Civilised Israel?

[Lonan3]

There is often a degree of contempt expressed for some countries in the Middle East on the grounds that they have medieval attitudes about so many things. On e of the few that rarely comes in for this kind of criticism is Israel which (mainly thanks to American support) has been portrayed as a fine example of the kind of civilised, democratic nation that ought to exist in the region.

Then a story like THIS ONE appears - and shows us that, beneath the thin veneer of modern civilisation, Israel is no different from the other Arab states.

[pauld]

An arab in a suit, is still an Arab.

[Keith]

...beneath the thin veneer of modern civilisation, Israel is no different from the other state that is led by religious fundamentalists.

 

I think I prefer your quote as it now reads.

[Barrie Stevens]

There is often a degree of contempt expressed for some countries in the Middle East on the grounds that they have medieval attitudes about so many things. On e of the few that rarely comes in for this kind of criticism is Israel which (mainly thanks to American support) has been portrayed as a fine example of the kind of civilised, democratic nation that ought to exist in the region.

Then a story like THIS ONE appears - and shows us that, beneath the thin veneer of modern civilisation, Israel is no different from the other Arab states.

 

Since when has Israel been an Arab country?

 

Many Israelis are like the so called "Manx"...they are "Comeovers" if you dig back a few decades. When did you last see a British Arab/Polish Arab/Russian Arab etc?

 

Israel is a secular state. It is not run by religious fundamentalists. The Orthodox Jewish element can be an embarrassment. They have influence. They have a cultural grip like the Catholic Church in some countries and likewise the C of E as the Established church in England but that is as far as it goes.

 

The Archbishop of Canterbury can be an equal embarrassment.

 

Most Israelis are as religious or as Jewish as you who are nominally Christians (Christianity being originally a sect of Judaism)..And by the way, these Orthodox Jewish courts exist in London, Manchester, Leeds, Bradford and for some reason Gateshead and they are all British.

 

And likewise the orthodox Jewish courts have jurisdiction in the Isle of Man but are beneath the law of the Island. The Island has its own Rabbi and Jewish congregation. The Island Rabbi used to be Rabbi Silverman.

 

Like the stoning of the dog or refusing a Jewish woman a divorce and keeping her "in chains" it is nominal and subservient to the ultimate law of the land.

 

It is not the same in terms of power as is Sharia in certain Arab countries. (And there are Sharia courts in the UK and they have jurisdiction in the Isle of Man but beneath local laws.

 

When did you last see a ritual beheading in Israel? When did you see a genuine stoning? You see these in some Arab countries.

 

The Orthodox do have some influence but overall Israel is a Western Democracy and secural. I mean, a non-Jewish Christian can become an Israeli.

[pauld]

I bet the countries on Israels borders are wetting themselves with exitement at the thought of being ruled by zionist Israel barry, so cultured are they.

[Barrie Stevens]

I bet the countries on Israels borders are wetting themselves with exitement at the thought of being ruled by zionist Israel barry, so cultured are they.

 

Please explain. I am not Israel. Not Zionist And not Barry.

[La_Dolce_Vita]

Oh come on, Lonan. Just because this dog is being stoned, let's not pretend this indicates that Israel is less civilised than the people of the UK.

 

You are pushing it a bit far discussing whether Israel should exist or not by linking it with some idea of it being a modern civilisation. Israel's reasons for existing and American support do not primarily rest on it being a modern, civilised state.

 

They're more superstitious, that's all in this respect. I mean, what goes in Britain? There are many, many cases of abuse of animals and medical testing on animals, which is often completely unnecessary, goes on all the time.

[Lonan3]

Oh come on, Lonan. Just because this dog is being stoned, let's not pretend this indicates that Israel is less civilised than the people of the UK.

 

You are pushing it a bit far discussing whether Israel should exist or not by linking it with some idea of it being a modern civilisation. Israel's reasons for existing and American support do not primarily rest on it being a modern, civilised state.

 

They're more superstitious, that's all in this respect. I mean, what goes in Britain? There are many, many cases of abuse of animals and medical testing on animals, which is often completely unnecessary, goes on all the time.

Your powers of misinterpretation continue to amaze!

 

I did not suggest - in any way, shape or form - that Israel should not exist. I was pointing out that, like the other Arab nations (and the Jewish people are an Arabic tribe) they are still bound by superstitious beliefs that ought to have no place in the modern world. We are not talking about 'greeting the little people' at the Fairy Bridge, or referring to the 'Scottish Play' rather than saying 'Macbeth,' - we are taking about a judge pronouncing a death sentence on a dog because it reminded him of a curse passed on a now deceased secular lawyer about 20 years ago, when judges bid his spirit to enter the body of a dog!

 

The point I was making is that we are quick to condemn all Islamic people for beliefs that seem outrageous and outdated - and for imposing punishments that seem uncivilised or excessively harsh - but when evidence of such ridiculous beliefs appear in an Israeli context the immediate reaction is to say that it is merely extreme fundamentalists who are responsible.

[pauld]

Aye with Israel it is, see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil, you cannot criticize Israel lonan, it is just not on, ONLY anti-Semites criticize gods chosen people.

 

You either are behind them, or you stay quiet, criticism in any form will not be tolerated, you are a hater if you have a criticism.

 

Anyway you can take comfort in the knowledge that the stray dog is considered a higher life form, and has more human rights in Israel, than any Palestinian.

 

Edit to add, unless it was a Palestinian stray.

[Langweilig]

There's a certain part of England whose inhabitants are still nicknamed "Monkey Hangers" just for mistaking a monkey for a French spy...as you do.

[pauld]

Yeah ZIONISM rocks.

 

 

"There's a certain part of England whose inhabitants are still nicknamed "Monkey Hangers" just for mistaking a monkey for a French spy"

 

Well thats englishmen for ya.

[La_Dolce_Vita]

 

Your powers of misinterpretation continue to amaze!

 

I did not suggest - in any way, shape or form - that Israel should not exist.

I wasn't saying you did. I was referring to your comment: "that rarely comes in for this kind of criticism is Israel which (mainly thanks to American support) has been portrayed as a fine example of the kind of civilised, democratic nation that ought to exist in the region.". I was referring to the connection you a making with the country's justification for existing. I don't see how you can make a connection with the debate over the country's existence.

 

I was pointing out that, like the other Arab nations (and the Jewish people are an Arabic tribe) they are still bound by superstitious beliefs that ought to have no place in the modern world.

But nor should Christian beliefs of heaven and hell and God that's involves itself in human affairs. They have no place.

 

We are not talking about 'greeting the little people' at the Fairy Bridge, or referring to the 'Scottish Play' rather than saying 'Macbeth,' - we are taking about a judge pronouncing a death sentence on a dog because it reminded him of a curse passed on a now deceased secular lawyer about 20 years ago, when judges bid his spirit to enter the body of a dog!

Actually, these superstitions are the same sort of thing, except the particular manifestation of this belief and its acceptance has resulted in this form of behaviour, i.e. by a court condemning a dog.

 

The point I was making is that we are quick to condemn all Islamic people for beliefs that seem outrageous and outdated - and for imposing punishments that seem uncivilised or excessively harsh - but when evidence of such ridiculous beliefs appear in an Israeli context the immediate reaction is to say that it is merely extreme fundamentalists who are responsible.

I don't think we are too quick to condemn. They deserve the condemnation. But where is the immediate reaction that these are fundamentalists?

[Jimcalagon]

Yes, those backwards Israeli mediaevalists, stoning dogs to death because they think they are possessed by evil spirits. The next thing you know they will be hunting wrens because they think that they are witches!

[spook]

In fact it turns out that the whole story was a bit of black publicity.

http://www.thejerusalemlife.com/news/when-a-dog-runs-wild-in-court

[Chinahand]

Aye with Israel it is, see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil, you cannot criticize Israel lonan, it is just not on, ONLY anti-Semites criticize gods chosen people.

I realize this is sarcasm directed at LDV, Pauld, but Israel gets lots of criticism for military excesses from people who support its basic right to exist, and who condem violence and terrorism against it. President Obama for one!

 

I pretty firmly believe that if there was an effective peace settlement Israel would happily leave its neighbours in peace, and that many of its problems are due to violence perpetrated against it. But I do think Israel has politically got itself on the wrong side of history with its oppression of the Palestinians and its siege mentality destroying the middle ground. Certainly many of those opposing it are violent and will not compromise. But the point is to empower moderates who you can do business with and isolate the radicals. Israel's policies, especially its walls, cordon santitaires, and 1000 Ib bombs, make that very difficult.

 

Israel has also allowed increasing ultra-orthodox influence on the state, and has basically racist land ownership policies with shamefully partisan attitudes towards illegal building activites by Settlers compared with Arab Israelis and Palestinians living in occuppied territory.

 

Its NOT a secular state, and its claim to be a liberal democratic one are become increasingly shaky. But it does have effective institutions.

 

South Africa in about 1975 is a pretty good proxy. Those who are protected by the state (~6.2 million)see it as a democratic, ordered country. Those who aren't, 1.2 million Israeli Arabs, and especially the 3.8 million people living in the Occupied Territories, see it as biased, oppressive, violent, and aquisitive.

 

Touch wood with Peace alot of these issues will be resolved, but not if terrorism continues and proxy wars are started by hostile countries who deny Israel's right to exist.

 

The question is can a two state settlement ever be just, or will it ever break down again into violence? I'm cautiously optimistic, but it'll be a long slog.