Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Israel's apartheid wall - The Guardian

I can't think of much that is more badly focussed or counter productive than blaming the victims of oppression for the (relatively speaking) pin pricks they are inflicting in response to the terrible injustices and daily violence they face. Your stance is akin to refusing to support the abolition of slavery because some slaves were violent in a slave rebellion, or failing to condemn the holocaust because some Jewish partisans killed German train crews.

You've got things totally ass backwards. If you want to see Palestinians behave more nicely, raise your voice against the conditions that cause them to act the way they do.

This thread is indicative of the problem with people of your mind - it's about the Israelis stealing land by building a wall that nearly every state in the world considers illegal and here I am trying to stop seemingly intelligent people from blaming the whole situation on the Palestinians' desparate response

(shakes head)

It is nothing to do with my views, it is to do with the Palestinian campaign and how it is doomed to failure. I also am not blaming the situation on anything. I fully support the aims of statehood and justice for the Palestinian people. But they will not acheive it like this. It WON'T HAPPEN. This is not a value judgement. This is not a 'which side are you on'. This is not a lack of solidarity. This is seeing clearly that the terror attacks and motar attacks ARE a political strategy by Palestinian groups - not some desperate defence. They are calculated, equipped and considered. And they are a tragi-comic miscalculation. A total own-goal.

I am not refusing to support the abolition of the slave trade, nor am I blaming the Jews for the holocaust - and for the record, the situation in Israel and the occupied territories is akin to neither for numerous reasons.

What I am doing is showing frustration that support for the Palestinians and progress toward statehood will forever falter if the terror attacks continue.
 
It is nothing to do with my views
It is though. It's about putting blame firmly where it lies, and that is at Israel's door. The Palestinian resistance is just about irrelevant and the more the world's governments and media realises people won't stand for that smokescreen the sooner there may be some progress in the situation.
 
But if some Palestinians are setting back the cause so spectacularly and demonstrably, surely that needs addressing and not ignoring?
 
But if some Palestinians are setting back the cause so spectacularly and demonstrably, surely that needs addressing and not ignoring?
But they're not particularly, or at least it's negligible. The imbalance in power to influence the media only gives that impression.

Which is a function of both Israel's PR power as well as that it's far more difficult to show the structural violence - the daily day to day grinding poverty and oppression resulting from the occupation/siege - than it is to show the result of an act of violence.

But in any case, Israeli violence has claimed 400 dead Palestinians this year, while Israel has suffered 29. How on earth can the acts that led to those 29 dead set things back more than the raids which killed 400? How is it that yor image of the situation is dominated by images of some masked men with a mortar and not the F-16, Apache and Merkava crews that launch metal at Palestinian civilians to much more devastating effect? Don't you think there's something wrong with the way information is transmitted and received if that's the view that dominates your mind?
 
But if some Palestinians are setting back the cause so spectacularly and demonstrably, surely that needs addressing and not ignoring?
by removing the situation that causes them to do that in the first place?
 
by removing the situation that causes them to do that in the first place?

So they are just animals who reflexively lash out by assembling a mortar?

And you said yourself that it's effect was insignificant. So why do it?
 
Don't you think there's something wrong with the way information is transmitted and received if that's the view that dominates your mind?

So you propose that to solve the problem we simply challenge the entire way the news agenda works, how humans process data and the global geopolitical balance. This is preferable than stopping motar and terror attacks?
 
So they are just animals who reflexively lash out by assembling a mortar?

And you said yourself that it's effect was insignificant. So why do it?
To keep their plight on the world's agenda, to satisfy a public that wants to see a response to:

* air raids
* armoured incursions
* the resultant killing and injuring of Palestinians on a massive scale
* the cutting off of energy, food and industrial supplies
* being imprisoned with all sea, land and air access barred by Israel
* collapsing public and health services, which should be paid for by Israel as the occupying power, but which it has withheld

How much justification do you need? How desparate would you be to do something if your children were playing in streets with open sewers and you struggled to get $2 a day and then there might not be any food to buy, while 10km away immigrants from around the world with little connection to the land moved into new housing built on your grandparents land on govt grants?

Just how fucked off would you be if that was your life?
 
So you propose that to solve the problem we simply challenge the entire way the news agenda works, how humans process data and the global geopolitical balance. This is preferable than stopping motar and terror attacks?
You klutz :D
 
To keep their plight on the world's agenda, to satisfy a public that wants to see a response to:

* air raids
* armoured incursions
* the resultant killing and injuring of Palestinians on a massive scale
* the cutting off of energy, food and industrial supplies
* being imprisoned with all sea, land and air access barred by Israel
* collapsing public and health services, which should be paid for by Israel as the occupying power, but which it has withheld

How much justification do you need? How desparate would you be to do something if your children were playing in streets with open sewers and you struggled to get $2 a day and then there might not be any food to buy, while 10km away immigrants from around the world with little connection to the land moved into new housing built on your grandparents land on govt grants?

Just how fucked off would you be if that was your life?

Of course I would be. I would be fucked off with the religious nutters making the problems worse. I would be angry that our elected government were isolated and ostracised by other governments. I would be frustrated that whenever the world's media reported on us, it was always one of the balaclava folks who were given coverage. It generally sucks being a Palestinian.

I still don't know why Arafat didn't sign the agreement in Oslo. It was rubbish, and a stitch up, but it was a start.
 
I still don't know why Arafat didn't sign the agreement in Oslo. It was rubbish, and a stitch up, but it was a start.
Err, he did sign :confused:

IMO, the so-called peace process is a sham - facts are being created on the ground (ie, land stolen) by the Wall and by Israeli control of the WB

Some facts:

* The West Bank has been divided into areas A, B and C since the mid-90s Oslo agreements.
* Area A – under PA control – 2% of land area of the West Bank
* Area B – PA civil control, Israeli military control – 26% of land area
* Area C – Israeli military control

* Total area of WB under Israeli military control – 98%

* Total land area of the West Bank 5,860km2
* Israel has confiscated or annexed 3,350km2 for exclusive use of the Jewish population.

* 2006 – 440,000 Jewish settlers in 120 official colonies and 100 outposts in the West Bank

* Separate legal systems exist for Jewish settlers and Palestinian residents. Any Jew can immigrate to the West Bank under the law of Return.
* Palestinians are subject to a separate Entry Into Israel law and Israeli military orders.

http://domino.un.org/pdfs/Badil_06-07Survey.pdf
 
Of course I would be. I would be fucked off with the religious nutters making the problems worse. I would be angry that our elected government were isolated and ostracised by other governments.
When in history has a bombarded and besieged people ever blamed its own government?
 
'"When I look from the window and see the wall, I immediately close the blinds and smoke a cigarette. It's like living at the end of the world," says Sufian, who asked to change his name to preserve his family's privacy.

His neighbours fled long ago, as the West Bank barrier crept down the main street of al-Ram, dividing families, separating children from schools and patients from clinics, and severing the road back to Jerusalem. Stranded outside Jerusalem by the barrier, al-Ram has become a virtual ghost town.'

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/jul/09/israelandthepalestinians
 
Aye, well the apartheid system collapsed eventually.

Only a matter of time before Israeli thugs get a taste of failure too.
 
Spion: "The UN has declared the Barrier to be illegal...": First, you and I have discussed this ad nauseum and what happens is that I state facts, you retort with insults and the facts are left untouched by you. I will again ask you, please respond factually; Is it true, yes or no, the issue you refer to is nothing but a BRIEF?

What is a Brief? Do you know Spion? In talking with you over the years I have found you certainly to be intelligent and therefore am going to assume that you understand what it is. If so, how can you propagate this? A brief has nothing to do with legality or illegality. THAT issue is determined in courts where BOTH sides are allowed to present evidence and to examine the evidence of the opposing side with , theoretically, an impartial arbiter that will in fact determine the legality or illegality of a given issue.

Ergo, there is nothing legal OR illegal by the Barrier in terms of International Law.

IF you want to again debate the issue of the Barrier, in terms of its moral implications, that is yet another subject and we can discuss that. However, for you to declare that a court has found it illegal is incorrect, and given that I have explained the above infromation to you (and others) at the very least 3 times, you are either ignorant or purposely deceptive.

I know you are not ignorant. Why then mislead people? You have an ideological stake given your political orientation. Cool. To each their own and if enough people who are CITIZENS of Israel agree with you, that is great. However, they do not and you are well aware that aside from very left leaning boards, organisations, and otherwise individuals, your position is a fringe position. The majority of the world happens to disagree with your orientation.

Here is the thing though, why do people who are very driven ideologically feel the need to impose THEIR ideology upon nations and groups they are not a part of? It is true, as I replied to another poster some days ago, that a person need not actually go to a specific place in order to form an opinion about it.

However, in retrospect and further consideration I have come to the conclusion that while they may certainly form their own opinions, they have no right to impose thier OPINIONS upon a foreign group or region.

More FACTS: The "Wall" is not a "wall" but a "Barrier." What is the point? Is it just an issue of semantics? The points is that this structure, still uncomplete, is for its vast majority mere chainlink and razor. This is still going to serve the same purpose, but a "wall" has certain connotations. Psychologically, the type of structuture represents a particular mindset. A wall totally separates. It does not allow for visibility, it shields one side from the other. A fence may serve the same purpose in terms of keeping two sides apart but it leaves a different psychological impression.


People can easily see through chainlink. They know that they are separated certainly, but that they are not disdained as such (you certainly will contradict that but the psychology of what I am saying is correct). It represents protection more than separation.

Of course that is exactly what the Barrier is constructed for, PROTECTION.

FACT: There has been a drop in all attacks above the 76 percentile. Fatal attacks have dropped by slightly more than 96% (both facts pretatin to attacks emanating from areas bordered by the Barrier).

FACT: It follows the route of "hot" areas in terms of emanation, NOT of "Settlements" although certainly the Blocs that are most likely going to be retained in Final Settlement are taken into consideration when feasible along the objective route.

FACT: The "Barrier" is not intended as a "border," an issue that will rest entirely upon "Palestinians" and negotiations.

FACT:Apartheid is not practiced by Israel. Almost 20% of Israeli citizens are of the same exact ethnic grouping as "Palestinians." How would Israel seek to exclude "Palestinians" on their basis of ethnicity and still give not only equal BUT GREATER RIGHTS to just under 20% of its own citizenry? It makes absolutely no sense.

Even that blowfish Jimmy Carter conceeded in his latest tome that Israeli-Arabs enjoy equal rights within Israel. If so, and it is, how would Israel then exclude "Palestinians" simply for being "Palestinian?" It makes absolutely no sense whatsoever .

Israel engages in protection of its citizenry , has proven that the measure not only saves lives but comes preciously close to eliminating the problem, and all you can say is that it is racist because it SLOWS down innocent "Palestinians." Hmmm...
 
Spion: "Tangent's Ha'aretz article was great because, amoong other things, it showed that Israel steals land and is confident because America guarantees that Israel will be able to annex the largest 'Settlements'.": the article , years old already, refers to an advisor and friend of an ex -PM who is now a vegetable. the man in question has NOTHING AT ALL to do with either the current govt. (despite the govt. being led by the political party the ex-PM created) OR its policies.

Even at that time, and in that article, the man conceeeds that Sharon NEVER meant for long term "Settlements." Ariel Sharon was a man who was an excellent tactician and as all are, he was very pragmatic. He realised long ago that there would be yet another Arab State ( to join the 24 now in existence) and that this new state would have to exist on some portion of land apart from Jordan, and Israel Proper.

Ergo, all that was left was Gaza, which geographically is absolutely tiny (albeit incredibly densely populated), and the heartland of the Jewish Homeland, the so called "WB."

The "WB" contains some of the holiest sites to the Jewish Religion as well as sites that are irrevocably tied to Jewish Culture and History. There are also some parts that are extremely valuable in terms of tactical value given the eternal warafe foisted upon Israel by the Arab World.

Yet, at the same time, "Palestine" must exist if Israel is to continue existing. To not conceed this would in the extreme short term lead to the absolute destruction of the Jewish State simply be a demographical shift. If Israel annexed either Gaza and/or the "WB" it would have to of course offer suffrage to the Arab residents. Immediately Israeli-Jews would border on minority status and this in turn, by the simple vote, would lead to the loss of its Zionist character.

The point, and of course I have said this many times, Israel must cede both Gaza and the vast majority of the so called "WB." As a result, your belief in annexing the homes of the nearly 230,000 people who live in the so called "WB" (I do not include the oft quoted statistic of 270,000 because that is based upon inclusion of E. Jerusalem in the data and E. Jerusalem is already annexed territory and thus considered by Israel, to be irrevocably part of any Final Settlement) is naive.

In order to cede viable land (viable in terms of providing contigous bordering land) Israel must make uncomfortable concessions it would otherwise resist making. This includes some of the heaviest Israeli-Jewish concentrations.

As I have stated elsewhere in this Forum, the Kadima Platform (platofrm of Israel's ruling party) calls for a retention of 4 to 6% in terms of the total "WB" land mass. In exchange Israel will cede 4 to 6% of its own land so that there is ZERO loss in overall land.

For full disclosure I have to let people know that when Israel entered current negotiations on this issue (it is being discussed currently) it attempted to retain almost 16% but this is a stock negotiating tactic. You ask for far more than you hope to retain and thus in the end the opposing side will be able to sell a "hard bargain won" to its own demographic. Currently, as of this past Thursday morning (no negotiations take place from Thursday morning until Monday because of reglious concerns. Friday is Juma for Muslims, Jewish Shabbat begins that evening and lasts until Satruday nightfall, Sunday is the Sabbath for Christian Arabs) , Israel was trying to negotiate for slightly more than 10% and offering land in the West Negev District , bordering Gaza but of course despite the newfound love between the PA and HAMAS the PA is still not crazy about having any land gaining Gaza and naturally so.


My own wish? Although it has a very rich Jewish History I would love, if it were ever possible, for the Israeli land offer to come from Galilee. Specifically from the Triangle (a part of Israel Proper almost entirely populated by Israeli-Arabs but very rich in terms of resources including arable land). The problem, other than the issues of contigious concessions, is that 85% of Israeli-Arabs state that they would never wish to live in any "Palestine," but wish to remain Israeli. Heck, even HAMAS Gazan PM Haniyeh has 2 sisters who live in Negev and refuse to even visit Gaza. Israeli-Arabs are VERY smart.


Finally, America does not dictate Israeli policy although it sure wishes it did. to hell with America and if you really want an inside peek, most people are totally unaware but when the US entered its Peace Keeping Deployment in Beirut, and I was there, our men engaged several US Marine Patrols. Noone died in the skirmishes but we did rack a percentage (only in wounds though) without incurring a single scratch.

The media tells you one thing, but the world is far different. America can allow its people, and obviously others, to think what they want them to think and that is fine with Israel as long as it does not conflict directly or indirectly with Israel's Hard Objectives.
 
The problem, other than the issues of contigious concessions, is that 85% of Israeli-Arabs state that they would never wish to live in any "Palestine," but wish to remain Israeli. Heck, even HAMAS Gazan PM Haniyeh has 2 sisters who live in Negev and refuse to even visit Gaza. Israeli-Arabs are VERY smart.
What on earth do *you* think that prooves?

Because to any sane person it prooves that the occupied territories are kept in a state of misery and if an Israeli-Arab visits he will have the Israeli secret police all over him like a rash.
 
What on earth do *you* think that prooves?

Because to any sane person it prooves that the occupied territories are kept in a state of misery and if an Israeli-Arab visits he will have the Israeli secret police all over him like a rash.

Aye, it proves nothing except that a people who have been violently booted out of their homes numerous time are hardly going to let their tormentors know they'll easily shift somewhere else are they?

"The Israeli Democracy Institute (IDI) surveyed Israeli citizens, published its "Democracy Index" in June 2007, and included some disturbing findings in it. Its survey showed:

-- only 54% favor freedom of religion and a bare 50% feel Arabs and Jews should have equal rights;

-- 87% rate Jewish-Arab relations poor or very poor;

-- 78% oppose having Arab parties or ministers join Israel's government;

-- 43% believe Arabs aren't intelligent;

-- 55% feel the government should encourage Arab emigration"

http://www.idi.org.il/sites/english/Pages/Results.aspx?k=Democracy Index
 
Spion: "Israel militarily controls 98% of the 'WB'.":Suuuuuure. 98%? I can guess where you pulled that one out of but I am the civil one, remember? Actually the real figure is 100%. In terms of whether Arabs in the "WB" actually see Israeli soldiers or other security apparattus, those living in the heaviest populated areas rarely do and it has been going int hat direction for quite some time.

I am sure, living in the UK you are very familiar with your ex-PM Blair and his current position. He of course is the Mid-East Envoy for the Quartet and is, to his credit, adamantly working to make things better in the "WB."

He was the driving force behind the PA Infantry (something I MIGHT one day despise him for but am currently very happy for) which has 600 men training in Jordan with their US trainers (Security Contractors under direct superivsion of a US military hierarchy). 600 is the current Battallion size for their newly created force and 2 Battalions are already currently deployed in the "WB."

One would imagine that you would have known about this. I have certainly talked about it here at least once if you did not learn on your own (YOUR sites probably do not discuss this). Ergo my disgust with your "98% Rabbit Out of the Hat."

The second Battalion is now deployed and responsbile for the security of an area larger than all of Gaza (The Jenin Batallion, the 2nd deployed Battallion).

Then you of course have the PA Police who are a massive apparrattus that is actually very much in violation of both the Oslo Accords and their own Charter and Laws but I will not discuss that for now. Only to mention it to say that they are perhaps the heaviest saturated police force on the face of the Earth. There is a whopping (actually more than) 16 police officers for every 1000 PA citizens. Israel, one of the most security conscious places on the face of the planet has slightly more than 4 per 1000 (4 itself being the world average).

The Israeli figure of 4 covers all of Israel and the so called "Territories" so that your insinuation of a heavy presence (as opposed to the actual issue of ultimate control which would make no sense, should you suggest that it was your true intent) is ridiculous. WHEN events such as Ni'ilin take place, of course one will see Israel react and so they should. One would be incredibly silly to suggest that a nation responsibile for the security of any given area should not try to neutralise armed threats. Should those whackos in N'ilin start giving Rubber Necklaces (placing a tyre around the neck of people they believe to be "collaborators," which is a ridiculous term if applied to people there, and then pouring gas on the tyres and lighting them until the person smells and looks like a roasted pig left on the stick a day too long) you can best believed "Palestinians" will start begging the IDF to stand strong.

Whether you choose to believe it or not, this dynamic just described (and others very similar) take place from time to time there, and used to take place daily for years at a time. My memory always goes back to post "Disengagement" (the Withdrawal) when I returned home for the last war.

After the war was done I was deployed with this and that (such boring tasks as picking up Cluster Munitions fired by Hezbollah all over the Galilee) and before my deployment and formal promotion (in rank and duty) to my former Checkpoint, I was deployed to Western Negev District.

Other Brigades were still deployed along that border, and down on the Egyptian Border. Then there was an Op that you do not see in your media, certainly not your sources. I can of course talk about it because it has been reported. In Gaza, just adjacent to the Rafah Crossing, on the southern edge of Rafah City (as opposed to Camp, Sultan, etc., etc.) sat a village of Settled Bedua.

When Israel had a "Settlement" just West of them, these Bedua were completely at ease with Israelis and worked there, socialised with the Israelis and the Guest Workers, and some people from both villages were as close as family.

About 3 days after the last Israeli vehicle left Gaza HAMAS gunmen encircled the Bedua village and refused to let anyone in or out. They threatened complete extermination for this village of "Collaborators." HAMAS was convinced by Fatah members in the PA, actually from Dahlan's faction, to call off the dogs lest the PA be painted as barbaric (as if Ramallah has not proved that forever).


The villagers though had their mukhtar ( usually means "mayor" today but Bedua are very tribal and it was more akin to chief of their primary clan) beg Israel to give them asylum as it sometimes does for allies like the SLA, etc. This presented some problems though because there are actually, and I am SURE YOU will be suprised, a fair number of "Palestinains" who also have warm relations with us.

Fast forward to my deployment south and HAMAS in the throes of its isolation after its coup in Gaza again surrounded the village and this time victimised a few of the villagers who had been at work and returned in the evening.

Other IDF went in, my G'dud was not operational over the Border, we had duties in the Negev at our new home base (our main base is on a mountainside over looking Lebanon but our main training base, Brigade wise, was Mahaneh 80 which was an old Jordanian base from the Jordanian OCCUPATION of the 'WB,' our new training facility was a brand new base constructed down south that I am not sure I can discuss because I have never seen it discussed Outside). They bought the evacuated villagers into the base and I will, as long as I live, never forget the looks on those faces.

What was my point in telling you this long subjective experience? To allow you and others to realise that Israel has a duty to protect ALL PEOPLE in the so called "WB". If we instead said, for example, "Ahhh just let the PA Police and Infantry (and of course their massive Security Apparattus which I did not also point out, which they still have not consolidated and vetted, another huge violation of Oslo, etc.) protect their own people there" we would be not only violating International Law (something you surely never realised) and more importnaly morally remiss and culpable.
 
Idaho: "What does Rahcamim think that the poll that found 85% of evaluated Arabs would never wish to live in a 'Palestinian State' means?": You misdunderstood both the poll and my intent in posting it; the poll adrressed the issue of whether or not polled Israeli-Arabs would ever want to live in a free, propserous, and democratic 'Palestine'."

What do I think THAT means? It means that even in the best scenario they would still wish to live in Israel because they identify as Israeli-Arab.

"Why would Israeli-Arabs wish to live in 'Palestine' when it would mean that they would just be brutalised by Israeli secret police (sic).": Why would you imagine that a person who has left Israel and is now living in another nation would ever be brutalised by anyone from Israel? OK, key phrase here: "Independant Palestine." Not "Palestinian places like the 'WB' or HAMASastan," a democratic and viable nation secure in its existence and its place in the world...not making up fictional histories and existing merely in a symbiotic relationship with a nation it despises.

That said, I have very, very little faith in polls from any source. Poll science is a new and burgeoning field but it is also full of people who have no clue whatsoever about how to go about it. Even those fully schooled in the science have not even begun to grasp implications or methodology.

Why then, would Rachamim EVER use a poll as a point of his screeds? Because this one happens to provoke intelligent debate in an area I wish to take it, naturally. First, it was conducted by a daily Arabic newspaper , in Israel, but a declared opponent of the Jewish State. It took only a control group from a single Arab (large sized) village and is hardly indicative scientifically. Yet, there is value even there in that it allows people to escape thier fantasy (not you per se) of a monolithic Arab culture in and around Israel.

I also happen to know that this is the view held by the majority of Israelis. How would I possibly know this? I have lived most of my life in my nation and as a native Arabic speaker (my first language) was talking with and associating with many Israeli-Arabs. You also see it in other areas within the society but in the end they wil not matter when related to a rational person. Offering a poll REPUTEDLY taken in a scientific manner however will get most rational people to examine the subject in a different way (different from the usual stereotype of a Fedayeen in a cheked kaffeyeh having his toddlers playing Shahad).
 
Weren't you telling us last week to ignore what holocaust survivors were saying?

You have a pretty long list of things people should ignore. Ironic.
 
Spion: "Aye, it proves nothing...": Aye matey, well blow me down and shiver me timbers. Pass me the lime as I put on me eye patch, strap the parrot on my shoulder down, and chase that white whale Ahab to sell for some dubloons!

Do people actually still talk that way over there? I have not been there since the mid 90s but for the life of me, outside of some very old Irishmen have never heard a person talk like that.

Absolutely nothing to do with the thread, I know, I know. Just made me laugh is all.

Back to the thread...

"Israeli Democracy Institute Poll":


"Only 54% of Israelis favour freedom of religion."

Well, aside from referring you to my previous post about the utility of polls and their "conclusions," this "factoid" is absolutely ridiculous. EVERY citizen has the vote. IF they believed this and the other non-sensical conclusions you would see it in reflected in our political system.

Israel is a not a dictatorship. It is a Liberal Democracy of the Parliamentary model. Why are these views not represented in policy?

"Only 50% of polled Israelis feel Arabs should have equal rights." Same as above. The conclusion is engaging in absurdity.

"87% rate Arab and Israeli relations as poor.": I would wager probably 96 or 97% of all Israelis feel that way. When we are not even allowed to use some Arab airports for airline transfers the situation is atrocious but then this is the fault of those Arab Nations (not all are against us but several certainly are). They refused and continue to refuse to recognise Israel or to live in peace with it.

Israelis are not commiting terrorism. We have had 3 Israeli-Jews commit acts of terrorism against Arabs since our RE establishment in 1948. How many acts by Arabs against Israelis?

When they want peace and codial relations I do not think many rational people doubt that Israel will give it.

"78% of polled Israelis say that Arab parties should not join Govt.": Well that is one that is one issue I complained about, in this forum, just 3 days ago. I think it is terribly wrong. On the other hand, there are 12 Arab MKs. These 12 MKs represent a demographic just under 20%, most of whom are far younger than 18 so that an actual 9% of the Israeli population has 12 seats in the legislature.

Israel HAS taken remedial steps such as funding voter outreach, democracy iniatives in the predominatly Arab areas of the nation, a few years ago lorewing the bar from a neccessary 3% of the vote to 1.5% in terms of seats in K'nesset. This important step allowed easier access to representation for minority ethnicities.


"43% of polled Israelis feel Arabs are not intelligent.": Are there Israelis who think this way? Of course. Every nation has bigots and ignoramuses but in Israel their lot is harder than anywhere else, and no way would anyone be able to cplain truthfully that almost 1 out of 2 (in this case close to 1.5 out of 2) Israelis feel that way. Again, you would see it not only reflected in the vote but in the social policies,etc.


"55% of polled Israelis feel that Arabs should emigrate.": Again, some do feel that way, more than those those who think they are stupid...granted. However, AGAIN, where is the reflection?

"Poll of Israelis.": Um, Israel IS the Jewish State but it is far, far, frar from monolithic. Clearly only Jews were (ALLEGEDLY) polled and this is indicative of shoddiness in the scholarship and science involved in the polls conducted by this NGO.

If I went to Mea She'arim and polled 100 members of the Neteuri Karta, I will have VERY pointed results. If I go to Yaffa and only poll Jews there, I will have a VERY pointed results, as I will in the "Settlements" of the "WB," etc. This particular NGO does not allow people to view and/or examine its methodology. It publishes sentationalist nonsense that makes absolutely no sense to anyone (no matter the ideology or slant) with minimal intelligence.
 
Dexter: "Was not Rachamim jsut saying last week that people should ignore Holocaust Survivors?": Dexter, tell me that your statement is not misleading.

I have never told anyone what to do. I did however say this PARTICULAR Survivor was a "biddy" and disgusting. In fact, she is a moron and should be charged for the air she breathes. My own mother was a Survivor and even without that, and even without the FACT that almost all Jews share a very, very close genetic connection, why would I EVER say something of that nature? I am a Jew, a member of the most effected demographic in that event.


That said, you need to pick who you are going to ignore. I would never censor anyone, including that windbag. Just because she is extremely ignorant does not mean that I would wish to muzzle her.
 
Spion: "Aye, it proves nothing...": . . . Do people actually still talk that way over there? I have not been there since the mid 90s but for the life of me, outside of some very old Irishmen have never heard a person talk like that.
It's quite typical of you that you externalise what is in fact your own ignorance. It's a deeply rooted personality trait of yours
 
Idaho: "What does Rahcamim think that the poll that found 85% of evaluated Arabs would never wish to live in a 'Palestinian State' means?": You misdunderstood both the poll and my intent in posting it; the poll adrressed the issue of whether or not polled Israeli-Arabs would ever want to live in a free, propserous, and democratic 'Palestine'."

What do I think THAT means? It means that even in the best scenario they would still wish to live in Israel because they identify as Israeli-Arab.

"Why would Israeli-Arabs wish to live in 'Palestine' when it would mean that they would just be brutalised by Israeli secret police (sic).": Why would you imagine that a person who has left Israel and is now living in another nation would ever be brutalised by anyone from Israel? OK, key phrase here: "Independant Palestine." Not "Palestinian places like the 'WB' or HAMASastan," a democratic and viable nation secure in its existence and its place in the world...not making up fictional histories and existing merely in a symbiotic relationship with a nation it despises.

I didn't write 'brutalises'. Did you misquote deliberately?

I think you'll find 85% of the world thinks that Israel and Palestine should be nuked from orbit to stop them dragging the world into more conflict - should we listen to them?
 
Spion: "It is quite clear that Rachamim externalises what is in fact his own ignorance.": Hmmm. I will be absolutely honest with you Spion, I do not know if it is my English but I cannot make heads or tails of that sentence. What on Earth do you mean? If you had simply said, "You externalise your own ignorance," I would have no problem understanding it although it still would not make sense given the context. Anyway, I will just run with the idea that you are trying to communicate that I am ignorant in expressing my suprise and curiosity over your English vernacular.

How is it ignorant? Becuase I , not a native speaker of your language to begin with, has never heard such archaic expressions? I DO consume an inordinate amount of English TV and media but even there I have not heard anyone outside of teleplays on 19th and 18th Century subject matter.

"It is a deeply rooted personality trait of Rachamim's.": Well, I can offer no opinion because I do not understand what you are saying. If you ever decipher it maybe I will be able to express an opinion (I know you cannot wait).

Still, I have a very big question for you. As I predicted (I believe I did anyway, if not I thought it). Why have you AGAIN decided to engage in criticism of me as a person as opposed to disputing the substance of my posts (no, disparaging me as ignorant is NOT talking about anything substantiative). In my small and ignorant mind I would like to think that the subject matter you yourself iniated was important enough to warrant adult discussion but then you yourself must not believe it either. Cool.


Idaho: "Rachamim stated that Idaho said the word "brutalise" in relation to Israeli Secret Police (sic) and their treatment of 'Palestinians.' Why did he do so? Was it a deliberate misquote?": I often paraphrase out of both expediency and as a tool to help me internalise a person's view See Spion?). For brevity's sake I will just give a very scant explanation of my methods.

Many here ask why I do not just use the "Quote" feature as opposed to paraphrasing. I am a Jew as I am sure you know. Traditional Jews have a rote and memory culture. When we are schooled it is repetitive and this is how we are taught to learn. Paraphrasing is a tool that helps people assimilate infromation. If you are forced to think about what is being stated to the degree that you must use synonyms and rewite it as efficently as possible in terms of number of words, composition, and so forth, you will be forced to develop new synapses.

I am also sure that you know alot about the process of learning, how our brains function in this area. Interestingly we Jews have used the memory trick I am talking about since time immemorial and it just happens to turn out that it is actually rooted in scientific fact.

When we learn, our brain lays new circuitry. If we do not engage in repetive exercise of these pathways we end up losing them. Repetitiveness ensures a higher degree of retention. This is fact.

If you get to know many Charedi People (Observant Jews) you will see that they have amazing memories (most anyway, nothing is monolithic). We are forced to memorise volumes of very complicated Scripture, such as the two Talmuds, many different works on those two compliations, and so on. One must have them thoroughly memorised in their entirety before being permitted to progrsss to higher levels of learning.


"Idaho thinks Rachamim will find that 85% of the world think both Israel and the 'Palestinians' should be nuked as opposed to leading the rest of the world into a world war.": No, I do not agree. 85% of the Arab World certainly, of the Islamic World perhaps as well, but not the world. I have actual polls from more countries than you would imagine on just this and many related subjects but then I seriously laugh at polls as described previously).

The point though, is that we are free to think what we want. However, opinions are often represented in action by govt. It is certainly true of any stripe of democratic govt. It is also often true of non-democratic govts. amnd entities. Those that do not curry favour with their own demographics have a way of ending very prematurely.

I happen to be very well travelled and travel oftenI have been in 9 nations this year alone and will be in at least 3 more before Jewish New Year at which time I will start my year in the Ukraine, etc. In travelling all the various places I go to I am allowed to sample both local media as well as local opinion on a variety of things. Naturally I am always looking for attitudes and opinions concerning my homeland.

Even with some Arab and Muslim groups you will find entities supporting Israel. Most rational people abhor the idea of terrorism. They might even think, ignorantly, that Israel should not "occupy" "Palestinian Lands." Yet, these same people usally empathise everytime Arabs set off another bomb,etc.

Patronising boards and forums like this you might very well think 85% of the world feels that way. If so, you should get out more.

I will regress for a moment to address your aggravation (apparently) of my having used the word "brutalise" in my paraphrsing of your previous post.

Now, as for the word "brutalise," no of course you did not say that. That you did not wish to convey the idea though is up to you. In retrospect I agree that "all over you like a bad rash" is NOT "brutal treatment" per se. However, I and many others would argue it is a form of brutality. You can internalise the word as tied to physical action, etc., but I take it to mean what it actually means. The usual coonotation is teatment in a negative manner exceeding the accepted norm. "All over you like a bad rash, and the phrase "Secret Police" when used in conjunction with one another kind of scream "brutality."

Of course if this was NOT your intent, I thank you for letting me know and it is duly noted (as if I were some sort of arbiter).


Grandma: "Welcome.": A tour guide now? Suits you I am sure.
 
Idaho: "Rachamim stated that Idaho said the word "brutalise" in relation to Israeli Secret Police (sic) and their treatment of 'Palestinians.' Why did he do so? Was it a deliberate misquote?": I often paraphrase out of both expediency and as a tool to help me internalise a person's view See Spion?). For brevity's sake I will just give a very scant explanation of my methods.

Many here ask why I do not just use the "Quote" feature as opposed to paraphrasing. I am a Jew as I am sure you know. Traditional Jews have a rote and memory culture. When we are schooled it is repetitive and this is how we are taught to learn. Paraphrasing is a tool that helps people assimilate infromation. If you are forced to think about what is being stated to the degree that you must use synonyms and rewite it as efficently as possible in terms of number of words, composition, and so forth, you will be forced to develop new synapses.

I am also sure that you know alot about the process of learning, how our brains function in this area. Interestingly we Jews have used the memory trick I am talking about since time immemorial and it just happens to turn out that it is actually rooted in scientific fact.

You are talking to someone who's grandfather trained as a rabbi :D Paraphrasing people to turn their arguements into strawmen isn't Jewish, it's just your own personal daft nonsense. You must be shit at learning from rote if you completely change the meaning of someone's words which are printed in black and white on your screen.

Tbh I would be a better defender of the Israeli status quo than the crap you come out with, and I think that the modern state of Israel should be largely disbanded :D
 
Back
Top Bottom