Posted on 07/21/2012 3:00:49 PM PDT by Eleutheria5
It was just a matter of time before self-appointed prominent Jewish leaders in America got organized to send a letter to PM Netanyahu claiming that Israel's int'l standing is in peril due to the recent judicial report by retired Supreme Court Justice Edmond Levy who concluding that Israel is not occupying Judea and Samaria and that there is no legal prohibition to populate the land east of the 1967 "border" (actually 1949 Armistice Lines) with Jewish residents.
Beyond the issue of the report itself, why have US Jewish leaders become so agitated and disturbed?
"As strong advocates for Israel’s security and well-being as a Jewish and democratic state, we are deeply concerned about the recent findings of the government commission led by [retired Supreme Court Justice] Edmund Levy. We fear that if approved, this report will place the two-state solution, and the prestige of Israel as a democratic member of the international community, in peril," the letter read.
Signatories to the letter include ... (usual blowhards with money and titles).
The signatories insist on ignoring the most basic historical facts, preferring to perpetuate the false and invented narrative that pre1948, the land already belonged to the Palestinian Arabs which is a gross historical fabrication.
The signatories also refuse to acknowledge that the land was allocated for a Jewish National home by the League of Nations and then by the United Nations in a partition plan that Israel accepted and the Arabs rejected.
Why are these self-proclaimed Jewish leaders losing sleep over a judicial report that simply reiterates the truth about Israel's legal standing in Judea and Samaria?
.....
(Excerpt) Read more at israelnationalnews.com ...
I see that as a what-if scenario, not a dilemma. If it happens, it happens. But I don’t think it will happen. They are not a majority. They are unlikely to become a majority.
That is, unless you want to forcibly annex Ghaza, which would be insane. Ghaza and Egypt deserve each other. Let them have each other, and let the latter annex the former, if it wants, and be held responsible for assaults by the former, whether or not it wants.
I will accept your analysis about the population estimates but even without there being a non-Jewish majority the nature of Israel as a Jewish state would still cease. With a non-Jewish population even approaching 40 or 45%, the pressure to eliminate all distinctions between Jews and non-Jews would be too great. A secular non-ethnic, non-religious state might be the answer but would most Jews in Israel accept it?
I was assuming the annexation of Gaza. (What does this do to your population estimates?) But even if Gaza were excluded you still have what I posted in #22.
Except for the past 63 years, the governance of the Land has changed hands many times, usually remaining anti-Jewish to a greater or lesser degree. I can’t speak for most Jews in Israel, but I’d still be here if it were under the governance of the Ottomans or the British, or even the Mamluks.
Whether or not a particular tract of land belongs to a Jew, we belong to the Land and no other land. Like I said, if the scenario you fear happens, there’s no stopping it. But I’m willing to bet my life (literally) that it will not. On the other hand, if a two-state solution happens, I can see no way it can end other than in total destruction. I’ll bet against a sure thing like that any day. One-state solution is the best option available.
Is there any sizable support for annexation with citizenship? Are there any reputable leaders supporting this idea? And would not this be the same as the Palestinians “Plan B” to disestablish the Palestinian Authority and call for a one-state solution? While annexation with expulsions is a fantasy, how likely could granting citizenship to the Palestinians be?
The population of Israel proper (excluding Gaza) is a little under 8 million, of which about 2 million are Muslim. Figure the number of Muslim women in the 18-30 age range would be on the order of 500K? If it took $10K per Muslim woman to persuade them the emigrate elsewhere, that would be about $5B.
A major problem however would be that it is the Muslim men, not women, who make all the decisions.
What if the men were not involved? What if all it took was a Muslim woman going up to an Israeli police officer and asking asylum? Of course, the Muslim men would riot.
We are talking about the West Bank, not Israel proper.
Would $10K convince you to leave your country?
If you think that Muslim women would do anything without the approval of the men you do not know Islam.
A captive bride of Jewish ancestry either would desire to renounce Islam and return to Judaism (in which case her Islamic marriage is annulled) or she wishes to remain Muslim (in which case why would you treat her differently than a Muslim?)
For liberal Jews the Jewish mission comes not from G-d or Sinai but from the way Jews have been treated by non-Jews, especially chrstians. The chrstians oppressed us like the big meanies they are, therefore it's "un-Jewish" to "oppress" anyone else. Never mind that HaShem commands the extermination of eight separate nations in the Torah or that in the full Biblical polity idolatry is a capital offense (provided all the criteria have been met, which isn't easy). All that has been forgotten. Jews are the people who learned from the anti-Semites not to be "mean" to anybody (unless they're Bible-thumping rednecks).
I read recently (it may have been here on FR; I don't remember) where some idiot pseudo-"rabbi" from a heretical "branch" said in a "sermon" that it doesn't matter if you don't keep Shabbat or kosher or anything like that, but you can't call yourself "Jewish" if you're not "for justice."
This is also another example of the utterly bankrupt "official Jewish leadership" who are nothing of the kind. Just a little over three hundred years ago Jewish communites were autonomous Theocratic polities where the Rabbis and their Battei-Din could enforce Halakhah. Do you suppose Edgar Bronfman even knows that?
Time to bury the eighteenth century "enlightenment" with a stake through the place where its heart should be (but isn't because it doesn't have one).
The so-called "west bank" (Yehudah and Shomeron) is Israel proper, indeed, the very heart of 'Eretz HaQodesh. Have you ever read a Bible? Shoot, in this morning's portion Moses gave the lands east of the Jordan to Re'uven, Gad, and half of Menashe!
It's simple. Annex the land and kick them out. That's not as bad a fate as G-d decreed for the Canaanites who were to be exterminated.
Especially don’t be mean to Muslims, because their tendency towards blatant oppression and even sadism is just a cultural thing that has to be respected. After all, most of them are non-white, so that ipso fatso means that they’re oppressed./sarc
Especially don’t be mean to Muslims, because their tendency towards blatant oppression and even sadism is just a cultural thing that has to be respected. After all, most of them are non-white, so that ipso fatso means that they’re oppressed./sarc
Especially don’t be mean to Muslims, because their tendency towards blatant oppression and even sadism is just a cultural thing that has to be respected. After all, most of them are non-white, so that ipso fatso means that they’re oppressed./sarc
There is growing support in the nationalist camp (Ihud Leumi, Yisrael Beteinu, the more right-wing factions in Likud) for annexation of the 61% of Judah and Samaria presently designated Area C.
If the Palestinians want to disestablish the PA, that dovetails perfectly—only we’d have to make sure it happened on our terms instead of theirs.
As for citizenship, 20% of the citizenry is Arab right now anyway. It’s no bigee. At least one Israeli Arab lives in the Kurdish enclave between Remat Mamre and Kiryat Arba, judging by the Israeli license plate on the car in front of his house. But as I said, there would be no wholesale grant of citizenship. It would be made available to those who applied, just as it already is in Jerusalem.
“Of course, the Muslim men would riot.”
For a change?
“Would $10K convince you to leave your country?”
When the piece talks started looking like they would actually result in two states, there was a flood of Pali emigration to Jordan, and a major upsurge in Jerusalemites applying for Israeli citizenship. Palestinian nationalism is the official line here. But all that means is that when you stick a camera in the face of a Pali, he will throw rocks and wave flags and shout slogans, so as to conform. But when the camera is not on, neither is their nationalism, and they think more practically. No doubt, offering asylum to women of child-bearing years would cause a huge uproar. But that’s only because of the Islamic obsession with “fitr” or “female virtue” as they see it. Offering an exit subsidy package sufficiently attractive and without reference to gender would yield astoundingly positive results, imho. Rav Dov Lior of Kiryat Arba has already spoken of offering such a package to the overpopulated Bedouin community as a matter of humanitarian necessity.
We need not go all the way back to the Bible. The so-called West Bank was made Judenrein from 1929 to 1948 by a series of genocidal massacres, sometimes with the passive cooperation of the British and the farshlugginer International Community.
To say that that land is Palestinian is to condone ethnic cleansing and land theft. To say that Israel stole it in 1967 is to punish a country for following the rules of war, and to favor ethnic cleansing and land theft in its stead.
But so long as you’ve brought up the Bible, it’s worthwhile to point out that the Koran in Suras 17 and 5 outright endorses the Biblical prophesy of Jews returning to the Land and rebuilding the Temple. If a doctrine of return is held valid by both parties, you have half the elements of an enforceable contract already. So what are we waiting for? Time to rebuild the Temple.
When having a conversation we need to use commonly recognized terms. “Israel proper” is commonly understood to mean the area within the Green Line. But if you prefer I guess I could use “the State of Israel proper”, although this is a bit cumbersome.
Despite the dreams of some, expulsion is not a viable solution. It would start a war in which Israel would be isolated. The support of the U.S. could not even be assumed. Universal support in Israel is not even guaranteed. Since Pakistan now has the bomb the reliance on nuclear weapons is no longer a safe response.
A solution must be found in what is realistically possible, not wishful thinking.
Paying money for the Palestinians to leave is an interesting idea but it would have to be to entire families, not just to the women. Trying to play the women off against the men will not work. Honor killings are not just theoretical and the women know this.
Also, I would think that the amount offered would have to be well above $10K. There would also have to be some arrangement for receiving countries. A willingness for the Palestinians to take the money and go would be meaningless if there were no countries willing to receive them.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.