[Ontiphishtim]

It does not mean the plan is right ether, just a plan based in discrimination against an ethnic group that does not fit the profile of the States predefined Race and Religion Character – and thus to be ejected and unwanted second class citizens in difference to the privileged first class citizens of the state..

If you say so. But all this is not relevant to me, what I support is most seperation between people as possible. The less Jews in their country and the less Arabs in our country, more peace will exist. Whether this reality fits with your un-realistic veluas, it is irrelevant. The claim that the Arabs or non-Jews are second class is false, of course.

Second-class stand can only be derived by law. The discrimination that exists - and exists not only against Arabs, but also against different sub-ethnic Jewish groups, is derived by ordinary bigotry and xenphobia, nothing less-nothing more.

They don’t want it? Apparently the Israeli-Arabs wish to stay in Israel.

Their will is not an important factor to my opinion. The 9000 deported settlers wished to remain in GS as well, it doesn't mean anything - though.

I don’t need to misrepresent you; you represent your own bigotry perfectly well enough on your own.

You preferctly do need to mispresnent me in order to claim I am a bigot. It is crystal clear you should do that.

But I’ll bite this baited hook none the less, what is the meaning of Arabs being a majority in Israel?

The meaning is that the Jews will no longer have a nation-state of their own.

Shall I guess, the destruction of the Jews to an Arab majority?

"I don’t need to misrepresent you; you represent your own bigotry perfectly well enough on your own."

[danholo]

I just feel that separation is the best solution, mainly for the people to realize all the internal problem and strife, when you can't blame "the enemy" anymore. Israelis would be forced to solve all their internal problems, or at least face them. I mean, OK, it's not like they don't do it, but since the focus is placed on the "outside" instead of the "inside", the latter isn't being solved.

[Tailz]

If you say so. But all this is not relevant to me, what I support is most seperation between people as possible. The less Jews in their country and the less Arabs in our country, more peace will exist. Whether this reality fits with your un-realistic veluas, it is irrelevant. The claim that the Arabs or non-Jews are second class is false, of course.

See my reply to Danholo below.

Second-class stand can only be derived by law. The discrimination that exists - and exists not only against Arabs, but also against different sub-ethnic Jewish groups, is derived by ordinary bigotry and xenphobia, nothing less-nothing more.

Their treated as a second class, lower than the sacred Jews whom the state was created for, thus when the ship of state is sinking, it’s the Arabs who are thrown overboard first.

Their will is not an important factor to my opinion. The 9000 deported settlers wished to remain in GS as well, it doesn't mean anything - though.

Of course you’re unconcerned about how those you intend to turf out with the trash feels. The problem with the settlers is that they should not have been there in the first place – totally different issues – one group living where they were born with those around them seeking to remove them because their not the right race/religion/culture, another group illegally squatting upon lands they only hold because the state sends forth an army to secure their squat.

You preferctly do need to mispresnent me in order to claim I am a bigot. It is crystal clear you should do that.

I don’t need to give you a shovel, to dig that hole your in any deeper.

The meaning is that the Jews will no longer have a nation-state of their own.

How would having a large population of Arabs affect the status of a land mass being the origin of the Jewish people? It didn’t seem to affect the status of the place when the Jews were a minority in Palestine – it was still the origin of the Jews even then.

What it does mean is that a racial group will not longer have hegemony to rule over all in a democratic state where the vote of the people provides the power to rule.

Shall I guess, the destruction of the Jews to an Arab majority?

"I don’t need to misrepresent you; you represent your own bigotry perfectly well enough on your own."

I was not putting words in your mouth, but having a guess as to why you would not desire an Arab majority in Israel.

But my guess was correct; you fear the destruction of the Jews by the Jews losing their Jewish State to the Arab majority within the state. No Jewish State, thus no Jews, visa-ve: destruction of the Jews! Thus why you wrote: The meaning is that the Jews will no longer have a nation-state of their own.

I just feel that separation is the best solution, mainly for the people to realize all the internal problem and strife, when you can't blame "the enemy" anymore. Israelis would be forced to solve all their internal problems, or at least face them. I mean, OK, it's not like they don't do it, but since the focus is placed on the "outside" instead of the "inside", the latter isn't being solved.

As strange as you may think to see me writing this, I agree. I think separation is a short term solution towards attaining a long term peace. But a difference I see is that the Israeli population is far better acclimatised to having Arabs within it, than the Palestinian population to having Jews within it. So I disagree that Arabs should be ejected from Israel just because their not Jews. While Jewish settlements in the West Bank should be removed because their illegal and will not be feasible as “outposts” when a line is draw between the two population groups.

[Ontiphishtim]

Their treated as a second class, lower than the sacred Jews whom the state was created for, thus when the ship of state is sinking, it’s the Arabs who are thrown overboard first.

They are not treated as a second class.

Code: Select allThe problem with the settlers is that they should not have been there in the first place

Yes, they actually should.

How would having a large population of Arabs affect the status of a land mass being the origin of the Jewish people?

Basic English here! "The meaning is that the Jews will no longer have a nation-state of their own."

But my guess was correct; you fear the destruction of the Jews by the Jews losing their Jewish State to the Arab majority within the state. No Jewish State, thus no Jews, visa-ve: destruction of the Jews!

Very good imagination you got there, but no. You can't invent thoughts of mine, sorry.

[kyleb]

Kyleb, look at your British Mandate maps. The Nile to the Euphrates is quite an accurate interpretation of what someone like Jabotinsky advocated...vis-a-vis creating the Israeli state in the borders of that mandate.

It seems you had me looking in the wrong place, as I have fund it was Herzl who first promoted the idea of Israel from the Nile to the Euphrates in his diary:

http://www.marxists.de/middleast/schoenman/map.htm

[Tailz]

They are not treated as a second class.

Then why are ppolitical groups looking to dump a part of the Israeli states Arab population. Surely if all Israeli’s are treated equally then the state would not wish to rid itself of anyone?

Yes, they actually should.

The settlers are squatters, in the odd occasion where they did legally purchase the land they live on, I’ve no problem with them. But the bulk of them are squatters upon someone else’s’ property.

Basic English here! "The meaning is that the Jews will no longer have a nation-state of their own."

And there being no Jewish Race State, would mean…what?

[Ontiphishtim]

Then why are ppolitical groups looking to dump a part of the Israeli states Arab population.

That exists in any country.

The settlers are squatters, in the odd occasion where they did legally purchase the land they live on, I’ve no problem with them. But the bulk of them are squatters upon someone else’s’ property.

Most do not.

And there being no Jewish Race State, would mean…what?

Exactly that.

[Tailz]

That exists in any country.

I’ll assume you meant to write: That will exist in another country.

I assume this is what you meant as what you did write makes no sense as a reply to what I wrote.

Now, I’ll reply, assuming my edit of your text is correct – please correct me if I got it wrong.

If the borders are moved about so that the area containing those Arabs does fall within the borders of the proposed Palestinian state, then yes it will technically be in another country – but it will be there by design, a design to exclude those Arabs from the Jewish state.

Most do not.

Most do not what? Most settlers do not squat illegally? Most settlers don’t legally purchase land? Most settlers don’t squat on someone else’s land?

Exactly that.

So what is the problem then? If the political entity ceased to be, all those Jews will still be there, and the land mass will still be the historic home of the Jews. So why the song and dancing over Israel not longer being a Jewish State?

[Ontiphishtim]

I’ll assume you meant to write: That will exist in another country.

No. You asked "Then why are ppolitical groups looking to dump a part of the Israeli states Arab population.", There are such political groups everywhere, in every country, that wants to dump part of the minority or whole of it. It doesn't mean that the discussed minority is second class.

Most do not what? Most settlers do not squat illegally?

You wrote: "But the bulk of them are squatters upon someone else’s’ property.", and I responded "Most of them do not". It shouldn't be that tough to understand it.

So what is the problem then?

The problam is exactly that.

[Tailz]

No. You asked "Then why are ppolitical groups looking to dump a part of the Israeli states Arab population.", There are such political groups everywhere, in every country, that wants to dump part of the minority or whole of it. It doesn't mean that the discussed minority is second class

Oh I certainly agree, I’d say the KKK would be more than happy to see American’s black population turfed out the door – the difference is that the KKK would have a snowballs hope in hell of getting such a measure passed in the US government, while Israel is actively seeking to do so. In Israel’s case its not Blacks, but Arabs its looking to eject. And not because redrawing the border as such will create more stability, but because redrawing the border as such will exclude the greatest amount of Arabs from the Jewish Race State. Which obviously means, that if the Arabs are the first ones you turn too, to throw out of the state, that’s your second class minority right there. Because you would never consider turfing out your precious first class Jews.

You wrote: "But the bulk of them are squatters upon someone else’s’ property.", and I responded "Most of them do not". It shouldn't be that tough to understand it.

So that would have to mean that they own the land they built those settlements upon? How did they come into the legal ownership of that land?

The problam is exactly that.

I don’t quite understand what the problem is – the land mass will still be there (it will not sink under the sea??), there will still be Jews there (unless they are all exterminated, which I obviously don’t support), and the area will still have a Jewish heritage and still be the origin/homeland of the Jews.

So what is the problem if Israel was no longer the Jewish state?

[Ontiphishtim]

Oh I certainly agree, I’d say the KKK would be more than happy to see American’s black population turfed out the door – the difference is that the KKK would have a snowballs hope in hell of getting such a measure passed in the US government, while Israel is actively seeking to do so.

Of course it does not.

Which obviously means, that if the Arabs are the first ones you turn too, to throw out of the state, that’s your second class minority right there. Because you would never consider turfing out your precious first class Jews.

It doesn't mean that they are second class citizens. Do you know what a second class citizen is?

So that would have to mean that they own the land they built those settlements upon? How did they come into the legal ownership of that land?

Israel gave them the lands Jordan prefered to call 'state lands', after it annaxed the West Bank in 1951.
But sometines, Jordan also took lands from ordinary people, making them 'state lands'. Later, these lands were used by Israel for the settlements, and thus there is a situation these lands were once privatly-owned lands.

So what is the problem if Israel was no longer the Jewish state?

It is exactly that.

[Tailz]

Of course it does not.

So Lieberman and other Israeli politicians have not suggested establishing boarders unilaterally and excluding areas from within those borders in order to reduce the Arab population from the Israeli demographics?

It doesn't mean that they are second class citizens. Do you know what a second class citizen is?

Of course their the second class to the first class citizens because their the ones your looking to toss overboard – your not looking to throw out Jews, just Palestinian Arabs.

Israel gave them the lands Jordan prefered to call 'state lands', after it annaxed the West Bank in 1951.

But Israel didn’t annex that land, as had it done so all of those Palestinians would be card carrying members of the Israeli state.

But sometines, Jordan also took lands from ordinary people, making them 'state lands'. Later, these lands were used by Israel for the settlements, and thus there is a situation these lands were once privatly-owned lands.

Everyone conquered those lands, and everyone was bound by the Geneva conventions as an occupier. Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, etc, all claimed some kind of ownership by conquest.

But anyway, so as far as your concerned, all of the West bank is owned by Israel as it annexed those lands and now has the right to put settlers onto those lands?

It is exactly that.

I’m fine with that, I think that would be a great step forwards towards peace if Israel dropped the whole premises of being recognised as the Jewish State. The Jews get to stay, the Arabs get to stay, and everyone is equal as Israeli’s. Yay!

I’m getting tired of running around this tree with you Oniphishtim – remain on you’re hilltop fort if you so desire. I’m getting off this merry-go-round.

[Ontiphishtim]

So Lieberman and other Israeli politicians have not suggested establishing boarders unilaterally and excluding areas from within those borders in order to reduce the Arab population from the Israeli demographics?

They do, it it doesn't mean "Israel is actively seeking to do so."

But anyway, so as far as your concerned, all of the West bank is owned by Israel as it annexed those lands and now has the right to put settlers onto those lands?

No.

I’m getting tired of running around this tree with you Oniphishtim – remain on you’re hilltop fort if you so desire. I’m getting off this merry-go-round.

You are just asking the wrong question.