Hi Lawrence, Darryl,
LAWRENCE (to Jonathan)
> So, this it, eh? Hit and run attacks? regardless of who started the
thread,
> you offered an 'historical summary'. No one forced you to do it. You
> conveniently started with the Mandate, but gave a radically distorted
> account of it.
That's just the point Lawrence. You have accused me of making "a
bunch of incorrect statements" [your post, 12 April], and now of giving a
"radically distorted account", but you have yet to substantiate your
accusation. I am not beyond making mistakes, and if I have made any, I want
to know about it.
I don't mean a general criticism, but a specific one - right now, I don't
think there is anything for me to answer (unless you are claiming everything
I have written is wrong!!!)
You are right that in one of my posts with the British mandate - hey, I have
to start somewhere. In another post, I mentioned the Jewish immigration of
the 19th century. Lawrence, please tell me what date I have to start to
avoid your criticism.
>I suggested you read the actual document, and a number of
> others that shine further light on the purpose of the mandate. You offer
you
> the primary citations. You decline. You cite 'other documents', implying
> that they are relevant to the topic. I ask you what they are, and now you
> duck this question, too.
No, what I said was this ...
>I have stated my own
>position and you are welcome to address it, citing whatever documentary
>support you need. I reserve the right to do the same if and when you
>enlighten me more on your own position.
LAWRENCE
> You try ad hominum attacks -- your "cost-free
> moralism" comment, and wonder why that won't suffice to silence those
> offering a more critical appraisal than you wish to hear. Then, you try
and
> duck behind Rog...
Excuse me, but who is offering a critical appraisal? - certainly not you!!!!
This is a bit Kafkaesque - you are accusing me something or other, but won't
really tell me what it is.
> Jonathan, what Sharon is now doing brings no honor to Israel or its
people,
> or those who support Israel.
I agree, but I don't think that is his aim.
> It is not good enough to say 'we are defending
> ourselves', when the actions your government is taking in fact have done
> nothing but aggravate the situation.
Not good enough for who? Israel's actions have undoubtedly aggravated the
situation, but you have probably heard on the news that there has been a lot
of "aggravation" going on here over the last few months - not all Israel's
doing. But to say that they have achieved "nothing" else, is completely
subjective and unproven. I know that the military are claiming that they
HAVE achieved a great deal, and can point to specific examples where their
actions have directly prevented an attack on Israeli citizens. Unlike you, I
don't know enough yet to decide if these gains outweigh the aggravation you
mention.
[snip]
> Did you not know that back in 1902 -- yes, 1902,
> BEFORE the mandate -- Ben Gurion, the eventual prime minister of Israel,
had
> already decided that one day the Zionists would have to conquer Palestine
by
> force? (Not that you seem very interested in primary sources, but yes, I
can
> give that one to you, as well.)
And why do you think that the writings of a 16-year-old are so important,
even if he was later to become a leader.
> Have you ever read Menachem Begin's
> autobiography? Until you do, please stop complaining about the Palestinian
> use of violence/terror. Begin and the other lads of the Irgun and Stern
> Gangs pioneered terrorism in the Holy Land. Does Deir Yaseen mean
anything
> to you? Or is that also not taught in Israeli schools?
Yes, I have read it. Right-wingers think it vindicates him. I think that
Begin portrays himself poorly. Begin and Stern were undoubtedly terrorists,
but you are incorrect in claiming that they pioneered terrorism. Ethnic
violence (terrorist attacks on civilians) started quite a bit earlier, with
the riots of the 1920s. Lawrence, do you know who instigated these riots,
and which ethnic group was the target?
Yes, I know about Dir Yassin - and I know exactly where it was. From the
independent reports published, I conclude that an atrocity was indeed
committed. David Ben Gurion thought so too, which is a major reason why he
had the Irgun disbanded soon afterwards. Do you know about the Altalena?
> Would you not consider joining the hand-full of Israelis and American Jews
> who are crying out that what Sharon is doing is profoundly wrong?
I didn't vote for Sharon and probably never will. But I do note that for the
first few months of his premiership, he played things fairly cool. We even
had a couple of unilateral ceasefires. Guess why those ended! It is far too
simplistic to just paint things black and white. Anyone claiming that Sharon
is wrong has to provide an alternative, and convince people that it has a
realistic chance. Lawrence, as a challenge to you, I invite you to suggest
what Israel should do as of today, given everything that has happened until
now.
Just two last questions Lawrence . . .
1. Does the State of Israel have the right to exist peacefully in recognized
boundaries?
and if you answer yes . . .
2. How should Israel respond if this right is threatened?
DARRYL
>I said that Israel is a functional theocracy. I was wrong in so describing
it . . .
Thanks for admitting your mistake. Unfortunately, you have gone on making
mistakes. . . .
>Israel is a land of around 5.9 million people, of whom approximately 4.7
are
>Jews, with almost all the rest being Arab (this is all from the official
Web
>site of the Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs).
I couldn't get into the site to verify the wording, but you can't conclude
that there are 1.2 million Arabs. The true figure is probably closer to 1
million. The only reason I bring this up is that it affects your later
calculation.
>Judging by the names of the parties and the listed
>representatives, there are about 7 Arab representatives in the legislature
>out of 120, which works out to less than 6%. This is quite a bit less than
>the roughly 20% of the population that is Arab. Could be that my figures
a>re wrong, based on the assumptions I've made, of course.
Some of your figures are right - the Knesset DOES have 120 members, and 7 is
6% of 120.
However, the rest of your figures are wrong. By my count, there are 12 Arab
members. They are in 3 of the 4 largest parties, and in several smaller
parties (some of them sectarian). Because of differing age profiles in
different groups, the Arabs are a smaller fraction of the electorate than of
the population as a whole - probably less than 15%. These figures do not
support your claim of gross underrepresentation.
>I remember hearing also that only Jews could own property in Israel. If
>that is not so, please let me know. I haven't found any information one
way
>or the other as I have been looking around the Net.
It is not so. This is probably the reason you could not confirm what you
thought you had heard.
So, Darryl, we are left with your objection to Israel defining itself as a
Jewish state, where the National Anthem talks about the ingathering of the
Jewish exile, the flag is modelled on a Jewish prayer shawl and opening
times are dictated by the Jewish Sabbath and holidays. It sounds pretty much
how I grew up - in a country where even atheists were expected to sing GOD
save the Queen, where shops were closed on Sunday and 25th December, and
where Muslims and Jews could look at their national flag and see the red
cross of St. George, the same cross the Crusaders wore.
I don't deny that the Arab minority in Israel suffers from discrimination
and indignities, but if you want to take up the cause, please do us the
respect of checking your facts.
Thank-you,
Jonathan
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:02:10 BST