55 thoughts on “Israel’s Loyalty Oath: Let’s Drink to New Jewish Republic – Tikun Olam תיקון עולם إصلاح العالم
Comments are published at the sole discretion of the owner.

  1. I disagree with the oath law as well, even in it’s augmented form. However, I fail to see how the oath law (the augmented) turns Israel into a Jewish republic. What is the additional influence the oath law has over the law of return?

    1. I find it interesting that a Jew who refuses to say the oath would be denied citizenship unless they find a way to override the oath & grant citizenship anyway. I’m guessing they’ll find a way to do this for the Haredim who would refuse to say the oath out of religious conviction. But they’ll refuse to do so for any Arab who wants to become a citizen.

        1. Exactly. Israel was founded as an ethnically-exclusionist, expansionist settler state, and it has always been an ethnically-exclusionist, expansionist settler state. Why should it come as a surprise that it is finally making that the official reality as well as the actual reality?

  2. The “transformation” towards open fascism is getting steam. MKs propose banning East Jerusalem Arabs from guiding in the city.

    It is asthonishing that Jews are so eagerly and with such enthusiasm creating in Israel a situation which surely doesn’t serve Jews outside Israel. How can a Jewish lobby group in future demand ending discriminate and/or racist practices in some country when in Israel the same is done in a much more robust way. It would be interesting to see the Jewish “group’s” demands if a member of a European parliament would demand a loyalty oath (emphasising Christian values and symbols) of new Jewish and Muslim citizens or demanding that only people who represent the Christian values of the country can serve a tourist guides.

    Surely it can with excellent arguments be said that not all Jews are supporting what happens in Israel, but it will be impossible to hope that non-Israeli Jews can be left out of the struggle. Judaism and Jews are so much used in Israeli propaganda that all Jews will have to pay the price.

    1. Yup, I believe the 9th Nuremberg Law prohibited Jews in Germany from being tour guides. Nasty Nazis.

      Its just like fascism!

      1. Hey, that’s hilarious. You missed your calling. Ever consider stand-up?

        You may think it’s hilarious that Israel’s battering down of democratic values and taunting of its Palestinian minority is food for humor, but many Israelis & many others who care about Israel think the Nuremberg analogy is quite apt.

      2. I bet that Dave you are one of the first and the most vocal anti-Semitism whiners when you read in news that for a Jew was in Paris not given a tourist guide permission or when a Catholic priest would publicly say that do not rent apartments to Jews. But when Jews do the same it seems to be a “joke”. Name one country where a minister has in front of parliament urged to drown minority “criminals” to a lake or threatened to kill (directly) millions by recommending bombing a giant damn in the basically friendly neighbour country. Not single other statesman outside Israel publicly makes such “jokes”. And Lieberman is not the only “comedian” in Israel. You have tens equally lunatic members in parliament, hundreds as your priests, thousands in military and millions among the Jewish population. And they have the control to hundreds of nukes, nerve gases and biological weapons. That is frightening.

        Denying Arabs to work as guides in Jerusalem is exactly the the same as in Germany was denying buying from Jewish owned shops. Deliberate restriction of livelihood for tens of thousands people and a deliberate public humiliation for the whole “race”/religion. You in Israel have done and are doing towards Palestinians everything what Nazis did towards Jews, besides the elimination on industrial scale. But if peace is not achieved very soon that elimination phase performed by the Jewish army will be a reality. You have no other options.

  3. “……. horror and disbelief.”? Not me. I have been against the creation of Israel as a “Jewish” state from its inception. I am happy to see its disintegration as such. What is so horrible about Israel finally becoming one state for all its people, Palestinian and Jews? My belief is that that is what is ultimately bound to happen. As Amoz Oz famously said in a recent book (How to Cure a Fanatic), this is not a question of religious beliefs, it is a question of real estate.

    If this loyalty oath law passes, I repeat my suggestion that Palestinians all convert (by taking the oath) to Judaism, thus giving them, too, the “right of return.” After that? Turn Israel into a secular state and be done with it.

    1. ‘As Amoz Oz famously said in a recent book (How to Cure a Fanatic), this is not a question of religious beliefs, it is a question of real estate.’

      That ‘question’ may very well have been the answer all along.

      This loyalty, oath-taking business has all the hallmarks of two-dimensional thinking. There is no dynamic here, no movement off the very barren surface of an identity crisis that has long gripped this small region of the world.
      Is it to be Israeli? Can it be called Arab? Will it become Jewish, Muslim or even Christian in the years ahead?

      Can this place ever aspire to any real depth, one that can absorb and accommodate the wide spectrum of peoples and faiths within its borders? Or will the divisions, now so indelibly etched upon the fabric of its society, preclude so implausible an arrangement?

      Well, if things proceed much in the way they have over the past six decades, these questions will, no doubt, become somewhat academic as future events unfold. Such events tend to affirm the native ability of human beings to screw things up in the most spectacular fashion.

      If there is to be any oath-taking or loyalty test, then let the occasion be one that applies to all of us, not just some specific group or band of newcomers.

      Let the whole of the human race give a solemn undertaking to put an end to this conflict once and for all.
      And any others that may need addressing, now or in times to come.

      Here’s how it can be done. Remarkably simple – if one takes the trouble to pursue the matter to its logical conclusion.


      The trick here is to transform peace into having more of a dynamic function, acting not so much as an end in itself but serving as an active participant in bringing about final resolution of the matter.

      Real esatate – that really is the answer.

      1. No, real esatate isn’t the answer.
        Only my keyboard thinks that it is.

        Real estate – that really is the answer here.

  4. as Haaretz op-ed item: http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/opinion/loyalty-oath-isn-t-racist-but-it-will-destroy-israel-1.319920
    The oath may serve to keep arab MK’s from the Knesset.
    They will have to take the oath to be seated MK’s.
    They won’t take the oath so they won’t be members and just like that by magic 20% of Israel’s citizens will be denied representation
    Talk about “taxation without representation” does anyone sense a new “tea party” in Haifa?
    drink up to Netanyahu utter stupidity for the sake of power.

  5. The oath is a shame.As an Israeli and a Jew or better say as a Jew and an Israeli I don’t believe what is happening. Zionism – an ideology that every democrat in the free world could identify with is turning gradually into a moral problem to us.It all leads to a great catastrophe.

  6. “It’s at this point I seek to join the party of Rabbi Yochanan Ben Zakkai….”

    does this mean you are going off to learn in yeshiva? good for you

    and only the second beis hamikdash was destroyed because of sinas chinam…the first was destroyed because of the people going away from halacha

    not sure how having new citizens give an oath of allegiance has anything to do with sinas chinam though..unless you are misunderstanding the term as that the current government is forcing you to hate them

  7. i fail to see how Jewish religious people, would be able to take a oath to begin with; i also want to remind you, that the oath would probably be to respect the law’s of the Jewish national home, and not the one’s of the Jewish religion, as the current law in the state of Israel, is based upon the English and the ottoman Laws, and not the Jewish law.

    1. No, the proposed oath would affirm that Israel is a “Jewish state.” A Jewish state is one in which Judaism is the state religion and its tenets & traditions inform the life of the nation. Nothing in there about respecting laws at all.

  8. I just cannot understand. The Law of Return finds its roots in the eastern european conception that Jews are a nation, as they posses a distinct culture and language. Israel is a nation state like many more in the area and grants a special right to the Jews to go back and settle there. If you are not Jewish, you can always apply for naturalization.

    Laws that are equivalent to Israel’s Law of Return are to be found throughout Europe of course, and the world; the same apply for the Nationality Law. And when you become a naturalized citizen, you are required to pledge an oath of allegiance. If you want to be Canadian you must pledge your loyalty to the Queen; in the U.S. it is to the Flag and what it stands for… In Italy you promise you will be faithful to the Republic and the Constitution, which in turns terms the Republic “Italian.”

    Israel’s Declaration of Independence too calls Israel a Jewish state, so where’s the problem as long as Israel stays democratic?

    1. Utter nonsense. Zionism and the State of Israel constitute a rejection of everything about Eastern Europe. I don’t know what you’re talking about. Nor do you. Jews in Europe did not possess a distinct language. They spoke Yiddish and every local language where they lived. And Yiddish isn’t the language of today’s Israel.

      Laws that are equivalent to Israel’s Law of Return are to be found throughout Europe of course

      Name me a single European nation which allows automatic citizenship for Christians found anywhere in the world who enter that country. What you’re claiming (& badly I might add) I gather is that there are countries which allow descendants of those countries to receive automatic citizenship upon returning to the native land. First, I don’t even know that it’s true. But even if it is, this is not even remotely close to the Law of Return which is based on someone’s religious identity and not their descent from native Israeli nationals.

      And when you become a naturalized citizen, you are required to pledge an oath of allegiance.

      Not to a religious state, just to a state. And the nature of the state isn’t even specified in most citizenship oaths.

      If you want to be Canadian you must pledge your loyalty to the Queen

      I doubt that’s true now if it ever was. And even if it is, the Queen is a symbol of the nation and not a religious representative. As to the U.S. citizenship oath, again you don’t know what you’re talking about. The oath doesn’t require you to pledge loyalty to the flag. it doesn’t mention the flag at all. It mentions the laws of the state and the Constitution. You’re talking about
      the Pledge of Allegiance which is another thing entirely, mostly recited by schoolchildren ea. morning before classes begin.

      where’s the problem as long as Israel stays democratic?

      Ah, there’s the rub. It can’t be if it affirms itself as a Jewish state. It won’t be democratic, in fact it isn’t really now even before a loyalty oath is invoked.

      1. Are you sure you know what you’re talking about? Large Jewish communities around the world always had distinct languages. East European Jews had Yiddish and north African Jews had Ladino. In order to integrate both Jewish communities, a decision has been made not to force one’s language onto the other. That’s one of the reasons to use Hebrew. Jews also new the languages of the people around them, which the had to do in order to trade and follow local law.

        Richard, you have to understand there is a Jewish nation, separate from religion. It’s hard to grasp, because there’s some confusion of terminology.

        1. I rather think Richard knows what he’s talking about a bit better than you do, Yakov. True, East-European Jews had Yiddish, but Iberian (not No. Afr.) Jews had Ladino. But they all spoke their native languages, i.e., German, Russian, Spanish, Portuguese, too. In Israel, a new invented Hebrew was imposed upon them. This was to give a sense of exclusivity. Communication among themselves would have been no more difficult without it. Actually, English is probably more used than Hebrew.

          1. Gene, you are ignoring one minor thing, and that is Jewish prayers and Torah readings, were always conducted in Hebrew, all over the world. trying to assimilate Jews did learn local languages, but Hebrew was always there.

          2. MOdern Hebrew is quite diff. & itself a radical break with traditional Hebrew. There is some continuity, yes. But much in modern Hebrew simply didn’t exist in traditional Hebrew.

          3. ” MOdern Hebrew is quite diff. & itself a radical break with traditional Hebrew ”

            could you please explain that ? the alef bet is the same alef bet, no changes there. grammatically it changed some but so is today’s English. the only difference is that words were added, and that was due to the reason that for many years Hebrew was considered a sacred language that was used only with relation to the jewish religion.

          4. If you came from the time of King David & spoke Bibilical Hebrew you would likely be very poorly understood if at all. Certainly there are similarities, but modern Hebrew is light years from traditional Hebrew.

            the only difference is that words were added, and that was due to the reason that for many years Hebrew was considered a sacred language that was used only with relation to the jewish religion.

            The “only” diff??? That’s a diff. that so huge you could drive a truck through it. Modern Hebrew is a secular language. Traditional Hebrew is a sacred language. Worlds apart.

          5. First of all let me tamk the owner of this blog for pointing out to me the difference between the pledge to the flag and the citizenship oath. I was mistaken on that point, or to be more precise the person who told me that was not informed himself or I may have misunderstood him. In Canada you must indeed pledge loyalty to the Queen, I have just checked that.

            People coming from the Easter European Jewish communities of course also spoke Polish, Russian, German etc.; because of their yiddish though they were regarded by Poles, Russian s and Germans as a nation (they indeed had a distinctive culture) and they themselves started regarding Jewishness as a nation, albeit with a religion attached. Ever wondered why Zionism started out in Eastern Europe and not the Maghreb? Because of the nationalistic vision that were current and generally accepted in that area. Italians (I am writing from Italy) were building their nation; nationalism in the Slavic world was strong… why not the Jews? Zionism was a cultural political phenomenon, not a religious one, and the laws in today’s Israel must be interpreted in that sense.

            If you are an Italian born abroad of an Italian born abroad, who was in turn born of an Italian, and you never visited Italy, and you don’t even know how to say ciao in Italian, you can nonetheless claim your Italian passport to be granted to you from your local Italian embassy, and you can enter and settle in Italy, and even vote without any prior connection to this country. If you are not of Italian origin you are an alien, and even if you were born in Italy you must wait at least ten years before being allowed to apply for citizenship (if you are a minor then you must wait until you are 18) while Italy is not obliged to grant anything to you. And if you get your Italian citizenship you must pledge loyalty to Italy, despite your not being Italian. That’s the way most nationality laws function in Europe. Israel is no different, with Judaism being considered as a nation.

            Jews from the Middle East tend to define their identity through religion, instead, but again under the Ottoman empire nationality was understood in religious terms, not through culture, so they see themselves as a national group too.

            Now the question is “isn’t that way of defining and handling nationality matters racist or discriminatory?” It is undeniable that nationalism has been the cause for many wars on European soil, and that is still going on in the Middle East. The obverse (so to speak) of the nation state concept is drawing a line on a map and declaring the this land belongs to “us” and “you” are an alien here. Nation states are inherently mono-cultural, but as it seems that is acceptable under international law, even if I (we) do not like that. So this brings me again to what I cannot understand: why singling out just Israel for passing laws according to a widespread legal pattern (believe me, it is), instead of criticizing that pattern in itself and for everybody. In this case I think you are being unnecessarily tough on one country alone.

          6. When re-reading my post I found a number of typos, so please let me thank again the owner of this blog… and then it should be Eastern European Jewish communities.. etc. etc. Please excuse me for the mistakes, and also for the poor English, as yours is not my mother tongue.

        2. That’s not what the guy was arguing. He was arguing that the State of Israel was inspired by the language & ideas of Eastern Europe. It wasn’t. Hebrew was the language that came to be spoken in Israel & this concept of reviving Hebrew was a radical break with previous eastern European Jewish culture. Zionism was a radical break with galut, not a continuity with it which is what the other commenter was claiming.

          I’m afraid the idea of Jewish nationhood is so vague as to be meaningless. I can ascribe to Jewish peoplehood, but not a nation. There is an Israeli nation and that’s good enough for me. And it shouldn’t be a Jewish nation. IT should be an Israeli nation.

    2. Mario, you get the geneology of the Law of Return wrong. If you want laws like that, you have to go back to the German Nationality Law of 1913, which was a based on a Prussian model, thus rooted in the history of the German settlement of Poland, which was a German imperial strategy of conquest and of using religion (protestant vs. catholic) as ethnicity. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prussian_Settlement_Commission#Achievements_by_1913 ) The settlement of Prussia also served as a template for the Kibutz movement.

      Bismark wasn’t a Shtetl Jew.

  9. Richard, the fact that your system opens a new thread is annoying.
    “Nothing in there about respecting laws at all.”

    can you please provide me with your crystal ball, or if you can’t please provide me with the proposed language of the oath.

    as for Israel being the Jewish state it was already concluded, and recognized by many countries (US. Soviet Union, England and others) that the Jews deserve a national home and that home would be in Israel, for example: “”His Majesty’s government view with favor the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people” not for religious Jews but for the Jewish people. (Balfour declaration November 2nd 1917) hence the way i understand it Israel is the home of the Jewish nation, not of the Jewish religion. and the rest can and should be defined in a constitution.

    1. The oath calls for affirming Israel as a Jewish and democratic state.

      No country in the world recognizes Israel as the type of expansionist supremacist Jewish state it is currently. If any did they’d have embassies in Jerusalem. The Balfour Declaration is fr. 1917 & doesn’t govern the current British gov’t or its policy toward Israel today.

      Israel can’t have a constitution as long as it is a Jewish state. And it won’t. Even if its leaders wanted a constitution (which they don’t), they couldn’t create one because there are 2 many internal contradictions that could never be overcome.

      1. Richard, as the new kid in the block i don’t know if i should intervene with other threads but:
        “No country in the world recognizes Israel as the type of expansionist supremacist Jewish state it is currently. ”

        but if you would replace the word Jewish with Muslim, and the world Israel with Egypt / Syria / and many others you will see that the world actually does accept such expansionist supremacist states, so what is the difference ?
        article 2 for the Egyptian cosnt. can be found here:http://www.uam.es/otroscentros/medina/egypt/egypolcon.htm

        article 3 of the Syrian const. can be found here

        also the reason foreign embassies are not in Jerusalem has nothing to do with this discussion.

        1. What on earth are you blathering about? When was the last time Egypt or Syria or any other Arab state expanded expanded its territory?

          As for your claims that they are supremacist states, if that is the best you can do for evidence, I recommend you find some other argument.

          1. Shirin, would you care to explain to an ignorant like myself why are you getting so upset ?

            territory isn’t the discussion here, so please stay on point, but just for the record first Syria occupied Lebanon form 1976 – 2005 (29 years)

            let me ask you a questions, article 2 and 3 from which i quoted are they part of these countries constitution ?
            (it should be a yes and no question)

          2. (it should be a yes and no question)

            If you want a serious answer then you will not give others such directives. I find this offensive & annoying. SO don’t do it again. You ask a question politely & wait for the answer. YOu don’t tell someone how to formulate their answer & how many words should be necessary to do so. Capice?

            If one word answers are what you want you’re in the wrong place.

          3. 1. What makes you think I am getting upset? Trust me it takes a great deal more than this kind of silliness for me to expend energy being upset.

            2. Yes, territory IS part of the discussion. That’s what expansionist refers to. Taking territory from others to add to one’s own. It is what Israel has done from the beginning, and is still doing now.

            3. Syria did not occupy Lebanon. The Lebanese
            government asked the Syrians to come in and help defend Lebanon against Israel. The two governments entered into a series of agreements. Many people believe that Syria overstayed its welcome, and they are likely correct, but Syria no longer has a presence in Lebanon, and did not attempt to add any of Lebanon’s territory to its own. In fact, a few years ago when Syria had the opportunity to claim Sheb`a Farms it chose to abide by a prior agreement that ceded Sheb`a Farms to Lebanon. That strikes me as the exact opposite of expansionist.

            4. You are asking the wrong question. The question is not what is in the constitution of a country (at least Syria and Egypt have constitutions, which is more than you can say for Israel), but what is its significance. There is nothing supremacist in either of the articles you cited. In fact, both Syria and Egypt are secular states.

          4. 1. it’s great that you are not getting upset.
            2. Territory isn’t part of the discussion as the PA refuses recognizing Israel as the home of the jewish nation even within the 67 borders. (by the way the 67 was never a border but a cease fire line)
            3. israel invaded Lebanon for the first time in 1978 – litany operation – the Syrian got there 2 years prior.
            4. Israel is a secular state, you are not differentiating between the Jewish nation and the Jewish religion. not every Jewish person is religious, but every religious Jew is part of the Jewish nation, the law’s in Israel are based on the ottoman and the English law (in Syria and Egypt they are based on Islam) so it is the same situation, with one different and that is the legal mechanism which is far more secular in israel then in Egypt and Syria.

            just FYI, i grew up in a kibbutz which is know for the it’s pigs farm and processing.

          5. Territory isn’t part of the discussion

            That’s ludicrous–the equivalent of saying that to make a cake flour isn’t part of the discussion.

            The Palestinians have said they would recognize Israel within 67 borders. There’s no need unless you want to be a rejectionist provocateur to demand something you’re never going to get: recognition of Israel as a Jewish state. Now, if you want to play games & say this is ground for Israel refusing to deal, be my guest. But when Israel goes down the tubes we’ll all pt our fingers at you & other Israelis like you who preferred dithering & counting angels on the head of a pin instead of seeking co-existence. I find this argument of your profoundly dishonest & offensive.

            by the way the 67 was never a border but a cease fire line)

            The Green Line is recognized by everyone except Israeli nationalists as a de facto international border. I suppose your rejection of it as a border tells us where you stand.

            Israel is a secular state

            Not really, partially secular, partially theocratic. The religious establishment controls or heavily impacts whole swaths of Israeli life–most prominently electoral coalitions in which reglious parties & their agendas are slavishing kissed up to.

            BTW, try finding pork in Jerusalem. What does that say about the city?

          6. 2. When you insisted that Egypt and Syria and “many others” are expansionist you made part of the discussion, so don’t complain that someone took issue with your nonsense claim. As for your assertion that the PA does not recognize Israel inside the Green Line (aka the 1949 armistice line), you need to get your head out of decades-old hasbara pamphlets and obtain some more up-to-date talking points. And yes, we know only too well that the green line is not a border, and we know exactly why Israel has until now refused to declare borders.

            3. I repeat that Syria came into Lebanon at the invitation of the Lebanese government, and did not invade and occupy, nor did it take any part of Lebanon to add to its territory.

            4. Thanks for the non-sequitur. I never mentioned what kind of state Israel is or is not, so what your wrote was a non-response out of the blue, but whatever. As for the Jews being a nation, that whole idea came about as a result of the early Zionists’ quest for the best way to sell the idea of a Jewish state to the European powers that be. The process by which they arrived at that choice of selling points is discussed in several sources that I know of.

            And speaking of non-sequiturs, what is the bit about the pigs supposed to be about? That Jews eat pork? Did you also raise and process shrimp, crab, and scallops on this kibbutz? Was one of your dinner specialties beef stroganoff? Did you often serve chicken parmegian?

          7. Richard, I think Kobi fancies himself some sort of TV show fantasy of a trial lawyer or perhaps an interrogator from a bad American TV show.

          8. 3. the most up to date PA official response to recognizing Israel as the home of the Jewish nation, was given by the president of the PA authority in an interview conducted with oded granot from news channel 1, you can see it in this link
            http://www.iba.org.il/media/?recorded=1 (you would have to look at the titles, hebrew only and select ראיון מיוחד עם אבו-מאזן
            the interview was conducted on the 17th it’s in arabic with hebrew subtitles.

            4. you mentioned that both Syria and Egypt are secular state, and to that i replied.
            the pig item, was to show you that israel isn’t a religious country. and no we didn’t process lobsters, and scalop and didn’t have chicken parmigiana.

          9. PA official response to recognizing Israel as the home of the Jewish nation

            I could care less what the PA’s response is to Israel as a Jewish state. It’s a total red herring designed by right wingers like you & Bibi to destroy the chances for a peace agreement.

          10. The PLO and the PA long ago formally and informally, implicitly and explicitly recognized Israel within the 1967 borders. Part of the Oslo Accords included formal recognition of Israel. If that is not formal and explicit enough for you, then nothing will be.The PA was created as part of an agreement between the PLO and the State of Israel, which could not have taken place had the PLO not recognized Israel. Even Hamas leader Khalid Mesh`al among others has said Hamas accepts Israel within the 1967 borders.

            The recent completely unnecessary and unreasonable precondition that Palestinians must formally recognize Israel as The Jewish State (NOT the “home of the Jews” as you disingenuously claim) is a transparent device intended as an obstacle to negotiations. It is one more bit of proof that Israel is not serious about peace, and will continually raise the bar to put a stop to any serious peace accord. Last week Fatah cleverly called Israel’s bluff by stating they are quite willing to declare Israel a Jewish state within the green line. Of course that was not acceptable to Israel because Israel has no intention of limiting itself to the territory inside the green line, and never has.

            I have no idea why you are working so hard to prove that Israel is not a religious state since I have never at any time in my life suggested that it is. On the contrary I have argued for decades that Israel is not a theocracy, but an ethnocracy, so you are wasting your time arguing with me about this question.

          11. # Richard

            you are wrong about mostly everything
            1. i do not support Bibi
            2. don’t talk about my father – he’s dead.
            3. You can find as mush pork in Jerusalem as you would like one place you can try is מעדני איוו, שמאי 5 ירושלים 026234676
            and there are many other place. if you need a recommendation, just ask.

          12. You are right, Richard, even though Zionism was a secular movement there are strong theocratic aspects to Israel’s government and institutions.

            I will buy Kobi’s pig-kibbutz-based claim of a totally secular state when bacon-wrapped scallops au gratin becomes a national dish in Israel. ;o}

        2. I’m completely uninterested in reading the constitutions of Egypt or Syria. Can you point me to any expansionist or supremacist ACTS by either country against Israel? When did they take Israeli territory or engage in hostilities against Israel (aside fr. 1973)? If not, I rest my case. Israel is expansionist, they aren’t.

          The reason other nations do not recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel is that Israel is occupying Palestinian land for decades. The reason it is doing it is that many Israelis believe they have a religious/nationalist perogative to settle those lands. That has everything to do w. the Jewish nature of the state (or at least the way these expansionists interpret the religion).

  10. # Richard & Shirin
    it’s funny how a Seattle based American and another foreigner (where you from shirin ?) are trying to explain few Israelis, what thier country is all about.
    nice work on the pork in Jerusalem Richard, it shows how much you really know about the Israeli society, as much as you know about canada’s news paper i assume.

    1. I’d like a survey of how many Jerusalem restaurants serve pork.

      There is an entire aspect of your own society you either deliberately or unintentionally deny exists. That’s where outsiders shine a light you would prefer to extinguish. If you can handle things so well why didn’t anyone in Israel publish the names of Doron Zahavi, Anat Kamm, Ameer Makhoul, Omar Said, Immanuel Sonino, and others inside yr country? It took me to do that before they had the guts to follow suit. No, I’m afraid that we’ll continue to rile you up & step on yr feet until your country can prove it wants to join the rest of the world community.

      1. Not really central to any arguement, but there are many restaurants in Jerusalem that sell pork on their menu – often disguised on the menu as “other meat” in Hebrew בשר אחר. The chances are that if you find a restaurant that is open on Shabbat it will have pork on the menu, together with other “Jewish” delicacies as prawns, shrimps or lobsters. And that’s without even mentioning East Jerusalem’s Christian Arab restaurants and the meat sold openly in the suq of the Old City of J.

  11. instead of a survey you can simply use the good services of google, you would come to at lease 20 paces in Jerusalem that sell pork, shrimps and you name it.

    nice attempt of diverging the conversation, i don’t see what publishing the names of Doron Zehavi and others have to do with your lack of knowledge of the Israeli society but so be it.

    by the way in the US you solved that issue, by hosting your detainees outside of the US borders, Guantanamo, Iraq and few places in Europe. can you provide a list of all the detainees in Guantanamo ? i doubt that.

    weather you like it or not a democracy has every right to defend it self and it employees, and that includes not telling Richard Silverstien who it arrested and why, and who is holding what job.

    i don’t mind the light you shade, but in your case it’s a one sided twisted light from someone who will do anything for his 2 seconds of fame.

    1. can you provide a list of all the detainees in Guantanamo

      Yes, the U.S. gov’t released just such a list. I guess you missed that. I didn’t solve any issue because I never supported Guantanamo, extraordinary rendition or torture. You’re confusing me with the other half of the country that voted for Bush. And I don’t support Obama’s policies when they’ve gone along w. Bush’s either.

      weather you like it or not a democracy has every right to defend it self and it employees, and that includes not telling Richard Silverstien who it arrested and why, and who is holding what job.

      No, democracies don’t do such things, and are transparent about most such things–which is why your country is a democracy in name only.

      i don’t mind the light you shade…one sided twisted light

      What an interesting image. But I think you’ve just created a physical rhetorical impossibility.

  12. This “loyalty oath” is a symbolic assertion of the principles of apartheid that have governed Israel since inception. The kind of opposition that is incensed by the symbol because of what it says and not of by the underlying reality is as problematic as the promoters of this loathsome idea. Such a weak, unprincipled, half hearted “left” will always loose. To Jews, all it has to offer is a pale copy of what the Right provides with pride. To Palestinians it only offers the hope of a peaceful disappearance.

    more of my diametrically opposed analysis at

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *