%
%By Elias Davidsson - April 1991 (Revision Oct. 1991)

Note - you are already posting "facts", some of which are outdated.

The biased presentation of facts, as well as the conclusions that
you reach leave me little hope of engaging in any fruitful
exchange that might lead to a "meeting of the minds".  It is to those
who read with open mind, that I address myself.

%The International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of
%Racial Discrimination adopted by the General Assembly of the
%United Nations in 1965, has now been ratified by most member
%states. Article 1 of this Convention defines the term racial
%discrimination as "any distinction, exclusion, restriction or
%preference based on race, colour, descent, or national or ethnic
%origin which has the purpose or effect of nullifying or impairing
%the recognition, enjoyment or exercise, on an equal footing, of
%human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic,
%social, cultural or any other field of public life."

While the ideals embodied in this text are worthy goals,
as the text currently stands I know of no country in which
racial discrimination of some sort can not be found.
It makes no mention of the need for for a legislative
violation.

%The General Assembly endorsed in 1975 a resolution defining
%Zionism as a form of racism and racial discrimination. The
%important, correct and legitimate resolution is incomplete since
%it does not include operative statements designed to end Israeli
%racial discrimination. Meanwhile the United States, on behalf of
%Israel, are exerting heavy pressure on member states of the United
%Nations to repeal this resolution and give Israeli racial
%practices - Zionism - moral legitimacy.

If you are, in principle, advocating UN intervention via operative
statements in this case, it must therefore hold that they can be
applied to any other case where the council perceives some form
of racial discrimination as previously exhibited.

Scarey thought.

%The very definition of Israel as a State belonging to the Jews of
%the world (but not to its inhabitants), alienates all native
%non-Jews born in that country. 

Actually, I know quite a few native non-Jews born in Israel that are not
alienated by this law.  If you had said some, you would probably be
correct, however your tendency to exagerate and slant facts becomes
apparent.  This slant permeates the text.

%Practically all non-Jews who are living in or originate from areas
%under Israeli control, identify themselves as Palestinians. Most
%of them are Muslim, many are Christian. A few Jews, including the
%author of these lines, also identify themselves as Palestinians.

The above statement is not true.  Practically all - discounting
Beduins, Circassians, Druze, and some other fringe groups.
Your own identification is a matter that has no bearing upon the
issue.  You could equally identify yourself as a [insert group].

%Zionism took off in Europe at the end of last century. It's aim
%was to create a Jewish state in Palestine in spite of the adamant
%opposition of Palestinian Arabs (95% of the population).

If I recall correctly, at the time "zionism" took off, there
was no adamant opposition in Palestine.  I am open to any
factual contradictory evidence .

%But the
%Zionists were more powerful, militarily, economically and
%technologically, and succeeded in 1948 in conquering 70% of the
%area of Mandatory Palestine. After driving into exile most native
%Arabs from the conquered areas, approximately 750,000 people, and
%razing most of their villages to the ground, the Zionists could
%finally establish a predominantly Jewish State. Only 150,000
%non-Jews remained on Israeli territory.

Do you therefore contend that the 400 villages you mention further on "most
of their villages"?

%Once the Jewish State was established, it began enacting laws to
%help the confiscation of land from native non-Jews, their
%political repression and their destitution.

There is no doubt that laws passed provided a framework which was later
used for these purposes.  However, you seem to imply that this was the
intention a priori, which implies a policy and agenda.  My knowledge was
that this was not the case.

You also neglect to mention the circumstances that surrounded
this.  As you do again, below.

%In 1967 the State of Israel invaded Egypt and Syria and occupied
%the rest of Palestine (the West Bank and the Gaza strip). Thus
%another 1.5 million Palestinians fell under its juridiction. Its
%occupation of Palestinian and other Arab territories is considered
%illegal by the international community, as reflected in Security
%Council resolutions. Israel has rejected all U.N. resolutions and
%began without delay to entrench its occupation and rule over these
%territories with the aim of annexing them at the appropriate time.

Not quite accurate.  Israel has not rejected all the resolutions,
though it has conflicting understanding with regards to some of them.
Israel never annexed the Sinai, West Bank, or Gaza.  The other
annexations were brought about partly due to the UN resolutions.

%Part of these territores, East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights,
%have already been forcefully annexed by Israel, in defiance of
%international law and UN resolutions.

Out of curiousity, provided that the annexees are granted citizenship,
what int'l law do you claim prohibits annexation of territories
captured in war?  Has this ever been applied to any other country
previously (other than Iraq) ?

%It must be emphasized that, although these people live under
%different regimes, they are united in their self-perception as
%Palestinians, that is as people identifying with Palestine, a
%territorial entity (not an ethnic or religious entity).

Incorrect! Palestinians themselves claim to be discriminated against
on an "ethnic or racial" basis.  Therefore your above statement is
incorrect.

I also note that given the previous definition of racial discrimination,
the only means that you could argue for that is nationalistically.
However, no such nation has existed.  It definitely did not exist
at the time of the creation of Israel, in which case you can not
argue racial discrimination during that period!

%Furthermore Palestinians generally consider the PLO both as a
%symbol of national identity and as the unchallenged authority that
%represents them in world affairs.

Once again, some do, some don't.

%The non-Jewish population living in the Palestinian and other Arab
%territories occupied by Israel in 1967 suffers not only blatant
%discrimination but is subject to brutal military occupation.

Another generalization, but then again, you don't seem to care
about anyone other than the Palestinian people, whose cause you
espouse.

%licence, to start a business and to buy industrial equipment, the
%right to educate children, all of these basic rights are subject
%to arbitrary rulings by military authorities and cannot be
%challenged in court.

Incorrect once again.  They have the ability to appeal.
Furthermore, although you may not agree with them, not all
of the military rulings are senseless or arbitrary.  Some
are, but this is not due to the "whims" of the military as
much as the sizeof the task/organization.

%Only Jewish inhabitants of the occupied
%territories are permitted to carry firearms.

Incorrect once again.  I know two Arab policemen who lived in
Daheisha and there were more.  Of course, with the outbreak of
the intifada they were forced by the locals to resign, bitterly.

%Jewish settlers have
%right to 6-7 more water per person than non-Jews. Jewish residents
%of these territories number now about 100,000 people. It is Israel
%governmentUs policy to increase this number substantially, in
%total defiance of international law, UN resolutions and the will
%of the population. The State of Israel systematically confiscates
%land from non-Jewish inhabitants of these territories for Jewish
%settlement.

That is no longer true, and I can't help but wonder what your
purpose is/was in posting this.

%Some 800,000 people in Israel proper,are not Jews. Most of them
%consider themselves Palestinians with Israeli citizenship. For
%many years after the establishment of Israel they were subjected
%to harsh military control. Much of their land was confiscated by
%the State and handed to Jewish organisations for exclusive Jewish
%settlement. They have been subject to massacres, destitution and
%humiliation. While they enjoy, with Jewish Israelis, the right to
%vote, they are discriminated against both through law and in
%practice.

Once again, to hell with the other minorities that don't fit in,
right?  Their are many villages who did not suffer in the way
you seem to indicate, Abu Gosh comes to mind.  Yes, some did but
as a result of what actions?

%Approximately 92% of the surface of the State of Israel within the
%Rgreen lineS is for all purposes closed to Palestinians who are
%second-class citizens in Israel. They may neither legally live on
%such land, nor rent or cultivate it. A direct effect of these
%policies is that native non-Jewish citizens of Israel are denied
%residence and membership rights in most rural communities in
%Israel, including the collective settlements, kibbutzim. Non-Jews
%are discriminated against in many other ways: The Government
%starves local authorities of Palestinian villages and townships of
%funds; Jewish city councils force Palestinians to live in ghettos;
%Jewish families receive higher child allocations than their
%non-Jewish neighbors, Palestinian schools suffer underfunding and
%understaffing (as compared to Jewish schools); Palestinian
%children are denied the right to learn their history and
%literature; Israelis who struggle for equal rights and for the end
%of racial discrimination, suffer continuous harassment by the
%authorities.

1.  There are some kibbutzim with Arab/Non-Jewish members.
    It is up to the members of the kibbutz.  There is no
    legislation against it, nor against a purely non-Jewish
    collective.

2.  Funds are the result of political lobbying.  Bearing in mind
    that non_Jews compose ~20% of the voting population, it has
    never failed to amaze me that they fail to form one large
    bloc, and increase their power.  The recent elections are a case 
    in point.

3.  Please provide factual evidence supporting your allegation
    with regard to educational material.  You have obviously
    never seen the curriculum of a school in the West Bank.
    It is based upon Jordan's school system.

4.  With regard to your last statement, it is simply another
    gross generalization.  

%The State of Israel refuses to acknowledge itself as the State of
%all its inhabitants.  Although the Israeli Cabinet has never
%openly endorsed the 'transfer' idea (the forced removal from the
%country of its native Palestinian population, that is, its
%ultimate Judaization), Israeli government policies towards
%non-Jews bear the mark of this 'Final Solution'. No attempt is
%made by the Zionist authorities to integrate Palestinian Arabs
%into Israeli public life. Thus, although comprising approximately
%17% of the population of Israeli citizens, no Palestinian citizen
%of Israel has ever served as Cabinet member, as director of 
%ministry or of a national institution, as judge of the Supreme
%Court, as ambassador of Israel, or in any leading position in
%Israeli economic or financial life. Even the director of the
%Ministry for Arab Affairs - yes, such a thing exists! - is a Jew.

Another generalization, but lets not stop here.
The transfer idea was espoused by one party in the last gov't,
Moledet.  It was intended to be a solution to the problem in the
territories, not the country itself.  With regard to other items,
I recall at least one Arab ambassador, and the rest was covered
previously.

%Although sexual
%relations between and cohabitation of Jews and non-Jews are legal,
%they are considered by Israeli/Zionist society somewhat a betrayal
%of the Jewish and Zionist ethics. The Israeli educational system
%nurtures this attitude in a systematic way.

When was the last time you were in Israel?  That is simply not true,
nor has it been for quite some time.  The question of religious
intervention is best answered by the proportional representation and
the lack of any Arab party bloc to counter the orthodox one.

%Zionism rejects the idea of a modern secular state, based on
%equality of all citizens. This is one main reason why Israel has
%not produced any written Constitution. 

Simply incorrect.
The answer is political.  Once again, your failure to understand the
dynamics and movements inside Israeli gov't, relegates your
contentions to the sidelines.

%Zionism predicates a state
%where Jews have privileged rights. Thus, according to Israeli law,
%a Jew born in London, who has never visited Israel, does not speak
%Hebrew and professes atheism, is granted automatic Israeli
%citizenship, while native Palestinian inhabitants who happen to be
%Christian or Muslim, are treated almost as aliens.  Racial
%discrimination, as defined in international law, is thus not only
%reflected in Israeli laws and policies, but is grounded in the
%very nature of Israel as a Jewish state.

But the discrimination is not based upon race.
Oops, sorry, nasty habit I have of countering malicious false truths.

%Any proposal for Israeli-Arab and Israeli-Palestinian peace that
%does not address the issue of racial discrimination by Israel -
%that is the Zionist nature of the State of Israel - is thus doomed
%to fail.

Real world intrusion - any proposal that does is doomed to fail.
Of course, I wouldn't expect you to understand, wrapped up as
you are in your VIEW of things.  Let's not let anything penetrate
shall we!?!  I may be a bit too sarcastic but there is a limit to the
amount of patience I have for rubbish at 02:00.


