Comments on: Don’t fight Apartheid Week: Responding to Haaretz’s Burston

By: Mikesailor

Mikesailor — Mon, 27 Feb 2012 23:18:56 +0000

STEVE: Are you really that dense that you cannot answer a simple question? Why should anyone recognize Israel as a ‘Jewish’ state rather than simply as a ‘state’? Isn’t the make-up of the state purely a domestic affair? As to my suggestion of a ‘thought experiment’, perhaps that is too difficult for one who doesn’t think but merely parrots talking points.

By: Piotr Berman

Piotr Berman — Mon, 27 Feb 2012 15:17:13 +0000

Sh: Tal law was found to violate the principle that Jews in Jewish state should be treated equally, of course military service does not apply equally to Jews and to the part of the population which is regarded as enemy.

It reminds me a fortress in the city I grew up. Tsar build Citadel not as a part of city defenses, but to make sure that rulers of the city have a defense against the city. (Now school kids have to visit the Citadel once and see how various national heroes were kept in little cells.) For non-Jews, IDF and security forces are the Citadel.

By: Sadegh Khalkhali

Sadegh Khalkhali — Sun, 26 Feb 2012 15:16:10 +0000

Kudos to Noam for his courageous rebuttal to Burston

By: Steve

Steve — Sun, 26 Feb 2012 00:28:48 +0000

MikeSailor wrote: Yet he refuses to answer the main question: ‘Why should anyone ‘accept’ a ‘Jewish’ state, especially all non-Jews? And, what is the definition of a ‘Jewish’ state
…
Well, I guess nobody has to “accept” reality if they want. People can live in a fantasy world if they so choose. But here on planet Earth, a country called Israel exists, and the majority of people in Israel refer to it as a Jewish state. And the only reason it was founded is to be a Jewish state. Majority rules. That’s called democracy. So there are dozens of Arab states, dozens of Muslim states, and one very tiny Jewish state. If antisemitic hatemongers want to make excuses as to why Muslim states are OK for being Muslim but the one tiny Jewish state is wrong for being Jewish, that’s their own problem.

By: sh

sh — Sat, 25 Feb 2012 21:43:33 +0000

“I am not a “one state” or “two state” supporter. A sage Chinese politician said “It does not matter if the cat is white or black, it matters if it catches the mice”.”
.
That’s wonderfully put, Piotr.
———
Back to Burston, he reminds me of religious preachers sometimes. It makes him clutch at straws when, like now, there’s no speck of silver in the lining of a cloud. I do wish he hadn’t chosen to piggy-back on that Finkelstein interview. Too many are claiming that Finkelstein’s leopard has changed its spots. It hasn’t. Finkelstein stays Finkelstein but the people who adored him when he carried them forward on his back, took his ideas somewhere he found counterproductive and dropped him when he said so.
.
I can’t say I noticed a whiff of democracy in the dénouement of the Khader Adnan affair. It was almost predictable after the previous day’s CNN mauling of Mark Regev. What Adnan and we have gained is the certainty that there was no case against him when they took him in and that someone got nervous about having fixed the High Court hearing when the man might already be dead. Too little to qualify as a stirring of hope. No sign either of Israeli society as a whole beginning to re-examine itself just because TA municipality has legalized public transport on Shabbat, in full knowledge that it will be thwarted by a higher authority. Nor will many see a dim horizon of light in the expiry of the Tal Law that will doubtless be replaced by another law to the same effect after the usual shenanigans from the usual quarters.
.
“I really hope that Burston’s message for the Palestinians was not that they need to wait another 115 years”
I didn’t see a message specifically for the Palestinians in Burston’s article. At least not Palestinians living under the occupation.

By: Mikesailor

Mikesailor — Sat, 25 Feb 2012 20:48:37 +0000

Poor STEVE. His idea of ‘progress’ is only to do more of the same. If only ‘they’ would accept the idea of a ‘Jewish’ state he wails, then everything would be all right. Yet he refuses to answer the main question: ‘Why should anyone ‘accept’ a ‘Jewish’ state, especially all non-Jews? And, what is the definition of a ‘Jewish’ state anyway? Is it a theocracy run by the rabbinate? Which rabbinate? Is it a state wherein the Jewish population is not bound by law, only the non-Jewish ‘citizenry’ is bound to follow? Is apartheid and discrimination against all non-Jews allowed so long as the perpetrators are somehow labeled as ‘Jewish’?
I would offer a thought experiment to STEVE and many other readers of this magazine. Take any piece of literature or any argument you consider ‘anti semitic’. Then transpose the word ‘Jew’ for Muslim or Goy or whatever. Reread the offending passage and then tell me, what is the difference on how you look at others from how you perceive others look at you. If you perceive no difference, then ask yourself why you thought such a piece ‘antisemitic’ in the first place. Simple justice requires such an examination. Would Mein Kampf and Hitler’s raving against Jews be acceptable if Netanyahu or Lieberman wrote the same book with Muslims as the target? Would the Nuremberg Laws make a template for a set of ‘Netanya Laws’ with all non-Jews suffering the same? Would South Africa’s apartheid laws be similar to the Israeli law under which the Palestinians suffer? Should Israel receive a special benefit by being recognized as a ‘Jewish’ state while all other countries are recognized as merely countries allowed to define themselves, not forcing others to recognize any ‘exceptionalism’? As I said, this is merely a thought experiment, perhaps overly strenuous to those who are so set on proving themselves ‘exceptional’ that they cannot see the fallacy of their own mindset.

By: Steve

Steve — Sat, 25 Feb 2012 20:28:25 +0000

To DIRECTROB:
…
It’s not hateful to want peace for the Palestinians and their own state.
…
It’s hateful to insist that Israel, the world’s only Jewish-majority state, be erased from existence.
…
Hamas do want Israel completely destroyed. Palestinians, knowing this, VOTED FOR HAMAS as their national leaders. Israel recognizes what this means. Others want to ignore it. Oh well.

By: Steve

Steve — Sat, 25 Feb 2012 20:25:57 +0000

If you want the occupation to end, tell the people outside of Israel to stop trying to erase Israel from existence, either via war, kids of refugees flooding in by the millions, or absurd “one-state solutions.”
…
Then it can end.
…
Until then, Israel’s going to protect itself and if that means holding onto addtional land that they won from Jordan and Egypt, so be it.

By: aristeides

aristeides — Sat, 25 Feb 2012 20:01:48 +0000

Hating apartheid is the right thing to do.

By: directrob

directrob — Sat, 25 Feb 2012 19:49:23 +0000

“Lifting an autumn hair is no sign of immense strength”
.
Whether in one state or two one day the people between the coast and the river Jordan have to live together as equals and in peace. The current situation with an Israeli state where Palestinians (including the refugees) have no rights cannot continue. If that is hateful so be it.