Explosions in Jerusalem

[west didsblue]

It’s not pejorative at all, that's the foundations of political zionism and the racist poison that dominates Israeli politics.

It’s not necessary to talk about WW2 and the holocaust, there isn't a realistic threat of that happening in North America or Europe.

If there was ever a need to claim asylum, a Jewish person could present at Israel and go through that process. For as long as it is the Jewish state then they will be accepted anyway.

A need for a theoretical safe haven doesn't necessitate the need for an easy route for regular economic or cultural migration.

The property rights is neither here nor there, with the passage of time, no one is going back. So it is just a question of compensation, tie it up with development funding and you take the sting out of it and offer an olive branch at the same time.

As I said the majority of Israeli Jews are the descendants of people fleeing persecution. Cutting off the easy route for economic or cultural migration would have only reduced the population of Israel by a relatively small amount. There is certainly a problem with mostly American religious fundamentalist Jews but changing the rules to limit their influence would open a can of worms and lead to unintended consequences.

As for a realistic threat of persecution in Europe or North America, a year ago no one would have thought there would be a full scale land war in Eastern Europe and two years ago a Trump win could have led to the break up of the US and a far right religious Christian fundamentalist country emerging leading to any number of outcomes none of which are good, and we’re not out of the woods yet. Circumstances change in ways we least expect them.

 

[Mr Kobayashi]

As I said the majority of Israeli Jews are the descendants of people fleeing persecution. Cutting off the easy route for economic or cultural migration would have only reduced the population of Israel by a relatively small amount. There is certainly a problem with mostly American religious fundamentalist Jews but changing the rules to limit their influence would open a can of worms and lead to unintended consequences.

So what percentage of the 1.1 million that came from the former Soviet Union after 1990 were refugees?

I'm not bothered about where they come from and their politics, it's hypocritical to reserve a special right for some people, tell refugees from Eritrea to fuck off back home or go to Rwanda and tell the Palestinians that they are unreasonable with their right to return claims.

The Palestinians claim for a right of return is extinguished by drawing a line in the sand and stopping the Jewish right of return.

 

[west didsblue]

So what percentage of the 1.1 million that came from the former Soviet Union after 1990 were refugees?

I'm not bothered about where they come from and their politics, it's hypocritical to reserve a special right for some people, tell refugees from Eritrea to fuck off back home or go to Rwanda and tell the Palestinians that they are unreasonable with their right to return claims.

The Palestinians claim for a right of return is extinguished by drawing a line in the sand and stopping the Jewish right of return.

I have no idea what the percentage is. What I do know is that Jews were treated as second class citizens in the Soviet Union and were treated even worse if they wanted to leave, so when the exit restrictions were lifted following the fall of the Soviet Union in 1990 there were understandably tens of thousands that had wanted to leave for years that were suddenly allowed to go. Many also went to countries other than Israel where they were allowed to claim asylum. In the years since it is true that many more have gone there that were effectively economic migrants however it is fanciful to suggest that a ban on them would all of a sudden solve the Palestinian refugee situation. There are 22 Arab countries and well over 50 Muslim majority countries that could have offered permanent refuge for some displaced Palestinians but from the formation of Israel onwards they chose to keep the Palestinians as refugees to use as pawns in their long term fight to delegitimise Israel's right to exist.

 

[Mr Kobayashi]

I have no idea what the percentage is. What I do know is that Jews were treated as second class citizens in the Soviet Union and were treated even worse if they wanted to leave, so when the exit restrictions were lifted following the fall of the Soviet Union in 1990 there were understandably tens of thousands that had wanted to leave for years that were suddenly allowed to go. Many also went to countries other than Israel where they were allowed to claim asylum. In the years since it is true that many more have gone there that were effectively economic migrants however it is fanciful to suggest that a ban on them would all of a sudden solve the Palestinian refugee situation. There are 22 Arab countries and well over 50 Muslim majority countries that could have offered permanent refuge for some displaced Palestinians but from the formation of Israel onwards they chose to keep the Palestinians as refugees to use as pawns in their long term fight to delegitimise Israel's right to exist.

I'm not suggesting that this is about solving the Palestinian refugee problem. By displacing people outside it's original 1948 borders and welcoming in interlopers Israel delegitimised itself.

It’s not a legitimate argument to create stateless people with little or no rights to accommodate people who were marginalised but not persecuted in other countries. This is only something that racist countries do.

Get rid of both claims to return and you can build ground to a lasting peace.

It would also help to solve the social and economic issues that both countries have created for themselves by encouraging rapid population growth.

Unfortunately Israel doesn't want Peace unless it involves taking in more territory.

 

[west didsblue]

I'm not suggesting that this is about solving the Palestinian refugee problem. By displacing people outside it's original 1948 borders and welcoming in interlopers Israel delegitimised itself.

It’s not a legitimate argument to create stateless people with little or no rights to accommodate people who were marginalised but not persecuted in other countries. This is only something that racist countries do.

Get rid of both claims to return and you can build ground to a lasting peace.

It would also help to solve the social and economic issues that both countries have created for themselves by encouraging rapid population growth.

Unfortunately Israel doesn't want Peace unless it involves taking in more territory.

I presume that you are aware that 2m of the 5m Palestinian refugees are in refugee camps located in the West Bank and Gaza (i.e. most people's understanding of the modern day Palestine) and another 2m are in camps in Jordan, all of which are in what could be described as the area formerly known as Palestine. You probably want to ask yourself why the descendants of all those that were effectively internally displaced are still living in refugee camps and are technically stateless in spite of them living in what is arguably their homeland. This issue could and should have been resolved decades ago.

I'm not arguing with you that the current right wing Israeli government are only too happy to maintain the status quo. The best opportunity for a solution was in the late 1990s and following its failure the extremists on both sides have held sway unfortunately and that looks unlikely to change any time soon. Changing the law of return isn't going to solve anything and calling Jews from around the world interlopers isn't helpful either.

 

[Mr Kobayashi]

I presume that you are aware that 2m of the 5m Palestinian refugees are in refugee camps located in the West Bank and Gaza (i.e. most people's understanding of the modern day Palestine) and another 2m are in camps in Jordan, all of which are in what could be described as the area formerly known as Palestine. You probably want to ask yourself why the descendants of all those that were effectively internally displaced are still living in refugee camps and are technically stateless in spite of them living in what is arguably their homeland. This issue could and should have been resolved decades ago.

Which was caused by political zionism, get rid of the entitlement and birth right and peace and conciliation is possible.

I'm not arguing with you that the current right wing Israeli government are only too happy to maintain the status quo.

This is the prevailing position in Israel politics it isn't confined to the current government.

The best opportunity for a solution was in the late 1990s and following its failure the extremists on both sides have held sway unfortunately and that looks unlikely to change any time soon. Changing the law of return isn't going to solve anything and calling Jews from around the world interlopers isn't helpful either.

Camps or permanent settlements?

The vast majority of Palestinians in Jordan have acquired Jordanian citizenship.

What is the definition of interloper?

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

The vast majority of Palestinians in Jordan have acquired Jordanian citizenship.

You make it sound like Jews just randomly descended on a group of well-established, stable Arab nations after WW2.

All the countries in that area are artificial, formed after WW1 when the French & British carved up their spheres of influence, drew some lines on the map and installed loyalists, some of who had no connection to that particular area. Jordan only became independent in 1946, just 2 years before Israel.

Prior to that, during WW1, the British used nascent Arab nationalism to whip up a revolt against the Ottomans, and rewarded those who supported that revolt. The local tribes rendered Transjordan ungovernable and the Hashemites were Saudis. The man who became the first king, Abdullah travelled from Hejaz to convince those locals that a unified government was the best way forward. The British essentially gave him 6 months to prove himself and then granted a reasonable level of autonomy to him, until independence in 1946.

After the War of Independence in 1948, Jordan occupied what's now the West Bank and annexed it, leading to calls for Jordan to be expelled from the Arab League. Had he handed it over to a Palestinian government then quite probably none of the subsequent events could have happened.

In 1970, Hussein launched the 'Black September' purge against the PLO and its associated factions, killing thousands and ridding Jordan of the military wing of the PLO. So it's not really that altruistic to naturalise them is it?

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

It’s not pejorative at all, that's the foundations of political zionism and the racist poison that dominates Israeli politics.

It’s not necessary to talk about WW2 and the holocaust, there isn't a realistic threat of that happening in North America or Europe.

If there was ever a need to claim asylum, a Jewish person could present at Israel and go through that process. For as long as it is the Jewish state then they will be accepted anyway.

A need for a theoretical safe haven doesn't necessitate the need for an easy route for regular economic or cultural migration.

The property rights is neither here nor there, with the passage of time, no one is going back. So it is just a question of compensation, tie it up with development funding and you take the sting out of it and offer an olive branch at the same time.

I agree with your final paragraph but take definite issue with the first and second, which show your ignorance of the subject.

Was there a "realistic threat" of mass extermination of Jews in Europe in 1930 or even 1935? I suspect even Hitler didn't think there was. Yet just 10 years later, around 6m Jews were dead, due to direct or indirect methods. And earlier you talked about Jews finding refuge in other places but in the 1930's no one would take them, including the UK and USA. Even after the war, when the scale of the Holocaust became clear, the British restricted immigration (plus ça change) to Palestine, sending many of the refugees back to the camps they'd survived, albeit under better conditions than they'd experienced prior to 1945.

I'd also take issue with the phrase 'political zionism'. Zionism was always a political (rather than religious) movement but there are many different shades of it, from left-wing, secular zionism to the rather militant right-wing form of the settler movement. That latter group, who dominate the political agenda, are the problem. I'd say the majority of Israelis just want to live in secure borders, in peaceful coexistence with their neighbours.

 

[west didsblue]

Which was caused by political zionism, get rid of the entitlement and birth right and peace and conciliation is possible.

It was caused by the Arab world not accepting the UN partition plan of 1947 and the ensuing war.

This is the prevailing position in Israel politics it isn't confined to the current government.

Agree it has been the prevailing position for most of the last 20 years. The best chance for an agreement was ironically when Ariel Sharon, who was recognised as a hardliner, was PM but his incapacitation put paid to that.

Camps or permanent settlements?

The vast majority of Palestinians in Jordan have acquired Jordanian citizenship.

What is the definition of interloper?

Jordan has 10 officially designated UNRWA Palestinian refugee camps as well as 3 unofficial ones housing around a quarter of those registered as refugees. As you say, the majority hold Jordanian citizenship and it is because of UN resolutions that they are still classed as refugees which wouldn't happen anywhere else.

 

[Mr Kobayashi]

You make it sound like Jews just randomly descended on a group of well-established, stable Arab nations after WW2.

All the countries in that area are artificial, formed after WW1 when the French & British carved up their spheres of influence, drew some lines on the map and installed loyalists, some of who had no connection to that particular area. Jordan only became independent in 1946, just 2 years before Israel.

Prior to that, during WW1, the British used nascent Arab nationalism to whip up a revolt against the Ottomans, and rewarded those who supported that revolt. The local tribes rendered Transjordan ungovernable and the Hashemites were Saudis. The man who became the first king, Abdullah travelled from Hejaz to convince those locals that a unified government was the best way forward. The British essentially gave him 6 months to prove himself and then granted a reasonable level of autonomy to him, until independence in 1946.

After the War of Independence in 1948, Jordan occupied what's now the West Bank and annexed it, leading to calls for Jordan to be expelled from the Arab League. Had he handed it over to a Palestinian government then quite probably none of the subsequent events could have happened.

In 1970, Hussein launched the 'Black September' purge against the PLO and its associated factions, killing thousands and ridding Jordan of the military wing of the PLO. So it's not really that altruistic to naturalise them is it?

We don't need to go back to the history lessons again, it's boring and circular.

No one has said that Jordan were (completely) altruistic.