|
team overhead smash posted:So it is okay to ignore a sizable chunk of the population as long as they form a minority of their overall religious group? The site has been controlled by Muslims for a thousand years, Why even entertain these notions of 'having to do something' when at the end of the day maintaining the status quo is easier, less inflammatory and perfectly coincides with the majority held theologies? In the future once tensions aren't as high those non Muslims who wish to visit the mountain or make pilgrimage should appeal their case to the high court (that is, assuming joint control over the holy sites).
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2014 14:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 20:52 |
|
|
Shortly after the Six Day war, the interview collection The Seventh Day ("Siah Lohamim" or "Warriors Speak") was published. Even though it was intended to counteract the aggressive arrogance that dominated Israeli Zeitgeist after the Six Day war, it encountered the typical reaction reserved for liberal zionist self-expression - anger at the tearful confessions from the right/center, including the mainstream Kibbutz movement, and the (now longstanding shorthand) expression "Shooting and Crying" from the left. I'm not sure if said expression hails directly from this parody or it's just the most famous work to make use of a popular joke to say something fairly poignant, but... It's a bit bloated, the first half establishing the scene more than anything, but the second half is just pure gold. "Back when they were going through their Hakshara, Zeev said that without strength, nothing can be built here, and Sonia agreed. But then Sonia said that without morals, nothing will be left here, and Zeev agreed. So they decided to call their first boy "Shooting", and raise him to shoot, and call their second boy "Crying" and raise him to cry. So it goes. But in the evening, when Shooting would come back from his target practice, Sonia, who believed that without morals there will be nothing left here, would also teach him to cry. And when Crying came home from his crying practice, Zeev, who believed that without strength nothing can be built here, would also teach him to shoot. So Shooting and Crying went forth into the world. ... Every time there's a war on, Shooting and Crying are the first to volunteer, because that's how they were raised. They fight like lions, fly like eagles, and kill without peer. "Shooting and Crying are our finest youth", the commander would say after every battle. But when the war is over, Shooting and Crying go home and write. Songs and stories and journals and books about the evil of wars, the ugliness of destruction and the awfulness of killing. Because that's how they were raised. ... When in the government, Shooting and Crying always vote according to the decree of their conscience; but always, when the opposite decision is made, they have no choice but to implement it completely. "We don't agree with a single word in the decision", Shooting and Crying tell the journalists, "but we will give our lives to make it happen". But Shooting and Crying are not hypocrites. So every night, before they sleep, they malign the decision, to gain the strength needed to keep carrying it out tomorrow. ... When Shooting and Crying settle somewhere, they, like everyone else, kick out those who were there beforehand. But Shooting and Crying, unlike everyone else, are, in principle, against the expulsion of those who were there beforehand. Shooting and Crying will occasionally even attend a demonstration for the rights of the expelled to return to their land. Then they go home to sow and reap. For they sow in tears but reap in joy - Shooting and Crying. ... Shooting and Crying aren't stupid, so, when they see things aren't going so well, they decide to protest so that things might get a bit better. So Shooting and Crying form a gathering and declare that things aren't that good, and someone should do something. Then they go home, but things keep going poorly regardless. So Shooting and Crying gather once more, and declare that things are honestly getting quite bad, and someone should really do something. Then they return to their homes, but things keep going as they go. So Shooting and Crying gather for the final time, and declare that things aren't going that well, and are getting quite intolerable really, and something must be done: so they are forced to support (with due reservations, of course) the current situation, because otherwise things might get even worse, and the present fairly-bad-situation is still better than the non-present far-worse-situation, so they publish a protest petition in support of the current situation. Things immediately turn not-so-bad, and they go home. ... Whenever the Turklin Caves are demolished to make room for a housing project [Apparently those caves were demolished so well that not a single trace is left on google] Shooting and Crying are there, and they cry twice. Once, for grief as the destruction of a natural treasure. Then, again, for joy for the continued settling of the land. For Shooting and Crying greatly love nature and the land both. ... Once a year, Shooting and Crying will visit a slum, or a poverty protest, and will be shocked and hurt. "Wherefore the poverty?" ask Shooting and Crying in shock. "Why the pain?" they ask in poverty. "How the shock?" they ask themselves in pain. "From where this distress?" they ask in distress. [Probably the most problematic translation in the whole skit. In the original, every question is a synonym for "From where X", which didn't really work for me. Any suggestions would be welcome] They have a lot of poignant questions, Shooting and Crying. ... In the occupation army. Shooting and Crying are opposed to the occupation, so they love to serve in the occupation army. Shooting and Crying love their service, because in the occupied territories they can shoot and cry as much as they will. They shoot because they are not wanted there. They cry because they are not wanted there. They shoot because they cry. They cry because they shoot. With one hand Shooting and Crying are shooting, and with one eye Shooting and Crying are crying. It is so lovely to see Shooting and Crying shooting and crying Shooting and crying shooting and Crying. So it goes. Shooting and Crying. " העולם הזה, 15.12.1976
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2014 17:20
|
|
|
emanresu tnuocca posted:The site has been controlled by Muslims for a thousand years, Why even entertain these notions of 'having to do something' when at the end of the day maintaining the status quo is easier, less inflammatory and perfectly coincides with the majority held theologies? Let's face it, if the jewish immigrants had decided to share the land in 1948, none of the current troubles in the region would be happening.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2014 17:28
|
|
|
team overhead smash posted:So it is okay to ignore a sizable chunk of the population as long as they form a minority of their overall religious group? There is a difference between accessing the Mount (which at least used to be possible to anyone) and praying there, which was what was forbidden for Jews to do. Honestly, this whole thing needs to be taken up by an interfaith commission, as should access to all holy sites, regardless of the side of the Green Line, after a secular peace deal is established. Keep in mind that the Jewish portion near Temple Mount, near the Wailing Wall, used to be the Moroccan Quarter, housing Muslims originally descended from the Maghreb, before being destroyed just after the Old City was occupied by Israeli troops in 1967. A mosque there was kept for a while, I think, then demolished also. The Wailing Wall was the other side of the alley, and access there was very unpleasant, and was the focal points for many clashes before 1948. Even the status quo has a nasty relatively recent history to it. MonsieurChoc posted:Let's face it, if the jewish immigrants had decided to share the land in 1948, none of the current troubles in the region would be happening. Well, considering that the Jewish leadership actually supported the Partition Plan while Palestinian and other Arab leaderships opposed it, that's kind of the exact opposite of how it was at that point in time. But that's a misleading place to start, really, because there were plenty of Jews beforehand, trying various strategies of immigrating to Palestine. There was no avoiding the basic fact that a lot of Jews wanted to immigrate and most Muslim and Christian natives did not want them to. Furthermore, the Partition Plan was doomed to fail, and was rightly perceived by the natives as giving way too much over to the Jews.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2014 18:16
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:Well, considering that the Jewish leadership actually supported the Partition Plan while Palestinian and other Arab leaderships opposed it, that's kind of the exact opposite of how it was at that point in time. But that's a misleading place to start, really, because there were plenty of Jews beforehand, trying various strategies of immigrating to Palestine. There was no avoiding the basic fact that a lot of Jews wanted to immigrate and most Muslim and Christian natives did not want them to. Furthermore, the Partition Plan was doomed to fail, and was rightly perceived by the natives as giving way too much over to the Jews. The Partition plan is merely taking half the country instead of all of it. It's not sharing, and it was a stupid plan doomed to fail. Sharing means one country with two people in it. Like all the other countries with more than one ethnic/cultural/religious gorup in it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2014 18:21
|
|
|
MonsieurChoc posted:The Partition plan is merely taking half the country instead of all of it. It's not sharing, and it was a stupid plan doomed to fail. Sharing means one country with two people in it. Like all the other countries with more than one ethnic/cultural/religious gorup in it. The Middle East is rife with counter-examples to that working out well. Also, there were some Jewish groups who tried that idea, it just had limited to no support among the natives. Again, for entirely legitimate reasons on some level: they didn't think whatever problem Jews had in Europe was their fault, and they didn't think it was possible for Zionists to just fit in with the existing order or share the land equitably. The latter was not unreasonable considering the Jews didn't think that was likely, either, or if they did, they were thinking of a colonial order where they show the natives the better, European way of life and they let the Jews stay and rule in fullest of gratitude. I think a big lesson here is that "that's not my problem" is a terrible way of dealing with immigration, colonialist or otherwise. Jewish expansionism could have been nipped in the bud with just a widespread Arab campaign to accept Jewish refugees after the Evian conference. And if we step back from that, and not put too much responsibility with people who had plenty of their own problems (dealing with British-French colonialism, civil unrest and economic hardship), if the US hadn't enacted the 1924 Immigration Act and just let as many Jews in as were running away from Eastern and then Central Europe, Zionists would have been an irrelevant rump state at most.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2014 19:35
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:Well, considering that the Jewish leadership actually supported the Partition Plan while Palestinian and other Arab leaderships opposed it, that's kind of the exact opposite of how it was at that point in time.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2014 19:59
|
|
|
Xander77 posted:Actually, I believe you'll find that the nefarious Zionists were always plotting to steal the land of Palestine for themselves. Purchasing title to land through a region's political order that is not intent on reform is not plotting to steal land, its providing development opportunities with an expat community able to be co-opted as cheap labor by local power structures when those expats are both willing and desiring to become assimilation into governing coalitions. In order to assimilate a population, you must offer a better alternative than those expats forming their own governing bodies. That's something which Palestinians have, historically, had an issue with creating. My Imaginary GF fucked around with this message at 20:07 on Nov 29, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2014 20:05
|
|
|
emanresu tnuocca posted:The site has been controlled by Muslims for a thousand years, Why even entertain these notions of 'having to do something' when at the end of the day maintaining the status quo is easier, less inflammatory and perfectly coincides with the majority held theologies? 1) "Maintaining the status quo being easier" is hardly the most compelling arguement. 2) Letting people to observe their religious practices is a basic and well-recognised human right and letting people access an important religious site should be expected of any nation. 3) Getting Israel to accept peace will happen sooner and easier if some kind of arrangement can be made. 4) I'd prefer there not to be a two-state solution where Israel and Palestine hate each other's guts and there is constant low-level conflict. Normalising relations is an important part of the peace process and I see a big component of that being getting Al-Aqsa to be treated like a site of religious significance for 2+ religions would be in any other civilised country. Absurd Alhazred posted:There is a difference between accessing the Mount (which at least used to be possible to anyone) and praying there, which was what was forbidden for Jews to do. Yes, in terms of praying the percentage is smaller (in the 40%s) but is still substantial, but it was a point against emanresu's framing of Jews as beep boop robots who must automatically want to follow rabbinical instructions about not accessing the Temple Mount at all.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2014 20:14
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Purchasing title to land through a region's political order that is not intent on reform is not plotting to steal land, its providing development opportunities with an expat community able to be co-opted as cheap labor by local power structures when those expats are both willing and desiring to become assimilation into governing coalitions. That may have been true as far as the First Migration was concerned, as they bought the land from absentee landlords and then employed the natives in basically working the same plots. The problem was much more severe with Second Migration and on, where they insisted that Jews should be active in the entire chain of production, farm labor and up, meaning that Arabs need to be removed. Socialists attempting to somehow paint this as ultimately being for the long-term benefit for the Arab laborer and peasant was obviously rejected with scorn. Furthermore, there were overwhelming forces inside Zionism which rejected wholeheartedly being integrated into a native social order. That was the rationale behind the Territorialists, who only cared about any territory rather than going to Palestine, and was seen as a clear necessity by even the most "peacenik" Mapainiks. There was no point in creating a new state for Jews if they were to be subservient to others. Zionism came about from the failure of assimilation in Europe (and got some support from its failure in Palestine), and if they simply accepted this kind of process in Palestine, they would have absolutely no benefit to confer to someone in Eastern Europe hesitating between Zionism and Bundism. ETA: team overhead smash posted:1) "Maintaining the status quo being easier" is hardly the most compelling arguement. You are putting the cart before the horse. There is not going to be equitable religious accommodation and normalization when the power disparities are so severe. Any concession made before, or not under the auspices of a Palestinian State will be considered a surrender. quote:Yes, in terms of praying the percentage is smaller (in the 40%s) but is still substantial, but it was a point against emanresu's framing of Jews as beep boop robots who must automatically want to follow rabbinical instructions about not accessing the Temple Mount at all. I think that the point is that the Venn diagram of people who want to pray in the Temple Mount and people who want to instigate conflict in order to remove Muslims from the area entirely is basically one huge blob. Respecting religion has its limits. There is a status quo that has held for a while, and makes for a better starting point to meaningful accommodation post-Statehood that is much better than basically opening all the borders and ignoring precedent just to be "religiously free". Absurd Alhazred fucked around with this message at 20:25 on Nov 29, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2014 20:21
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:That may have been true as far as the First Migration was concerned, as they bought the land from absentee landlords and then employed the natives in basically working the same plots. The problem was much more severe with Second Migration and on, where they insisted that Jews should be active in the entire chain of production, farm labor and up, meaning that Arabs need to be removed. Socialists attempting to somehow paint this as ultimately being for the long-term benefit for the Arab laborer and peasant was obviously rejected with scorn. Let's get real: Second migration wasn't about removing arabs, it was about lowering the costs of labor. You did that through vertical integration and incorporation in which you run company towns. Either, as a community, Palestinians offer those immigrants a better alternative than expatriat plantation work, or the Palestinians lower their own labor costs by cutting deals for subcontracting and subleasing with increased effective rates of taxation in order to own the logistics infrastructure before those vertically-intregrated agrarian communities construct their own. Another alternative: raise minimum costs for all labor and enforce those standards.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2014 20:35
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Let's get real: Second migration wasn't about removing arabs, it was about lowering the costs of labor. You did that through vertical integration and incorporation in which you run company towns. Either, as a community, Palestinians offer those immigrants a better alternative than expatriat plantation work, or the Palestinians lower their own labor costs by cutting deals for subcontracting and subleasing with increased effective rates of taxation in order to own the logistics infrastructure before those vertically-intregrated agrarian communities construct their own. Another alternative: raise minimum costs for all labor and enforce those standards. There you go again, using your own idio
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2014 20:48
|
|
|
And besides, amoral realism like he uses it is pretty much evil.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2014 21:48
|
|
|
An Angry Bug posted:And besides, amoral realism like he uses it is pretty much evil. You have to know people's weak spots. Does MIGF seem sensitive to being called evil? No, he will dismiss you as unrealistic and foolish. Better to show him up for a fraud and hurt his professional credibility. Which I am well-placed to do in this situation where I know 1000% more than he ever will. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2014 21:51
|
|
|
An Angry Bug posted:And besides, amoral realism like he uses it is pretty much evil. "Like he uses it" being the key phrase. The thing is, I don't think even he understands his own thinking, because he's perfectly happy to leap from amoral realism to amoral pedantic legalism when it suits him. There's just no there there, the only constant is amorality.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2014 21:51
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:There you go again, using your own idio And who profited from the labor? I don't care what the pitch was that got folks to come work the land, I care about who accumulated capital from the profits off that labor.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2014 22:24
|
|
|
Who gives a poo poo about money? Human lives are more important than that.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2014 22:27
|
|
|
Xander77 posted:Shooting and Crying That was really fascinating. Thanks for posting that.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2014 22:28
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:And who profited from the labor? I don't care what the pitch was that got folks to come work the land, I care about who accumulated capital from the profits off that labor. Except the capital is not the main motivator for the settlements and apartheid. You also care about whether or not Israel is allowed to do a preemptive nuclear strike on Iran, so what you care about is of little consequence to reality.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2014 22:31
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:And who profited from the labor? I don't care what the pitch was that got folks to come work the land, I care about who accumulated capital from the profits off that labor. The colonial power practicing apartheid accumulated capital from their profit and from their theft of land. Therefore, colonialism is good because it allows profits to happen. An Angry Bug posted:Who gives a poo poo about money? Human lives are more important than that. If only this were true, the world would be a lot less lovely.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2014 22:50
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:And who profited from the labor? I don't care what the pitch was that got folks to come work the land, I care about who accumulated capital from the profits off that labor. What is the internal logic here? The Palestinians were pushed off the land because Jewish immigrants would work for less? This is an assertion which needs some empirical grounding or it's worthless. (Remarkable if true, but y'know, MIGF, so I won't hold my breath.)
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2014 23:01
|
|
|
Jack of Hearts posted:What is the internal logic here? The Palestinians were pushed off the land because Jewish immigrants would work for less? This is an assertion which needs some empirical grounding or it's worthless. (Remarkable if true, but y'know, MIGF, so I won't hold my breath.) See, we killed off and moved the Native Americans because 
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2014 23:12
|
|
|
Jack of Hearts posted:What is the internal logic here? The Palestinians were pushed off the land because Jewish immigrants would work for less? This is an assertion which needs some empirical grounding or it's worthless. (Remarkable if true, but y'know, MIGF, so I won't hold my breath.) The logic is that the effective return on labor for Jewish immigrants was lower than for non-Jewish individuals under the Ottoman registers and tax structures. Jewish immigrants would work for a lower effective rate than non-Jewish laborers in the Palestine province under Ottoman structures. You think the landlords and Ottoman officials didn't want Jews and other minorities resettled in muslim-majority provinces? Of course they did; their resettlement and immigration policies were rooted in the higher effective tax rates imposed upon on those minority populations, and the requirement for taxes to be paid through non- in-kind payments. I've got a few secondary sources on order so I can back this up with analysis of primary-source tax records. Its natural that Arabs would resent Jewish immigrants in Palestine: landlords and officials were able to extract a higher rate of return off employment of Jewish and minority laborers than they were off employment of muslims. That's why I asked Absurd Alhazred who the capital accumulated to. You have to look at Ottoman tax records to understand the origins of the I/P conflict. CommieGIR posted:See, we killed off and moved the Native Americans because Because it expanded the tax base and increased rates of capital accumulation for American commodity purchasers and officials. It's not about the land, its about the money. Laborers may work the land for effectively lower margins when they think its about the land; capitalists know its about the gently caress'n money. My Imaginary GF fucked around with this message at 23:25 on Nov 29, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2014 23:22
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:I'm just glad I have US citizenship, too, so it wasn't too much of a procedure to move out. I wish I could just transplant everybody else out of there, but a lot of my family calls it home and will go down with the ship. Most Israelis are not eligible for US citizenship. You are standing on third base, where you were born, and begrudging others who weren't as fortunate as you. Laughing at how butthurt you are, chaver.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2014 23:34
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Because it expanded the tax base and increased rates of capital accumulation for American commodity purchasers and officials. It's not about the land, its about the money. Laborers may work the land for effectively lower margins when they think its about the land; capitalists know its about the gently caress'n money. No, its pretty much about the land in the case of I/P.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2014 23:51
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:You have to look at Ottoman tax records to understand the origins of the I/P conflict. Say what you will about his ethical and intellectual standing, but MIGF is the man who keeps horrible humanitarian crises hilarious.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2014 23:57
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:You are putting the cart before the horse. There is not going to be equitable religious accommodation and normalization when the power disparities are so severe. Any concession made before, or not under the auspices of a Palestinian State will be considered a surrender. None of this is what the Palestinians should do now. team overhead smash posted:What does everyone think should be done with Al-Aqsa under some hypothetical peace deal? It was from the very first post about how it should be dealt under a hypothetical future peace deal that creates a Palestinian state. From past experience it would be a significant part of any deal so there is going to be some kind of agreement on it pretty much no matter what. It's simply a case of what would work, what's best and what we should support.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2014 00:30
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:And who profited from the labor? I don't care what the pitch was that got folks to come work the land, I care about who accumulated capital from the profits off that labor. The First Migration settlers sure didn't, because they were being forced to pay Jewish wages (higher) while getting Jewish work (lower quality due to their lack of experience in agriculture and labor). My Imaginary GF posted:The logic is that the effective return on labor for Jewish immigrants was lower than for non-Jewish individuals under the Ottoman registers and tax structures. Jewish immigrants would work for a lower effective rate than non-Jewish laborers in the Palestine province under Ottoman structures. Bullshit. See above. ETA: TheImmigrant posted:Most Israelis are not eligible for US citizenship. You are standing on third base, where you were born, and begrudging others who weren't as fortunate as you. That is what I am saying, you disingenuous moron. Most of them can't. So "get everyone out of there" is not a loving solution. You loving pathetic excuse for human excrement, who was born with a home run base because you never had to even grow up in Israel, shithead. But keep telling yourself you get to lecture anybody, you jet-setting terrorism-funding hypocrite. Absurd Alhazred fucked around with this message at 00:38 on Nov 30, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2014 00:34
|
|
|
TheImmigrant posted:Most Israelis are not eligible for US citizenship. You are standing on third base, where you were born, and begrudging others who weren't as fortunate as you. So we should give Israelis an expedited path to citizenship in the US and therefore remove ourselves from this pointless quagmire? Cool. All of Israel could be distributed between a few states without anyone particularly noticing. Let's do that, instead of the endless economic, military, and diplomatic support we give them. I haven't been to Israel, but I'm reasonably certain that when God spoke of the promised land, he meant California.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2014 00:51
|
|
|
Jack of Hearts posted:So we should give Israelis an expedited path to citizenship in the US and therefore remove ourselves from this pointless quagmire? Cool. All of Israel could be distributed between a few states without anyone particularly noticing. Let's do that, instead of the endless economic, military, and diplomatic support we give them. I haven't been to Israel, but I'm reasonably certain that when God spoke of the promised land, he meant California. And did those feet in ancient times Walk upon Cali's valley yellow: And was the Cow of the Temple, In Cali's pleasant vineyards mellow! ETA: Although I do wonder what nativists will think of adding ~5million asylum seekers to the docket, ones who will probably be competing for their jobs, not the ones they won't take themselves. Absurd Alhazred fucked around with this message at 01:27 on Nov 30, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2014 00:54
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:And who profited from the labor? I don't care what the pitch was that got folks to come work the land, I care about who accumulated capital from the profits off that labor. down with slavery posted:Are you on some mission to prove how big of a moron you are to D&D?
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2014 01:13
|
|
|
Jack of Hearts posted:So we should give Israelis an expedited path to citizenship in the US and therefore remove ourselves from this pointless quagmire? Cool. All of Israel could be distributed between a few states without anyone particularly noticing. Let's do that, instead of the endless economic, military, and diplomatic support we give them. I haven't been to Israel, but I'm reasonably certain that when God spoke of the promised land, he meant California. All Israelis, or just the Jews? Deportation, or a US citizenship option?
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2014 01:24
|
|
|
TheImmigrant posted:All Israelis, or just the Jews? Deportation, or a US citizenship option? All Israelis, and US citizenship. We gave it on an expedited basis to Cuban refugees. I was challenging the silliness of your original statement, not claiming that it was a plausible solution to the problem. Although, actually, if there were a way for America to give subtle preference to Jewish and Israeli immigration, that would let a tremendous amount of air out of Israel's tires.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2014 01:37
|
|
|
They already did that in the 80s with the Soviet Union.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2014 01:48
|
|
|
Kim Jong Il posted:They already did that in the 80s with the Soviet Union. Really? OK, in that case we're (US) boned.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2014 01:51
|
|
|
Jack of Hearts posted:All Israelis, and US citizenship. We gave it on an expedited basis to Cuban refugees. I was challenging the silliness of your original statement, not claiming that it was a plausible solution to the problem. Although, actually, if there were a way for America to give subtle preference to Jewish and Israeli immigration, that would let a tremendous amount of air out of Israel's tires. And what of the Israelis (most certainly a majority) who did not wish to become yordim?
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2014 01:58
|
|
|
TheImmigrant posted:And what of the Israelis (most certainly a majority) who did not wish to become yordim? You were the one calling them privileged. What do you want?
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2014 02:01
|
|
|
Jack of Hearts posted:Really? OK, in that case we're (US) boned. No I mean we passed Jackson-Vanik which was used as a hammer to free Soviet Jews.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2014 02:01
|
|
|
Following a week of incitement against the bilingual school in Jerusalem it was partially burned down by price tag Nazis: http://972mag.com/we-will-overcome-arson-mourning-at-jerusalems-bilingual-school/99428/ If you want to help them out with donations you can do it here: https://www.israelgives.org/amuta/580293710
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2014 16:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 20:52 |
|
|
I hope they can rebuild: that looks like it was a nice school. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2014 18:45
|
|