ican wrote:Quote:Quote:And, what is the alleged nature of that alleged Israeli discrimination against Israeli Arabs?
According the to Or Commission report, the nature of the Israeli discrimination against Israeli Arabs is that the government failed in a lack of comprehensive and deep handling of the serious problems created by the existence of a large Arab minority inside the Jewish state. The Israeli government has been primarily neglectful. The establishment did not show sufficient sensitivity to the needs of the Arab population, and did not take enough action in order to allocate state resources in an equal manner. The state did not do enough or try hard enough to create equality for its Arab citizens or to uproot discriminatory or unjust phenomenon.
So the Or Commission alleges Israel's government has not
done enough for its Arab population! And you think that, if true, justifies terminating Israel and not openly criticizing the Arab killing of Israeli non-combatants? That's insane!
The state did not do enough or try hard enough to create equality for its Arab citizens or to uproot discriminatory or unjust phenomenon. Furthermore, the state of Israel maintains marriage cohabitation restrictions against its Arab citizens.
That's just the discrimination against the Arab Israelis. It oppresses the Palestinian people that, as a result of the 1948, and 1967 wars , fled areas now under the control of the Israeli government either through the urging of the Arab leadership in advance of the oncoming violence, or through the ethnic cleansing that the Zionists/Israelis perpetrated in an attempt to create an ethnically pure state, or, what actually resulted, to create a Jewish majority and a "manageable" Arab minority. The state of Israel refuses the Palestinians' right of return in order to maintain a Jewish majority there.
This is cause for the dismantling of the ethnocetrically discriminatory and oppressive Israeli regime.
Quote:I think it's the Arab-Israeli population's responsibility to do enough for themselves and not the Israeli governent's responsibility. I think the same is true for any part of the population of America. Each individual and group of individuals in America is responsible (or ought to be) for doing enough for themselves.
The welfare and wellbeing of the Arabs of Israel and Palestine is the responsibility of both the Israeli leadership and the Arab leadership. It is the responsibility of government to ensure that discrimination and oppression are mitigated, or better yet, eliminated.
The ethnocentric drive of the state of Israel guarantees that discrimination and oppression by the state will continue against the Arabs of Israel and Palestine.
Quote:...
InfraBlue wrote:
They want the ethnocentrically discriminatory and oppressive state to survive.
What? You think it oppressive to deny anyone elected to Israeli office the right to negate the existence of the State of Israel as the state of the Jewish people?
That's not oppressive unless the Israelies were to forbid the Arabs to leave Israel and they do not do that.
It is discriminatory against the Arabs of Israel to have to accept the existence of the state of Israel, the state of the country in which they exist, as the state of an ethnicity to whom they do not belong.
As an analogy, it would be discriminatory of the USA if the USA were to bar people who aren't Anglo-Saxon Protestants from running for Congerss if they negated the existence of the state as the state of the Anglo-Saxon Protestant people.
Quote:The Arabs making war on Israel say they want to make all of Palestine an Islamic state which would require any surviving Jews to convert to Islam or be killed. Now that would be true oppression.
Although I doubt the details of your assertion, i.e. that any surviving Jews would have to convert or be killed, the creation of an Islamic state in Israel/Palestine is not something I am arguing for. I am arguing for the creation of a single, egalitarian and pluralistic state, secular and democratic, for all of the peoples of Israel/Palestine. The moderate peoples there should take the initiative and create an open state before the situation with the Islamist extremists worsens.
Quote:...
InfraBlue wrote:Because I haven't criticized Arab rocket attacks on Israeli non-combatants in this thread does not mean I do not criticize Arab rocket attacks on Israeli non-combatants. Yours is a logical error based on an assumption.
No it isn't! My statement is based on the probability that what you do and do not do is a reliable indicator of what you do and do not think. My statement is based on the reality of the past absence of your criticism of Arab rocket attacks on Israeli non-combatants, and now in your last post the continuation of that absence. The only way you can logically refute my logical inference is to actually criticize Arab rocket attacks on Israeli non-combatants.
Now come on! Don't be coy!
Your inferential statement is based on assumptions which themselves are based on probabilities which themselves are based on merely your assumptions. Your logical error is threefold.
Quote:InfraBlue wrote: One thing is fanatic killing of Israeli non-combatants, another thing is Israeli self-defense of killing both Arab combatants and Arab non-combatants harboring Arab combatants. Yet another thing is collective punishment of Arab combatants, Arab non-combatants harboring Arab combatants, and the majority of Arabs who do neither. It is your faulty logic which attempts to equate the aforementioned.
I do not know whether or not a majority of the Arabs "do neither." I think you do not know that either. Remember that Arabs tolerating killer Arabs in their midst equates to harboring killer Arabs.
Remember also that most Palestinians do not have the wherewithal to confront these groups of militant extremists, much like the average Joe in New York doesn't have the wherewithal to confront the Mafia there in his neighborhood. I prefer to give the majority of the Palestinians the benefit of the doubt.
Quote:InfraBlue wrote:Quote:You are what you do and don't do!
Like the assumptions you make upon which to base your faulty logic.
My logic is not faulty, but yours is.
You've demonstrated your logic to be
at best threefold faulty.
