AP Analysis: Is Israel democratic? Not so clear

[Thorgal]

Perhaps the Jews were immigrants in those Arab countries and the Palestinians were native people for many generations in Palestina. Why using double standards ?

The claim is well known and will be fixed with the future peace plan negotiations.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_right_of_return

Edited March 29, 2015 by Thorgal

[Johpa]

Perhaps the Jews were immigrants in those Arab countries and the Palestinians were native people for many generations in Palestina. Why using double standards ?

The claim is well known and will be fixed with the future peace plan negotiations.

There are no planned peace negotiations of any substance, both sides are now intransigent.

And perhaps the Palestinian's ancestors were immigrants into the territory of the original Phoenicians whose language was closer to Hebrew than to Arabic. But there were other groups migrating through the region: e.g., Hittites, Sumerians, Nabataeans, to name but a few. The point is that migrations and displacements of peoples are the common themes of history, not pretty or without suffering to those displaced, but nonetheless common themes even today. Meet any Sogdians recently? The Jewish peoples have certainly had their share of being displaced by the tides of history. Why should they alone be castigated when, for once, those tides flow in their direction? OK, there are a few who support the Tibetans, but the outcry against the Chinese is nearly non-existent in comparison with the anti-Israeli sentiment in the West.

Concurrently with the establishment of Israel, we saw similar population dislocation in South Asia between India and Pakistan. There was an exchange of populations in far greater numbers than in the Levant, and with far greater suffering. India accepted and assimilated the Hindu refugees from Pakistan and Pakistan accepted and assimilated the Muslim refugees from India. Both sides accepted the brutality of history and moved forward. That is really the only good option between the Jewish population of Israel and the Muslim population of the territories. The only other option is an incessant war that can never be won without inflicting even greater suffering on both sides. Although don't underestimate the social influences, many acting sub rosa, of those who wish to see such a cataclysm to realize their particular eschatology.

[Seastallion]

Jews are a tiny world minority.

There is only one nation state with a majority Jewish character -- Israel.

Of course the right of return in Israel is for Jews only.

DUH!

So much irrational hostility towards Jews having dominance over that one tiny nation.

We know the reason ...

Of course, hopefully the Palestinians will realize their own national state SEPARATE from the state of Israel ... and in that case of course Palestine would presumably be welcoming all those in the world that identify as Palestinian Arabs to their nation. Jews ... they won't want any Jews at all, their leaders have said as much.

DUH, you say? What's so obvious about it? Is the right of return for one particular ethnicity or for indigenous people? It is, after all "return", and indigenous implies roots in the place.

[Ulysses G.]

The claim is well known and will be fixed with the future peace plan negotiations.

Wrong. It will never be fixed. Those Jews lost everything and they will never get it back. They had to flee to Israel and Arab countries are going to have to house the Muslims who fled because of war.

[Seastallion]

Perhaps the Jews were immigrants in those Arab countries and the Palestinians were native people for many generations in Palestina. Why using double standards ?

The claim is well known and will be fixed with the future peace plan negotiations.

There are no planned peace negotiations of any substance, both sides are now intransigent.

And perhaps the Palestinian's ancestors were immigrants into the territory of the original Phoenicians whose language was closer to Hebrew than to Arabic. But there were other groups migrating through the region: e.g., Hittites, Sumerians, Nabataeans, to name but a few. The point is that migrations and displacements of peoples are the common themes of history, not pretty or without suffering to those displaced, but nonetheless common themes even today. Meet any Sogdians recently? The Jewish peoples have certainly had their share of being displaced by the tides of history. Why should they alone be castigated when, for once, those tides flow in their direction? OK, there are a few who support the Tibetans, but the outcry against the Chinese is nearly non-existent in comparison with the anti-Israeli sentiment in the West.

Concurrently with the establishment of Israel, we saw similar population dislocation in South Asia between India and Pakistan. There was an exchange of populations in far greater numbers than in the Levant, and with far greater suffering. India accepted and assimilated the Hindu refugees from Pakistan and Pakistan accepted and assimilated the Muslim refugees from India. Both sides accepted the brutality of history and moved forward. That is really the only good option between the Jewish population of Israel and the Muslim population of the territories. The only other option is an incessant war that can never be won without inflicting even greater suffering on both sides. Although don't underestimate the social influences, many acting sub rosa, of those who wish to see such a cataclysm to realize their particular eschatology.

The similarity with Pakistan and India is that it was a British line drawn on a map. The differences are major, though. In the Indian partition, there was a swap of people. In Palestine, it was an ingress of Europeans. In the Indian analogy, two separate countries were formed, in Palestine, one country was formed and the rest of the people now live in a territory that the established country refuse to allow to become a self-determining state.

In Israel, there is a premise of a God-given Promised Land (with capital letters) that does not include the indigenous peoples, just the Jews, whether ethnic Jews, converted Jews, or descendants of converted Jews (the latter two groups being the majority)...how a converted Jew can claim God's promise is another matter.

This premise interferes with the state of democracy because it allows God's promise for one ethnic identity but not others....which may be ok, except the promise is for the land on Earth, not a promise of some religious ethereal heaven.

[Ulysses G.]

in Palestine, one country was formed and the rest of the people now live in a territory that the established country refuse to allow to become a self-determining state.

As usual, you have it ALL wrong. Two peoples were offered the chance to form their own country. Israel accepted. The Palestinian Arabs refused and declared war of Israel which they lost. The Arabs made their own bed. .

Why do you insist of posting fabricated history after it has been exposed over and over again for being dishonest?

Edited March 30, 2015 by Ulysses G.

[TooPoopedToPop]

Perhaps the Jews were immigrants in those Arab countries and the Palestinians were native people for many generations in Palestina. Why using double standards ?

The claim is well known and will be fixed with the future peace plan negotiations.

There are no planned peace negotiations of any substance, both sides are now intransigent.

And perhaps the Palestinian's ancestors were immigrants into the territory of the original Phoenicians whose language was closer to Hebrew than to Arabic. But there were other groups migrating through the region: e.g., Hittites, Sumerians, Nabataeans, to name but a few. The point is that migrations and displacements of peoples are the common themes of history, not pretty or without suffering to those displaced, but nonetheless common themes even today. Meet any Sogdians recently? The Jewish peoples have certainly had their share of being displaced by the tides of history. Why should they alone be castigated when, for once, those tides flow in their direction? OK, there are a few who support the Tibetans, but the outcry against the Chinese is nearly non-existent in comparison with the anti-Israeli sentiment in the West.

Concurrently with the establishment of Israel, we saw similar population dislocation in South Asia between India and Pakistan. There was an exchange of populations in far greater numbers than in the Levant, and with far greater suffering. India accepted and assimilated the Hindu refugees from Pakistan and Pakistan accepted and assimilated the Muslim refugees from India. Both sides accepted the brutality of history and moved forward. That is really the only good option between the Jewish population of Israel and the Muslim population of the territories. The only other option is an incessant war that can never be won without inflicting even greater suffering on both sides. Although don't underestimate the social influences, many acting sub rosa, of those who wish to see such a cataclysm to realize their particular eschatology.

The similarity with Pakistan and India is that it was a British line drawn on a map. The differences are major, though. In the Indian partition, there was a swap of people. In Palestine, it was an ingress of Europeans. In the Indian analogy, two separate countries were formed, in Palestine, one country was formed and the rest of the people now live in a territory that the established country refuse to allow to become a self-determining state.

In Israel, there is a premise of a God-given Promised Land (with capital letters) that does not include the indigenous peoples, just the Jews, whether ethnic Jews, converted Jews, or descendants of converted Jews (the latter two groups being the majority)...how a converted Jew can claim God's promise is another matter.

This premise interferes with the state of democracy because it allows God's promise for one ethnic identity but not others....which may be ok, except the promise is for the land on Earth, not a promise of some religious ethereal heaven.

Good comparison with the India/Pakistan partition.

The wacky Zionist premise of a God-given Promised Land will always preclude a just settlement of this conflict.

[phrodan]

Nonsense - Israel has enacted laws ensuring that Palestinians married to Israelis are denied the vote.

How would you feel about someone being legally married and landed in the US being denied citizenship and voting rights based upon ethnicity? It's an absurdity and indefensible.

You are getting into a granular detail.

I assume you're talking about an Israeli citizen marrying a non-Israeli citizen and the question of the non-Israeli citizen's voting rights/citizenship rights?

If there is discrimination based on Arab ethnicity in such situations, I would of course oppose it and see it as a case which shows something we already know. Israel's democracy is not perfect.

But it seems to me you are making grand general assumptions based on special case about which I am not really familiar with. If you think it's on topic to get into such detail with some some supporting information, fine, but I don't.

The greater truth is that Arabs who ARE Israeli citizens DO have voting rights.

Is granular detail the kind of detail which is uncomfortable truth?

It's laughable how people squirm when faced with the indefensible.

[Jingthing]

Document your assertion or shut up about it. I have already condemned it if true. If true it surely only applies to a tiny percentage of Arab Israeli citizens though.

Not sure what kind of nasty bait game you are playing. I have never said Israel is perfect and shouldn't do better. I'm just against the vicious hateful demonization.

Sent from my Lenovo S820_ROW using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Edited March 30, 2015 by Jingthing

[BKKBobby]

So if you're an Christian Arab, how would one's "ethnicity" be recorded? What if a Christian ceased to be a Christian and converted to Islam - would their ethnicity be changed and then recorded differently on 'government records'.

What government records are there that record Christianity as ethnicity? Seems a mighty strange way to classify things. Maybe atheism is an ethnicity also along with Buddhism and Zoroastraism.

Why do you care so much?

Why does the world care so much about the internal policies of teeny tiny Israel?

It's really bizarre.

Actually every single nation in the world has it's own unique cultural take on racial/ethnic/religious social classifications.

That's because people are social animals and very complex.

If you think Israel's are strange look at the Dominican Republic.

Look at how Brazil classifies race compared to the USA.

But few people are interested in such things.

Teeny tiny Jewish majority Israel continues to fascinate so many to an absurdly IRRATIONAL degree.

Should Jews be flattered or angry about such unbalanced attention compared to every other thing going on in the world?

Because Israel is... annoying. Why? Because the country gets away with everything between heaven and hell because of unquestioned never ending vetoing by the US.

More or less every single anti-Israeli post have been deemed anti-semitism by some specific poster.

Deflection deluxe.

Edited March 30, 2015 by BKKBobby

[BKKBobby]

Document your assertion or shut up about it. I have already condemned it if true. If true it surely only applies to a tiny percentage of Arab Israeli citizens though.

Not sure what kind of nasty bait game you are playing. I have never said Israel is perfect and shouldn't do better. I'm just against the vicious hateful demonization.

Sent from my Lenovo S820_ROW using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

I wish I could get away with the Pro-Israeli and conservative hardline rightwing posters do...

I also feel like telling people to shut up when I get angry.

We are not allowed to call Israel an apartheid state since the topic is about Israeli democracy.

Israels democracy is great by the regions standards. Congratulations!

[BKKBobby]

So if you're an Christian Arab, how would one's "ethnicity" be recorded? What if a Christian ceased to be a Christian and converted to Islam - would their ethnicity be changed and then recorded differently on 'government records'.

What government records are there that record Christianity as ethnicity? Seems a mighty strange way to classify things. Maybe atheism is an ethnicity also along with Buddhism and Zoroastraism.

Why do you care so much?

Why does the world care so much about the internal policies of teeny tiny Israel?

It's really bizarre.

Actually every single nation in the world has it's own unique cultural take on racial/ethnic/religious social classifications.

That's because people are social animals and very complex.

If you think Israel's are strange look at the Dominican Republic.

Look at how Brazil classifies race compared to the USA.

But few people are interested in such things.

Teeny tiny Jewish majority Israel continues to fascinate so many to an absurdly IRRATIONAL degree.

The barrel is now being scraped.

Israel has a disproportionate "influence," on world affairs because the world's sole superpower has a blind spot regarding the country .

The US could easily defuse many of the ongoing disputes by calling Israeli politicians to heel.

And right now many Israeli Firsters are going wild because the have a President that's had enough of Israeli spin and nonsense.

There's also a growing Jewish constituency worldwide that have had enough of it too.

That is typical GARBAGE that the situation in Israel is responsible for everything bad in the world. Like the Shia and Sunni wouldn't be killing each other if it weren't for Israel. Like China wouldn't have taken over Tibet if it wasn't for Israel. Like Venezuala wouldn't be run by dangerous lefty loonies if it wasn't for Israel. And 1000 more. It makes me want to vomit. The anti-Israel bias is so obvious and so totally irrational. Face it, if Israel wasn't Jewish and was anything else, you wouldn't get that kind of garbage. In fact, people wouldn't even be interested. (Like if Israel was Sunni Arabs and the Palestinians were Shia ... the situation would be considered and would actually be mild compared to many other conflicts.)

Shia, Sunni,China, Tibet, Venezuela...

Or just throw in ISIS and global warming.

Deflection.

Why not write Hitler!!! That will probably make the thread die.

[Jingthing]

So if you're an Christian Arab, how would one's "ethnicity" be recorded? What if a Christian ceased to be a Christian and converted to Islam - would their ethnicity be changed and then recorded differently on 'government records'.

What government records are there that record Christianity as ethnicity? Seems a mighty strange way to classify things. Maybe atheism is an ethnicity also along with Buddhism and Zoroastraism.

Why do you care so much?

Why does the world care so much about the internal policies of teeny tiny Israel?

It's really bizarre.

Actually every single nation in the world has it's own unique cultural take on racial/ethnic/religious social classifications.

That's because people are social animals and very complex.

If you think Israel's are strange look at the Dominican Republic.

Look at how Brazil classifies race compared to the USA.

But few people are interested in such things.

Teeny tiny Jewish majority Israel continues to fascinate so many to an absurdly IRRATIONAL degree.

Should Jews be flattered or angry about such unbalanced attention compared to every other thing going on in the world?

Because Israel is... annoying. Why? Because the country gets away with everything between heaven and hell because of unquestioned never ending vetoing by the US.

More or less every single anti-Israeli post have been deemed anti-semitism by some specific poster.

Deflection deluxe.

Something is "annoying" on this thread, that's for sure ...

[BKKBobby]

So if you're an Christian Arab, how would one's "ethnicity" be recorded? What if a Christian ceased to be a Christian and converted to Islam - would their ethnicity be changed and then recorded differently on 'government records'.

What government records are there that record Christianity as ethnicity? Seems a mighty strange way to classify things. Maybe atheism is an ethnicity also along with Buddhism and Zoroastraism.

Why do you care so much?

Why does the world care so much about the internal policies of teeny tiny Israel?

It's really bizarre.

Actually every single nation in the world has it's own unique cultural take on racial/ethnic/religious social classifications.

That's because people are social animals and very complex.

If you think Israel's are strange look at the Dominican Republic.

Look at how Brazil classifies race compared to the USA.

But few people are interested in such things.

Teeny tiny Jewish majority Israel continues to fascinate so many to an absurdly IRRATIONAL degree.

Should Jews be flattered or angry about such unbalanced attention compared to every other thing going on in the world?

Because Israel is... annoying. Why? Because the country gets away with everything between heaven and hell because of unquestioned never ending vetoing by the US.

More or less every single anti-Israeli post have been deemed anti-semitism by some specific poster.

Deflection deluxe.

Something is "annoying" on this thread, that's for sure ...

Yes, I think I know what you are trying to say. It goes both ways.

People here can keep on the good work with apologising for everything Israel does and keep on demonizing Palestinians! 'Palestinians' are fair game.

[Jingthing]

Yes, I think I know what you are trying to say. It goes both ways.

People here can keep on the good work with apologising for everything Israel does and keep on demonizing Palestinians! 'Palestinians' are fair game.

I don't think you have added anything the slightest bit productive to these Israel - Palestinian issue threads. Instead you are all about playing personality games. Therefore, welcome to my ignore list.

[NeverSure]

Perhaps the Jews were immigrants in those Arab countries and the Palestinians were native people for many generations in Palestina. Why using double standards ?

Simple questions, please. It is generally accepted that the Jewish, Islamic and Christian religions are all "Abrahamic" religions coming from Abraham who is well covered in the Old Testament. All three religions have the Old Testament and agree that Abraham lived about 4,000 years ago.

If you agree with that, I'd like you to tell me some things.

1. Where exactly did Abraham and his family live?

2. Where did his sons settle?

3. Where did his grandson, Israel settle?

4. What was the status of what was Israel in 1948, 4000 years ago?

See, I keep hearing that Israel is a newcomer to the region and a pretender. I'd just appreciate those answers, please.

Thanks

[Johpa]

Good comparison with the India/Pakistan partition.

The wacky Zionist premise of a God-given Promised Land will always preclude a just settlement of this conflict.

Being an atheist, I agree that by today's standards the Zionist premise sounds a bit wacky. But methinks we can find many historical precedents of geo-political wackiness: American Exceptionalism, Manifest Destiny, British Imperialism, Chinese Middle Kingdom, and the list goes on. Again, why should perceived Jewish wackiness be treated, from a historical point of view, any differently than other group's perceived wackiness.

The only settlement of conflicts occurs when both sides determine that maintaining a state of adversarial conflict is no longer worth the cost or the suffering. And "justice" is a highly subjective concept: there are many Arabs who feel that the only just settlement is one where the clock is turned back and Israel ceases to exist. I find that position no less wacky than the advocation of a promised land by some god.

And look, don't mistake me for someone who supports Netanyahu, I think that many of his policies are wrong-headed as do many Israeli citizens, all of whom have the right to vote, which is why I disagree with those who would impugn that Israel is not a democracy. But I also have no sympathy for the policies advocated by the Palestinian political leadership over the past decades. As I have said a few times in this forum, I think both sides are wrong and that anybody who picks one side over the other is wrong too. And, alas, my own preferred solution is vehemently reject by both sides. It seems I too am on the wrong side of history on a number of fronts, including my indolent state.

[Jingthing]

Keep in mind it is inaccurate to see Zionism only in a religious light. Zionist ideology is political and the early activists were largely more secular. Large percentages of Israelis today who would consider themselves Zionists in the sense of supporting the existence of Israel with a majority Jewish character are secular as well. Within Zionism today, there is a large range from left to right. Zionism as an ideology per se is arguably a dated concept anyway ... in modern times it has mainly evolved to be about the existence of Israel. Of course the ideology started long before that happened.

Edited March 30, 2015 by Jingthing

[Thorgal]

Perhaps the Jews were immigrants in those Arab countries and the Palestinians were native people for many generations in Palestina. Why using double standards ?

Simple questions, please. It is generally accepted that the Jewish, Islamic and Christian religions are all "Abrahamic" religions coming from Abraham who is well covered in the Old Testament. All three religions have the Old Testament and agree that Abraham lived about 4,000 years ago.

If you agree with that, I'd like you to tell me some things.

1. Where exactly did Abraham and his family live?

2. Where did his sons settle?

3. Where did his grandson, Israel settle?

4. What was the status of what was Israel in 1948, 4000 years ago?

See, I keep hearing that Israel is a newcomer to the region and a pretender. I'd just appreciate those answers, please.

Thanks

Just to stay on topic with OP without changing the original content/context of my previous post and with my reply :

"Contemporary Eastern European Jews comprise the largest ethno-religious aggregate of modern Jewish communities, accounting for nearly 90% of over 13 million Jews worldwide."

http://gbe.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2012/12/14/gbe.evs119.full.pdf

Note : Eastern European Jews came after 1948 into Israel...as immigrants. Most of them were simply converted into Judaism in the 8th Century.

Furthermore, Iraqi Jews (Abraham) share almost the same genetic pool as the Palestinians.

Israeli political 'democratic' aparatus (since 1948) consists mostly of Eastern European Jews.

Perhaps a crucial factor in the future 'democratic' peace proces in Israel and Palestine...if you consider seriously the semite vs non-semite equilibrium in the whole region of the Levant...

That's why, for me, the 'Right of Return' is un-democratic and unlawfull...

Edited March 30, 2015 by Thorgal

[NeverSure]

Perhaps the Jews were immigrants in those Arab countries and the Palestinians were native people for many generations in Palestina. Why using double standards ?

Simple questions, please. It is generally accepted that the Jewish, Islamic and Christian religions are all "Abrahamic" religions coming from Abraham who is well covered in the Old Testament. All three religions have the Old Testament and agree that Abraham lived about 4,000 years ago.

If you agree with that, I'd like you to tell me some things.

1. Where exactly did Abraham and his family live?

2. Where did his sons settle?

3. Where did his grandson, Israel settle?

4. What was the status of what was Israel in 1948, 4000 years ago?

See, I keep hearing that Israel is a newcomer to the region and a pretender. I'd just appreciate those answers, please.

Thanks

Just to stay on topic with OP without changing the original content/context of my previous post and with my reply :

"Contemporary Eastern European Jews comprise the largest ethno-religious aggregate of modern Jewish communities, accounting for nearly 90% of over 13 million Jews worldwide."

http://gbe.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2012/12/14/gbe.evs119.full.pdf

Note : Eastern European Jews came after 1948 into Israel...as immigrants. Most of them were simply converted into Judaism in the 8th Century.

Furthermore, Iraqi Jews (Abraham) share almost the same genetic pool as the Palestinians.

Israeli political 'democratic' aparatus (since 1948) consists mostly of Eastern European Jews.

Perhaps a crucial factor in the future 'democratic' peace proces in Israel and Palestine...if you consider seriously the semite vs non-semite equilibrium in the whole region of the Levant...

You didn't answer my questions although I didn't think you could.

Thank you.

Edited March 30, 2015 by NeverSure

[Jingthing]

The Ashkenazi conversion theory has only been a theory and recently there has been strong evidence strongly refuting it. Yet, hilariously and obnoxiously obsessive "anti-Zionists"seem fixated on this theory as if it was a proven fact. It isn't even close to a proven fact. It is more likely false. In any case Jews are Jews ... as far as genetic connection all major flavors of Jews have some genetic connections with each other, also Palestinians, ITALIANS, and some other ethnicities as well.

Jews are not descended from Khazars, Hebrew University historian says New study finds no evidence that Ashkenazi Jews are the descendants of Khazars, or that subjects in the medieval kingdom converted to Judaism en masse.

http://www.haaretz.com/jewish-world/jewish-world-features/1.601287

Right of return for Jewish PEOPLE to the sovereign nation state of ISRAEL is clearly LEGAL under the laws of Israel. The IMMIGRATION laws of Israel are the business of the legal CITIZENS of Israel. Certainly of no interest to most citizens of Israel or global Jews are the accusations of "illegality" from people who assert the lack of legitimacy for the state of Israel in the first place. So many of them are hard core HATERS -- Islamists, neo-Nazis, antisemites, confused leftists who think have a knee jerk "imperialist" explanation of the history of Israel failing to see the ancient connection of that area of the world to the Jewish people, indigenous to that area.

Now I'm not saying immigration policies of any country can't be criticized or questioned. For example in the U.S. why do Cubans get favorable treatment over Mexicans? Is that fair? Probably not, but the existence of laws that are not perfectly "fair" does not mean the U.S. is not a democracy or acting under U.S. laws in its immigration policies.

Edited March 30, 2015 by Jingthing

[Scott]

An off-topic post has been removed. Please stay on topic.

[BKKBobby]

Yes, I think I know what you are trying to say. It goes both ways.

People here can keep on the good work with apologising for everything Israel does and keep on demonizing Palestinians! 'Palestinians' are fair game.

I don't think you have added anything the slightest bit productive to these Israel - Palestinian issue threads. Instead you are all about playing personality games. Therefore, welcome to my ignore list.

Thank you! I will wear the 'ignore' as a badge of honour

Some people (Im not refering to any specific person) are drama queens...

Welcome to my ignore list. LOL

The post im replying to is an off-topic post that only contains an opinion about my usefulness in the thread, plain and simply. Its not a post about the topic.

L'chaim!

Edited March 31, 2015 by BKKBobby

[Thorgal]

What about the Israeli harsh treatment of African refugees ? Is this another example of how Israeli governement is fooling with basic human rights ?

"In December 2013, the Israeli Knesset added an amendment to the Anti-Infiltration law. It requires asylum-seekers from Eritrea and Sudan to be automatically detained for at least a year and then placed, indefinitely, in an open detention center in the desert."

"As former Interior Minister Eli Yishai put it, to “make their lives miserable,“until they give up and agree to let Israel deport them to a third country, often Uganda."

http://time.com/3705591/african-refugees-in-israel/

Perhaps mentioned somewhere on another ignored list of unlawfull treatment of human kind.

Edited March 31, 2015 by Thorgal

[Ulysses G.]

"In December 2013, the Israeli Knesset added an amendment to the Anti-Infiltration law. It requires asylum-seekers from Eritrea and Sudan to be automatically detained for at least a year and then placed, indefinitely, in an open detention center in the desert."

Sounds an AWFUL lot like the way that Australia treats unwanted refugees, but no one is claiming that they are not a democracy/

[Seastallion]

"In December 2013, the Israeli Knesset added an amendment to the Anti-Infiltration law. It requires asylum-seekers from Eritrea and Sudan to be automatically detained for at least a year and then placed, indefinitely, in an open detention center in the desert."

Sounds an AWFUL lot like the way that Australia treats unwanted refugees, but no one is claiming that they are not a democracy/

Australians don't go on record as saying they are deliberately trying to make lives miserable. And even so, there is a lot of criticism.

[Ulysses G.]

So, denying the truth makes it better? What the Australians are doing is not exactly a secret.

[Thorgal]

"In December 2013, the Israeli Knesset added an amendment to the Anti-Infiltration law. It requires asylum-seekers from Eritrea and Sudan to be automatically detained for at least a year and then placed, indefinitely, in an open detention center in the desert."

Sounds an AWFUL lot like the way that Australia treats unwanted refugees, but no one is claiming that they are not a democracy/

Australia is off topic.

That doesn't make it now more legal for the Israeli 'democracy'...

[Ulysses G.]

"In December 2013, the Israeli Knesset added an amendment to the Anti-Infiltration law. It requires asylum-seekers from Eritrea and Sudan to be automatically detained for at least a year and then placed, indefinitely, in an open detention center in the desert."

Sounds an AWFUL lot like the way that Australia treats unwanted refugees, but no one is claiming that they are not a democracy/

Australia is off topic.

That doesn't make it now more legal for the Israeli 'democracy'...

So is your post on illegal refugees. They have nothing to do with democracy.

[Thorgal]

Protection of the human rights is not endorsed by the current Israeli law of infiltration.

The rules of law, in which the laws and procedures apply equally to all people on Israeli soil is not foreseen for refugees.

Those are some basic principles to be respected in every democracy.

Furthermore, we may not forget that the 'democratic' state of Israel was developed far before 1948 with the 'refugee' concept. A completely different immigration concept than the Australian one...

Why providing a serie of non-exemplary policies for those who need them the most. Israel has the finacial capabilies...

Again, if the Africans were Jews they will be able to apply for a permanent visa based on the right of return.

If they are Muslim or Christian, they face a desert camp and a long time wasting, unhumane legal treatment.

How do the Israeli Muslim and Christian minorities look up to that phenomenom of legal diversity of Law of Return ?

Public opinion is very important in every democracy. Perhaps not all...

Edited March 31, 2015 by Thorgal