Korean Job Discussion Forums

[ddeubel]

From my recent issue of N.Y Review of Books.

Good article and premise of which I support. Soros details why America is going to fail again in its Middle East policy and especially in regards to the Palestinian issue. He also tackles the problem of those who think any criticism and rejection of the present Israeli militancy is heresy. I believe as he does, we should raise our voices against the Israeli government's continue policy of "apartheid" and confrontation and also against the totalitarianism of the American Jewish lobby.....

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/20030

[stevemcgarrett]

DD:

Just to be magnanimous like your Islamic brethren in Tehran, I decided to post. It'd be pathetic if no one did.

Unfortunately for you, I have nothing else to contribute to the thread....

[Adventurer]

George Soros, like many liberal Jews, resent AIPAC and consider groups like AIPAC to be opposed to the old Bundist, universal values that Jews subscribed to in the past. Many liberal Jews helped build the United Nations, push for the rights of workers in America and Canada, and push for the end of segregation. George Soros does not want to be associated with Jews like those who run AIPAC. He thinks they are very unbalanced when dealing with the Middle East. George Soros is definitely not a sectarian, bigot.

I believe George Soros and Bronfman talked about forming organisations to compete with AIPAC. AIPAC, I believe, has had a couple of its people being investigated by the FBI. There are people on the Right and Left who do not like the interference of AIPAC. Paul Findley, a former GOP representative, lost his seat because AIPAC went against him. I don't think they are good for Israel or the region. I like Soros's views on these matters. Unlike Chomsky, he is not an anarchist. He is a businessman, and he thinks AIPAC is bad for business just like the unproductive ones on the Muslim side.

The treatment of Jews who disagree with the so-called leadership is horrible. The relatives, depending on your relatives, will say you are betraying your Jewishness if you associate with Arabs, criticize AIPAC.
The right wing groups are the ones who get more of a face on television. The others are excluded and even worse can get expelled from a university like the fellow at York University in Canada. I remember the fellow who had a Palestinian girlfriend, and his parents were threatened.

The founder of Zionism was, like Sorors, a non-practicing Jew. He was motivated by the prejudice against Jews to start the Zionist project. Soros is motivated by the prejudice he sees against Arabs, which he disagrees with, and the fact that he doesn't see AIPAC promoting peace.

[ddeubel]

McGarette,

Unlike you, I post something that I think is quality and not merely something that might give me jollies or portend a pat on the back. I also don't care who responds, if anyone. Just sharing what I think is something that is a good read and others might find enlightening, whatever their own leanings.

I commend Adventurer for doing the same and for the most part, posting articles with depth and articulation and not mere verbage.

As to the article. Soros says some things that need to be said. He is not a person with an axe to grind but someone whose opinion I think can and should be valued. He says what a lot of us secular Jews might say --- there has to be discussion and not a closing off, of the Israeli and Jewish mind.

DD

[ddeubel]

Here is a good opinion piece, stating the same but with a focus on a peace agreement....

http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/04/09/opinion/edsieg.php

[Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee]

I it has 194 which calls for right of return then it is not a peace plan.

[Adventurer]

[Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee]

[ddeubel]

Joo,

About 194, I will repeat what the article states, as my own arguement. I hope you did read it.

[quote]Olmert's insistence that any reference to UN resolution 194 - which makes no mention of a Palestinian "right of return" - be omitted from the Arab initiative is a non-starter. Even Palestinians who agree that most refugees will have to be repatriated in the new Palestinian state will not agree to the elimination from the initiative of a reference to a UN resolution that acknowledges, however inferentially, a measure of Israeli moral responsibility for the dispossession of Palestinians from their homes in the war of 1948.

Israeli historians have established beyond any question that such responsibility does indeed exist. Its acknowledgment by Israel - even if it finds it impossible to permit a return of anything more than a symbolic number of refugees - is no less important to the Palestinians than the demand that its own history of persecution and oppression not be denied is to the Jews.[/quote]


DD

[Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee]

[quote="ddeubel"]Joo,

About 194, I will repeat what the article states, as my own arguement. I hope you did read it.

[Neil]

How about:

Israel withdraws to it's 1967 borders.

It is made a full member of NATO and its existance is guaranteed by the EU along with granting all Israelis citizens the opportunity to come and live in Europe at any time.

Jerusalem becomes a free city that is policed by troops/Police from a non Christian/Muslim nation. Maybe employ a force of Ghurkas to do the donkey work.

Palestine becomes its own country and OPEC puts say a 1 or 2 % tax on every barrel of oil it produces towards rebuilding it although there would need to be some pretty hefty controls put in place to stop the corruption that already exists in the Palastinian authourity.

Next world crisis please....