So - What Is "A Jewish State" ?

[stuartsdesk1]

PM Netanyahu has added yet another obstacle to developing a "two state solution" with the Palestinians -

He now insists they must recognize Israel's right to exist AS A JEWISH STATE. What does that mean?

In fact, what is "Jewish"? Is it religious, cultural, racial or all of those together?

Would that be a religious Jewish state Netanyahu demands? Or merely a cultural Jewish state? Or a purely racial Jewish state?

How could the Palestinians agree to what is totally undefined?

Would that Jewish state be truly democratic? Would it guarantee equal rights, obligations and respect for non-Jews?

Or would non-Jewish citizens be encouraged to leave? Or be forced to leave?

Would the Jewish State of Israel be similar to the Islamic Republic of Iran? Would it make religious law supreme over civil law?

Could non-believers drive cars on Saturday? Eat pork sausages? Would adulterers be stoned?

How could Mahmoud Abbas ever agree to this condition when it is totally undefined and open to dangerous interpretation?

What to do? Abbas should seize the initiative and craft his own statement. Something like -

"The Palestinians will recognize Israel's right to exist as a democratic state, with equal rights and dignity for all of its citizens, based on a Jewish cultural core heritage, with peaceful, respectful relations between Muslims, Christians, Jews, other faiths and non-believers....
......as Israel must also agree to recognize a democratic Palestinian state with equal rights and dignity for all of its citizens, based on a Palestinian cultural core heritage with peaceful, respectful relations between Muslims, Christians, Jews and other faiths and non-believers.

Is Netanyahu ready to accept such a statement?

[aranthus]

1. Is this a news post or is it your own?

The reason that I ask is that only news posts are allowed on the I/P thread, so if this is your own work, the thread is likely to be locked soon. If it's a post of some news item, then it's a good idea to state from where and provide a link. Anyway welcome to the forum.

As to your last question, I think it likely that Netanyahu would accept something like the statement in your post far more than Abbas would issue it.

[Ken Burch]

2. I still don't understand why Netanyahu insists the PA recognize Israel as "a Jewish state".

A)Recognizing "the State of Israel" as Egypt and Jordan did in their peace agreements, would essentially mean doing that, whether or not the specific phrase was used;

B)If simply recognizing the state was enough for Egypt and Jordan, why isn't it enough for the PA?

Every time Netanyahu makes the demand for the use of the phrase "as a Jewish state", it makes him sound like a three-year-old who wants the other kids to "say it the way I want you to say it". It's as if he cares more about "making them say it" than about moving on and actually ending the conflict.

Isn't getting the fighting stops what REALLY matters here? How can a handful of words be of greater importance than human life?

[aranthus]

3. I will explain.

A)Recognizing "the State of Israel" as Egypt and Jordan did in their peace agreements, would essentially mean doing that, whether or not the specific phrase was used;

[font color=blue]No it does not. Recognizing the state of Israel means recognizing the government. It says nothing about recognizing the right of the Jewish people to have that government.[/font]

B)If simply recognizing the state was enough for Egypt and Jordan, why isn't it enough for the PA?

[font color=blue]Because the Palestinians are demanding right of return. The demand for the right of return is the flip side of denying the legitimacy of the Jewish state. Recognizing Israel as the Jewish state doesn't end right of return, but it does mean formal acceptance by the Palestinians that the right (assuming it actually exists) can never be implemented. Otherwise, the Palestinians are going to have to formally renounce RoR, and they aren't going to do that. Recognizing Israel as the Jewish state is actually a way around that impasse.[/font]

Every time Netanyahu makes the demand for the use of the phrase "as a Jewish state", it makes him sound like a three-year-old who wants the other kids to "say it the way I want you to say it". It's as if he cares more about "making them say it" than about moving on and actually ending the conflict.

[font color=blue]Except that the conflict is square solid about the right of existence of that Jewish state. Shouldn't the Palestinians have to agree to stop trying to destroy it or make demands on it that are equivalent to its destruction?[/font]

Isn't getting the fighting stops what REALLY matters here? [font color=blue]Peace talks are never about peace or stopping the fighting. They are always about what each side wants more than it wants peace. For the Palestinians, that thing is RoR, which means the end of the Jewish state. For the Jews that thing is Arab acceptance of their right to their own state. Put another way, the Palestinians are willing to recognize that for now they can't actually destroy the Jewish state, but they want to hold on to their "right" to try, and the Jewish state wants them to stop wanting to destroy it.[/font] How can a handful of words be of greater importance than human life? {font color=blue]If you are seriously asking this, I have to conclude that you really don't know much about humans. People have been fighting and dying for words (and more importantly what those words mean) for a very long time.[/font]

[Ken Burch]

4. The conflict is NOT solely about people having an issue with Israel being "a Jewish state"

Last edited Tue Apr 8, 2014, 05:30 AM - Edit history (2)

There are some Palestinians who are driven mainly by that(and that group, a small minority of Palestinians since most have legitimate grievances in play here, as opposed to just being bigots, are vile and should be denounced by all)as there are probably an equal number of Israeli Jews(again, I'd hope a minority, but who knows)who simply hate Arabs and/or Muslims(you'd agree, I hope that hatred of Arabs and/or Muslims is just as wrong as hatred of Jews). I have always condemned that, over and over again. But hatred for hatred's sake is not why this conflict is happening.

For most, it's about what they've been put through...especially since 1967, when the Occupation started, and in particular since 1973 when the illegal West Bank settlement project started. The Palestinian struggles have been based on injustice, not hate for hate's sake...and really, what's the difference between the terms Palestinians use for their opponents in this conflict and the normal "trash talk" that ANY side in any war uses against the people they're fighting. All such talk is ugly(what Israelis say about Palestinians is equally ugly), but it's just part of war. It's not like they wouldn't say harsh things about their opponents if they were fighting Italian Catholics, Scottish Presbyterians, or evangelicals from Texas...or that they didn't when they were fighting against Ottoman domination for centuries. It's simply wrong to insist that the Palestinian position is based on bigotry rather than reality. Who WOULDN'T fight for liberation in the situation they've been in since 1967?

It has never been a question of just telling Palestinians to "get over it". They have reasons for their dispute with Israel that have nothing to do with the dominant religion and cultures of that state...and it's hardly likely that they'd be ok with being treated this way by anybody else.

Both sides have suffered in this...and most of those who suffered on BOTH sides did nothing to deserve it. Ending the war and starting a reconciliation process(two things that cannot be separated)mean addressing the suffering people on both sides have experienced-not insisting that Palestinians accept the fiction that the whole thing is "their fault". They've done bad things...Israel has equally done bad things-and you need to admit that there's equal victimhood on both sides.

Palestinians will need to recognize Israel(the PLO already did that in 1994, in case you've forgotten)but you can't get them to do that by making them say a phrase that sounds to them like an acceptance of subjugation and defeat. There needs to be an admission that this has been a two-sided conflict and that past Israeli intransigence(such as the twenty-seven years when the Israeli government refused to accept the PLO as a negotiating partner, even though no alternative Palestinian leadership ever had any real support among Palestinians and even though there was never going to be a possibility of peace that did NOT involve engaging the PLO)is as much to blame as Palestinian tactics.

As to RoR...it's going to have to happen for, at least, the elders of 1948. There's no harm in letting them come back to their homeland to die. As to the others, RoR will need to be dealt with not just through compensation, but also through acknowledgment that it was wrong for Palestinians to have been forced out of their homes in the hundreds of thousands in 1948, through apologies for that, and for some sort of establishment of their right to call themselves Palestinian nationals even if they can't come home. Netanyahu and his government have to let go, also, of the myth that "Palestinian" is not a real identity...that the "P word" was just a dirty Arab trick to cause trouble.

Making the Palestinian leadership "say it like we want them to say it", can't lead to an end to the conflict...because Netanyahu is essentially asking the Palestinian side to surrender first, AFTER which there might be negotiations...with a Palestinian negotiating partner chosen by Israel(and thus guaranteed to have no credibility with anyone on the Palestinian side). Since any "agreement" negotiated on Netanyahu's terms by such a Palestinian partner would automatically lead to that "partner" being removed from power by the actual Palestinians, such an "agreement" negotiated on Netanyahu's terms, would be worthless...and the war would just go on.
We know that because it's impossible to end this dispute via either side getting an absolute "unconditional surrender" military victory over the other.

So why go through all the futility Netanyahu's position guarantees? What's the good of insisting on terms that can't end the war?

It sounds like you care more about Netanyahu being able to say "I won and THEY lost" and about humiliating the Palestinian simply by making them say one rather redundant phrase than you do about making it possible for Israel to be at peace with its neighbors-something that REQUIRES all sides in the conflict to cooperate, which is something that can only happen if no side is made to be seen as "the losers".

Peace can only be made through negotiations...and negotiations require parity of respect. Netanyahu's demand doesn't show parity of respect towards Palestinians.

[stuartsdesk1]

5. Thank You Ken Burch for a Truly Reasonable and Well Spoken Response

Thank you Ken Burch for your sincere, reasonable, well spoken response.

If both sides in this conflict exhibited your clear, compassionate and just point of view,
then the conflict would already be over.

But, that's not the way it is.

In my opinion, Netanyahu has more on his mind than forcing the Palestinian side to say "uncle".

Recognizing Israel as a "Jewish State" would open the door for all kinds of possible, abusive maneuvers later on such as -

Making non-Jews 2nd class citizens (in many cases and respects they already are).

Encouraging or even forcing non-Jews to emigrate.

Allowing the orthodox community to gain a privileged status.

Precluding any possible right of return, even for very senior Palestinians.

Precluding any just compensation to Palestinians who lost land or property to Israel in 1948 or afterwards.

Netanyahu's new demand (to recognize a "Jewish State&quot as the basis for progressing peace negotiations, is ingenuous and insidious.

[Israeli]

6. yes ...thank you again Ken ...

and agree with you to stuartsdesk1.

[Ken Burch]

10. You are right that Netanyahu himself does see the matter through the eyes of a vindictive conqueror

Perhaps some of what he feels is based on the hatred his father, Ben-Zion Netanyahu, a man whose views were essentially fascist and ethnic supremacist, taught him from a young age. Indeed, since his father's passing, Netanyahu's position seems to have become more rigid, more arrogant, and more vengeance-minded.

Perhaps some of it is also his continuing grief-driven anger about the death of his brother in the Raid on Entebbe back in 1975(which is disturbing, since his brother's death was cause by the action of Idi Amin's thugs, and Palestinians played no role in it).

Someone with that much anger and with so much personal investment in NOT ending the war and not ending the oppression of Palestinians is too dangerous and destructive a person to still be leading the Israeli government.

I truly hope the voters of Israel will finally do the same thing and remove Netanyahu and his party of death(and it's even scarier and more life-hating coalition partners, such as Naftali Bennett and his mob) from the government. Neither has anything to offer that country any more.

[azurnoir]

11. with regard to Yontan Netanyahu perhaps Bibi is still trying to live up to his memory be a hero

in his own right

Yontan led the raid on Entebbe and died in it, it's difficult to live up to the memory of a dead hero, especially one who saved the lives of Jews

[Ken Burch]

12. You might have something there. n/t.

I was always a little bit puzzled by the change in political direction in Israel after Entebbe...that happened while Labor was still in power(during the first Rabin government)but it really seemed to galvanize the Right, for some reason.

[aranthus]

13. It's the core issue.

Of course people are also upset about what has happened to them since they started the war and lost it, but those aren't the reasons that the Palestinians started the war in the first place. You seem to have a boundless ability to ignore 70+ years of history as well as what the Palestinians themselves say. They weren't fighting for liberation in 1948. They weren't fighting for RoR in 1948. They were fighting to rule all of Palestine and not have a Jewish sovereignty ruling any part of it. If you want to say that their hostility to Israel's existence is based more on Arab/Muslim chauvinism than anti-Semitism, I think you're wrong, but go ahead. The point is that they have set this war up as an all or nothing (they get all of Palestine and no one else has any right or legitimate claim to any part of it at all). They still believe that. They are still acting on that belief. That's why there is still a war.

[Ken Burch]

14. The PLO recognized Israel in 1994...that PROVES that Palestinians aren't absolutist

about nobody but Arabs living in Palestine. If the Mossad and Shin Bet hadn't spent years helping build up Hamas as an alternative to the PLO(because of the insane Likudnik obsession with deligitimizing the PLO at all cost, no matter what doing that would lead to)its much more likely that some sort of peace deal would be achieved.

Besides, if I was "ignoring history", would the poster "Israeli&quot who, unlike you, actually lives in Israel, on a kibbutz)have agreed with my post? Are you saying that she's ignoring the history she lives through on a daily basis?

And even if I had it wrong and you had it totally right...that it was about hating having Jews being in Palestine at all(which doesn't make sense, given the milennia in which Jews and Arabs lived side-by-side in Palestine and both groups were pretty much ok with that situation), would making Palestinians recognize Israel "as a Jewish state" really change anything? If they were driven by blind, unrelenting Judeophobia, wouldn't they just agree to the phrase, bide their time, and then go right back to attacking Israel anyway? Do you really believe that those four words have some sort of magical power?

Most Palestinians get it that Israel is never going to go away, no matter what. They know it's a done deal and that a two-state settlement is what they can get. But you don't get to an end of hostilities by making them say a phrase for the sake of making them say a phrase. You get to the end of hostilities by

a)stopping all injustices imposed on both sides, immediately;
b)then negotiating, with neither side being in a position to dominate the other;
c)coming up with an agreement that doesn't make either side look like it has "lost".

No, that won't be easy, but at least it's possible. Demanding that Palestinians essentially surrender BEFORE negotiations, which is what the full range of demands Netanyahu makes essentially means, guarantees that any agreement reached through any such "negotiations" would be worthless...since no Palestinian leadership that agreed to it would survive, politically to say the least(and perhaps physically as well).

Netanyahu doesn't care about that. Bennett doesn't care about that. They just want to be able to say "we won and they lost"-even though Netanyahu knows that insisting on that means that the war can't ever actually end.

If you care about Israel, you really shouldn't trust that guy. His whole life has been about keeping hate going, keeping war going, and making his country more right-wing, more socially divided, and more ethnically divided(he's another Ashkenazim supremacist and he looks down on the Sephardim and Mizrahim that give him most of his electoral support). What's to like?

[aranthus]

19. I never said they were absolutist about Jews living in Palestine.

[font color=blue]Try to focus on the issue. They are against a Jewish state in Palestine. They are against a state with a Jewish majority. That continuing demand for right of return proves it. The continuing official denial of Jewish attachment, relationship and right to the land proves it.[/font]

'Besides, if I was "ignoring history", would the poster "Israeli&quot who, unlike you, actually lives in Israel, on a kibbutz)have agreed with my post? Are you saying that she's ignoring the history she lives through on a daily basis?'

[font color=blue]You mean, "I don't believe in the myth of a Jewish people," Israeli? http://www.democraticunderground.com/113459648#post72

I can't think of a greater ignoring of history. Now let's be clear. This isn't about Arabs hating Jews (not mainly). It's about the Jews not knowing their place. They don't get to rule. Only Arabs have the right to rule anywhere in Palestine. Jews aren't a people, they are only a religion. Now those sentiments are what I and most responsible Jews (and others) call antisemitism, but it isn't the rabid Jew hatred you seem to think that I'm claiming.[/font]

[Israeli]

28. I'm a post zionist aranthus....

ref: " I can't think of a greater ignoring of history "

we disagree with your version of history :

[Scootaloo]

24. You're a terribly uneducated person. No wonder Zionism has such appeal

Of course people are also upset about what has happened to them since they started the war and lost it, but those aren't the reasons that the Palestinians started the war in the first place.

I hope you didn't pay someone for this information, Aranthus, because if you did, you got ripped the fuck off (but again, zionism doesn't appeal to the bright ones.)

[King_David]

35. Wow you think calling someone stupid or " not bright. "

Or not smart or whatever makes YOU "smart" and oh soooo. "Clever" ?

LOL ... Sorry I am not seeing it , and I think I am in a better position to judge this than you are. ( from what I can tell )

[Scootaloo]

44. Nope. Just pointing out that ity tends to be unintelligent thugs attracted to racist ideologies

When you're such a low achiever that a fluke of genetics is your highest point of pride...

[King_David]

45. Preoccupied with Jewish genes

And how smart you are ?

Wow that is "smart "

[Scootaloo]

47. Nope, simply stating genetic lottery is nothing to be proud of

Which is one of the features that makes racist ideologies so fucking dumb - yet appealing to people who will never achieve anything more.

[King_David]

50. All this Zionist Nobel prize winners

Are nowhere as clever as you describe yourself .

WOW!

[Scootaloo]

52. Nice yo see you admit that Zionism is a racist ideology, Dave

What did you win your nobel prize for, if i may ask?

[King_David]

54. Your self admittedly so much cleverer than all of us posting here,

We are all in awe of your self described superior intellect.

Shkaich

[Scootaloo]

59. Maybe if you started posting smarter things, Dave?

Maybe take a page from Oberliner (whatever happened to that guy?) and actually provide content?

[Fozzledick]

55. I agree with that. Anti-Semites in particular are really stupid.

Some of them are so dumb they think that no one will realize what they're really up to as long as they insist that they don't hate all Jews, just "Zionists". That seems to be their standard cover story these days.

[Scootaloo]

57. Actually, my experience says that antisemites can't tell the difference between "Jew" and "Zionist"

And use the terms interchangeably without a blink, or any hint of such caution or hedging.

Strange thing is, my experience with Zionists shows the same thing. Even to the point where for some Zionists, a jew who is not a Zionist is also not a Jew.

of course this isn't without precedent - White nationalists harbor their greatest loathing and hatred not for blacks or Jews or whoever - but for whites who do not hold white nationalist ideals.

[Fozzledick]

61. I think it depends on the audience.

They may be that open about it when they're with sympathetic friends, but the ones I've seen posting on the internet know enough to stick to the party line, especially in moderated forums.

[Scootaloo]

62. It still comes out, though.

See Dave downthread, talking about "Zionist genes." What in the hell is a "Zionist gene"? That's the sort of thing that the fig leaf antisemites get up to, lazy use of one term to cover for another.

[Fozzledick]

64. Um, actually he's referring to YOU using that kind of language.

But I agree with you that it does indeed come out, even if they're too dumb to realize it and think they can double-talk around it.

[Scootaloo]

67. Problem is, I never have

Which makes it doubly bizarre, I think One that he would come up with such a notion, and two, try to attach it to me, of all people. Seriously, the notion that politics is genetic? Weird.

[Fozzledick]

69. I don't understand how anyone could have such a grotesque impression of someone as smart as you.

No, wait, actually I do.

Never mind.

[Scootaloo]

70. Hardly grotesque. Just very strange.

And really, what's your "idea"?

[King_David]

71. SO YOUR SELF ADMITTEDLY A MEMBER OF THE STORMFRONT FORUM:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1134&pid=61860



Why?


1.Your views on Jews and/or Zionism are the same as most of the posters there? (example below)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1134&pid=57842

OR

2. It is a 'spy' membership, (9-11.Mossad,CIA) type of thing?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1134&pid=61860

[Fozzledick]

74. Secret Agent Double-O Zero strikes again!

I can only wonder what his mission on DU is.

[King_David]

75. Is it possible to be a spy member on Stormfront and DU ,

or just DU ?

[Fozzledick]

76. Looks like a mystery wrapped in an enigma to me

and covered with a thick layer of bullshit.

[azurnoir]

80. Well it is possible o be a member of DU and a spy member at a hate site as I was

at one time, just a registered member never posted just kept track -the site is defunct now seems Google pulled their ads or something, it labeled itself as a ProIsrael site but most of the posts were actually rather juvenile attacks on DUers, seems a number of them were banned DUers one named Queer Justice claimed to be from Canada, America, Israel and occasionally South Africa and or Australia also claimed to be something in medical field

here's a sample of his work, just so you understand what I'm talking about

QueerJustice Donating Member (457 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-20-04 09:40 PM
Response to Reply #16
41. You may not like it...

But the truth is they DO attack JEWISH targets ..A shul (synagogue) in Tunisia, A JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTRE in Argentina,a Jewish Day school in Montreal, multiple Jewish headstones in Paris , Toronto , New Zealand.

You may not like it but the great MAJORITY of Jews Identify and support the state of Israel..maybe you do not but its the tiny minority you in including Natura Karta ,Noam Chomsky,Adam Shapiro...etc

You may not Like it but Jews in New York , Florida, Toronto , Sydney ,
Cuba ,Montreal, Johannesburg (where I come from) etc etc...Are way more homogeneously united in their support for Israel than you would like them to be.

The Arab resistance is not shy about their ANTI-SEMITIC/Jewish (not ANTI-ISRAEL) unity either..

I think its very safe to say MOST Jews think this way.

It may not square with some peoples ideal views but ITS TRUE.

Judaism would not survive without Israel , every morning millions of Jews worldwide face Jerusalem and the 1st words out of there mouth is ~ ``Hear O ISRAEL `` not ~``Hear o France ``

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=124&topic_id=79203&mesg_id=79666

There was also a former Moderator named gabys poppy or something rumor has it that he got banned for divulging personal info of other DUers

posted as an example of how one can indeed be a spy member of various forums and sites without actually supporting the philosophy of those sites

[Scootaloo]

81. I had an account on that hole, too

I kept waiting for some of the DU regulars there to give me a funny little name like you and a few others got.

Sadly, it wasn't to be. Maybe because i'm already named after a cartoon pony. Hard to get sillier than that, really

[King_David]

85. No clue what that has to do with self proclaimed members of DU and Stormfront ,

You have link to that site for us ?

Sounds like inter/intranet childish blog politics ...

I don't partake in those childish activities but please give me a link I will look it over .

As far as Stormfront is concerned it's very much a hate Jews , Hate Zionists , Hate Israel kind of a place and I have heard that some of the posts and posters there on Stormfront look very much like ones posted in this forum .

I used to wonder if anyone posting in this forum with such hate on Zionism and or Jews and or Israel was really from there.

[King_David]

86. I remember a dude called AllureBlack

Got banned for overt AntiSemitism , real bad hateful stuff.

Used to say he came from Minnessota or Chicago or somewhere.

Said he was a trauma nurse and a quarter Jewish , but eventually banned for real nasty Jew hate.

[azurnoir]

94. Hmmmm that's odd when I search DU for AllureBlack the Google site search nothing comes up

save your comment. In fact I don't remember any such person here ever but then again I did not join DU till 2006, could have been before my time, nice you remember though

oh I found Queer Justice via the same Google site search of DU

[King_David]

96. And ?

[azurnoir]

97. Just a point in fact that person does not show up, while other banned members do

[Violet_Crumble]

103. I remember Queer Justice...

Claimed they'd lived in a whole bunch of different places, was a surgeon or something who was always going to medical conferences somewhere, had a really unmistakable posting style, and had a habit of conflating the terms 'Jew' and 'Israel' whenever it suited him. Finally got tombstoned for being a anti-Arab/anti-Muslim piece of shit

[Scootaloo]

79. Question is answered in your initial link, Dave

I actually have several such accounts spread around the web, because I like to keep track of what the nutters are up to.

1) You really think people on Stormfront are as disgusted by white nationalism as I am, and more that they will lump Zionism together with that ideology as I do? Really, is that what you think?

2) no such affiliations. As I said, I like ot keep track of crazy, in its own words.

[JDPriestly]

33. Truman and the United Nations formed and recognized Israel as a Jewish State.

So it is a Jewish state. That's basic to the agreement between the United Nations and Israel. That's why. Israel wants to make sure that the UN resolution under which it was formed is kept intact and will be honored.

From UN Resolution # 181, Nov. 29, 1947:

The mandatory Power shall use its best endeavours to ensure than an area situated in the territory of the Jewish State, including a seaport and hinterland adequate to provide facilities for a substantial immigration, shall be evacuated at the earliest possible date and in any event not later than 1 February 1948.

3. Independent Arab and Jewish States and the Special International Regime for the City of Jerusalem, set forth in part III of this plan, shall come into existence in Palestine two months after the evacuation of the armed forces of the mandatory Power has been completed but in any case not later than 1 October 1948. The boundaries of the Arab State, the Jewish State, and the City of Jerusalem shall be as described in parts II and III below.

4. The period between the adoption by the General Assembly of its recommendation on the question of Palestine and the establishment of the independence of the Arab and Jewish States shall be a transitional period.

. . . .

http://unispal.un.org/unispal.nsf/0/7F0AF2BD897689B785256C330061D253

[azurnoir]

34. The terms Arab and Jewish states were used to distinguish the 2 groups nothing more

not the fist time that's been trotted out though

[King_David]

38. LOL

Because ?

Oh because YOU say so?

[azurnoir]

66. yep me and well these little things called ummm facts

but don't let those stop you - now

[King_David]

68. Well give us the facts then.

What you gave us was a personal statement.

[azurnoir]

72. I'll explain

UN did not recognize Israel as the Jewish state nor did it recognize Palestine as the Arab state, neither would have been possible at the time, the statement simply designated the 2 groups that the land was divided between to claim the UN recognized Israel as the Jewish state is an over statement

[King_David]

73. So the UN created and recognized a Jewish state

But not the Jewish state per se .

Sounds like Monty Python's flying circus.

[azurnoir]

77. you're claiming now that the UN created Israel? interesting

No the UN did not recognize Israel as the Jewish state

[King_David]

78. Sigh

[JDPriestly]

84. I picked up a copy of the Jewish Journal from my local Los Angeles library (freebies bench).

It's the March 21-27, 2014 edition.

I've got news for you.

It is dated as "Approved May 14, 1948" and signed by Harry Truman in his own handwriting. It states as follows:

"This Government has been informed that a Jewish state has been proclaimed in Palestine, and recognition has been requested by the (next word inserted in Truman's handwriting) provisional Government thereof.

The United States recognizes the provisional government as the de facto authority of the (again next 3 words inserted in Truman's handwriting) State of Israel."

The signature is Harry Truman's.

The document bears a stamp showing that it is from the Harry S. Truman Library.

On page 4 of that copy of the Jewish Journal, it says

"On the cover:
The United States Press Release from 1948 about Recognition of Israel signed by President Harry Truman. Courtesy of the U.S. National Archives and Records Administration.

We did not recognize just a state. We recognized a Jewish state. The intention at the time was to provide a safe haven for the Jewish people. In honor of the 6 million innocent Jews killed by the NAZIs and Fascists in WWII, it was the least we could do. The land belonged to the Ottoman Empire before and came under the British Protectorate following the end of WWI and the victory over among other countries, the Ottoman Empire (which had long ago conquered much of North Africa and the Middle East).

Israel is and always was a Jewish State.

The more other countries attack Israel, the bigger it gets. Palestine should make peace. So should Israel. The alternative is another war which the Palestinians will lose.

[azurnoir]

95. Thanks for making my point Truman did not use the words

Jewish State of Israel or we recognize the provisional government of the Jewish State of Israel, he said Israel and only Israel.

sorry I missed this one earlier or I would have replied at the time

[JDPriestly]

98. No. He specifically said Jewish State.

This from the Truman Library:

UN Resolution 181, defined the outline of a settlement in Palestine creating both a Jewish and a Palestinian homeland. The 1947 UN Partition divided the area into three entities: a Jewish state, an Arab state, and an international zone around Jerusalem.

At midnight on May 14, 1948, the Provisional Government of Israel proclaimed the new State of Israel. On that same date the United States, in the person of President Truman, recognized the provisional Jewish government as de facto authority of the new Jewish state (de jure recognition was extended on January 31). The U.S. delegates to the U.N. and top ranking State Department officials were angered that Truman released his recognition statement to the press without notifying them first. On May 15, 1948, the Arab states issued their response statement and Arab armies invaded Israel and the first Arab-Israeli war began.

http://www.trumanlibrary.org/whistlestop/study_collections/israel/large/index.php

And Resolution 181 speaks of a Jewish State.

. Independent Arab and Jewish States and the Special International Regime for the City of Jerusalem, set forth in part III of this plan, shall come into existence in Palestine two months after the evacuation of the armed forces of the mandatory Power has been completed but in any case not later than 1 October 1948. The boundaries of the Arab State, the Jewish State, and the City of Jerusalem shall be as described in parts II and III below.

4. The period between the adoption by the General Assembly of its recommendation on the question of Palestine and the establishment of the independence of the Arab and Jewish States shall be a transitional period.

. . . .

http://unispal.un.org/unispal.nsf/0/7F0AF2BD897689B785256C330061D253

The language used is "Jewish state." There is no question.

Israel was admitted to the UN as Israel.

But Merriam-Webster defines "Israel" as

: jacob 2
2
: the Jewish people
3
: a people chosen by God
— Israel adjective
Origin of ISRAEL

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/israel

Israel was formed as a Jewish State. Israel is a Jewish state that recognizes the rights of non-Jews, some of whom sit in the Knesset.

That is more than you can say for some of Israel's neighboring states. Some of them barely recognize the rights of anyone not already in the ruling group.

[azurnoir]

100. Truman did not formally recognize Israel as the Jewish State those weren't his words

when he recognized the state of Israel, post all the resolutions you wish, does not change that fact.

BTW you do realize you haven't 'discovered' anything that hasn't been trotted out here in the past

[Scootaloo]

60. Israel will be withdrawing to the borders it declared and had recognized in 1948, then?

Well, that actually ought to solve most of the big problems in this conflict. Kudos to Israel for finally getting on board with international law. All that's left now is restitution and repatriation.

[JDPriestly]

89. Actually, it is unlikely that the Palestinians would even accept that. They want the "right of

return." Of course, the majority of Palestinians now living never lived in the area that is Israel so the "right of return" is just a slogan for them. They can't return to a place they never were.

In addition, the Palestinians would soon discover that, as Thomas Wolfe wrote, "You Can't Go Home Again." The place you call "home" changes as you change, and you can never return. What's more when you do try to return, you realize that "home" was never as perfect as you remembered it.

There is a lot of misinformation about the formation of Israel, the partition and all the history surrounding the situation.

Here is an accurate history from the Truman Library website:

http://www.trumanlibrary.org/whistlestop/study_collections/israel/large/index.php

[Scootaloo]

7. If you're still curious, take a gander at Naftali Bennett's recent efforts in the knesset

Presenting legal arguments for the expulsion of Israeli Arabs, justification for the "Judaization" of the Negev and Galilee (which involves more Arab expulsions, as we see with the Prawer plan) and he and his part''s striving to demand "loyalty-oaths" of non-Jews in Israel wherein non-Jews protesting government policy can have their citizenship revoked, arguments that Arab Israelis can - and should - be barred from "Jewish communities," etc.

It's not "undefined." it's the same as any Racist Nationalism.

[Igel]

8. You've answered your question.

What's a "Palestinian state"? A state that is 100% pure Palestinian, ethnically? One that only allows Palestinian Arabic? One that only allows Islam?

That's how some read "Jewish" state--one that is somehow ethnically, religiously, linguistically, culturally "pure". It's an extreme interpretation that suits them as a strawman. Is it possible for it to head in that direction? Sure. Any nationalism can head in that direction.

Having France be "French," making sure that Kenya is Kenyan, asking that South Africa reflect the majority population's culture(s) and language(s) could easily--as in Zimbabwe--lead to ethnic repression and racial cleansing.

But still, you voluntarily and freely came up with "Palestinian state" with no appreciation of the irony involved.

A Palestinian state is presumably a state dominated by Palestinians, where they can enjoy at least equal rights, their own language untrammeled by others, their own culture allowed free expression. Just as a Mexican state would object to having French culture foisted upon it, or a Navajo reservation wants space for its own language. This can lead to forced assimilation. Or ethnic cleansing. But they don't have to.

Ultimately such states are only metastable unless there's an overriding ideology or structure to provide for individuality and stability. They can fracture and repartition or become a fairly culturally and linguistically uniform territory. France, for example, had a homogenization campaign in the 1800s to extirpate the various dialectal divisions.

[Scootaloo]

20. "Palestinian" is a nationality, not an ethnic group

A parallel to "Palestinian" is "Israeli," not "Jewish."

Palestine is not demanding anyone recognize it as an Arab nation. Nor as a Muslim nation - nor for that matter a christian one. It is asking to be recognized as Palestine.

it is Israel's demand to be acknowledged as a "Jewish State." Thus, we are discussing what, exactly, it is that Israel is demanding.

Do try to keep up.

[King_David]

37. Have you explained this to Hamas?

Oh I forgot, you think your much smarter than them or anyone else .

LOL

[Scootaloo]

40. I imagine the average root vegetable is smarter than Hamas, Dave

But you know if you want to stick your neck out and vouch for them - again - be my guest.

[King_David]

41. I defer to you because you keep telling us how

Smart and clever you are compared to everyone else

[Scootaloo]

43. well, compared to you and the other DU zionists, at least

So, what is it you'd like to know, Dave?

[King_David]

46. I'm so impressed at how clever you are

Thanks for telling us all -- now we know.

[Scootaloo]

49. My pleasure n/t

[JDPriestly]

90. Just for your information and use in future arguments on this topic:

There is a lot of misinformation about the formation of Israel, the partition and all the history surrounding the situation.

Here is an accurate history from the Truman Library website:

http://www.trumanlibrary.org/whistlestop/study_collections/israel/large/index.php

I posted this in a response above.

The intention was to form a Jewish state.

Geography was rearranged all over the world after WWs I and II. Members of my husband's family (not Jewish at all) were rendered stateless by changes in the geography after WWII. That happens. It's a part of the peace process. And that is what the partition of Palestine was -- a part of a peace process that only fools want to change.

Why so many DUers don't understand that is beyond me.

There is so much misleading propaganda out there, so much muddle and so many falsehoods about the history.

Palestine was not a separate country until the partition. It was transferred after WWI into a British Protectorate. That's why the British had a big say in the partition. Yet many DUers think that somehow it was. They seem to be completely ignorant when it comes to the Ottoman Empire. They do not seem to understand that Constantinople, in Turkey, was the center of Christian culture in the East, the home of the emperor. Apparently no one sings that old son, It's Istanbul, not Constantinople any more, not like we did when we were children. Kids do not seem to learn about the fall of Constantinope or the Muslim conquests in the Middle East or the Muslim invasions into Europe. Hungary was under Muslim rule not so long ago when you think in terms of all of human history. Vienna turned back the Turks in only 1683 and then thanks to the Polish.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Vienna

We learn so much about the Crusades but no one mentions that

"Charles Martel (d. 741), won the Battle of Poitiers in 732, halting the advance of Muslim armies across the Pyrenees.[92]"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Middle_Ages

I get frustrated because it is one thing not to know history (I'm no expert) but quite another to not look up historical information. That's what we are dealing with here.

[azurnoir]

91. why keep the pretense Israel is a Jewish state already, look at it's flag for instance eh?

also national holidays, work week, official sabbath.......Israel is already a Jewish State

Israel is singularly requiring the Palestinians and ONLY the Palestinians to recognize Israel as The Jewish State, Israel has signed peace treaties with both Egypt and Jordan without such caveats, so why the Palestinians, first to nullify any type of RoR or compensation to refugees, also there are Israel's own Arab citizens who are automatically reduced to second class citizenship, along with cementing the family unification law which makes it difficult to nearly impossible for an Israeli married to a Palestinian to live as a family in Israel at least without special government permission, which is not often given, add to that Israel's rightwing which has suggested that some area's that are heavily Arab populated be 'transferred' to Palestine

[JDPriestly]

92. Maybe those who object to the fact that Israel is a Jewish state should ask Truman and the

United Nations that voted to recognize it as a Jewish state.

It's what it is. That's how history works.

As I have pointed out repeatedly, countries disappeared and borders changed in many places after the World Wars. The allied leaders held the cards and dealt them as they saw fit.

The result is what we call peace. No one wants to sacrifice that peace.

The partition of the area called Palestine (there was no nation of Palestine because it was under a British Protectorate and was not independent) is a part of the overall peace agreement that ended WWII.

And after that time, Palestinians did not make peace with Israel. There were wars and confrontations, and Israel gained land in each one.

[azurnoir]

93. Israel did not make such demands of Jordan or Egypt as a pricetag for peace

you can make all the excuses you want, but it does not justify this move as Israel has already set precedence for making peace. As pointed out Israel is already a Jewish state, this is about Israel shedding itself of any responsibility for Palestinian refugees and quite likely for future dealings with it's own Arab population especially Muslim's who in the passage of a law recently Israel's Rightist MK's declared natural enemy of Israel' while declaring Arab Christians to be not really Arabs .

[Scootaloo]

99. Yes indeed there is plenty of propaganda and muddle

Your "Accurate history" isn't, exactly; of course being a summation, how could it be accurate, strictly speaking?

The intention was to form a Jewish state.

of course, there's a list of troubles here.

1) The majority of the territory's population opposed partition.
2) The UN could not impose partition
3) Great Britain, the occupying power, was likewise imposed from such decision-making.
4) Jews did not have a majority anywhere within the territory to begin with; even their densest population centers were still Arab-majority. In fact out of all the divisions slated for the Jewish state, only two - Haifa and Jaffa - had a Jewish population of over 30% - Beersheba (encompassing the whole of the naqab) had less than 3%.

So, when nobody has the power to impose a partition, when the majority opposes a partition, and the minority isn't that sizable even at its densest point (and frankly, hardly politically unified itself) how does one get a state ruled by this minority?

Well... Apparently it involves arms smuggling in violation of an international embargo, in order to arm paramilitary groups who are targeting civilian populations in an effort to ethnically cleanse territory in order to create a majority. Not very different from what Britain did in the rest of its erstwhile protectorates, really.

And that is what the partition of Palestine was -- a part of a peace process that only fools want to change.

No, it was hardly anything of the sort. I'm not sure where you would get this notion from.

Palestine was not a separate country until the partition.

No, but it was a recognized territorial entity.

It was transferred after WWI into a British Protectorate. That's why the British had a big say in the partition.

And htey simply reprised their plan from 1946 that split up India... Which worked so well for those people, didn't it? One must imagine that the Palestinians - Arab and jew alike - saw that plan, looked at this plan, and were.. .skeptical.

They do not seem to understand that Constantinople, in Turkey, was the center of Christian culture in the East, the home of the emperor. Apparently no one sings that old son, It's Istanbul, not Constantinople any more, not like we did when we were children. Kids do not seem to learn about the fall of Constantinope or the Muslim conquests in the Middle East or the Muslim invasions into Europe. Hungary was under Muslim rule not so long ago when you think in terms of all of human history. Vienna turned back the Turks in only 1683 and then thanks to the Polish.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Vienna

We learn so much about the Crusades but no one mentions that

"Charles Martel (d. 741), won the Battle of Poitiers in 732, halting the advance of Muslim armies across the Pyrenees."

What's the relevancy of al-Andalus to Palestine, if you don't mind explaining the flow of your logic?

[azurnoir]

101. bringing Charles the Hammer into this discussion could allude to an insinuation of creeping Islamism

something we about especially from Red states like OK where there was an attempt to institute antisharia laws, thankfully such bigotry was struck down by a federal judge

[JDPriestly]

102. I was complaining about the lack of understanding of the history of the region and especially

of the Ottoman Empire among those who criticize Israel for simply existing and for having been created as a Jewish State. Real estate has changed hands a lot in Europe over the centuries. The Ottoman Empire lasted a long time as a mostly Muslim State. It ceased to be such a huge empire at the end of WWI. But who knows what will happen next?

[King_David]

39. Says who?

I keep forgetting that you are so clever compared to the rest of is ( says you)

[bravenak]

56. Very clever.

He be smashing on y'all, all day, with minimal effort. All you can do is lol at yourself. LOL!

[Scootaloo]

63. "He be smashing on y'all, all day"

Screw this, I'm going to cook up some salmonburgers and take a walk on the beach.

[bravenak]

65. My bad!

Didn't mean it like that! It's just that, well, you just be killin it sometimes. And our leige, his royal highness, cannot handle it. Best part.

[King_David]

9. You have a link for us?

[Fozzledick]

15. Israel. Israel is a Jewish state.

It's really so simple, but some people just can't bring themselves to recognize it.

[Crunchy Frog]

16. At the risk of getting severely flamed

It's a highly diverse state; predominantly Jewish, but with large minority populations of Muslims and Christians and the ever present potential for demographic shifts.

Some people just can't bring themselves to recognize this.

Nobody belonging to an ethnic or religious minority is going to ratify their own status as second class citizens.

[Fozzledick]

17. The same is true of most countries.

But most of them have a core national and cultural identity that they seek to preserve.

The United States' cultural "melting pot" is a revolutionary exception.

[aranthus]

18. You're wrong about the US

It's revolutionary because it created a new way of defining its core cultural identity. But like every other state, it does have one.

[Scootaloo]

21. So, what's that definition, Aranthus?

Do tell. i want to hear about hte one thing that defines Americans distinctly.

[aranthus]

22. Many things

I Pluribus Unum; In God We Trust; Liberty; Judeo-Christian values. We're cowboys; We're mutts. There is more.

[Scootaloo]

23. So, you tell me now

Where does someone like myself, who does not adhere to "Judeo-Christian values" (whatever the fuck those are) fit within America, as you define it? I'm certainly no cowboy; I do not now, nor have I ever "trusted in god" - I find faith to be a curious derangement of simple minds. And while I do love apple pie, I can't say I give a rat's anus about baseball. Or that mess of a game we call "football," for that matter.

How about someone like yourself, or Mosby, or King_David, who fear and loathe race-mixing with such vitriol, how can any of you be Americans with your rage towards "mutts"? How can you, while cheering on an ongoing occupation, the use of military force against hostage civilians, proclaim liberty to be a value you hold? It's obviously a self-cancelling stance all of you take there, so surely you can be no more Americans, yes? And e Plurbus unum, coming from someone who advocatesthe segregation of nations by race through use of force and ethnic cleansing? Oh my.

You just listed a string of "values" that, between the two of us, none of which are held in value.

Know how I define "American"? Were you born here? You're an American. Did you immigrate here? You're an American. Nice and simple, I don't have to come up with all these stupid self-defeating contortions to define "American."

But then, I'm not the one of us who is groping and grasping in a desperate attempt to justify blind, fawning support for the latest incarnation of a fucking shitty idea like racist nationalism, now am I?

[Fozzledick]

25. Nice glass house you have there

Regarding your last paragraph, yes you are the one grasping to justify the creation of a racist apartheid state and the destruction of a culturally diverse Democracy.

I expect you'll continue with the usual evasions and denials, but you really shouldn't be throwing stones.

[Scootaloo]

26. Am I, now?

Which racist apartheid state would that be? Which culturally diverse democracy? How would the state be created, how would the democracy be destroyed?

Poor Fozzie. You really think that simply going "No, you!" is actually an argument, don't you?

[Fozzledick]

29. Have you forgotten what group you're in or what positions you've taken?

That's either the worst case of Reagan's disease (selective amnesia) I've seen in a long time, or else the laziest denial you've come up with yet.

And FWLIW, you asked a simple question and I answered it directly: yes you are the one who fits that description. If you didn't want a truthful answer you shouldn't have asked.

[Scootaloo]

30. No, Fozzie, I know exactly what my posiitons are

I'm curious about your very unique interpretation of these positions. Please, expound, in detail

[aranthus]

27. This is an outright lie.

How about someone like yourself, or Mosby, or King_David, who fear and loathe race-mixing with such vitriol.

[font color=blue]If you can't even be bothered to tell the truth about your opponents, then why should anyone believe anything you write?[/font]

[Fozzledick]

31. I've found when someone falsely accuses me of believing something I've never thought

that they're just projecting their own mentality, and are incapable of comprehending that other people don't think the same way they do.

[Scootaloo]

32. Well, now I'm curious

How can you defend the notion of a multiethnic state defining itself by a just single ethnicity - which is indeed your position here - and claim that it's a lie when others point out that by necessity this means you are opposed to race mixing?

I mean it's part and parcel there, Aranthus, the two notions just go together. If you're going to define a state by a race, then that race must itself be defined. And when a race is defined, all "deviations" just become unacceptable, if only because of the complexity of keeping everything in order!

You can't support racist nationalism and at the same time have no problem with "crossing the streams." Racist nationalism demands blood purity - and you can doll it up however you want, use whatever euphemisms you like, it all boils down to the same thing.

Maybe you just don't put much thought into your ideology? Maybe, maybe. I might be wrong about your personal positions, but I'm not wrong about the necessity of these beliefs to racist nationalism - and you very definitely are taking that position. I see a Republican bumper sticker, i figure the person has Republican stances, I see a zionist talking, I figure the person believes in Zionism. Maybe spend some time thinking about what you believe.

Such as the notion that America is based on "Judeo-Christian values," for crying out loud.

[King_David]

36. "Someone like yourself, or Mosby, or King_David, who fear and loathe race-mixing with such vitriol"

WTF. ??? What a bunch of shit.

There is no worse bigot than a self described AntiZionist .

Imagine a website tolerating a self described antisemite? Well some do like other sites you belong to ( self admittedly like the Stormfront clips you post here regularly as seen in this thread

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1134&pid=61620 )

But no matter what anyone says there is no difference between antiZionism and AntiSemitism and it's being proven here every day.

[Scootaloo]

42. See my reply to Aranthus

And yes, I have a spy account on Stormfront, Dave. I actually have several such accounts spread around the web, because I like to keep track of what the nutters are up to.

Rather amusing how it turned out I can use such tracking of the whackos to prove that you're talking out the wrong orifice, though, as per that thread

[King_David]

48. A spy account ?

LOL

Oki doki that's clear .

LOL

[Scootaloo]

51. Yep, Dave, a spy account

That's what it's called when you make an account on a web forum, so that you can get viewing access to hidden groups, the search feature, member profiles, all that sort of stuff that might require an active and approved account to view.

[King_David]

53. Ok if you say so

But just noticing some of the things you say about "Zionists " not being so clever any talking about "Zionist" genes and Zionism and white supremism etc -- these things wouldn't be out of place on that website and you cut and paste from their forums onto DU forums AND you tell us your a (spy) member of Stormfront .

Ok --- if you say so.

[Scootaloo]

58. "Zionist genes"?

You come up with some weird shit, Dave.

[ZombieHorde]

82. The older I get the more I dislike the illusion of identity.

I need to stop perpetuating it.

[Fozzledick]

83. Just remember who you truly are and let go of your attachment to manifest forms.

On the other (clapping) hand, some things are "just like this". Sometimes a mountain is just a mountain.

[ZombieHorde]

87. Not the worst advice. :)

I love your signature line.

[Fozzledick]

88. Don't look at it too long

You wouldn't want to get eaten...