Israel's right wing has grand plans for Trump era

[sanemax]

3 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

And in some countries it's a lot harder for citizens of a certain ethnic or religious group to get permission than for citizens of another ethnic or religious group. Happens in countries all over the world. Therefore, it must be okay.

 

   I do believe that land and building permit rules and regulations in Israel are the same for everyone , regardless of their Religion or ethnicity

[ilostmypassword]

1 hour ago, sanemax said:

 

   I do believe that land and building permit rules and regulations in Israel are the same for everyone , regardless of their Religion or ethnicity

Look up the Jewish National Fund and it's relations to the Israeli Government.

[marcofunny]

The borders of Israel are clearly drawn on this Israeli coin, why bother any more with the UN ?

 

Edited January 21, 2017 by marcofunny

[Kiwiken]

3 hours ago, sanemax said:

 

   Yes, but that happens everywhere .

In most Countries you need to obtain  a permit from the Government to build a building .

    If you build a building without a Gov permit, the building will get knocked down, happens in Countries all over the World , 

I agree with you 100% but what do you do when the Country you live in simply refuses you a permit to build because you are not of the same Religion as them. Is that not apartheid? Or is it only white against black that causes that. In Israel it is Semite against Semite. One Arab One Jewish.

[Morch]

54 minutes ago, marcofunny said:

The borders of Israel are clearly drawn on this Israeli coin, why bother any more with the UN ?

 

 

You're simply repeating Arafat's conspiracy theory nonsense. The design is simply a copy of a fragmented ancient coin.

Edited January 21, 2017 by Morch

[dexterm]

4 hours ago, uptheos said:

 

Dexterm only creeps out when there's anything to do with Israel and then quotes same old stuff ad nauseam.

Ad hominem attacks = absence of anything sensible to add to the discussion.

 

Not interested in Trump, Brexit and Muslim bashing which seem to be the staple diet on TV. But I do know something about the Israeli - Palestinian conflict, so I try to balance the biased script of the resident Zionist apologists here. No repeated quotes...all original thoughts, buddy.

 

The fact that you single me out speaks volumes about attempts to censor the truth.

[Morch]

2 minutes ago, dexterm said:

Ad hominem attacks = absence of anything sensible to add to the discussion.

 

Not interested in Trump, Brexit and Muslim bashing which seem to be the staple diet on TV. But I do know something about the Israeli - Palestinian conflict, so I try to balance the biased script of the resident Zionist apologists here. No repeated quotes...all original thoughts, buddy.

 

The fact that you single me out speaks volumes about attempts to censor the truth.

 

Your posts are mostly repetitive one-sided rants and tirades, peppered with the same worn slogans. Originality is not really your strong suit. As for "knowing something", it would seem most of your so called "knowledge" amounts to selective regurgitating of information lifted from the net. Being opinionated is not the same as possessing knowledge. And then there's the usual victim card played, while bashing anyone not accepting your extreme views - as said, not very original.

 

 

[Thorgal]

 

You're simply repeating Arafat's conspiracy theory nonsense. The design is simply a copy of a fragmented ancient coin.

Can you provide a link of a picture of the original ancient fragmented coin ?

I'm a great fan of ancient numismatics.

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect

[Morch]

6 minutes ago, Thorgal said:

Can you provide a link of a picture of the original ancient fragmented coin ?

I'm a great fan of ancient numismatics.

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect

 

You can google it pretty easy, and that refers both to the coin and the conspiracy theory. Both of which are off topic.

[dexterm]

1 hour ago, Morch said:

 

Your posts are mostly repetitive one-sided rants and tirades, peppered with the same worn slogans. Originality is not really your strong suit. As for "knowing something", it would seem most of your so called "knowledge" amounts to selective regurgitating of information lifted from the net. Being opinionated is not the same as possessing knowledge. And then there's the usual victim card played, while bashing anyone not accepting your extreme views - as said, not very original.

 

 

So, another ad hominem attack. Very rude too.

 

Back to the OP.

I wonder when has Trump ordered the U haul removalist trucks to shift the US Embassy to Jerusalem thereby undermining the Oslo Accords, the two state solution, needlessly inflaming the whole of the Muslim world, and intiating a further recruitment drive for ISIS  all in one hit? Obama on Wednesday warned him it would be explosive. Netanyahu thinks so too. But Bibi was never one to get in the way of inciting violence.

 

Scenarios of Violence Should Trump Move Embassy to Jerusalem
Prime minister isn't sure whether or when the incoming U.S. president would announce the embassy's relocation, but has told defense officials to complete security preparations by the inauguration.

http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium-1.766275

 

Nice one, Donald. Your first foray into bringing peace to the region as promised.

 

And when the proverbial hits the fan, let's not forget who unnecessarily  initiated all this.

Edited January 21, 2017 by dexterm

[Morch]

7 minutes ago, dexterm said:

So, another ad hominem attack. Very rude too. I must be hitting a raw nerve with the truth.

 

Back to the OP.

I wonder when has Trump ordered the U haul removalist trucks to shift the US Embassy to Jerusalem thereby undermining the Oslo Accords, the two state solution, needlessly inflaming the whole of the Muslim world, and intiating a further recruitment drive for ISIS  all in one hit? Obama on Wednesday warned him it would be explosive. Netanyahu thinks so too. But Bibi was never one to get in the way of inciting violence.

 

Scenarios of Violence Should Trump Move Embassy to Jerusalem
Prime minister isn't sure whether or when the incoming U.S. president would announce the embassy's relocation, but has told defense officials to complete security preparations by the inauguration.

http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium-1.766275

 

Nice one, Donald. Your first foray into bringing peace to the region as promised.

 

Kettle. Pot. Just re-read your posts and see how you denigrate those not subscribing to your extreme views. You made some claims regarding your posts and posting style - I was commenting on these. And no, truth is also scarce in them.

 

The possible relocation of the US embassy was discussed on other topics. I'm not sure that Netanyahu is actually as thrilled as some of his coalition partners, but even so, he'd be somewhat bound by his own rhetoric and electoral considerations. IMO, if he can - he'll delay this, same as what happened to the recently proposed illegal settlement legislation. It is, again, another reminder that much as people like to revile Netanyahu, there are worse options on the sidelines.

[dexterm]

1 hour ago, Morch said:

 

Kettle. Pot. Just re-read your posts and see how you denigrate those not subscribing to your extreme views. You made some claims regarding your posts and posting style - I was commenting on these. And no, truth is also scarce in them.

 

The possible relocation of the US embassy was discussed on other topics. I'm not sure that Netanyahu is actually as thrilled as some of his coalition partners, but even so, he'd be somewhat bound by his own rhetoric and electoral considerations. IMO, if he can - he'll delay this, same as what happened to the recently proposed illegal settlement legislation. It is, again, another reminder that much as people like to revile Netanyahu, there are worse options on the sidelines.

>>Kettle. Pot. Just re-read your posts and see how you denigrate those not subscribing to your extreme views.

...Quite the opposite. I have been suspended twice for some very mild banter. So I now find myself self-censoring as best I can all my posts to eliminate personal attacks and emotive language in order to stick to forum rules...a practise I wish others would follow. You may have noticed I very rarely use emoticons, unlike others, because by definition they are designed to convey emotions often denigratory and sarcastic.

 

As to your 2nd point about Trump moving the embassy, he seems pretty serious about it, according to his press secretary and ambassador...

 

"Conway’s comment echoes earlier statements she made regarding the embassy, including during an interview in December when she said moving the embassy “is [a] very big priority for this president-elect, Donald Trump.”

“He made it very clear during the campaign, and as president-elect, I’ve heard him repeat it several times privately, if not publicly,” she added at the time.

David Friedman, Trump’s designee for US ambassador to Israel, is also a strong supporter of the move, saying in December following the announcement of his nomination that he was eager to begin working from “the US embassy in Israel’s eternal capital, Jerusalem.”"

http://www.timesofisrael.com/trump-i-did-not-forget-jerusalem-embassy-move-pledge/

 

She also said that Trump was a man of his words. Perhaps so, but it would be more helpful if he'd think of the consequences before moving his lips.

 

Next week should be interesting.

[Morch]

30 minutes ago, dexterm said:

>>Kettle. Pot. Just re-read your posts and see how you denigrate those not subscribing to your extreme views.

...Quite the opposite. I have been suspended twice for some very mild banter. So I now find myself self-censoring as best I can all my posts to eliminate personal attacks and emotive language in order to stick to forum rules...a practise I wish others would follow. You may have noticed I very rarely use emoticons, unlike others, because by definition they are designed to convey emotions often denigratory and sarcastic.

 

As to your 2nd point about Trump moving the embassy, he seems pretty serious about it, according to his press secretary and ambassador...

 

"Conway’s comment echoes earlier statements she made regarding the embassy, including during an interview in December when she said moving the embassy “is [a] very big priority for this president-elect, Donald Trump.”

“He made it very clear during the campaign, and as president-elect, I’ve heard him repeat it several times privately, if not publicly,” she added at the time.

David Friedman, Trump’s designee for US ambassador to Israel, is also a strong supporter of the move, saying in December following the announcement of his nomination that he was eager to begin working from “the US embassy in Israel’s eternal capital, Jerusalem.”"

http://www.timesofisrael.com/trump-i-did-not-forget-jerusalem-embassy-move-pledge/

 

She also said that Trump was a man of his words. Perhaps so, but it would be more helpful if he'd think of the consequences before moving his lips.

 

Next week should be interesting.

 

Like I said, just have a look at your own posts. Gives a clear idea that you do not offer what you ask for.

 

IMO, there's a gap between the wishes of Trump (or rather, I suspect, his son-in-law and future ambassador) and those of Netanyahu. The similarities have more to do with their reliance on hot air and posturing, as opposed to action. Trump might very well be serious about it (posted some of them pesky details on possible when and where on a previous topic), but then he's been "serious" about a whole lot of thing, only to back down later.

 

Netanyahu is well aware of the possible consequences of such a move, and doubt he's keen on facing them. His way of doing things is to talk tough, then do little, or take things slowly. The trouble with this issue is that he is both ideologically committed and that his own coalition partners will push this forward (both for ideological and electoral considerations) thus putting him in a tough spot. Coupled with the current corruption investigation he's under, things are getting complicated for Netanyahu. Remains to be seen how he deals with it.

[muffy]

Turn Israel loose and let them get the job done .

[Jingthing]

15 minutes ago, muffy said:

Turn Israel loose and let them get the job done .

Sounds ominous.

[Ulysses G.]

2 hours ago, Jingthing said:

Sounds ominous.

 

Ominous for Islamic terrorists and their supporters. Israel does not mess around and President Trump admires the way that Israel defends itself. The USA is going to support Israel again now that he is in power. No more stabbing them in the back.

Edited January 21, 2017 by Ulysses G.

[Jingthing]

52 minutes ago, Ulysses G. said:

 

Ominous for Islamic terrorists and their supporters. Israel does not mess around and President Trump admires the way that Israel defends itself. The USA is going to support Israel again now that he is in power. No more stabbing them in the back.

That's fine but U.S. support for provocation particularly building more west bank settlements and the Jerusalem embassy thing do send a strong message that the USA at least under trump has given up on a two state solution. I can't support that. 

[Ulysses G.]

Perhaps a different way to a two state solution. Settlements might motivate the Palestinians to get off their butts and finally make peace before some land get s too built up to turn over to them.The other way is not working.

[Jingthing]

4 minutes ago, Ulysses G. said:

Perhaps a different way to a two state solution. Settlements might motivate the Palestinians to get off their butts and finally make peace before some land get s too built up to turn over to them.The other way is not working.

Stranger things have happened in history so I won't say it's impossible. Remember right wing Nixon opened up China. At that time, a liberal democrat couldn't have pulled that off politically because they'd be called to soft on communists. But I wouldn't take that bet. On the other hand, I don't see the odds of any path towards a two state solution regardless of tactic being likely. 

[bandito]

On ‎1‎/‎20‎/‎2017 at 9:55 AM, dexterm said:

from the OP..
"Bennett ultimately advocates the annexation of most of the West Bank, leaving just the major Palestinian towns and cities in Palestinian hands."

 

Now where have we seen that situation before in relatively recent history? Sounds pretty much like apartheid to me. At least the charade of Israel supposedly wishing to negotiate a two state solution allowing Israel to simply manage the conflict will be over.

 

No doubt all the ramifications of such a situation and an eventual binational state with equal rights for all Muslims, Jews, and Christians loom large in Netanyahu's thinking.

 

As Kerry warned: "Israel can either be Jewish or democratic, it cannot be both"

http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/1.761881

 

Netanyahu will be rushing to see Trump to discuss this with him because the dope hasn't realized this yet. 

 

Linking to an anti-government paper.

This paper can exist because Israel is a democratic nation and her religion is Jewish, got nothing to do with either democratic or Jewish, she is both.

It's like saying Italy is either democratic or Catholic, it cannot be both.

Which is the height of saying dumb things.

[dexterm]

3 hours ago, bandito said:

 

Linking to an anti-government paper.

This paper can exist because Israel is a democratic nation and her religion is Jewish, got nothing to do with either democratic or Jewish, she is both.

It's like saying Italy is either democratic or Catholic, it cannot be both.

Which is the height of saying dumb things.

The short answer to your question is that Italy can be democratic and Catholic because it has a Cathoic majority population.

 

At the moment Israel is a Jewish state because the majority of its population is Jewish. It achieved that by ethnically cleansing Palestinians in 48 and 67. Either they fled or were forced out, as many people do in conflicts, but Israel's war crime is not allowing them to return in accordance with the Geneva Convention.

 

So with a Jewish majority Israel can pass laws giving preference to Jews, the most discriminatory of which is the so called right of return for anyone who is even remotely Jewish by marriage (such as Ivanka Trump), conversion, or whose [grand]mother was Jewish.They qualify for instant citizenship and subsidized housing in a place they have never even set eyes on before, but West Bank Palestinain refugees who were born there and still hold the keys to their confiscated homes just a few miles away don't.

 

If Israel annexes the West Bank, it will also be annexing 2.5 million Palestinians who live there. If Israel does not then grant them citizenship, it will be practising apartheid. If it does give them citizenship, it will be just a matter of time before non Jews become the majority in Israel and no doubt preferential Jewish laws such as the right of Jewish return and the right to marry whomever you like will be challenged democratically through the ballot box.

 

If you still don't understand the math and democracy, better ask John Kerry to explain what everyone else knows.

 

This is why the grand plans of the Israeli right wing in the OP may backfire on them.

 

[Ulysses G.]

2 minutes ago, dexterm said:

 

At the moment Israel is a Jewish state because the majority of its population is Jewish. It achieved that by ethnically cleansing Palestinians in 48 and 67.

 

 

They did not "ethnically cleanse" the Palestinians. They beat them in a war that the Palestinians and five Arab armies started. Actions have consequences.

[dexterm]

20 minutes ago, Ulysses G. said:

 

They did not "ethnically cleanse" the Palestinians. They beat them in a war that the Palestinians and five Arab armies started. Actions have consequences.

Fortunately we live in more enlightened times under international law and the Geneva Convention to which Israel and the USA are signatories, and not under the rule of Genghis Khan and Attila the Hun.

 

And also please in future include my entire quote so as not to distort its meaning and disrupt the flow of the discussion...which is against forum rules, but which you repeatedly abuse.

Edited January 22, 2017 by dexterm
spelling

[Morch]

16 hours ago, Jingthing said:

Sounds ominous.

 

Sounds like nonsense.

[Morch]

12 hours ago, Ulysses G. said:

Perhaps a different way to a two state solution. Settlements might motivate the Palestinians to get off their butts and finally make peace before some land get s too built up to turn over to them.The other way is not working.

 

That's a US right wing talking point. The illegal settlements are not built in order to motivate the Palestinians toward signing a treaty nor is their ongoing development aimed at using them as bargaining chips down the road. In effect, the way illegal settlements are located can be said to hinder a possible solution rather than promote one.

 

 

 

[sanemax]

22 hours ago, Kiwiken said:

I agree with you 100% but what do you do when the Country you live in simply refuses you a permit to build because you are not of the same Religion as them. Is that not apartheid? Or is it only white against black that causes that. In Israel it is Semite against Semite. One Arab One Jewish.

 

    Are you saying that Israel refuses to allow its Muslims citizens permits to build because they are Muslims and for no other reason ?

[sanemax]

13 hours ago, Ulysses G. said:

Settlements might motivate the Palestinians to get off their butts and finally make peace before some land get s too built up to turn over to them.

 

   The settlements will stay there, with the same people living there .

Even if a Palestine Country is created, the Jews living there will become Palestinian Jews .

   I am sure that all the people who disagree with "forcing people off their land" sentiment , will not want to force the Jews from the West bank, as many were born there and only ever lived there

[Morch]

39 minutes ago, sanemax said:

 

   The settlements will stay there, with the same people living there .

Even if a Palestine Country is created, the Jews living there will become Palestinian Jews .

   I am sure that all the people who disagree with "forcing people off their land" sentiment , will not want to force the Jews from the West bank, as many were born there and only ever lived there

 

As for the first part - neither side is in agreement with your your view. There is no acceptable proposition which advocates it. As for the second part - people of both sides were already forced off their land - through war, agreements or their leadership's actions. Nothing new there.

 

 

 

[Kiwiken]

3 hours ago, sanemax said:

 

    Are you saying that Israel refuses to allow its Muslims citizens permits to build because they are Muslims and for no other reason ?

Can you think of any other reason. Now they threated some 2000 Israeli Arab homes. policies one got to know well with the South African Apartheid System. Or are all Arabs liars?

[Morch]

2 hours ago, Kiwiken said:

Can you think of any other reason. Now they threated some 2000 Israeli Arab homes. policies one got to know well with the South African Apartheid System. Or are all Arabs liars?

 

I can think of more than one reason, non of which are on topic, other than for those seeing any such topic as a bash-fest. As said, Israel is far from a perfect democracy, and is less than stellar on human rights. That doesn't automatically make it the worse country on earth, nor does it imply it is similar to Apartheid era South Africa. The same view is held by non other than the former South African president, de Klerk.

 

 

 

Edited January 22, 2017 by Morch