They begin with typical egocentrism: claiming that although most of the world is very concerned about Iran possibly attaining nuclear weapons, the only reason why Netanyahu is talking about that issue is to deflect attention away from the Palestinians. They attack Israel for not pursuing peace enthusiastically enough (saying nothing about the Palestinians and their consistent refusal to negotiate) before finally getting down their main point. They don't like that Jews have a state. As part of this we get all the usual lies and obfuscations:
"To be clear, Israel is already a Jewish state, one which clearly defines itself as such, and one which since its inception has pursued policies to strengthen, reinforce, and increase its Jewish character. These policies are pursued through all the means available to the state, whether it be violence through the destruction of Palestinian homes and villages, through legal rulings legislating the confiscation of Arab lands, or through countless, successive government policies which formalize Jewish hegemony and superiority over the indigenous Arab population."Israel's actions toward the Palestinians has nothing to do with it being Jewish, and it's a somewhat clever rhetorically device to try and link them. Unless the authors were referring to Arab Israelis in this paragraph, which is also very telling as well as wrong. I notice that they don't explain exactly what these "government policies" are, nor bother to point out that nowhere in Israel's government documents is it defined as a Jewish state. And of course Arabs are not indigenous and Jews are.
This is all going to the Palestinians refusal to recognize Israel as a Jewish state, refusal that they see as justified, just like everything else the Palestinians do. They say that if the Palestinians do recognize Israel, that will legitimize Israel's bad behavior and "undemocratic policies." I'm not sure why Israel being undemocratic is any concern of the Palestinians, especially given that the Palestinians have no leg to stand on when it comes to criticizing the democracy of others. They then references the supposed "50 discriminatory laws" in a link to Adalah (the organization of one of the authors) which fails because one of the supposed laws is the anti-boycott law. Good luck figuring out how that discriminates against Arabs. Having failed to find any discrimination against Arab Israelis they are forced to turn to potential Arab Israelis:
"To illustrate the point, a Jewish American who voices an interest in emigrating to Israel will receive a heightened form of Israeli citizenship compared to the country's original Palestinian citizens, enabling them to settle in areas barred to Palestinians, or to bring a spouse of their choosing to the country."I have no idea what the hell a "heightened form of Israeli citizenship" is supposed to mean, and the authors don't bother to explain what they are talking about. I'm also unsure what the country's "original Palestinian citizens" is. Do they mean Arab Israelis or Palestinians? You can follow their links but they are unpersuasive: one is about the government building housing in the Negev and the other is about non-citizens. The authors are trying really hard to find discrimination but they aren't succeeding.
Anyway they come back to the "Palestinians can't recognize Israel as a Jewish state because..." argument and it's just as lacking as before:
"Palestinian recognition of Israel as a Jewish state would condemn the estimated 1.3 million Palestinians with Israeli citizenship to a permanent status of inequality, prejudice their quest for equality, and pre-empt the right to claim equality."And here I was thinking they already had that. This argument is so illogical and yet Palsbarists use it all the time. How does Palestinians saying some words lead to all these terrible consequences for Arab Israelis? After all 90% of the world already recognizes Israel as a Jewish state and if Israel was going to disenfranchise their Arabs they would have done so decades ago.
This also begs the question of what the Palestinians' priorities are: do they really think it makes sense to suffer, fight, die and be occupied for years just because acting like human beings might "prejudice" somebody's "quest for equality?" Nothing about this makes any sense.
Not only are the authors anti-negotiation, they are also anti-peace. What shining representatives of the Palestinian cause:
"There is a danger that by instituting the West Bank (or parts of it) as a Palestinian state and Israel as a Jewish one, the conflict will be seen as solved by the international community, ignoring the lives of Israel's Palestinian citizens and their children while legitimizing their dispossession and unequal allocation of rights and resources on the basis of Israel's agreed-upon 'Jewish' character."I really wish that the Palestinians would just go to Barack Obama and tell him that they don't intend to make peace or form a Palestinian state (even though they technically already have) because doing so might lead to "unequal allocation of rights" for Israel's Arab minority. I would love to see what he says. Of course it's easy to have principles when you aren't the one fighting soldiers with rocks to attain them. But as I have said before, it's amazing how the Palestinians never stop coming up with excuses why they won't, or can't, or shouldn't, or ought not to make peace.
I'm not going to spend too much longer with these guys; I just didn't want you to think I was exaggerating when I said they want Israel gone. They very clearly do:
"It is illogical for a country with mixed demographics to define itself on the identity of just one sector of society, in the same way that it would be unimaginable for the United States to characterize itself as a Christian state."One of these authors is from "Palestine." Although "Palestine" has a Christian minority, every national document ever written declares that Islam is its official religion.
The other author is from the United Kingdom. Although Christians are only 60% of the total population there, there is an official Church of England (the Anglican Church) that even has special constitutional privileges.
As Matt has written in the past, you have to be a hypocrite to be a Palestinian supporter. It's just that these two are a lot more blatant in their hypocrisy. Perfect Huffington Post blogger material, though.