[wat0n]

Palestinians have no or few rights to freely travel in Israel as an Israeli citizen would, despite the fact that they are living inside borders that are under effective control of the Israeli government.

And Israeli citizens also have no right to travel in the West Bank as freely as a Palestinian would. If anything, this is consistent with an occupation of a neighboring nation.

A terrible comparison to try and explain away the fact that Palestinians are prisoners in their own country - while Israelis are not.

On the contrary, it illustrates Israel considers the West Bank as an Israeli-occupied territory.

From your source:

As expected coming from pro-Palestinian activists. The point, however, is that even they acknowledge Palestinian Jerusalemites are getting Israeli nationality - exactly because Jerusalem is labeled as Israeli territory and thus they can get it if they want.

Needless to say, the author's claims with regards to house demolitions are also contested.

And according to another source, only about 1/3 of applications are approved.

This source actually claims over 75% of applicants get Israeli nationality.

[GandalfTheGrey]

On the contrary, it illustrates Israel considers the West Bank as an Israeli-occupied territory.

Except for the fact that Israel has spent the last nearly 50 years arguing its not occupied territory.

[wat0n]

1) Politicians may say one thing, Israeli courts say another and the State has to follow the courts when it comes to litigation.

2) Even then, Israel doesn't claim the West Bank is part of its territory, unlike the case of Jerusalem.

[GandalfTheGrey]

ven then, Israel doesn't claim the West Bank is part of its territory, unlike the case of Jerusalem.

Semantic hogwash.

Area C is fully controlled by Israel, they administer it as if it is their own sovereign territory, with next to no consideration to the happless Palestinians stuck there. Moreover, Area C is specifically designed so it creates a complete stranglehold over the rest of the WB (so called Areas A and B). The semantics you echo from the Israeli government is nothing but a cruel joke given the realities on the ground: "nevermind Palestinians - don't mind these permanent settlements we are planting, and all the associated boundaries and areas of control specifically to make your existence unviable - we don't define it as part of Israel

[wat0n]

Actually, just today the news is that it turns out that Netanyahu seemingly offered the Palestinians to trade land and uproot settlements or leave settlers under Palestinian rule.. This is in line with past Israeli offers if true

You see, land can be swapped to accommodate both sides' concerns, particularly since the bulk of the settlers live close to the Green Line

[GandalfTheGrey]

In response to the report, Netanyahu's office said: "At no point did Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu agree to withdraw to 1967-lines, divide Jerusalem or recognize the Palestinian right of return. That was and remains his position."

"in line" with past Israeli offers my arse:

it was an American proposal that Israel never signed-off on

[wat0n]

Well, that is what Netanyahu is saying - it is not clear if he's being honest about it. After all, back when the Palestine Papers were leaked, Abbas disowned his proposal to Ehud Olmert during the Annapolis talks in 2008.

And yes, the conditions in that alleged framework are similar to the offer by Ehud Olmert.

[LehmanB]

That would be correct if Israel was doing equal things as cambodia and saud and syria. But it isnt. Israel is doing things that i may compare to the west. The true thing is there are higher standards. But the obsession to Israel is indeed nationalistic and not comes from rights. That is a valid point.

[Tailz]

Tailz wrote: Indeed, if I moved into your homeland and setup an Artists Only Colony over where you live. Then wrote your not Artistic enough to really be considered a part of Artist Land. I too would be hinting at - with weasel words - that you are a foreigner or don't belong to our new artists utopia.

Sure, and probably those artists would also say I'm not part of it either. Especially if I show no willingness to join it.

Certainly! Just as I doubt you would cherish the idea of being a second class politically disempowered minority, or the joy of having that unwanted minority around ether.

Your perpetuating the hatred, mistrust, enmity, selfishness, and craving for land that got Israel and the Palestinians into this mess.

Tailz wrote: Weasel words, by writing their not Israeli enough - that they therefor don't belong in Israel. You are writing that they are foreigners in Israel - a social and political construct which makes them foreigners to where they have lived all their lives.

And one in which most of those who belong to it have also lived in all their lives.

Indeed, but you can't hide the history of where those people live, a history that still involves the dispossession of a group of people on the basis that they don't belong to the states particular character profile and thus must make way for those settlers who do belong to the states character profile.

Oh but wait a second, actually Palestinians do have one construct they call home, or so I'm supposed to believe since people label it as Occupied Palestinian Territories.

You write as if the Israeli's or Palestinians have another geographic place to go, that each has a separate home from the other. Both characterised groups reside in the same geographic area, both give it different names, Israel, Palestine. It is the same place contested between two etho-religious nationalist groups. Thus why part of it, is occupied by troops from one character set who are fighting the resistance groups of the other character set.

But I suppose that in your limited logic land cannot divided and new societies and states cannot arise.

Limited logic? Why resort to such feeble retorts? Of course new lines can be drawn upon maps as new societies/states arise, but such lines are often drawn in ignorance of the amount of people who have to be pushed around to make those lines a reality. Your retort is just an excuse for taking other peoples stuff.

Well, that is what Netanyahu is saying - it is not clear if he's being honest about it.

Honest? The guy who immediately sort a way of circumventing the Oslo Accords because he found a loop hole that lets him do whatever he wants by simply declaring "closed military zones"

[wat0n]

Certainly! Just as I doubt you would cherish the idea of being a second class politically disempowered minority, or the joy of having that unwanted minority around ether.

Your perpetuating the hatred, mistrust, enmity, selfishness, and craving for land that got Israel and the Palestinians into this mess.

Am I? Or I'm simply stating the obvious, i.e. that Palestinians have no interest in being Israeli?

Or they actually do want to be part of Israeli society and have no interest in having their own state?

Indeed, but you can't hide the history of where those people live, a history that still involves the dispossession of a group of people on the basis that they don't belong to the states particular character profile and thus must make way for those settlers who do belong to the states character profile.

And a history that both sides can say they have experienced. In fact, it is precisely this history which means they are different societies anyway.

You write as if the Israeli's or Palestinians have another geographic place to go, that each has a separate home from the other. Both characterised groups reside in the same geographic area, both give it different names, Israel, Palestine. It is the same place contested between two etho-religious nationalist groups. Thus why part of it, is occupied by troops from one character set who are fighting the resistance groups of the other character set.

No, I'm talking about dividing the land and how many among both sides see this as a good outcome.

Limited logic? Why resort to such feeble retorts?

It's not false, it's the truth. Your claims stop making sense when you consider that the land can be divided between both.

Of course new lines can be drawn upon maps as new societies/states arise, but such lines are often drawn in ignorance of the amount of people who have to be pushed around to make those lines a reality. Your retort is just an excuse for taking other peoples stuff.

No, my retort is exactly what has already happened - there is a clear division on where do Jewish and Palestinian populations are concentrated within the region.

Honest? The guy who immediately sort a way of circumventing the Oslo Accords because he found a loop hole that lets him do whatever he wants by simply declaring "closed military zones"

So you think he's lying when he says he didn't offer that to the Palestinians and that it was an American proposal?

[Pisa]

Sorry - no actual story here, just a thought bubble...

So you know how Israel - and particularly her useful idiots - are constantly whining "why single out Israel" "there are far worse atrocities going on around the world which are conveniently ignored" "its obviously a racist, anti-semitic agenda!"

A good reason why Israel is singled out:

- because Israel's own propaganda tells us to single it out. Let me explain....

Israeli leaders and her useful idiots never tire of reminding us that Israel is a beacon of democracy and freedom in a land of oppression. So by implication they apply the standards of the free and democratic west in judging their human rights record. When Israel complains that critics are not equally as critical of tin pot dictatorships in Africa, they are exercising a double standard: accept us as a place of democracy and human rights on the one hand, but judge our human rights records on the same level as the worst dictatorships. The "special" criticism Israel receives is merely affirmation that Israel shall be judged by the very standards Israel sets for itself.

This is akin to saying that all the other people are inferior to Jews, since they are judged by lower standards.

Are they?

This is also akin to saying that only people wronged by Jews may enjoy full support for their human rights.

Should Israel become a brutal dictatorship, it will undoubtedly be allowed to do whatever it wants to whomever it wants. Right?

Bottom line, this is the typical defensive meme of bullies: the victim practically begged for it!

It would be just the same as if Germany or Sweden suddenly started stealing land, caging up and indiscriminately slaughtering a section of its own society - they would understandably come under an especially targeted sort of criticism.

Understandably?

The especially targeted sort of criticism you talk about would be just as wrong for Germany or Sweden as it is for Israel. It's racist to expect people to behave in a specific manner just because of the circumstances of their birth.

Racism is fact, and racism is reality. Everyone should ask the Jews to choose one argument and stick to it. [1]Will they be Zionists and thus acknowledge that race is still a significant social force in the world and that it always be? Or [2]will they choose to be Bolsheviks and condemn all humans including themselves to nullification and oblivion through massive intermingling and diversification?

Jews are not a race. We don't think of ourselves as a race, but as a people. The Falash Mura are not ethnic Jews, neither are the Lemba or the Jewish Berbers, but they are still Jews.

Your two choices don't make any sense. Why would someone expect a whole nation to think and act in unison, like ants or bees?

Personally, I don't think a nuclear Iran is the end of the world from an Israeli perspective. It might even be in its long-term strategic interest under the right conditions (conditions I'm sure you won't like for ideological reasons).

When both Egypt and Saudi Arabia are looking for ways to go nuclear, Israel should reconsider its long-term strategic interest.

http://edition.cnn.com/2015/02/10/middl ... sia-talks/
http://www.saudigazette.com.sa/index.cf ... 0303235639

[wat0n]

When both Egypt and Saudi Arabia are looking for ways to go nuclear, Israel should reconsider its long-term strategic interest.

http://edition.cnn.com/2015/02/10/middl ... sia-talks/
http://www.saudigazette.com.sa/index.cf ... 0303235639

I'm aware of it, but you have to consider the possibilities here.

I think we can agree that nuclear powers don't fight each other directly due to the deterrent effect of nuclear weapons. As such, the actual threat of a nuclear Iran doesn't lie on the idea that they'll nuke Israel and thus face the Israeli nuclear answer, along with destroying Jerusalem and the region's holy places. Instead, the threat of a nuclear Iran lies in:

1) It would be able to be much bolder in its support for its proxies on the region, including those on Israel's northern border.

2) It would likely provide strong incentives for other states in the region to follow its steps and go nuclear, in fact, it would basically bury the nonproliferation system.

Yet, I think that:

1) Were the Iranian proxies in Israel's borders be utterly defeated in Syria, the long Iranian arm reaching the eastern Mediterranean would basically be severed. As such, I think that if this deal between Iran and the P5+1 is not conductive to nonproliferation, Israel may as well take a more active position in Syria.

2) Egypt and Saudi Arabia would likely take a while to be able to operate a nuclear program directly, and in any event they would not be directed against Israel but against Iran. This leads to a strong potential of cooperation between them, and an outright alliance if it becomes more palatable to Arab public opinion, which it might be if a deal is reached between Israel and the PA which includes a wider acceptance of Israel among Sunni Arabs. That is, a nuclear Iran may make the Arabs and Israelis more receptive to each other's demands and needs because they'd have an interest in that as they would both have more pressing concerns to deal with - especially the Sunni Arabs if Assad falls and Iran's proxies are cut off from their patron. That is, while Israel would provide concessions, in the end the Palestinians will face pressure from their Arab allies to accept the fact that they'll lose when it comes to the harshest sticking points, like refugees.

[GandalfTheGrey]

This is akin to saying that all the other people are inferior to Jews, since they are judged by lower standards.

No you completely misunderstand the point. I'm saying Israelis (note I never made this a "jew" issue like you are) have to expect to be held to account for the standards they claim for themselves - ie as a champion of democracy and human rights. Not unlike how my country - Australia - is copping a lot of flak right from the UN for our treatment of asylum seekers while we claim otherwise to be a champion of human rights.

Israel should rightfully be heavily criticised for its cynical strutting of the international stage, loudly promoting its fake human rights and democracy credentials. But thats not saying at all that human rights abuses shouldn't be exposed and condemned in their own right - wherever and whenever they occur.

[QatzelOk]

I'm saying Israelis (note I never made this a "jew" issue like you are) have to expect to be held to account for the standards they claim for themselves - ie as a champion of democracy and human rights. Not unlike how my country - Australia - is copping a lot of flak right from the UN for our treatment of asylum seekers while we claim otherwise to be a champion of human rights.

Israel should rightfully be heavily criticised for its cynical strutting of the international stage, loudly promoting its fake human rights and democracy credentials. But thats not saying at all that human rights abuses shouldn't be exposed and condemned in their own right - wherever and whenever they occur.

There is a problem with defining what an "Israeli" is, and deciding who is responsible for Israel atrocities.

It's the same thing with the Canadian atrocities that have been committed over the last few decades. Am I responsible for the Canadian government's constant lying about foreign people, or its constant killing of innocent citizens of the same nations it lies about? Ultimately, I have no control over the handful or rich "Canadians" who control the paid-for government of the country I struggle to live in.

Same with Israelis, who are lied to by their elite, and are then held accountable for the atrocities of this group of lying rich people over whom the average Israeli has absolutely no control. Of course, the lies of the rich are designed to appeal to schmoes, with lots of "we're a heroic people" tossed around to deflect criticism of our history and our current geopolitical aggression.

But many of my fellow Canadians (and fellow Israelis) believe these pleasant lies. What choice do they have? These lies are treated like gifts of truth that have fallen from heaven by the elite's mass media drones.

So if the propaganda is too clever by half, it's probably fooled most Israelis. And this makes them victims of the lies of their own elite, and not co-conspirators as your text suggests.

[GandalfTheGrey]

Yes Qatz, I thought it was implicit in my argument that I was referring to Israeli elites, and not the general population.

[wat0n]

Oddly enough, however, Israeli businessmen tend to support the peace process as far as I'm aware. They want to go after what they term the "peace dividend".

[QatzelOk]

Oddly enough, however, Israeli businessmen tend to support the peace process as far as I'm aware. They want to go after what they term the "peace dividend".

Israeli arms dealers are certainly not interested in a peace dividend. They make billions off of wars in the Middle East and elsewhere. War is the most lucrative "industry" in the world, right after usury.

[wat0n]

Peace would open up new, more lucrative markets for them however. The whole neighborhood is in flames after all.

[ArtAllm]

Sorry - no actual story here, just a thought bubble...

So you know how Israel - and particularly her useful idiots - are constantly whining "why single out Israel" "there are far worse atrocities going on around the world which are conveniently ignored" "its obviously a racist, anti-semitic agenda!"

A good reason why Israel is singled out:

- because Israel's own propaganda tells us to single it out. Let me explain....

Israeli leaders and her useful idiots never tire of reminding us that Israel is a beacon of democracy and freedom in a land of oppression. So by implication they apply the standards of the free and democratic west in judging their human rights record. When Israel complains that critics are not equally as critical of tin pot dictatorships in Africa, they are exercising a double standard: accept us as a place of democracy and human rights on the one hand, but judge our human rights records on the same level as the worst dictatorships. The "special" criticism Israel receives is merely affirmation that Israel shall be judged by the very standards Israel sets for itself. It would be just the same as if Germany or Sweden suddenly started stealing land, caging up and indiscriminately slaughtering a section of its own society - they would understandably come under an especially targeted sort of criticism.

Good post!
Zionists always say that Iran calls himself an "Islamic state", so why Israel should not be accepted as a "Jewish state"?

Well, there are two problems.

1. Nobody claims that Iran is sharing "our western values", and according to the Zionist media these values are "multiculturalism". If USA was a "Christian State", because it was founded by Christians, the Jews in the USA would cry and call this "racism". So how on earth can USA and Israel share the same values, if Israel is an ethno-religious state, and USA is supposed to be (according to the Israel Lobby in the USA) a "milticultural state"? Multicultural is only a blessing (according to the Zionist media) for the USA and other western countries, but in Israel this is an "existential threat" to the survival of Israel as a "Jewish state".

2. Everybody can become a Muslim, and you have to be a religious person, if you convert to Islam.
Jews is not just a religious group, it is an ethno-religious group, and Netanyahu even talked about the "Jewish race". Who is a Jew can only decide a white Ashkenazi Rabbi, and according to these white Rabbis a white atheist from Russia is a Jew, because his grandmother was Jewish, but a black Jew from Chicago is not a Jew, because he does not have "Jewish blood".

[Buzz62]

Good point Art.

However...while you people debate the incredibly obvious...

At this point, I'm "assuming" everyone's about had it with the bullshit being produced in the Middle East.
No matter if you're a raving lunatic Liberal who just wants to save lives, or a predatory Republican who enjoys a good war, and the profits from it. This Middle East thing is getting annoying.
Greece has refugee issues...EU countries are already voicing opinions concerning "quotas" they are being saddled with...and ISIS just continues to be some sort of "Bad-Guy of the Year". Upsetting the delicate balance that must exist for any society to live peacefully.

What a bunch of horseshit.

You people really wanna settle this ugly annoyance?
ENCIRCLE THEM ALL!
Noone gets in...noone gets out.
Let the Middle East burn, for Gawd's sake!
The arms dealers get their sales...they shoot at eachother instead of any of us...and Wolf Blitzer gets its favorite thing live on TV daily...DEATH!

As for Israel...this has always been unavoidable...and I bet most of us have always known that...