I am pointing out that no one has provided any information regarding Israeli immigration policies except for persistent references to the Law of Return. I do not know what the rules are for naturalization for non-Jews–and they may be tough or non-existent. However, references solely to the Law of Return do not provide that information.
Even the site to which you linked simply does not address the issue. References to Permanent Alien status may imply that no one else but Jews need apply–or it may simply indicate that so few non-Jews have actually chosen to take up citizenship in a nation constantly threatened with annihiliation that the law firm has had no call to mention the procedure.
I have made no such claim Tom. The right of return policy is one of the HUGE issues facing this conflict. Israel grants right of return to Jews as an inherent religious rite. Arabs ask for the same in light of the fact that they have significant religious claim there also. The government of Israel, like many others, holds religious / racist favortism in its nation policy. The right of return is but one of the examples that draws attention. Israel is by no means alone in these kind of policies but is one of great interest to the world right now.
So now her daughters children, grand children, great grand children, etc. , etc. , etc. are Jewish and extended exclusive rights of return? That is just plain scary. No way can “Rights of Return” surivive the eternal scrutiny of man kind.
A group of people (not a race) finds themselves the objects of 2,500 years of persecution in Europe, Northern Africa, and Asia Minor and decides to establish a location where such persecution will not be permitted at the whim of a monarch or parliament.
Since their persecution has been based on their identity (associated with their religious beliefs), why should they not use the rules of their oppressors to identify who should be allowed sanctuary within their nation?
I do not think that Israel is above judgement and I believe that they have made a number of errors in their handling of the Palestinian situation–and must bear some responsibility for it, at least since 1967.
However, I see no natural law that should prohibit them from accepting a class of persecuted individuals as citizens since I have still seen no evidence that they prohibit anyone else.
(Heck, until the Congress decided that we were seeing just too many of those dark-skinned Haitians, the U.S. used to have a policy of welcoming refugees.)
Tom, I want to give you a chance to think a little more about why “they” should not use the rules of “their” oppressors. I am also a little confused with your use of “their oppressors” and “their nation”. If you believe Israeli policy to be so open what is up with all the “their” stuff? Are “they” really open to other citizens participation in “their” nation? Your words betray you Tom.
Sundry peoples over hundreds of years have identified one group of people as “bad” based on their religious beliefs. If a member of that group wants to protect others from being harmed, based on their religious affiliation, what method would you suggest for them to use to identify the people at risk? Flip a coin?
You have a question about the phrase “their oppressors”? Perhaps you’d like a litany of the peoples who have attempted to harm or destroy the Jewish people based on their religion? Persians, Greeks, Romans, Christians (those who became Orthodox, those who became Catholics, and those who became Protestants), most of the principalities/incipient nations of Europe, as well as at least two secular 20th century nations.
You are objecting that there is something “wrong” with Israel providing a haven for people with similar affiliations. You have not explained why this is “bad.”
While it is certainly arguable that Israel has engaged in other activities that can be condemned, you have still presented no reason why a policy of offering shelter to one group, without specifically excluding other groups, is unjust.
Israel has citizens who are Muslim and who are Christian. There are no laws within Israel that discriminate against these groups. (I am sure that there is discrimination at the personal level during these times of strife, but the nation of Israel has no “Jim Crow” laws to enforce those attitudes.) Those other people have their own political parties.
How open are they? I don’t know. I’m sure that Israeli society suffers from the illness of xenophobia and discrimination. They have not enshrined those attitudes in law, however. (Unlike the PA that continues to include language calling for the destruction of Israel nine years after promising to remove it.)
Many of the current problems are the result of Israeli actions. Many of the current problems are the result of Palestinian actions.
I am sure that the Law of Return is an aggravating factor in Palestinian opinions. However, you have failed to demonstrte that it is, inherently, evil. Perhaps your persistence in claiming “bad” while failing to present an actual argument as to its “badness” in the midst of your rhetorical questions “betrays” you?
The Jews were given the opportunity to create a state by the UN in 1948; they successfully did so.
The Palestinians were given the same opportunity. They declined to set up a state.
Other Arab countries did not help them set up a state, despite the oil wealth.
The Palestinians and many Arab countries have been consistently trying to destroy Israel since its beginning in 1948, right up to today, by warfare and by terrorism (i.e., guerilla warfare).
Given the huge growth in Palestinian population, their “right of return” would amount to another approach to destroying Israel.
For over 50 years, all sides have agreed that there should be a Palestinian state. If they and other Arab countries would drop the killing and pursue a Palestinian state, this could and would be done.
Tom , You seem to take things to extremes. “Inherently evil” is a strong case to make and I would not be inclined to do so. I wouldn’t call it pure evil but it is definitely not any way to win friends and influence people. It sets a bad example for the people living under and exposed to the policies that matter - of factly state preference for race and / or religion. Please don’t take exception to the fact that we are discussing Israel here. You can get classified ads from news papers all over the mid east where racial / religious preferences are openly revealed by offering different prices for a home for sale depending on your race / religion. Preference does indeed equal a degree of exclusion. The right of return policy is but another part of the ebb and flow between public opinion and national agenda.
And after previously asserting that the policy was racist.
It sure looked to me as though you were moving toward an assertion that it was inherently evil.
Noting that it will make the Palestinians very unhappy is accurate, of course. On the other hand, one reason that the Palestinians are unhappy is that the more Israelis there are the harder it will be to destroy Israel.
I think that Israeli policy has been flawed since 1967 (and I have held that opinion since 1970). I suspect that I do not know the best answer to the situation, so I will not declare the “solution.”
The Law of Return, however, is currently a fairly small part of the problem in that region–particularly since Israel has been suffering more emigration than immigration in that last few years. Bringing it up on this thread as a philosophical point of condemnation, thus, appears to be simply a way to throw stones at Israel (particularly when you have demonstrated that you were unaware of several particulars regarding immigration law and the definition of who might be Jewish).
Are jewish religion and idealogy a threat to us all ?
Tom, I have responded in regard to the OP. I do believe this type of idealogy is a threat to us all. It is by no means the only idealogy that is a threat to us all. Jewish idealogy and religion run deep into the government of a nuclear capable nation. This makes that particular idealogy very important to me and a possible threat to me and alot of other human beings on this planet. It is not inherently evil but is subject to the same fallacy as any other religious idealogy that is not accepted by the entire planet and has not manifest to be true for all of us.
As I understand it, anyone of a different religion is excluding from claiming right of return. Their citizenship is then subject to immense discretion.
Ahem. Let me point out perhaps the most important reason behind Israel’s creation. During World War II, a large problem for the Jews was that they had very few places to run to. Israel was established so that if the Holocaust ever repeated itself, if you will, then the Jews would have a place to go. So, all of this argument over the imigration policy concerning Jews is rather pointless. After all, the motive behind it is good, and, correct me if I’m wrong, the immigration policy seems to do little more than make things easier for Jews. Also, all of this talk about the Jews being a massive threat is rather interesting. I am well aware that not all Muslims are terrorists, and many despise terrorism, just as I do, but isn’t Islam a driving force behind a great deal of terrorism? Should we be more concerned about that religion, if any? Really. Now, if you can dispute my point, I encourage you to do so, because dispute often establishes the correct point. However, make sure your dispute is well established, and well thought out, or this shall become a mindless argument based more on who can yell their point louder than who has a stronger basis for their argument. Carry on.
Why was the Original Poster banned? Just curious, because much of this thread is fairly easily rebuked. The Original Poster doesnt appear to have broken any rules. Maybe he angered a biased moderator, I dont know.
I wouldn’t dispute your point in the least. Fundamental Islamic sects harbor some of the most dangerous people on earth. Respect for human life is trown by the wayside in favor of religious agenda and promises of eternal fulfillment. If you start a thread in regard to the threat of Islamic idealogy I am right there with you. Anytyime and anywhere that religion will cause hate, to the brink of mass military death and destruction, I will have to take exception to the religious principles that harbor the means to breed such contempt for your fellow man. If God shows up, I can promise you he will not need any of our petty little lists of who is Jew and who is Muslim and in which nieghborhood they lived. You can all stop keeping score Your God will sort it all out who ever he may be. Please wait patiently and avoid killing each other in the lobby.