not directly fit these two categories, but is what with the AQ connection It can be seen as a security issue.

 

The law does not prevent anyone from marrying anyone, it does curtails immigration rights to Israel from certain countries.

 

[Morch]

Morch,

 

isn't yours a silly approach to negotiatiing peace...Hamas offers Israel an olive branch, but Israel's response is ..yes, yes, but .... but..you don't really mean it, so I'm not even going to listen.

 

Why not give peace a chance..the thing that Israel is always accusing Palestinian negotiators of failing to do.

 

Israel seems to have a problem for every solution.

 

No, it isn't.

Hamas never offered a peace, just a truce, and in this context, most people with a bit of understanding in regional traditions know what it means and what it does not mean. I suggest that what is offered is not a "truce" in the sense most Westerners would interpret it. Not an olive branch for sure. Note that the offer was not made directly to Israel, and that there is no open recognition of Israel.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hudna
 

Contrary to your nonsense claims, Israel has long standing peace agreements with two of its neighbors (Egypt and Jordan).

[Morch]

 

 

I’ll be the mediator. I’ll have peace there in 12 months...

 

What if on 12^th June Israeli had chosen the diplomatic rather than military option?

 

...when the 3 Israeli teens were kidnapped and murdered, police had launched a regular homicide investigation, as they did when the Israeli Arab boy was kidnapped and burnt to death ...they had 2 suspect in mind already on day one, because they bulldozed part of their homes..

 

...at the same time with the rockets reduced to a trickle (2 in 2 weeks), Israel had turned to the new unity PA/Hamas government, and said “Look, if no more rockets fall in the next month, we will ease the Gaza blockade allowing an increase in XYZ goods. If no more rockets fall over the next 3 months, we will ease the blockade further and release some Palestinian prisoners. If no more rockets fall over the next 6 months, we will release more prisoners, ease the blockade further and sit down to discuss peace without preconditions; may be a long haul, but lets make a start. If no more rockets fall over the next 12 months, we will lift the blockade completely, but reserve the right to inspect goods entering Gaza.”

 

..and 1600 Palestinians and 63 young Israeli soldiers would have been sitting down for a meal with their families and loved ones on a peaceful, balmy Mediterranean summer's evening.

 

Shalom.

 

 

More to do with Jurisdiction, the Arab boy's body was found within Israel's borders. The kidnapping of the Israeli boys was in the West Bank, which is not part of Israel.

 

The houses of suspects were not bulldozed on day one.

 

There was no unity PA/Hamas government. Trying to present the reconciliation deal as anything resembling a done deal is plain misleading. In fact, part of the Hamas eagerness for a fight had to do with the crisis the reconciliation deal got into - and this was mostly over PA unwilling to pick up Hamas's tab and pay its bills (mostly salaries).

 

Hamas does not accept Israeli inspections of all goods and does not agree to monitoring of dual use materials in the Gaza Strip.

 

Making up an idiosyncratic course of events with fantasy details is not going to produce any solution to the conflict.

 

 

So Israel goes to war killing 1740 Palestinians, including hundreds of innocent children, while sacrificing the lives of 66 Israeli soldiers on a technicality of police jurisdiction! Give us a break! 

 

There was nothing worse for Israel than a rapprochement between Hamas and PA and the gradual detente that preceded 12 June, because Israel would then have to sit down, discuss peace and make concessions. So in whose interest was it to disrupt that process...Israel’s ...by starting a war on the flimsiest of pretexts.

Another of your distortions of the truth..

 

Hamas have no say in the matter. If a truck passes through an Israeli crossing, of course Israel can and will inspect it, whether Hamas likes it or not. Duh! 

 

 

No, this is your silly interpretation only.  The assumption that somehow Israeli police was better equipped to deal with the investigation is bogus.  The international outrage if Israeli police was to conduct investigation in the West Bank would have probably been quite considerable, as this could be seen as a signalling Israeli intentions to incorporate the West Bank into Israel.

 

The Palestinian reconciliation effort was far form being a done deal, with many of the core problem issues having nothing to do with Israel. It is hard to explain when people refuse to believe that the Palestinian do have their own petty domestic politics and internal power plays. Also quite difficult to make it clear to some people that if the Hamas joins the Palestinian Authority as part of the government, and doing so without denouncing its anti-Israel ideology and dropping the armed struggle, this would constitute a breach of previous agreements with the Palestinians. In such a case, not only would Israel not be under obligation to deal with the Palestinians, but in all probability, the Palestinians will lose a considerable amount of funding and support they are currently getting. No distortions here, just takes a bit clearer view of conditions than some seem to posses.

 

Hamas refused accepting delivery or transferring payment on certain occasions in the past. Noted in this regard is the fuel issue from a few years back, where due to Hamas politics vs. the PA, fuel had to go in a really roundabout way which did cause quite a lot of hardship for civilians. In addition, Hamas does refuse monitoring of dual use materials, even when it is obvious (such as in the case of cement) it is not being used for civilian's benefit.

[Morch]

 

A lot more than a mediator is needed there. How about a big dose of common sense, particularly for the Palestinians. When you get your nose bloodied time after time, perhaps it's time to try a different tact.

 

The Palestinians have repeatedly offered peace. When there's a whiff of tranquility and detente, Israel is always the one to provoke trouble again.... as it did in 2008, 2012, and now 2014..it's like deja vu all over again!

 

Israel doesn't want peace. It just wants a managed conflict while it grabs more land illegally in the West Bank. Foolish...because it will one day inherit a huge demographic time bomb of Palestinian citizens outbreeding them.

 

 

The Palestinians, or rather, the Hamas, did not offer peace. Ever. A truce is not a peace.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hudna Failing to see the difference, especially in the cultural context does not make for a great display of knowledge.

 

It can certainly be claimed (and quite correctly) that Israeli governments, especially when led by right wing parties, were not  eager to make the necessary concessions peace requires. This is, however, relevant to the PA, rather than the Hamas, and in addition can be equally be attributed for the Palestinian side. Then again, Israel does have peace agreements with two of its neighbors (Egypt and Jordan), so saying that Israel does not want peace, as a generality, is not true.

 

The demographic issue worrying Israelis has more to do with Orthodox Jews, but that's another matter altogether. 

[Morch]

 

A lot more than a mediator is needed there. How about a big dose of common sense, particularly for the Palestinians. When you get your nose bloodied time after time, perhaps it's time to try a different tact.

 

Perhaps i might correct you on a "minor" item.

 

1850 civilians murdered is not a bloody nose as you put it.  Its genocide.  This Israeli government are war criminals as should be judged as such.  

 

 

Presenting all the casualties as civilians is disingenuous.  And, no, regrettable as the carnage is, it is not genocide, unless one holds a very broad definition of the term, which would then include quite a lot of warfare instances around the world. I think that the tossing about of the term demeans it.

[Morch]

 

 

 

What is needed it a total ceasation of support for Israel until they stop the onslaught of Palestinians' withdraw out of and end the blockade of Gaza. Mediators are useless until this occours. However we still have clowns trying to stoke the fire from the otherside of the planet.

"Meanwhile, the US Congress approved $US225 million ($A243 million) on Friday to restock the Iron Dome systems with interceptor missiles. The measure awaits Obama's signature".

It worked in South Africa and in the end it will work with Israel.

In the UK the CoOp supermarkets no longer stock West Bank products and Tesco, the UKs largest supermarket chain, says it will no longer sell products originating from the West Bank, starting this September.
 

 
Wonder how this ban will effect Palestinians working in Israeli factories on the West Bank....
 

All looking childishly tit for tat if you ask me.

 

 

Not a tit for tat at all. If the ban is effective and hurts relevant businesses employing Palestinians there would be cut backs, same as happens in most similar situation in the world. Then again, not really sure how much of an effect does this really have as far as exports of Israeli products originating from the West Bank goes. By the way, does the Tesco thing applies to Thai branches as well? Don't recall many products from Israel there, but curious.
 

[dexterm]

Morch, 

 

Arab Israelis can marry whomever they like. What it not allowed is immigration of Palestinians spouses to Israel

 

 

So...Catch 22

 

A very interesting discussion on the topic

 

http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-26067980

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/12/israel-civil-marriage-ban_n_3429764.html

 

I didn’t realize how powerful the Rabbinate was.

 

Could an Israeli Arab use the same loophole that Israeli Jews do?

“Thousands of couples have taken advantage of a loophole in the law, in which they fly abroad, often to Cyprus, and have a wedding there. That civil wedding is then recognized by the State of Israel and the couple is listed as “married” in Israel.”

 

Which brings us back to my original point, why by law can an Israeli Arab who is supposed to have equal rights, not marry a West Bank Palestinian or a Yemenite or a Pakistani in Cyprus even and bring the spouse back to live in Israel?

[Ulysses G.]

Which brings us back to my original point, why by law can an Israeli Arab who is supposed to have equal rights, not marry a West Bank Palestinian or a Yemenite or a Pakistani in Cyprus even and bring the spouse back to live in Israel?

For the exact same reason that a Jewish Israeli CAN'T as you have been told over and over again. Palestinian terrorists could use marriage to become Israeli citizens, so neither Jews nor Arabs can have their foreign spouses from hostile countries immigrate to Israel.

[Jingthing]

 

Which brings us back to my original point, why by law can an Israeli Arab who is supposed to have equal rights, not marry a West Bank Palestinian or a Yemenite or a Pakistani in Cyprus even and bring the spouse back to live in Israel?

For the exact same reason that a Jewish Israeli CAN'T as you have been told over and over again. Palestinian terrorists could use marriage to become Israeli citizens, so neither Jews nor Arabs can have their foreign spouses from hostile countries immigrate to Israel.

 

I think some of the posters here are much more knowledgeable about Israeli marriage law than 99 percent of Israelis. What an unusual hobby! I think I shall embark upon becoming an expert on the marriage laws of Bulgaria. I suppose it's more useful than stamp collecting. 

[ggold]

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4552821,00.html

 

 

Why are Saudis pushing for peace with Israel?

 

According to Hamid, since 1947 the Palestinians have been repeatedly missing opportunities to compromise. In the meantime, he says, Israel is developing and growing stronger while the Palestinians are growing weaker and their territory is diminishing.

 

Hamid argues that many of the Palestinians' demands are unrealistic, like the demand to return the Palestinian refugees, which he compares to the return of the Indians to US cities.
 

 

Saudi Arabia is well aware of Israel's political, economic and social stability, its restraint in light of the turmoil in the Arab world, its power against Hamas and its impressive technological abilities in the war on terror, especially the Iron Dome system in the present, and the war on the terror tunnels in the future.

 

Saudi Arabia is interested in ending the "small conflict" between Israel and the Palestinians in order to have Israel on its side in the "big conflict" against the Shiite world and the growing Sunni terror threat.

 

[dexterm]

 

Which brings us back to my original point, why by law can an Israeli Arab who is supposed to have equal rights, not marry a West Bank Palestinian or a Yemenite or a Pakistani in Cyprus even and bring the spouse back to live in Israel?

For the exact same reason that a Jewish Israeli CAN'T as you have been told over and over again. Palestinian terrorists could use marriage to become Israeli citizens, so neither Jews nor Arabs can have their foreign spouses from hostile countries immigrate to Israel.

 

 

You are being disingenuous and dishonest.

 

1000s of Israeli Jews fly to Cyprus to marry non Jews in a civil ceremony. They come back to Israel and the civil ceremony is recognized and they both have residency.

 

But an Israeli Arab man cannot get married outside Israel to his West Bank Palestinian bride, have his marriage recognized by the State of Israel where he is a supposedly equal citizen, because there is a law specifically aimed at Israeli Arabs. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizenship_and_Entry_into_Israel_Law

 

So much for Israeli democracy.

[Ulysses G.]

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4552821,00.html
 
 
Why are Saudis pushing for peace with Israel?
 
According to Hamid, since 1947 the Palestinians have been repeatedly missing opportunities to compromise. In the meantime, he says, Israel is developing and growing stronger while the Palestinians are growing weaker and their territory is diminishing.
 
Hamid argues that many of the Palestinians' demands are unrealistic, like the demand to return the Palestinian refugees, which he compares to the return of the Indians to US cities.

 

Hamid is spot on. It is amazing that everyone can not see this. 

[Ulysses G.]

 

 

Which brings us back to my original point, why by law can an Israeli Arab who is supposed to have equal rights, not marry a West Bank Palestinian or a Yemenite or a Pakistani in Cyprus even and bring the spouse back to live in Israel?

For the exact same reason that a Jewish Israeli CAN'T as you have been told over and over again. Palestinian terrorists could use marriage to become Israeli citizens, so neither Jews nor Arabs can have their foreign spouses from hostile countries immigrate to Israel.

 

 
You are being disingenuous and dishonest.

 

No. You are - once again. A Jewish Israeli can't marry a Palestinian Arab that is not already a citizen of Israel and bring her back to live with him. An Israeli Arab can't either. The law does not discriminate.

You keep repeating the same nonsense that has already been proven to be wrong - repeatedly  - like no one notices it. 

[ggold]

 

 

Which brings us back to my original point, why by law can an Israeli Arab who is supposed to have equal rights, not marry a West Bank Palestinian or a Yemenite or a Pakistani in Cyprus even and bring the spouse back to live in Israel?

For the exact same reason that a Jewish Israeli CAN'T as you have been told over and over again. Palestinian terrorists could use marriage to become Israeli citizens, so neither Jews nor Arabs can have their foreign spouses from hostile countries immigrate to Israel.

 

 

You are being disingenuous and dishonest.

 

1000s of Israeli Jews fly to Cyprus to marry non Jews in a civil ceremony. They come back to Israel and the civil ceremony is recognized and they both have residency.

 

But an Israeli Arab man cannot get married outside Israel to his West Bank Palestinian bride, have his marriage recognized by the State of Israel where he is a supposedly equal citizen, because there is a law specifically aimed at Israeli Arabs. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizenship_and_Entry_into_Israel_Law

 

So much for Israeli democracy.

 

 

http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2013/05/20135218450744543.html

 

 

On April 29, the non-profit organisation Hiddush - Freedom of Religion for Israel, which advocates religious freedom and equality in Israel, released a comparative online world map that examines the current status of freedom of marriage in 194 countries. The study, which is the first-of-its-kind, revealed that "although Israel is a democratic and liberal state, it ranks among some of the most fundamentalist countries in the Islamic world on this issue". 

 

Israeli matrimonial law is based on the Millet system employed in the Ottoman Empire. According to this confessional community system, issues of personal status such as marriage and divorce are governed by the religious law of the parties concerned. For example, Israeli Islamic law courts have exclusive jurisdiction in matters of personal status concerning Israeli Muslim citizens. Therefore, Israeli citizens can only marry spouses of the same religion and only by their own recognised religious authority. That is to say, interfaith and non-religious marriages are not allowed in Israel. 

 

 

According to the study, "Israel is the only Western democracy in the world that received the lowest grade. Its restrictions on marriage places Israel, in this regard, alongside its neighbouring Muslim countries: Iran, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia (...)." North Korea, an officially atheist country in which inter-class marriage is forbidden, received the same grade as Israel: a zero. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[dexterm]

 

 

Which brings us back to my original point, why by law can an Israeli Arab who is supposed to have equal rights, not marry a West Bank Palestinian or a Yemenite or a Pakistani in Cyprus even and bring the spouse back to live in Israel?

For the exact same reason that a Jewish Israeli CAN'T as you have been told over and over again. Palestinian terrorists could use marriage to become Israeli citizens, so neither Jews nor Arabs can have their foreign spouses from hostile countries immigrate to Israel.

 

I think some of the posters here are much more knowledgeable about Israeli marriage law than 99 percent of Israelis. What an unusual hobby! I think I shall embark upon becoming an expert on the marriage laws of Bulgaria. I suppose it's more useful than stamp collecting. 

 

 

So finally after all UG and Morch’s bloated prose we have a half truth out of you.

 

Israeli Arabs are discriminated against and cannot marry a foreigner because he or she might be a terrorist. Give us a break! Of course we all know that is only half the truth or maybe even only an eighth. Shin Bet could quite easily thoroughly vet the bride and groom.

 

The real reason that Israeli Arabs cannot marry a foreigner is Israeli Arab population increase. It's all back to demographics, ethnic dominance, and land.

 

The reason I pursued this research is to expose the oft repeated lie in this thread that Israel is the only true democracy in the Middle East that treats its minorities equally. Clearly it does not. And that is why you have prevaricated so long in answering and are now trying to make light of my question.