Meanwhile back in Israel

mickeyrat said:

mickeyrat said:

mickeyrat said:

mickeyrat said:

mickeyrat said:

mickeyrat said:

yosi said:

I assume the question is what I think the "Jewish identity" of Israel should consist of. Basically I'd like for the country's civic identity to be defined by its Jewish majority. So Hebrew as the common vernacular, the national calendar defined by the Jewish calendar (e.g., major school holidays aligned with Passover (let's say) in the same way that winter break in the US lines up with Christmas), etc. I also think there should be a strict separation of synagogue and state.

Who exactly would this apply to? Who is included in the Jewish majority?

Waiting, watching the clock......

Still Here

Taps fingers on the table.

anxiously waiting a reply.

Still waiting for a god damned answer to my motherfucking question.

Sorry, what's the question again?

yosi said:

mickeyrat said:

mickeyrat said:

mickeyrat said:

mickeyrat said:

mickeyrat said:

mickeyrat said:

yosi said:

I assume the question is what I think the "Jewish identity" of Israel should consist of. Basically I'd like for the country's civic identity to be defined by its Jewish majority. So Hebrew as the common vernacular, the national calendar defined by the Jewish calendar (e.g., major school holidays aligned with Passover (let's say) in the same way that winter break in the US lines up with Christmas), etc. I also think there should be a strict separation of synagogue and state.

Who exactly would this apply to? Who is included in the Jewish majority?

Waiting, watching the clock......

Still Here

Taps fingers on the table.

anxiously waiting a reply.

Still waiting for a god damned answer to my motherfucking question.

Sorry, what's the question again?

You studied law right?
Due diligence would suggest you look at the entire quote chain. After your post I quoted initially.

mickeyrat said:

yosi said:

mickeyrat said:

mickeyrat said:

mickeyrat said:

mickeyrat said:

mickeyrat said:

mickeyrat said:

yosi said:

I assume the question is what I think the "Jewish identity" of Israel should consist of. Basically I'd like for the country's civic identity to be defined by its Jewish majority. So Hebrew as the common vernacular, the national calendar defined by the Jewish calendar (e.g., major school holidays aligned with Passover (let's say) in the same way that winter break in the US lines up with Christmas), etc. I also think there should be a strict separation of synagogue and state.

Who exactly would this apply to? Who is included in the Jewish majority?

Waiting, watching the clock......

Still Here

Taps fingers on the table.

anxiously waiting a reply.

Still waiting for a god damned answer to my motherfucking question.

Sorry, what's the question again?

You studied law right?
Due diligence would suggest you look at the entire quote chain. After your post I quoted initially.

Sorry, but I'm tired, and I'm not going to go combing back through the thread. I'm happy to answer the question if you'll only remind me what it is.

mickeyrat said:

Define "Jewish Identity" for me will you?

mickeyrat said:

I was clear in the question. define it. Not what you THINK it is. but what it actually is. ethnic? nationality? belief in judaism? define it.

mickeyrat said:

yosi said:

I assume the question is what I think the "Jewish identity" of Israel should consist of. Basically I'd like for the country's civic identity to be defined by its Jewish majority. So Hebrew as the common vernacular, the national calendar defined by the Jewish calendar (e.g., major school holidays aligned with Passover (let's say) in the same way that winter break in the US lines up with Christmas), etc. I also think there should be a strict separation of synagogue and state.

Who exactly would this apply to? Who is included in the Jewish majority?

There you go Yosi. Too tired to respond to mickey but plenty of energy to reply to questions more to your liking? With all due respect to mickey and you Yosi.

Where do the ethiopian jews stand then. Frankly what you describe in my opinion is eastern european all others can get fucked.

mickeyrat said:

Where do the ethiopian jews stand then. Frankly what you describe in my opinion is eastern european all others can get fucked.

I'm not sure why you've come to that conclusion. Ethiopian Jews are considered Jews. The whole reason why there is a significant Ethiopian Jewish community in Israel is because of Operation Solomon, which was explicitly undertaken BECAUSE Israel considered them Jewish.

yosi said:

mickeyrat said:

Where do the ethiopian jews stand then. Frankly what you describe in my opinion is eastern european all others can get fucked.

I'm not sure why you've come to that conclusion. Ethiopian Jews are considered Jews. The whole reason why there is a significant Ethiopian Jewish community in Israel is because of Operation Solomon, which was explicitly undertaken BECAUSE Israel considered them Jewish.

whats that?

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-32813056

Another interesting read:

Why the World Should Test Netanyahu’s Newfound Commitment to Peace
Bibi announces support for Arab Peace Initiative. It doesn’t matter if it’s real.

By Yair Rosenberg|May 28, 2015

If there were one word to describe the spirit of Benjamin Netanyahu’s re-election campaign, it would not be “compromise.” From questioning the viability of the two-state solution to vowing to keep Jerusalem undivided, the prime minister repeatedly appealed to hard-right voters in a successful bid to draw them away from rival conservative parties. And yet, less than a month after his new government’s swearing-in ceremony, Netanyahu has made a remarkable about-face on the peace process.

First, last week, in a meeting with European Union foreign policy chief Federica Mogherini, the prime minister expressed a willingness to negotiate Israel’s borders in the West Bank, delineating which settlements Israel could build in, and where it would cede land to Palestine. This openness came as a surprise, Haaretz reporter Barak Ravid noted, because it was “the first time since he took office in 2009 that Netanyahu has voiced willingness to discuss the size of the settlement blocs and their borders with the Palestinians.” Doing so would open the door to freezing settlement construction outside the negotiated border line, effectively halting the settler enterprise in its tracks.

The prime minister’s second act, however, was even more eye-opening. At a press conference in Tel Aviv today, Netanyahu backed the Arab Peace Initiative, a 2002 proposal put forward by the Arab League that outlines a path to two states. Due to its problematic formulations on Palestinian refugees, among other provisions, no Israeli prime minister or government has accepted the API as a basis for negotiations—until now. Netanyahu outlined his reservations on refugees and security, of course, but his bottom line was “the principle of trying to achieve an understanding with the leading countries in the Arab world is a good one.”

It seems clear that a desire to head off international pressure–from EU settlement product labeling initiatives to a looming prospective U.N. Security Council resolution mandating Israeli withdrawal from the West Bank–has led Netanyahu to take more conciliatory public positions on peace. Whether or not he is actually interested in turning those words into actions, however, is another matter entirely, given his checkered track record.

Unsurprisingly, then, global reactions to Netanyahu’s newfound enthusiasm for the peace process have ranged from cautiously optimistic to scornful. After meeting with the prime minister, European officials reportedly “agreed that Netanyahu had done the maximum possible to try to signal the European Union that he’s interested in turning over a new leaf.” While unsure of his commitment to negotiating settlement borders, they resolved to pursue the prospect. Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat, meanwhile, rejected Netanyahu’s border talks proposal outright, deeming it a non-starter. Likewise, Ilan Goldenberg, a member of John Kerry’s ill-fated negotiating team, dubbed the gambit “cynical even by Bibi’s standards.”

Reading these responses, it might seem like divining Netanyahu’s intentions is necessary in order to formulate an appropriate political response to his pronouncements. But the truth is, it doesn’t actually matter. In fact, both Bibi-skeptics and Bibi-believers should treat him as if he is serious, because it will ultimately further the prospect of peace regardless.

Now, it’s easy to see why those who accept Netanyahu’s sincerity should pursue his proposals. After all, they could bring peace. But even those who think Netanyahu has no intention of following through on his words, and see his statements as mere stalling tactics to allay international opprobrium, should pretend as if they are made in good faith. Why? Because just entertaining the notion of setting Israel’s borders, stopping settlement expansion, and negotiating on the basis of the Arab Peace Initiative, has already put Netanyahu at odds with his settler coalition partners and imperiled his premiership.

As soon as news broke of Netanyahu’s proposal to negotiate final borders for the West Bank, Jewish Home minister Uri Ariel took to Facebook to denounce the prospect as “dangerous and precedential,” warning that it violated the governing coalition’s commitment to preserving Jewish sovereignty. Likewise, after Netanyahu signaled his openness to the API, while offering the caveat that Israel would need to maintain a security presence in the West Bank for some time before fully withdrawing, former West Bank council head Dani Dayan retorted, “Netanyahu is wrong when he says Israel must control militarily Judea and Samaria for many years. It must be forever.”

In other words, every time Netanyahu publicly commits to the prospect of peace initiatives, he drives a wedge into his governing coalition. A typical government could weather such storms, but Netanyahu’s is far from typical—it is a razor-thin 61-seat coalition with a majority dependent on just one seat. Any disgruntled lawmaker can hold it hostage or even bring it down.

This means that, for those who think peace is not in the cards while Netanyahu is in power, the best thing they can do right now is to pretend that it is. Take Netanyahu at his word and use his commitments to heighten the tensions in his coalition. Even if such pressure produces little headway with the Palestinians, the more the topic is on the agenda—and the more Netanyahu is forced to swear public fealty to the notion of curbing settlement building—the more precarious his coalition will become.

Moreover, in offering up both the West Bank borders and API of his own initiative, Netanyahu has effectively neutered his usual defense against international pressure on the peace process. In the past, he has been able to turn such pressure into a political asset by portraying himself to Israeli voters as a principled leader standing up to an unfair world. But this time—unlike by European-initiated U.N. resolutions, or Obama administration criticisms—the maelstrom will be of his own making. The proposals are Netanyahu’s own. If he goes along with them, he creates further friction in his fractious coalition. And if he backs off, he comes across as the very opposite of the strong leader he seeks to embody to the electorate.

The basic political reality, then, is this: For those who believe Netanyahu is open to compromise, he just handed them an olive branch. For those who don’t, he just handed them a club. In either case, both groups would be foolish not to use it.

yosi said:

mickeyrat said:

yosi said:

mickeyrat said:

Where do the ethiopian jews stand then. Frankly what you describe in my opinion is eastern european all others can get fucked.

I'm not sure why you've come to that conclusion. Ethiopian Jews are considered Jews. The whole reason why there is a significant Ethiopian Jewish community in Israel is because of Operation Solomon, which was explicitly undertaken BECAUSE Israel considered them Jewish.

whats that?

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-32813056

That article doesn't contradict what I said. All I said was that they are recognized as Jews. I don't deny that Israel did a very poor job of absorbing the Ethiopians into Israeli society and that they face a range of hardships in Israel including outright discrimination. But that more or less describes the experience of most immigrants from pre-industrial countries in western industrial nations. That's not an excuse, but you seem to be making the point in order to depict Israel's abnormal failings, when it's really just proof that Israel shares in the normal failings of normal states.

I don't know of many 'normal' states that administer birth control to specific immigrant populations, as Israel was shown to be doing to Ethiopian women a couple years back...I don't consider that a normal failing.
Edit: maybe I should have not used the word 'shown', and included the word 'alleged'? Has the investigation into this been completed yet?

You're amazing. Someone makes a wild assertion, unsupported by any evidence, based on an utterly false and discredited story, and you immediately accept it as the truth because it confirms your hateful biases. The article below is from 2013. I especially like the prophetic bit at the end, which is especially apt here:

Let’s Get the Facts Straight About Ethiopian Jews and Contraception

February 7, 2013

According to a sub-headline accompanying an Op-Ed in the English edition of Ha’aretz, “The revelation that Israel is sterilizing Ethiopian women adds to a shameful history of abuse of powerless women and communities.” That’s a shocking, horrifying assertion with its overtones of Nazi racism and Dr. Mengele’s experimentation. It’s also completely false. Although it was later corrected, the damage was done.

Along with two news articles in Ha’aretz which purveyed slightly less extreme charges – that Israel allegedly required Ethiopian women in transit camps en route to Israel to receive long-lasting contraceptive injections as a condition for immigrating – the Ha’aretzitems set off a firestorm of global coverage. According to reports, the coerced injections continued even after the women arrived in Israel.

Millions of readers have heard various versions of the story in venues ranging from the mainstream (such as Huffington Post’s“Ethiopian Women Claim Israel Forced Them to Accept Birth Control Shots”) to the virulently anti-Semitic. (“State of Israel forced the sterilization of Ethiopian women” speaks of Zionist Dr. Mengeles.)

Is it true? Did Israel’s soaring rescue of thousands of Ethiopian Jews crash land some two decades later?

The Ha’aretz stories were based on a Dec. 8, 2012 Israeli broadcast called “Vacuum,” with host Gal Gabai. Ignoring information to the contrary, and placing words in the mouths of her interviewees, Gabai relentlessly pushed her pre-determined and unsubstantiated thesis that the coerced injections of Depo-Provera, a contraception shot which lasts three months, led to a 50 percent decrease in the birth rate among Ethiopian immigrants in the last decade.

Besides the abhorrent possibility that Israeli officials and/or employees of the Joint Distribution Committee, which operates the Ethiopian clinics, maintained a “systematic mechanism” (Gabai’s words) to ensure the women receive the shots, are there are other feasible explanations for the prevalent use of Depo-Provera among Ethiopian Jews? Yes, but Gabai, Talila Nesher of Ha’aretz and their foreign colleagues failed to consider them.

Depo-Provera is the most popular birth control method in African countries, including Ethiopia. Many women prefer the shot, a discreet means of birth control, which can be administered without the knowledge of disapproving husbands. A 2005 study carried out by Family Health International found: “Because contraceptives may introduce social discord, leading at times to intimate partners’ violence among African couples, women of low bargaining powers often resort to family planning methods that are suitable to covert use. . . Consequently, a general pattern that has been observed in the contraceptive method mix in sub-Saharan Africa and elsewhere in the developing world is the predominance of injectables.”

A serious journalist covering the widespread use of Depo-Provera among Ethiopians would have taken into account women’s desire for discreet birth control. Gabai interviewed the head of the Israeli Society for Contraception, who noted the cultural preference for injections, but she completely discounted this point in her conclusion.

Moreover, Gabai ignored other factors aside from alleged coerced injections which contributed to a lower birth rate. For instance, in the modern world, declining birth rates are associated with greater affluence and an improvement in the status of women. As they gain greater study and work opportunities, as well as better access to more advanced medical care and family planning, many women opt for fewer children. Poor populations with high child mortality rates also have high fertility rates. Israel has a lower infant and child mortality rate than Ethiopia.

As demographer Petra Naihmas notes in the Demographic Research journal: “Ethiopian immigrants arrived from a rural, less developed country, where traditionally children have an important economic role to play. Obviously, within a developed urban economy, children are a net economic burden upon the parents until early adulthood and there is an emphasis on the future returns to investment in the education of children. The economic incentive to reduce fertility exists.”

Futhermore, Naihmas contends that “abortions are being increasingly relied upon as a form of pregnancy control, especially among younger Ethiopian women” in Israel. Moreover, she says, women are putting off marriage and children: “The increase in median age of first marriage is particularly impressive for new Ethiopian immigrants, which increased by six years between 1990 and 2000.”

According to a 2007 USAID report, many women in Ethiopia want birth control and are unable to get it; 34 percent of Ethiopian women want family planning services to prolong the time between births, or to prevent additional pregnancies. In their Ethiopian clinics, the JDC provides these critical, sought-after family planning services, and women are treated there from their own free will. These are the same services that are offered in thousands of programs around the world, run, for example, by the United Nations Population Fund. And yet Gabai assigned a sinister purpose to the JDC family planning workshops, referring to them as a “euphemism for decreasing the birth rate.”

Regardless, is it still possible that certain JDC employees were negligent in carrying out their responsibilities, not carefully enough explaining side effects or alternative contraceptions? Might some Israeli health workers have been patronizing or racist, assuming that Ethiopian women could not be relied upon to take pills every day? Of course these are possibilities.

But, is it true, as Gabai says to one of her interviewees, an Ethiopian mother of four, “they told you [having children is] forbidden in Israel”? The mother, who said she intends to have more children, replied: “No, why forbidden? There are loads of children. What, why forbidden?”

Irresponsible, sensationalist reports distract from real social challenges facing Ethiopians in Israel, and do not help them.

There are those, however, who do benefit from this saga. In the digital era, where falsehoods long outlast yellowed news clippings, the lie about Israel’s sterilization of Ethiopians will doubtless become another weapon in the arsenal used by extremists to delegitimize the Jewish state.