Israelis In Chiang Mai

[Charma]

I think at this stage I would declare myself firmly with Thaiquila on this one. I think it was me that originally raised the question of what the debate was about - Race, religion. politics etc..

Well we have many views on this and many have said that nationality is the basis for the sign. Well let's just think about that for a moment. In considering whether prejudice, bigotry or discrimination is taking place, does this depend on whether it is based on race, religion, political views, ethnic or national origin? I would suggest if the sign was based on ANY of these it would still fall firmly within the bigotry sphere. Most western countries have laws that prohibit such discrimination and specifically mention the list above. I am rather surprised to see posters from whom I have read many good and sensible posts, step in a either support or excuse such bigotry. Yes, Thailand is not the west and prejudice is manifested differently here. But our own fundamental principals and values are surely not discarded when we cross the border?

Going back to the reason for the sign, one poster mentioned smoking. Perhaps this is a good analogy to use here. If a bar owner was indeed fed up with cigarette smoke, carpet burns and the risks of secondary smoking, yes he could put up a sign that reads "no smokers". What he should put up is a sign saying "no smoking". As Thaiquila has said many times - concentrate on the behaviour not the person. This way, a smoker who is perfectly happy to not smoke in the bar could still go in an enjoy it without upsetting the owner. A simple principle, but one IMHO that can applied to any such situation, regardless of the grounds that it is based upon.

[grtaylor]

All reminds me of a sign I saw years ago on a bar in Walking Street, Pattaya:

"No Arabs - we don't want arabs coming into this bar and drinking our beer and fondling our women. WE respect YOUR religion."

G

[Blinky Bill]

Because the next step would be to ban Americans - too loud - Brits - too violent - Germans - cheap and demanding - Japanese - sadists - Indians - "dirty - Australians - drunken louts - New Zealaders - sheep shaggers - blacks - "dirty" - Muslims - all of the above.

What a great idea

I'm thoroughly offended UG!! Why didn't you mention the real scum of the earth?......Glabrous Brits who become Australians?

[Ulysses G.]

I'm afraid that I might end up "glabrous" myself one day.

[miltonbentley]

At first I thought I too agreed with Thaiquila but then the arguments about how a 'No Israelis' sign had nothing to do with nationality, race or religion won me over.

In fact in order that we may further stamp out this undesirable behaviour perhaps we could make it easier to to spot the offenders. Lets say we make all Israelis some recognisable symbol wear gold stars so we may recognise them and they could be excluded from places where decent people go.

Now I'm sure I remember from my history lessons that someone did that last century. Wonder how that turned out. . .

[Pond Life]

I do agree that the sign should descriminate against the behaviour & not the person.

For instance in my friends bar there is a sign saying "No A$$hole" (her spelling & grammer not mine).

But I & most of you are westeners with western values, Thais however are not westeners & do not share our values & guilt complexes, its their country & they are free to do things their way whether we like it or not.

I personaly would not have a problem giving my custom to a bar, resturant or guest house with a "No Israeli" sign, right or wrong that sign gives me a better chance of passing my time without being disturbed by loud, obnoxious "A$$holes".

[chuchok]

How about "No tight arsed Christians"..

[Pond Life]

How about "No tight arsed Christians"..

You mean our non tipping missionary brethren ?

[Gonzo the Face]

Why has this topic caused as much polarizing as it has. Are posters letting their most personal feelings about what is going on in the Middle East/Lebanon today affect their judgement and opinions regarding Israeli's and therfore their reaction to the sign and terms "No Israeli's ??

Lets weigh that a bit.

In many, if not most countries in the West, a disabled person is looked upon with some difference than that same person would be here in Thailand. In the West the disabled is looked upon with somewhat an air of helplessness. Which that person is.... somewhat helpless, thats a disability. Folks there treat this person with some deference. Making way, helping up a curb or whatever.

Now here there is much to be said re the belief that this person must definitely have done something wrong or bad in an eariler life and so now this is the balancing or pay back. Here the disabled are not treated in any negative way, nor are the treated in any positive way as they would be in the west.

But lets say a very "believing" Guest House owner would sincerely feel that having someone of this nature [disabled] in their GH would reflect on his business with a negative impact, so he erected "NO Disabled" signs on his property.

Now as I believe that most of the posters are Westerners and with different cultural beliefs than the Thai, what would be the response to the NO DISABLED" sign and would it have drawn as much response as the OP that sign said "NO ISRAELI's"

Do we all have our own traces of bigotry, racism, discrimination, just dependent on our own hot buttons???

[chuchok]

How about "No tight arsed Christians"..

You mean our non tipping missionary brethren ?

Yep.

[Ulysses G.]

I personaly would not have a problem giving my custom to a bar, resturant or guest house with a "No Israeli" sign, right or wrong that sign gives me a better chance of passing my time without being disturbed by loud, obnoxious "A$$holes".

Yes, and I have a feeling that you took miltonbentley's last post literally.

[Rasseru]

I personaly would not have a problem giving my custom to a bar, resturant or guest house with a "No Israeli" sign, right or wrong that sign gives me a better chance of passing my time without being disturbed by loud, obnoxious "A$$holes".

Odd, then, that you would choose to spend time amongst all of us here.

[Thaiquila]

I personaly would not have a problem giving my custom to a bar, resturant or guest house with a "No Israeli" sign, right or wrong that sign gives me a better chance of passing my time without being disturbed by ".

Actually, it doesn't. It only reduces your chances of encountering ISRAELI loud, obnoxious "A$$holes."

Again, this tolerance for restrictions against people from the JEWISH state of Israel is enlightening. Not a big surprise, of course. Anti-semitism is still rampant in the world, especially among Europeans.

So, Pond Life, what happened in your life to contribute to your prejudice against Israelis (who just happen to be Jews)?

BTW: I expect to be flamed for saying this is anti-semitic, but I am convinced that it is. A ban on Israelis equals a ban on Jews, and what is more anti-semitic than that?

[Pond Life]

Actualy I had nothing but admiration for the state of Israel until I started backpacking & met alot of Israelis on trains & buses, guest houses & bars.

From my experiences I found that the vast majority of Israeli's were loud & obnoxious.

You keep banging on about being anti jewish & this is simply not true, I think you are useing it to stir up our collective guilty conciences about the Holocaust.

My aquired dislike of Israeli's has nothing to do with religion & does not make me a murdering Nazi !

[Charma]

I personaly would not have a problem giving my custom to a bar, resturant or guest house with a "No Israeli" sign, right or wrong that sign gives me a better chance of passing my time without being disturbed by ".

Actually, it doesn't. It only reduces your chances of encountering ISRAELI loud, obnoxious "A$$holes."

Again, this tolerance for restrictions against people from the JEWISH state of Israel is enlightening. Not a big surprise, of course. Anti-semitism is still rampant in the world, especially among Europeans.

So, Pond Life, what happened in your life to contribute to your prejudice against Israelis (who just happen to be Jews)?

Not sure how you came to this conclusion Thaiquila. If it was based on the comments of the posters on thread, I would guess you are engaging in some stereotyping there!

In relation to pondlife's comments, I am not sure if you are agreeing with the sign or not - the post seems a little contradictory. But for someone who has made only 60 posts in just under a year and all of those relating to "informational" or "technical" topics, I am curious what it was about this subject that caused you to get stuck in?

*edit: ahh, just saw your latest post which answers my first point!

[Thaiquila]

Actualy I had nothing but admiration for the state of Israel until I started backpacking & met alot of Israelis on trains & buses, guest houses & bars.

From my experiences I found that the vast majority of Israeli's were loud & obnoxious.

You keep banging on about being anti jewish & this is simply not true, I think you are useing it to stir up our collective guilty conciences about the Holocaust.

My aquired dislike of Israeli's has nothing to do with religion & does not make me a murdering Nazi !

There are different degrees of anti-semitism, Sir. You are of type that wishes to ban Jews, not murder them. How civilized of you.

Lets get this clear again. Israelis are mostly Jewish people. Israel is a Jewish state. Jewishness is more than about religion. Most Israelis and most world Jews are NOT religious, but they are still Jewish. If you wish to ban Israelis, you wish to ban Jews.

[Pond Life]

As always I disagree , the vast majority of jews in the world are not Israeli.

Several of these Jews are my friends.

I would guess that some of these Jewish people are also offended by the behiour of Israeli's.

I will ask them next time I see them.

Charma, I live in a Northern town popular with backpackers, this subject often comes up during conversation.

Good night all, off to eat my supper.

Shalom, salaam Alicum, peace be apon you.

[Thaiquila]

As always I disagree , the vast majority of jews in the world are not Israeli.

Several of these Jews are my friends.

I would guess that some of these Jewish people are also offended by the behiour of Israeli's.

I will ask them next time I see them.

Charma, I live in a Northern town popular with backpackers, this subject often comes up during conversation.

Good night all, off to eat my supper.

Shalom, salaam Alicum, peace be apon you.

OK, great.

But I think you will find that the vast majority of your Jewish friends would strongly oppose any ban on ANY nationality from a PUBLIC business, and most would take a ban on Israelis as very offensive, Israeli or not.

The majority, yes, but not the VAST majority:

Most estimates I have seen suggest that there are about 13-14 million Jews in the world. The vast majority of these Jews live in either the United States and Israel, each with approximately 5-6 million Jews. There are less than 2 million Jews in Europe, 400,000 in Latin America and 350,000 in Canada. In Africa, there are less than 100,000 Jews, about 90% of whom live in the country of South Africa. There are about 100,000 Jews in Australia and New Zealand combined. There are about 50,000 Jews in Asia (not including Israel).

http://www.jewfaq.org/populatn.htm

[Charma]

The concept is known as indirect discrimination. A condition is applied that has a disproportionate and detrimental affect on a particular group. If shopkeeper decides to ban all people wearing turbans, he is not discriminating directly against Sikhs or Arabs, but the effect will be the same.

[Rasseru]

A ban on Israelis equals a ban on Jews . . .

As a ban on Americans equals a ban on human beings of all ethnicities and religions? I don't think so.

[Thaiquila]

A ban on Israelis equals a ban on Jews . . .

As a ban on Americans equals a ban on human beings of all ethnicities and religions? I don't think so.

I don't think so either!

But you see Israel is a JEWISH state and is mostly Jewish, so in the case of Israel, the concept does apply. I realize most people don't support Israel or Zionism. Is supporting banning Israeli citizens a reflection of that hostility, especially from Europeans?

Maybe Europeans are comfortable with passive weak Jews, and not proud, strong Israelis!

[Charma]

A ban on Israelis equals a ban on Jews . . .

As a ban on Americans equals a ban on human beings of all ethnicities and religions? I don't think so.

I don't think so either!

But you see Israel is a JEWISH state and is mostly Jewish, so in the case of Israel, the concept does apply. I realize most people don't support Israel or Zionism. Is supporting banning Israeli citizens a reflection of that hostility, especially from Europeans?

Maybe Europeans are comfortable with passive weak Jews, and not proud, strong Israelis!

Thaiquila - whilst I support the general principles of your argument, that is the second time you have stereotyped Europeans and this is the second time I have asked you why. Are you trying to make a point? Perhaps you could explain.

[Thaiquila]

God forbid that I stereotype Europeans. But did I support BANNING them from guesthouses?

I thought it was a known fact there is poor support for Israel in Western Europe, with the possible exception of the UK. Am I wrong about that?

I am just trying to get to the real root causes of this tolerance for bigotry, or, if you wish, outrageously blatant discrimination.

[chuchok]

God forbid that I stereotype Europeans. But did I support BANNING them from guesthouses?

I thought it was a known fact there is poor support for Israel in Western Europe, with the possible exception of the UK. Am I wrong about that?

Now why do you think that many Europeans don't support Israel?

[Rasseru]

A ban on Israelis equals a ban on Jews . . .

As a ban on Americans equals a ban on human beings of all ethnicities and religions? I don't think so.

I don't think so either!

Well, you should, since the logic is the same.

But you see Israel is a JEWISH state and is mostly Jewish, so in the case of Israel, the concept does apply.

That does not follow in the least.

Is supporting banning Israeli citizens a reflection of that hostility, especially from Europeans?

Maybe, in some cases. Maybe not, in others. A speculative question.

Maybe Europeans are comfortable with passive weak Jews, and not proud, strong Israelis!

More speculation, which has the appearance of being the product of another prejudice.

[Thaiquila]

God forbid that I stereotype Europeans. But did I support BANNING them from guesthouses?

I thought it was a known fact there is poor support for Israel in Western Europe, with the possible exception of the UK. Am I wrong about that?

Now why do you think that many Europeans don't support Israel?

Because it is an objective fact?

Check this link http://www.science.co.il/Arab-Israeli-conf...-2002-10-07.asp

and also ...

Why Americans Support Israel And Europeans Don`t

Posted 5/15/2002

By Glenn M. Frazier

"Glenn M. Frazier is a freelance writer and editor of GlennFrazier.com."

The European bureautocracy is shocked by the American stance toward Israel. The common views outside the United States range from seeing Israel as an oppressor state — some say "terrorist" — to the milder "well, both sides are guilty, but Israel is stronger."

Americans don`t see things that way.

I`m not Jewish. Most Americans aren`t Jewish. Large numbers of Americans, though (including myself), support Israel. What`s up with that? To listen to America`s critics, their implied message seems to be that only a Jew could care about the Jews, and that therefore something sneaky must be going on in the United States.

In a poll taken by the Pew Research Center in early April, the growing transatlantic gap in opinions on the Israel-Palestine conflict was confirmed. According to the poll, most people on the continent (France 63 per cent, Germany 63 per cent, Italy 51 per cent) disapprove of current U.S. policies with regard to the Middle East, while only 26 per cent of Americans themselves polled said they "disapprove".

Further, when asked to choose sides between Israel and the Palestinians, most Europeans either primarily sided with the Palestinians (France 36 per cent, Great Britain 28 per cent), or selected "neither" (Germany 33 per cent, Italy 32 per cent). Most Americans, on the other hand, placed their sympathies with Israel (41 per cent), with 21 per cent saying "neither" and only 13 per cent choosing the Palestinians. (Interestingly, in every country surveyed, those sympathizing with "both" were outnumbered by those choosing "neither.")

So what`s going on here?

First, it should be noted that in past polls, going back many years, Americans have generally always sympathized with Israel over the Palestinians, with percentages ranging from 34 per cent in 1990 to 48 per cent in 1997. Our views on this issue, in fact, have not changed substantially since before the September Atrocity.

This, of course, feeds the tired claims of a "Jewish controlled media" and the supposedly stunning power of Jewish lobby groups in the U.S. This is probably the oldest of attempted explanations for American support of Israel. As explanations go, though, these claims are not terribly convincing. If a "Zionist conspiracy" really ran this country, Arabs would be commemorating the thirtieth anniversary of Arafat`s martyrdom about now.

It is true that as lobby efforts go, those supporting Israel are among the most powerful. But how powerful is that? Certainly not enough to so radically sway common public opinion to the point that we see Israel exactly opposite of how Europe perceives Israel.

A more recent attempt at explaining American support for Israel involves two components of the Republican constituency that were core to President Bush`s election. The first is the Evangelical Christian movement. (The Boston Globe recently cited Evangelicals as strong supporters of Israel, dismissively implying the motives of the Christian Right as essentially scriptural.)

According to a recent article in The Economist, the other component, the so- called neoconservatives (an ever-shifting label), support Israel as part of an overall desire to see America "play a more forceful role in the world." That`s, well, interesting. Being occasionally tagged as a neocon myself, I find it hard to disagree with the author`s statement that "Neocons are obsessed with the grand design of foreign policy." But so what? I`d say Marxists are similarly obsessed, but — despite Israel`s regrettable socialist idiosyncrasies — this bare fact does not amount to anything.

So let`s be generous and lump these two groups together (the total Jewish population in America is too small to have a significant impact on these numbers, by the way) and not question the attributed motives. Do neocons and theocons really make up 41 per cent of the American Public? Some might wish that it were so, but how then would one explain two terms of Clinton? Remember, we`re talking about stable levels of public support for Israel since at least the late 1970`s.

Here`s one more data point: among Europeans, the "highly educated" were far more likely to respond as sympathizing with the Palestinians, compared to their non-Sorbonne-impaired neighbors. France, in particular, showed a dramatic difference among these two demographics, with only 30 per cent of French with "low" education supporting the Palestinians, versus 51 per cent of those with "high" education.

And here, I think, is the real cause of this historical rift between opinions. Call us middle-brow, say we lack nuance, whine about American exceptionalism, but the basic truth is that Americans are idealistic where Europeans are cynical, and cynics where Europeans are idealists.

Take the European response to President Bush`s declaration of the Axis of Evil, for example. Across all four European nations polled, the majority disapproved of the statement — France by a whopping 74 per cent. In the United States, the majority approved, with only 34 percent saying they disapproved.

So do Americans support Israel because we think the Second Coming is, well, coming? Do we do it out of some nefarious scheme to launch a New Imperialism? Are we bamboozled by the dreaded "Jewish Controlled Media"?

No. We believe — more than Europe does — that some things are just plain wrong. No excuses, no rationalizations. Like my mom used to say, "I don`t care what he did first, if you hit, you`re wrong!" Sure, that policy lacked nuance, but it certainly was clear.

President Bush`s popularity is in large part due to the great gift he brought us in September: moral clarity.

Academic quibbles among the intelligencia about moral equivalency and "root causes" frankly cause the average American`s eyes to glaze over. Sure, the average American thinks, Israel may have misbehaved. Sure, there should be a separate Palestinian state. But once people started blowing up pizza parlors, a far more important — and far more clear — problem walked onto the scene. Until the absolutely clear evil of terrorism, suicide bombing, and attempted policide is eliminated, other, lesser problems are put on hold.

Europeans call this idealism simplistic, and maybe it is.

On the flip side, Americans are sometimes dumbfounded to discover how oddly credulous Europeans are when it comes to so much else. Europeans put a value on words that is foreign to the average American. Just because "peace process" sounds like maybe there`s a process that can create peace, it does not mean that anything baring the label is actually worthy of any respect.

As idealistic as many Americans are when it comes to notions of right and wrong, we are deeply, deeply cynical when it comes to words and ideas. We are the "show-me" nation. And that`s one more reason the notion of a conspiratorial Jewish Controlled Media is so silly to the average American. Who trusts the media?!

We Americans sniff out conflicts of interest as a knee-jerk reflex, assume everyone has a bias, and know that just because there`s a picture of the batboy shaking hands with Jimmy Carter doesn`t mean the event actually happened. Some poor souls here still have a hard time accepting that Elvis is dead. I mean, did you see the body?

This, in the end, is the great divide between Europe and the U.S.: We believe nothing, they believe in nothing.

[meadish_sweetball]

I realize this is a sensitive subject, but please refrain from ascribing views to people which they have not expressly stated themselves.

It is more likely to stir up controversy and insult people, than to improve the climate of this discussion.

[chuchok]

God forbid that I stereotype Europeans. But did I support BANNING them from guesthouses?

I thought it was a known fact there is poor support for Israel in Western Europe, with the possible exception of the UK. Am I wrong about that?

Now why do you think that many Europeans don't support Israel?

Because it is an objective fact?

I don't know about objective, but I ment to ask for your opinion, not from some scrote of a jurno.

[Charma]

As a ban on Americans equals a ban on human beings of all ethnicities and religions? I don't think so.

I don't think so either!

Well, you should, since the logic is the same.

Well actually I do not think that the logic is the same because the religious and ethnic make up of the two countries are very different. Therefore a ban on a particular nationality is going to have a different effect. However, in both cases, it is direct discrimination based on nationality.

In relation to Thaiquila and comments on Europeans, I feel that you have done something that you are accusing others of doing. I accept that there may be a case for arguing that Europeans hold negative views about Israeli policies, but your comments were about how Europeans feels about Israelis. I can be angry about what Israel as a state is doing in Lebanon, but that does not necessarily mean I dislike Israelis.

[Thaiquila]

I accept that there may be a case for arguing that Europeans hold negative views about Israeli policies, but your comments were about how Europeans feels about Israelis. I can be angry about what Israel as a state is doing in Lebanon, but that does not necessarily mean I dislike Israelis.

Fair enough, but I personally will never consider it tolerable to post signs on guesthouses or any public business banning specific nationalities. And the fact that these signs are banning Israelis, and therefore, Jews, does raise the question as to why some farangs seem to find this OK.

Is there a connection to European anti-semitism and anti-Israeli sentiment? I don't know. I am asking though.