Israel's purpose is being refuge for the world's Jews from persecution.
You could say Israel confuses Judaism with nationality, but not ethnic groups in general. Its hardly a confusion though, its simply the purpose of Israel. Israel sometimes extends this definition to provide refuge for other persecuted peoples (refugees from Darfur and other parts of Sudan, as an example).
The right of return of Jews to Israel simply stems from that, and does not negate the right of return from Arabs and other ethnic groups who have family in Israel, for example.
Given Israel's purpose to provide that refuge, you can see how the demographic issue is a problem - if Israel loses its Jewish majority, then it cannot continue to provide this refuge.
I am not sure how the link you provide shows any pressure to leave Israel, its merely a right extremist who is in the government expressing his own racist opinions.
The compensation offered to refugees instead of a right of return was in the order of 300K$ for each family, which is enough to buy equivalent property already.
On what basis it will not be right to kick out the USA or Israelis? On the basis of human happiness vs suffering.
If you hold weird morals like the religious ones, or believe that land ownership is more important than life and preventing of suffering, then I can see why you would think its right to kick out the USA to make room for native Americans.
But most of us atheists believe that morals exist to optimize human happiness and decrease suffering. All "rights" and moral codes stem from that, and are there to optimize on that.
If you can agree that we indeed should optimize the world for that parameter, do you now easily see why we should not kick the USA out to make room for native Americans?
Again, you are confusing broadcasts representation of the population.
Hamas has one ideology. It does not broadcast a variety of opinions - but only the official one of Hamas.
As for the threatning of a Holocaust, indeed that was a very poor thing to say and I am sure he regrets saying it, however it is not really close at all to that of Hamas you see on PMW.
And it is in this sense that we see Israel as a continuation of this history. I am not following you there. Is Israel conflating nationality with ethnic groups? Is it an "absolutist" state?
If that's what you meant, please provide some examples (with links).
I don't believe that people have "historic rights" to lands at all. I don't think Jews had a "right" due to the bible or history to set up a land here in these lands. They had a right to buy lands from willing sellers (which is what happens up to 1948).
All the 60-years-ago crap doesn't matter anymore anyhow, people's right to live somewhere and to lands derive from their already being there now.
Kicking people out of their homes is a wrong. You do not fix it 5 generations later by kicking out the people to make room for the historic peoples.
It will not be right to kick out the USA to make room for the native Americans, and even if Israel wrongfully kicked out Palestinians and had no right to settle there in the first place, its not right to kick out Israelis to make room for descendants of the Palestinians.
We should optimize our actions for the greatest benefit of men, and decide what "rights" exist based on that. Historic rights to lands contradict that so are not rights at all.
Nobody is "defending" Israeli actions by saying "they're not as bad as the Holocaust".
But when someone actually claims that what Israel does is anything at all like the Holocaust, it pisses a whole lot of us off. Not because of the accusation of wrongdoing, but because he's devaluing the memory of the Holocaust and trivializing it.
Not only that, it makes that person a liar of the worst kind, or extremely ignorant. Either way, he ceases to be worthy of listening to.
In other words, he's a lot less likely to create or support legislature based on the perception that the internet is a bunch of tubes. The internet has not only "information tubes" (connections), but also nodes that connect those tubes together with some logic (routers) and protocols dictating how information flows on those tubes.
But as a first-order rough approximation, calling the internet a "bunch of tubes" sounds as accurate as it gets. Can you find a term as short and simple as that that describes the internet, even as partially as that?
Restoring a ring or other such property to its owner is possible without creating a big "wrong".
Kicking out 6 millions Jews from their homes to make room for 3 million refugees, in order to "correct a [supposed] wrong" from 60 years ago is a little worse than taking a ring from someone who wore it for 40 years.
You can compare certain aspects of the Holocaust, but claiming that a Holocaust is taking place in Gaza right now, is not only a lie, but one that takes away from the memory of the real Holocaust.
The dehumanization that went in the Holocaust may be compared, perhaps, to the dehumanization of the Jews in Hamas's media (unfavorably, not even that comes close to what the Nazis did in the media), but to claim Israel is dehumanizing Palestinians in any similar manner? Please back that up with some links.
Relocating those people would be horrible, and encourage Hamas to shoot missiles at other settlements, and make a huge portion of the already-small Israel uninhabitable. Not to mention that Sderot is within the green lines, not a settlement, and there's no excuse for these rockets.
And to be fair, the people firing those rockets were there first. Huh?? What the hell are you talking about? Sderot did not exist before these people settled it many years ago.
Actually, Israel haspulled out of Gaza. Hamas is shooting from Gaza, and Gaza is not occupied.
Try learning a fact or two about the situation before making bold claims about how you would have solved it. You don't know the most basic facts of this conflict (to wit, your very rough date is also wrong).
The left in Israel is dying out, and the right, including right extremists are gaining in popular opinion.
Israelis have less hope than ever before for a peace agreement, and believe military might is their only option for a bit of quiet. They see the disengagement plan (Pulling out civilian settlements and military presence from Gaza) as a huge failure.
The elections you are referring to are before Hamas's coup. Funny thing is, people were in favor of doing another disengagement in the West Bank, but that plan is completely out of the question after what happened in Gaza.
Peace will not arise in the next 5 years. 10 years, though, is a little too hard to predict.
My mother brought me up correctly, two wrongs != a right. And that is why we should kick out people who have been living in Israel for 3 generations now, because their grand grand parents have supposedly stolen lands or such?
If you disbelieve how awful Palestinian propaganda really is, take a look at Palestinian Media Watch. If you believe those cartoons and videos are fakes generated by the Israeli site, please say so.
It's a circle of violence that is not restricted to one side These missiles are being shot by Hamas for 7 years now, in which Israel has not responded to them (Simply stopped, as you put it) for long periods of time.
It didn't work, Hamas kept shooting those missiles.
So its not symmetrical, and its not a cycle. Hamas is shooting at Israeli civilians unconditionally.
Richard Dawkins once said (Not exact wording): "When two people are arguing, it is entirely possible that the truth does not lie somewhere in between, and that one side is right, and the other is simply wrong".
A lot of people hold as a mantra this notion that the truth is always somewhere in between. Its not.
Virtually all Israelis admit that Israel has done many wrongs in its past. But the situation now is quite clear, and is not a symmetric one:
Israel is being shelled by artillery fire on a daily basis for about 7 years now.
Israel is not occupying in any meaningful way the territories from which the fire comes from.
Israel has gone for long periods of time without responding to that fire (negating any claims that this is a "cycle". Its not a cycle, Hamas fired at Israel without responses for long periods of time).
Israel finally broke after 7 years of daily fire, and the upgrading of the missiles used by the Palestinians.
In this case, the truth is not somewhere in between, Hamas apologists are wrong, and Israel is simply defending itself.
As a Jew I am outraged by this. The so-called Zionists don't like to hear this, but they are doing to the Palestinians exactly what the Nazis did to us.
A. As the GP posted, people were not kicked out in 1948. Virtually all of the peoples chose to leave and became refugees. Some of it was due to wartime activity. A war, which, by the way, was started by those same people who were later complaining (The Jewish side accepted the peaceful UN division plan).
B. Millions of other refugees were created by WWII around that time, none of which remained refugees 30 years later. These Palestinian refugees are still considered refugees 60 years later! They should assimilate into whatever lands they live in, they are not refugees anymore.
C. Even if any wrong was done 60 years ago, the grandchildren of the refugees from 1948 are indeed "bad" to be shooting rockets at the grandchildren of the Jews from 1948, who were born to parents who were born there. Whatever happened 60 years ago is now irrelevant to who the lands belong to.
D. They are not really trying to "conquer back the lands", which would, if successful, require another holocaust, but are just trying to kill as many civilians as they can. They know they cannot conquer the lands or achieve anything but propaganda success with violence, and are indeed focusing on the propaganda side.
Evolution does not explain where life came from, but where species came from ("The origin of species").
The origin of the first life (or the first self-duplicating organism) is a separate matter not covered by evolution.
Evolution is anything but religion.
The word Evolution really refers to an "algorithm":
Duplicate the organism accurately, but not completely accurately.
Apply some sort of non-random selection on the result of the duplication.
Optionally mix features from multiple organisms to share evolutionary results and speed up evolution greatly.
This algorithm works, which means that whenever you have something that duplicates almost accurately, and selection applies, you will inevitably get incremental changes towards the selected traits. Since life on Earth obviously has these features, evolution is inevitable.
As for the question of whether evolution (The "Theory of Evolution") explains the past and the origins of species we can see now, my take is that given that it is obvious that evolution is inevitable, and that it can explain the formation of species and the features we see around us, its quite obviously the response fitting of occam's razor.
On top of that, we have huge amounts of evidence piled up. In my opinion, the obviousness of the inevitablity of evolution (given the duplication and selection that exist) is already enough to make evolution a default answer.
Slashdot Mirror
Israel's purpose is being refuge for the world's Jews from persecution.
You could say Israel confuses Judaism with nationality, but not ethnic groups in general. Its hardly a confusion though, its simply the purpose of Israel.
Israel sometimes extends this definition to provide refuge for other persecuted peoples (refugees from Darfur and other parts of Sudan, as an example).
The right of return of Jews to Israel simply stems from that, and does not negate the right of return from Arabs and other ethnic groups who have family in Israel, for example.
Given Israel's purpose to provide that refuge, you can see how the demographic issue is a problem - if Israel loses its Jewish majority, then it cannot continue to provide this refuge.
I am not sure how the link you provide shows any pressure to leave Israel, its merely a right extremist who is in the government expressing his own racist opinions.
The compensation offered to refugees instead of a right of return was in the order of 300K$ for each family, which is enough to buy equivalent property already.
If you hold weird morals like the religious ones, or believe that land ownership is more important than life and preventing of suffering, then I can see why you would think its right to kick out the USA to make room for native Americans.
But most of us atheists believe that morals exist to optimize human happiness and decrease suffering. All "rights" and moral codes stem from that, and are there to optimize on that.
If you can agree that we indeed should optimize the world for that parameter, do you now easily see why we should not kick the USA out to make room for native Americans?
Again, you are confusing broadcasts representation of the population.
Hamas has one ideology. It does not broadcast a variety of opinions - but only the official one of Hamas.
As for the threatning of a Holocaust, indeed that was a very poor thing to say and I am sure he regrets saying it, however it is not really close at all to that of Hamas you see on PMW.
Is Israel conflating nationality with ethnic groups? Is it an "absolutist" state?
If that's what you meant, please provide some examples (with links).
I don't believe that people have "historic rights" to lands at all. I don't think Jews had a "right" due to the bible or history to set up a land here in these lands. They had a right to buy lands from willing sellers (which is what happens up to 1948).
All the 60-years-ago crap doesn't matter anymore anyhow, people's right to live somewhere and to lands derive from their already being there now.
Kicking people out of their homes is a wrong. You do not fix it 5 generations later by kicking out the people to make room for the historic peoples.
It will not be right to kick out the USA to make room for the native Americans, and even if Israel wrongfully kicked out Palestinians and had no right to settle there in the first place, its not right to kick out Israelis to make room for descendants of the Palestinians.
We should optimize our actions for the greatest benefit of men, and decide what "rights" exist based on that. Historic rights to lands contradict that so are not rights at all.
This is not a collection of opinions. This is a collection of propaganda pieces that are being broadcast in Palestinian media - to all Palestinians!
It is not "representative" of this section of the population or another, its what Hamas is broadcasting on its newspapers, TV and radio networks.
You will not find similar propaganda about Iranians in America, or about Palestinians in Israel.
Nobody is "defending" Israeli actions by saying "they're not as bad as the Holocaust".
But when someone actually claims that what Israel does is anything at all like the Holocaust, it pisses a whole lot of us off. Not because of the accusation of wrongdoing, but because he's devaluing the memory of the Holocaust and trivializing it.
Not only that, it makes that person a liar of the worst kind, or extremely ignorant. Either way, he ceases to be worthy of listening to.
Kicking out the Jews is not an option now, so whether or not a wrong has been done 60 years ago by the Jews is completely irrelevant.
But as a first-order rough approximation, calling the internet a "bunch of tubes" sounds as accurate as it gets. Can you find a term as short and simple as that that describes the internet, even as partially as that?
Restoring a ring or other such property to its owner is possible without creating a big "wrong".
Kicking out 6 millions Jews from their homes to make room for 3 million refugees, in order to "correct a [supposed] wrong" from 60 years ago is a little worse than taking a ring from someone who wore it for 40 years.
You can compare certain aspects of the Holocaust, but claiming that a Holocaust is taking place in Gaza right now, is not only a lie, but one that takes away from the memory of the real Holocaust.
The dehumanization that went in the Holocaust may be compared, perhaps, to the dehumanization of the Jews in Hamas's media (unfavorably, not even that comes close to what the Nazis did in the media), but to claim Israel is dehumanizing Palestinians in any similar manner? Please back that up with some links.
Actually, Israel has pulled out of Gaza. Hamas is shooting from Gaza, and Gaza is not occupied.
Try learning a fact or two about the situation before making bold claims about how you would have solved it. You don't know the most basic facts of this conflict (to wit, your very rough date is also wrong).
You are making a fool of yourself.
You have got it completely backwards.
The left in Israel is dying out, and the right, including right extremists are gaining in popular opinion.
Israelis have less hope than ever before for a peace agreement, and believe military might is their only option for a bit of quiet. They see the disengagement plan (Pulling out civilian settlements and military presence from Gaza) as a huge failure.
The elections you are referring to are before Hamas's coup. Funny thing is, people were in favor of doing another disengagement in the West Bank, but that plan is completely out of the question after what happened in Gaza.
Peace will not arise in the next 5 years. 10 years, though, is a little too hard to predict.
If you disbelieve how awful Palestinian propaganda really is, take a look at Palestinian Media Watch. If you believe those cartoons and videos are fakes generated by the Israeli site, please say so.
It didn't work, Hamas kept shooting those missiles.
So its not symmetrical, and its not a cycle. Hamas is shooting at Israeli civilians unconditionally.
A lot of people hold as a mantra this notion that the truth is always somewhere in between. Its not.
Virtually all Israelis admit that Israel has done many wrongs in its past. But the situation now is quite clear, and is not a symmetric one:
In this case, the truth is not somewhere in between, Hamas apologists are wrong, and Israel is simply defending itself.
Was the Holocaust anything at all like Gaza?
Your comparison disgusts me. You are either extremely ignorant, or a liar, and about this subject specifically, it is infuriating.
Israel does not target civilians, they are killed because Hamas uses them as human shields.
Not anymore.
Today, Israel fights so that Sderot's people can live in peace without constant rocket attacks.
Hamas fights so that as many Israeli civilians die, and Israel ceases to exist.
A. As the GP posted, people were not kicked out in 1948. Virtually all of the peoples chose to leave and became refugees. Some of it was due to wartime activity. A war, which, by the way, was started by those same people who were later complaining (The Jewish side accepted the peaceful UN division plan).
B. Millions of other refugees were created by WWII around that time, none of which remained refugees 30 years later. These Palestinian refugees are still considered refugees 60 years later! They should assimilate into whatever lands they live in, they are not refugees anymore.
C. Even if any wrong was done 60 years ago, the grandchildren of the refugees from 1948 are indeed "bad" to be shooting rockets at the grandchildren of the Jews from 1948, who were born to parents who were born there. Whatever happened 60 years ago is now irrelevant to who the lands belong to.
D. They are not really trying to "conquer back the lands", which would, if successful, require another holocaust, but are just trying to kill as many civilians as they can. They know they cannot conquer the lands or achieve anything but propaganda success with violence, and are indeed focusing on the propaganda side.
Excuse me? Why would Israel return any lands after the 1967 war, in which it was attacked by those nations who lost that said land?
The Microsoft monopoly was created by a different kind of government intervention: Copyrights.
Without government intervention (and thus, without copyrights), Microsoft could not have become a monopoly.
Evolution does not explain where life came from, but where species came from ("The origin of species").
The origin of the first life (or the first self-duplicating organism) is a separate matter not covered by evolution.
Evolution is anything but religion.
The word Evolution really refers to an "algorithm":
Duplicate the organism accurately, but not completely accurately.
Apply some sort of non-random selection on the result of the duplication.
Optionally mix features from multiple organisms to share evolutionary results and speed up evolution greatly.
This algorithm works, which means that whenever you have something that duplicates almost accurately, and selection applies, you will inevitably get incremental changes towards the selected traits.
Since life on Earth obviously has these features, evolution is inevitable.
As for the question of whether evolution (The "Theory of Evolution") explains the past and the origins of species we can see now, my take is that given that it is obvious that evolution is inevitable, and that it can explain the formation of species and the features we see around us, its quite obviously the response fitting of occam's razor.
On top of that, we have huge amounts of evidence piled up. In my opinion, the obviousness of the inevitablity of evolution (given the duplication and selection that exist) is already enough to make evolution a default answer.