Morch Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 4 minutes ago, dexterm said: >>Replacement of a Jewish dominance in a secular state for an Arab dominance that would inevitably lead to another genocide and expulsion of Jews ...that's where we disagree. Your scenario is not inevitable. I believe people of different faiths, races and cultures can live together in peace. It's how I was raised. But I also realize that after so many bitter years of conflict any transition to a secular state would have to be handled carefully with checks and balances, and some degree of social engineering such as via education. Israel could still be a haven for genuinely persecuted Jews throughout the world via a clause in its constitution. The benefits of peace may actually also attract more Jewish immigration . I regard the Jewish State of Israel is an artifical construct imposed on a majority Muslim and Christian resident population. That is the fatal flaw which will ultimately cause the end of one group's dominance over the other..there are too many of the other. I support the BDS movement...oops I just got myself banned from Israel...because I regard the present illegal occupation as de facto apartheid, but as other posters have stated we do not have de jure apartheid yet until Israel annexes the West Bank. IMO all the signs are there that it will ultimately annex simply because there is virtually no land left for a viable Palestinian state..Israel has bulldozed itself into a hole, creating too many extremely hard to reverse facts on the ground. Trump has spilled the beans from his meeting with Netanyahu with US for the first time ever mooting a single state. Israel will then have to face the dilemma of what to do with the 2.5 million Palestinians it has just annexed. The OP ban on people who support BDS indirectly is yet another indication that Israel regards the occupied territories and all that is produced there as Product of Israel, deleting the Green Line and any possibility of a two state solution. ...that's where we disagree. Your scenario is not inevitable. I believe people of different faiths, races and cultures can live together in peace. It's how I was raised. What you believe seem to be at odds with how things are in the Middle East in general, and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in particular. There is a difference between long term processes which shape reality, and the fast lane of social engineering you advocate. Social engineering, if it is to be successful, requires knowledge and understanding of involved communities - something obviously lacking in your posts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cdnvic Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 If you want to debate the issues please do so, but stop attacking each other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morch Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 6 hours ago, Thorgal said: Quote from link : "It also bans entry visas and residency rights for those who call for boycotts of Israeli institutions in any “area under its control”, including Jewish settlements in the West Bank that are regarded as illegal under international law."http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/israel-travel-ban-boycott-supporters-bds-movement-banned-knesset-vote-settlements-visas-residency-a7616701.html Makes that any Jewish, Muslim or Catholic pilgrim who's against the illegal settlements will be stopped at any border and access to the Holy Land will be denied, ...except for Israeli residents or nationals... Freedom of movement is rather a basic human right for everyone.https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_movement Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Freedom of movement usually refers to citizens (or residents) of country, and their movement within the country. It does not imply a country cannot deny entry to foreigners. This is actually covered in the Wikipedia link provided. And no, this will not effect any pilgrim who is against Israel's illegal settlement effort - just those actively calling for boycott. I doubt that the two are synonymous, even if posters repeatedly try to present it at such. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ace of Pop Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 I consider the State like Hongcong..If the Jews n Brits deserved being Laughed at as they were in the offset ,yet turned them both into something ,they never would want the places backSent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dexterm Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 27 minutes ago, Morch said: ...that's where we disagree. Your scenario is not inevitable. I believe people of different faiths, races and cultures can live together in peace. It's how I was raised. What you believe seem to be at odds with how things are in the Middle East in general, and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in particular. There is a difference between long term processes which shape reality, and the fast lane of social engineering you advocate. Social engineering, if it is to be successful, requires knowledge and understanding of involved communities - something obviously lacking in your posts. >>Social engineering, if it is to be successful, requires knowledge and understanding of involved communities - something obviously lacking in your posts. ... I bow to the superior knowledge of Israeli Jewish commentators such a Miko Peled and Ilan Pappe, who grew up bilingually with Jewish and Palestinian friends. They advocate a one state solution, with which I agree. It's going to be hard, but hard is not impossible. Also, I feel that inevitability of a one state solution is overtaking the impossibility. Therefore one way or another Israelis are going to have to find practical ways of dealing with the situation....peacefully I hope. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morch Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 48 minutes ago, dexterm said: >>Social engineering, if it is to be successful, requires knowledge and understanding of involved communities - something obviously lacking in your posts. ... I bow to the superior knowledge of Israeli Jewish commentators such a Miko Peled and Ilan Pappe, who grew up bilingually with Jewish and Palestinian friends. They advocate a one state solution, with which I agree. It's going to be hard, but hard is not impossible. Also, I feel that inevitability of a one state solution is overtaking the impossibility. Therefore one way or another Israelis are going to have to find practical ways of dealing with the situation....peacefully I hope. The usual namedropping is not an answer. Both of them do not realistically address how such social engineering is to be successfully achieved, but rather focus on what ought to be. The fact that both may (or may not) had certain personal experiences does not make these into a general condition or proof that such a reality can be widely attained. So basically, you just repeat your position, without anything resembling a shred of an attempt to deal with the reality (other than bash Israel, that is). There is no insight given as to how things are to be achieved, or on what grounds positive outcomes are based. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dexterm Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 47 minutes ago, Morch said: The usual namedropping is not an answer. Both of them do not realistically address how such social engineering is to be successfully achieved, but rather focus on what ought to be. The fact that both may (or may not) had certain personal experiences does not make these into a general condition or proof that such a reality can be widely attained. So basically, you just repeat your position, without anything resembling a shred of an attempt to deal with the reality (other than bash Israel, that is). There is no insight given as to how things are to be achieved, or on what grounds positive outcomes are based. No namedropping. They are simply Israeli Jews whom I find insightful and inspiring and who have just as deep an understanding of the conflict and peoples involved as you. What I am saying in my 2nd paragraph, is that whether you or Israelis like it or not, a one state solution is becoming an inevitability, simply because a two state solution is becoming an impossibility.... too many facts on the ground and intransigence over every issue. It's up to Israelis who will need to figure out the mechanism of how they will all live together. They have so far failed miserably in working out how they can live separately. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CharlieK Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 3 minutes ago, dexterm said: No namedropping. They are simply Israeli Jews whom I find insightful and inspiring and who have just as deep an understanding of the conflict and peoples involved as you. What I am saying in my 2nd paragraph, is that whether you or Israelis like it or not, a one state solution is becoming an inevitability, simply because a two state solution is becoming an impossibility.... too many facts on the ground and intransigence over every issue. It's up to Israelis who will need to figure out the mechanism of how they will all live together. They have so far failed miserably in working out how they can live separately. You really think Israel is that stupid that it would allow itself to evolve into an Arab state? Never. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morch Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 (edited) 14 minutes ago, dexterm said: No namedropping. They are simply Israeli Jews whom I find insightful and inspiring and who have just as deep an understanding of the conflict and peoples involved as you. What I am saying in my 2nd paragraph, is that whether you or Israelis like it or not, a one state solution is becoming an inevitability, simply because a two state solution is becoming an impossibility.... too many facts on the ground and intransigence over every issue. It's up to Israelis who will need to figure out the mechanism of how they will all live together. They have so far failed miserably in working out how they can live separately. Namedropping is all it is. As if these two actually address the the issue of how, the difficulties involved or the positions of the other side. And in the same way, you are unwilling or unable to discuss these as well. That you, and others, declare the two-state solution "impossible" does not necessarily make it so. Not more "impossible", at any rate, than your imaginary utopian fantasy. And there is that other differences - such as treating a possible one-state outcome while addressing the difficulties involved in making it a peaceful one, or not glossing over the obvious dangers of it going pear shaped. As for the usual, tired one sided view that it all rests with Israel and Israelis - still nonsense. How a one-state, or a two-state solution will look like, got a whole lot to do with the Palestinians. Figuring it out is impossible if only one side is engaged. Edited March 8, 2017 by Morch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CharlieK Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 The solution is very simple. The Arabs in the west bank can go live in Jordan, the real Palestinian state in the ME. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dexterm Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 1 hour ago, Morch said: Namedropping is all it is. As if these two actually address the the issue of how, the difficulties involved or the positions of the other side. And in the same way, you are unwilling or unable to discuss these as well. That you, and others, declare the two-state solution "impossible" does not necessarily make it so. Not more "impossible", at any rate, than your imaginary utopian fantasy. And there is that other differences - such as treating a possible one-state outcome while addressing the difficulties involved in making it a peaceful one, or not glossing over the obvious dangers of it going pear shaped. As for the usual, tired one sided view that it all rests with Israel and Israelis - still nonsense. How a one-state, or a two-state solution will look like, got a whole lot to do with the Palestinians. Figuring it out is impossible if only one side is engaged. I have in the past offered on this and other forums suggestions of how a one state solution may be achieved, on the Ghandian principle of lighting a candle and 6 degrees of separation, since obviously I have no other power.You dismissed them as idealistic along with other far more derogatory epithets. "A thousand candles can be lighted from the flame of one candle" (Ghandi) I believe a two state solution is impossible ,because I don't think Israel has the resolve to evacuate some 500,000 Jewish settlers from the West Bank and 350,000 from East Jerusalem, nor the will to create a Palestinian capital in E Jerusalem and a viable contiguous Palestinian state in the West Bank? And they are just fooling themselves if they think Palestinians will accept Netanyahu's state-minus ...a series of Bantustans under 100% Israeli military and economic control? Nor do I believe Palestinians will wait around for another 24 years playing the charade of negotiating something better. Maybe you think some of the above are possibilities. I think that is delusional or a deflection. Events and legislation are moving too quickly anyway under the present right wing government, making the above irreversible. The PR from the OP ban creates more awareness via social media worldwide of Israel behaving badly again. I have already added a well known hotel booking company to my boycott list as a result of my reading. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morch Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 5 minutes ago, dexterm said: I have in the past offered on this and other forums suggestions of how a one state solution may be achieved, on the Ghandian principle of lighting a candle and 6 degrees of separation, since obviously I have no other power.You dismissed them as idealistic along with other far more derogatory epithets. "A thousand candles can be lighted from the flame of one candle" (Ghandi) I believe a two state solution is impossible ,because I don't think Israel has the resolve to evacuate some 500,000 Jewish settlers from the West Bank and 350,000 from East Jerusalem, nor the will to create a Palestinian capital in E Jerusalem and a viable contiguous Palestinian state in the West Bank? And they are just fooling themselves if they think Palestinians will accept Netanyahu's state-minus ...a series of Bantustans under 100% Israeli military and economic control? Nor do I believe Palestinians will wait around for another 24 years playing the charade of negotiating something better. Maybe you think some of the above are possibilities. I think that is delusional or a deflection. Events and legislation are moving too quickly anyway under the present right wing government, making the above irreversible. The PR from the OP ban creates more awareness via social media worldwide of Israel behaving badly again. I have already added a well known hotel booking company to my boycott list as a result of my reading. You have never offered any realistic input as to how such things may be achieved or even tackled. Nothing which takes into account the prevailing conditions, attitudes, and positions of both sides and their respective various factions. Indeed, all you have on offer seems to be pseudo-idealistic musings, and a staunch disregard to any factual point made which intrudes upon this touted illusion. What your posts deal with is, almost exclusively, the wished for outcome - not how to get there or what such a process involves. IMO, this is because actually addressing such issues, rather than the broad brush treatment given, requires in-depth knowledge of relevant topics (rather than engaging in propaganda), and the willingness to consider things in a more even-handed manner. Both being anathema to your posts. It is enough to consider that a peaceful, one-state outcome will require both sides to let go of their respective narratives, at least to a degree. Constantly pushing forward a one-sided narrative is not an encouraging indication of real willingness to promote the desired outcome. With regard to the two-state solution, there had already been quite a bit of progress over negotiation rounds as to how things can be sorted. At least in this regard, there is a better understanding and acknowledgement of what such a solution entails. Repeating some old chestnuts won't make them factual - for example, Israel will probably not have to deal with removing all of its citizens from the West Bank, and leaderships on both sides have trouble committing and mustering support, not just Israel. It would seem, that following your "logic", it is better to drop any efforts to promote a semi-realistic, if troubled, path to a solution. And instead, favor a completely uncharted alternative with slim likelihood of not worsening things. That pretty much embodies the sort of social engineering often derided, and rightly so. Having a chuckle every time someone pats his own back about supporting BDS, and doing it while posting on this specific forum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Galactus Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 (edited) oh my...another day and another mindless act from Israel. this time against the speakers of truth. For the people opposing a bloody conflict, for the people opposing land stealing and more by simply announcing, supporting a peaceful boycott towards israel! so now Israel wants to ban such people! it is only fascists fearing from truth and criticism and freedom of speech. Israel once again showed that it is transitioning from a state with no freedom of speech to a state fearing from freedom of speech. Israelis, i believe staying in middle east for long time:) now they are not different from other fascist middle eastern countries. If you lie down with the dogs, you rise up with fleas:) now, all EU countries and USA will shoot heavy criticism on Israel. It is like Israel shooting its own leg and actually, such actions just help such a boycott to become popular and recognized. Such tactics will never stop the boycott or its supporters. those supporters, anyway, will never go to a rogue-unlawful state like Israel which is formed by blood, conflict, unfairness, discrimination and oppression. so what next Israel? Maybe finding and catching Boycott supporters around the world with Mossad agents like CIA of US does all the time and jail them in a Guantanamo like place in Israel? so they cant speak anymore? Edited March 8, 2017 by Galactus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morch Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 17 minutes ago, Galactus said: oh my...another day and another mindless act from Israel. this time against the speakers of truth. For the people opposing a bloody conflict, for the people opposing land stealing and more by simply announcing, supporting a peaceful boycott towards israel! so now Israel wants to ban such people! it is only fascists fearing from truth and criticism and freedom of speech. Israel once again showed that it is transitioning from a state with no freedom of speech to a state fearing from freedom of speech. Israelis, i believe staying in middle east for long time:) now they are not different from other fascist middle eastern countries. If you lie down with the dogs, you rise up with fleas:) now, all EU countries and USA will shoot heavy criticism on Israel. It is like Israel shooting its own leg and actually, such actions just help such a boycott to become popular and recognized. Such tactics will never stop the boycott or its supporters. those supporters, anyway, will never go to a rogue-unlawful state like Israel which is formed by blood, conflict, unfairness, discrimination and oppression. so what next Israel? Maybe finding and catching Boycott supporters around the world with Mossad agents like CIA of US does all the time and jail them in a Guantanamo like place in Israel? so they cant speak anymore? The law may be a shot in the leg, and redundant to boot. But it does not amount to the hyperbole presented above. For starters, the law does not prohibit Israelis and Palestinians from promoting such boycotts. It applies to foreigners, Hardly a single instance of a country limiting entry and political activities of foreigners within its borders. Even certain Western countries. There is no full equivalency between opposing the Israeli government's policies and supporting such boycotts. It is quite possible to adhere to the former and reject the latter. Suggesting this implies to anyone criticizing Israel is false. Also, fantasies aside, on the whole, government level boycott of Israel is not a reality, and doesn't seem to be on the cards anytime soon. Not by the US, not by the EU, and not by rest of the World. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Galactus Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 15 minutes ago, Morch said: The law may be a shot in the leg, and redundant to boot. But it does not amount to the hyperbole presented above. For starters, the law does not prohibit Israelis and Palestinians from promoting such boycotts. It applies to foreigners, Hardly a single instance of a country limiting entry and political activities of foreigners within its borders. Even certain Western countries. There is no full equivalency between opposing the Israeli government's policies and supporting such boycotts. It is quite possible to adhere to the former and reject the latter. Suggesting this implies to anyone criticizing Israel is false. Also, fantasies aside, on the whole, government level boycott of Israel is not a reality, and doesn't seem to be on the cards anytime soon. Not by the US, not by the EU, and not by rest of the World. as @Thorgal stated before, Israel can ban anyone going to Palestinian side as well. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/israel-travel-ban-boycott-supporters-bds-movement-banned-knesset-vote-settlements-visas-residency-a7616701.html hope these were all a fantasy morch:( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dexterm Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 (edited) 51 minutes ago, Morch said: You have never offered any realistic input as to how such things may be achieved or even tackled. Nothing which takes into account the prevailing conditions, attitudes, and positions of both sides and their respective various factions. Indeed, all you have on offer seems to be pseudo-idealistic musings, and a staunch disregard to any factual point made which intrudes upon this touted illusion. What your posts deal with is, almost exclusively, the wished for outcome - not how to get there or what such a process involves. IMO, this is because actually addressing such issues, rather than the broad brush treatment given, requires in-depth knowledge of relevant topics (rather than engaging in propaganda), and the willingness to consider things in a more even-handed manner. Both being anathema to your posts. It is enough to consider that a peaceful, one-state outcome will require both sides to let go of their respective narratives, at least to a degree. Constantly pushing forward a one-sided narrative is not an encouraging indication of real willingness to promote the desired outcome. With regard to the two-state solution, there had already been quite a bit of progress over negotiation rounds as to how things can be sorted. At least in this regard, there is a better understanding and acknowledgement of what such a solution entails. Repeating some old chestnuts won't make them factual - for example, Israel will probably not have to deal with removing all of its citizens from the West Bank, and leaderships on both sides have trouble committing and mustering support, not just Israel. It would seem, that following your "logic", it is better to drop any efforts to promote a semi-realistic, if troubled, path to a solution. And instead, favor a completely uncharted alternative with slim likelihood of not worsening things. That pretty much embodies the sort of social engineering often derided, and rightly so. Having a chuckle every time someone pats his own back about supporting BDS, and doing it while posting on this specific forum. Para 1 applies equally to your supposedly preferred two state solution. I don't believe Zionists have ever had any intention of allowing Palestinians their own state. Para 2 IMO there is no moral equivalence between Israel and the Palestinians. Zionists are the powerful invaders and occupiers, not the other way round. Para 3 Nonsense. They have been negotiating for 24 years amidst the smoke and mirror of Oslo Accords while Israel has created ever more facts on the ground, making the ostensible aim of Oslo (self determination for the Palestinians) now an impossibility. Enough already of the very-convenient-for Israeli-respectability charade. Para 4 "semi-realistic, if troubled, path to a solution" ...Nice euphemism for the Israeli stonewalling tactic of pretending to negotiate. I prefer the pressure of BDS and the social and international media backlash to deliver a solution when Israel annexes the West Bank and starts practising de jure apartheid. Para 5 Gotta sleep with the enemy sometime to have your voice heard. Edited March 8, 2017 by dexterm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morch Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 2 minutes ago, Galactus said: as @Thorgal stated before, Israel can ban anyone going to Palestinian side as well. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/israel-travel-ban-boycott-supporters-bds-movement-banned-knesset-vote-settlements-visas-residency-a7616701.html hope these were all a fantasy morch:( And you point is...? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Galactus Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 11 minutes ago, Morch said: And you point is...? point is Israel does not allow any criticism for its bloody politics in Palestinian side by foreigners as well which does not belong to Israel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jingthing Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 (edited) There seems to be a wide consensus here that this Israeli policy is certainly very bad PR for Israel. It reminds me a bit of trump's "Muslim ban" -- does nothing productive and makes the world dislike the USA more. I wonder if the timing isn't some kind of coincidence as currently most of the world would naturally be more focused on the trump immigration policies than Israel. Anyway, I can be very pro-American and still detest trump and most of his policies. Similarly it's possible to be very much pro-Israel and detest many of the government policies there as well. The anti-Israel opposition seems to insist on making everything black and white, but in the real world, it doesn't work that way. Edited March 8, 2017 by Jingthing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morch Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 2 minutes ago, dexterm said: Para 1 applies equally to your preferred two state solution. Para 2 IMO there is no moral equivalence between Israel and the Palestinians. Zionists are the powerful invaders and occupiers, not the other way round. Para 3 Nonsense. They have been negotiating for 24 years amidst the smoke and mirror of Oslo Accords while Israel has created ever more facts on the ground, making the ostensible aim of Oslo (self determination for the Palestinians) now an impossibility. Enough already of the very-convenient-for Israeli-respectability charade. Para 4 "semi-realistic, if troubled, path to a solution" ...Nice euphemism for the Israeli stonewalling tactic of pretending to negotiate. I prefer the pressure of BDS and the social and international media backlash to deliver a solution when Israel annexes the West Bank and starts practising de jure apartheid. Para 5 Gotta sleep with the enemy sometime to have your voice heard. There is no equivalency whatsoever between our approaches. That's one of the shoddiest deflections you ever engaged in. I rarely engage in anything but realistic consideration based on facts and knowledge of relevant conditions. Most of what you offer does not. And yet more deflections. Your opinions on matters of moral are not relevant. What was pointed out is that the failure to actually address these issues stems from lack of knowledge and a uncompromising stance - both not very conductive to anything required for dealing with the topic discussed. That you choose to call negotiations nonsense, just drives home the previous point home. You have no real interest in conflict resolution. And again, your reply does not actually relate to what I posted - namely, that at least on this front, both sides are aware of the possibilities and requirements. No mention of how choosing uncharted stormy seas is an improvement. Israel is not solely responsible for negotiations not coming to a conclusion. This is a false narrative. The Palestinian side refused to commit on some occasions, broke agreed negotiation guidelines on others. Not expecting you to acknowledge any of it, as per your insistence of not discussing anything projecting negatively on the Palestinian side. For all your words, nothing much by way of addressing how a peaceful, one-state solution could be promoted or what it involves from either side of the conflict. That is, nothing realistic, practical or factual. The only thing on offer is complete rejection of one side, while pretending to favor a "peaceful" solution. If such a one-state solution is to materialize, the Palestinians would have to let go of their narrative as well. Not a feature in your posts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morch Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 10 minutes ago, Galactus said: point is Israel does not allow any criticism for its bloody politics in Palestinian side by foreigners as well which does not belong to Israel. The law does not pertain to "any criticism" but to actively promoting boycotts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dexterm Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 11 minutes ago, Morch said: There is no equivalency whatsoever between our approaches. That's one of the shoddiest deflections you ever engaged in. I rarely engage in anything but realistic consideration based on facts and knowledge of relevant conditions. Most of what you offer does not. And yet more deflections. Your opinions on matters of moral are not relevant. What was pointed out is that the failure to actually address these issues stems from lack of knowledge and a uncompromising stance - both not very conductive to anything required for dealing with the topic discussed. That you choose to call negotiations nonsense, just drives home the previous point home. You have no real interest in conflict resolution. And again, your reply does not actually relate to what I posted - namely, that at least on this front, both sides are aware of the possibilities and requirements. No mention of how choosing uncharted stormy seas is an improvement. Israel is not solely responsible for negotiations not coming to a conclusion. This is a false narrative. The Palestinian side refused to commit on some occasions, broke agreed negotiation guidelines on others. Not expecting you to acknowledge any of it, as per your insistence of not discussing anything projecting negatively on the Palestinian side. For all your words, nothing much by way of addressing how a peaceful, one-state solution could be promoted or what it involves from either side of the conflict. That is, nothing realistic, practical or factual. The only thing on offer is complete rejection of one side, while pretending to favor a "peaceful" solution. If such a one-state solution is to materialize, the Palestinians would have to let go of their narrative as well. Not a feature in your posts. The pressure for Israel to change will have to come from outside from such groups as BDS, and eventually with sanctions from foreign governments when Netanyahu and his nationalists bang the final nail in the coffin and make everything other than a one state solution impossible, and start practising de jure apartheid. Hearts, minds and pockets of the electorate have a way of coming to terms with reality in such circumstances. Perhaps at that stage you will be delving in the TV archives for some of my suggestions to make the transition to a secular state less painful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morch Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 5 minutes ago, dexterm said: The pressure for Israel to change will have to come from outside from such groups as BDS, and eventually with sanctions from foreign governments when Netanyahu and his nationalists bang the final nail in the coffin and make everything other than a one state solution impossible, and start practising de jure apartheid. Hearts, minds and pockets of the electorate have a way of coming to terms with reality in such circumstances. Perhaps at that stage you will be delving in the TV archives for some of my suggestions to make the transition to a secular state less painful. I have no intention going on a wild goose chase for non-existent suggestions. All you ever posted on this issue have very little to do with realistic, practical and factual considerations. That you hang on to your hatred is indicative enough of the impossibility of such "suggestions" being genuine. And the above is yet another example of the usual bailing out whenever confronted with outright questions. Just pile on more hate, some doom predictions (with assured "victory" following), and that's about it. Nothing of substance, nothing directly relating to what is discussed. To state how things are - the BDS actual effect is negligent, foreign governments do not take part, and there is on annexation of the West Bank (recent reports suggest that the Trump administration warned Israel not to...eh). And as usual, nothing in your posts which relate to the Palestinians. Do you imagine that a peaceful, one state solution is achievable if only one of the sides have a change of heart? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorgal Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 as @Thorgal stated before, Israel can ban anyone going to Palestinian side as well. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/israel-travel-ban-boycott-supporters-bds-movement-banned-knesset-vote-settlements-visas-residency-a7616701.html hope these were all a fantasy morch:(@Morchhttp://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium-1.775614"The new law doesn't include caveat urged by Justice Ministry: To exempt Palestinians who reside in Israel."Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
binjalin Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 1 hour ago, Jingthing said: There seems to be a wide consensus here that this Israeli policy is certainly very bad PR for Israel. It reminds me a bit of trump's "Muslim ban" -- does nothing productive and makes the world dislike the USA more. I wonder if the timing isn't some kind of coincidence as currently most of the world would naturally be more focused on the trump immigration policies than Israel. Anyway, I can be very pro-American and still detest trump and most of his policies. Similarly it's possible to be very much pro-Israel and detest many of the government policies there as well. The anti-Israel opposition seems to insist on making everything black and white, but in the real world, it doesn't work that way. Ah the 'Love the Sinner but not the Sin' defence. No one is totally Evil as no one is totally Righteous but the Zionists (I don't like using the term 'Israelis' for the reason you allude too) are as fundamental and radical as most Muslim extremists. Religion, per se, should be kept out of politics but they use it constantly (that and guilt) to justify atrocities. Let them ban and become insular it just focuses those of reasonable mind on what they really are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morch Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 1 hour ago, Thorgal said: @Morchhttp://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium-1.775614 "The new law doesn't include caveat urged by Justice Ministry: To exempt Palestinians who reside in Israel." Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect The article goes into it in greater detail: the reference is to Palestinians residing in Israel on temporary residence permit, while awaiting approval of their permanent resident status. The Justice Ministry input was in regard to the difficulty of defending the law in future court cases. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morch Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 43 minutes ago, binjalin said: Ah the 'Love the Sinner but not the Sin' defence. No one is totally Evil as no one is totally Righteous but the Zionists (I don't like using the term 'Israelis' for the reason you allude too) are as fundamental and radical as most Muslim extremists. Religion, per se, should be kept out of politics but they use it constantly (that and guilt) to justify atrocities. Let them ban and become insular it just focuses those of reasonable mind on what they really are. I'm sure you realize that even them "evil" Zionists come in different shapes and sizes. For reference, one of the main opposition parties goes under The Zionist Camp. That would be the opposition mentioned in the OP as voting against the law. So no, not all Zionists are "fundamental" or "radical", and even if you wished to uphold the inept comparison to Muslim extremists, you'll have to acknowledge that they do not tend to export their violence. Also, not all Zionists are religious, and not all religious Jews are Zionists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Galactus Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 (edited) 14 minutes ago, Morch said: I'm sure you realize that even them "evil" Zionists come in different shapes and sizes. For reference, one of the main opposition parties goes under The Zionist Camp. That would be the opposition mentioned in the OP as voting against the law. So no, not all Zionists are "fundamental" or "radical", and even if you wished to uphold the inept comparison to Muslim extremists, you'll have to acknowledge that they do not tend to export their violence. Also, not all Zionists are religious, and not all religious Jews are Zionists. zionism is a religion based term and it revolves around religion! so sure there is no atheist zionist in this world! you are contradicting with yourself a lot morch, like most of the zionists. so sure zionists come in different shapes, some long, some short:) but all of them are religious, they have to be otherwise they cant be called zionists. so zionists from all around the world from thousands of kms away are coming to middle east and stealing and occupying some lands to this day and you say zionists dont export violence?! funny! Edited March 8, 2017 by Galactus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morch Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 1 minute ago, Galactus said: zionism is a religion based term and it revolves around religion! so sure there is no atheist zionist in this world! you are contradicting with yourself a lot morch, like most of the zionists. so sure zionists come in different shapes, some long, some short:) but all of them are religious, they have to be otherwise they cant be called zionists. so zionists from all around the world from thousands of kms away are coming to middle east and stealing and occupying some lands to this day and you say zionists dont export violence?! funny! I doubt that you're an expert, especially considering this pearl "no atheist Zionist" in the world. If you consult the post you replied to, there was an example given right there. Quite a bit of the anti-religious legislation attempts come from politicians defining themselves as Zionist. And no, I do not see Zionists regularly carrying terrorists attacks world wide, as opposed to Muslim related terrorism. For the most part, it's the violence is localized. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jingthing Posted March 8, 2017 Share Posted March 8, 2017 Zionist in the modern context basically means support for the existence of the state of Israel keeping that state with a majority Jewish demographic character. It does not specify final borders. Zionism started as a political liberation movement for the Jewish people recognizing the need for nation state homeland of the Jewish people. Jewish is both a religion and also an ethnographic people. Within the broad definition of Zionism is included many different factions including atheist Zionist, Jewish religious fanatic Zionists, and many others. The vast majority of global Jews are Zionist in the sense of supporting the existence of Israel so sorry the truth is that people that say they hate all Zionists but not Jews aren't fooling anyone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now