US State Dept defines Israeli settler violence as terrorism

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

Argentina is trying to ethnically cleanse the indigenous Falkland Islanders ?

Yep. If they were to gain control their laws would not be favorable to the indigenous people. They would make every attempt to strip them of their property I'm sure using their own legal system. They'd become refugees through a steady occupation.

Edited August 24, 2012 by Sousuke

[Darnell 8,478]

Israel/Palestine.... We should leave them both alone and let them destroy each other.

It'd be over in 24 hours, given equal armaments, ordnance and ammunition.

[PalestineMyHeart 1,897]

Yep. If they were to gain control their laws would not be favorable to the indigenous people. They would make every attempt to strip them of their property I'm sure using their own legal system. They'd become refugees through a steady occupation.

I don't think the people living in the Falklands/Las Malvinas (depending on one's political persuasion) fit the definition of "indigenous people," at least not in the way the term is generally used. They are the descendants of British and various European colonists who arrived in the 1800s, along with a few South Americans who also arrived after the colony was established. They are no more "indigenous" than the descendants of Europeans in the rest of the Americas.

However, they did not drive out the indigenous inhabitants (as there weren't any.) And they certainly have rights of their own as inhabitants. So of course I do not believe they should be ethnically cleansed in the case of a change of flag over city hall.

I have read that the Argentine constitution explicitly states that its claim to sovereignty over the Falklands/Malvinas must be pursued in a manner "respectful of the way of life of their inhabitants and according to the principles of international law." This would mean no ethnic cleansing.

http://pdba.georgetown.edu/Constitutions/Argentina/argen94_e.html#firstpartch1

However, I would be very interested to read any links you might have about Argentina's plans to expel them.

At any rate, it's a rather different situation than what happened to the Native Americans, or to Palestinians (to bring it back to the topic.)

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

I don't think the people living in the Falklands/Las Malvinas (depending on one's political persuasion) fit the definition of "indigenous people," at least not in the way the term is generally used. They are the descendants of British and various European colonists who arrived in the 1800s, along with a few South Americans who also arrived after the colony was established. They are no more "indigenous" than the descendants of Europeans in the rest of the Americas.

However, they did not drive out the indigenous inhabitants (as there weren't any.) And they certainly have rights of their own as inhabitants. So of course I do not believe they should be ethnically cleansed in the case of a change of flag over city hall.

I have read that the Argentine constitution explicitly states that its claim to sovereignty over the Falklands/Malvinas must be pursued in a manner "respectful of the way of life of their inhabitants and according to the principles of international law." This would mean no ethnic cleansing.

http://pdba.georgetown.edu/Constitutions/Argentina/argen94_e.html#firstpartch1

However, I would be very interested to read any links you might have about Argentina's plans to expel them.

At any rate, it's a rather different situation than what happened to the Native Americans, or to Palestinians (to bring it back to the topic.)

Haha think "liquid property"...and they are technically indigenous in the same way any human may become indigenous, the only difference is time. By the time the sun becomes a red giant, there will be little difference between them and say the first people that crossed into the Americas. Of course by the time the sun is a red giant our atmosphere and water will have boiled away and humanity will no longer exist.

Edited August 24, 2012 by Sousuke

[PalestineMyHeart 1,897]

Haha think "liquid property"...and they are technically indigenous in the same way any human may become indigenous, the only difference is time. By the time the sun becomes a red giant, there will be little difference between them and say the first people that crossed into the Americas. Of course by the time the sun is a red giant our atmosphere and water will have boiled away and humanity will no longer exist.

Well, technically, no, they're not "indigenous" in the way term is generally used - which is to mean aboriginal people of a land before colonization. After many thousands of years of continuous habitation there, we might start to consider them "indigenous" (as we do with other populations that migrated in prehistoric times) but a few hundred years is really not nearly long enough.

However, they certainly are "native born" inhabitants, and of course they have full rights including to their private property. I was hoping you might have some links about this plan to ethnically cleanse them - it is a very disturbing idea, and I am quite interested in such things.

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

Well, technically, no, they're not "indigenous" in the way term is generally used - which is to mean aboriginal people of a land before colonization. After many thousands of years of continuous habitation there, we might start to consider them "indigenous" (as we do with other populations that migrated in prehistoric times) but a few hundred years is really not nearly long enough.

However, they certainly are "native born" inhabitants, and of course they have full rights including to their private property. I was hoping you might have some links about this plan to ethnically cleanse them - it is a very disturbing idea, and I am quite interested in such things.

Well "technically" humans are indigenous to perhaps only a single place on the earth likely Africa. Its relative to time as I mentioned.

Edited August 24, 2012 by Sousuke

[PalestineMyHeart 1,897]

Well "technically" humans are indigenous to perhaps only a single place on the earth likely Africa. Its relative to time as I mentioned.

Just about everything is relative. So do you consider yourself an indigenous African ?

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

Just about everything is relative. So do you consider yourself an indigenous African ?

Indeed I do. Every ** sapien should remember it too as it might allow them to think more on balance about our commonality.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Ooi3KVfWnM

[PalestineMyHeart 1,897]

Indeed I do. Every ** sapien should remember it too as it might allow them to think more on balance about our commonality.

I see.

*Ponders on your comments about illegal immigration, in light of the commonality of man.*

Edited August 24, 2012 by wife_of_mahmoud

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

I see.

*Ponders on your comments about illegal immigration, in light of the commonality of man.*

Well I do believe in immigration laws and the rule of law in general. At the same time I do not think minors should be held responsible for their parents mistakes.

[PalestineMyHeart 1,897]

Well I do believe in immigration laws and the rule of law in general. At the same time I do not think minors should be held responsible for their parents mistakes.

I think I get it. Some indigenous Africans who become indigenous Europeans who become indigenous Americans are different than some indigenous Africans who become indigenous Europeans who become indigenous Americans.

"That's some catch, that Catch-22," Yossarian observed.

"It's the best there is," Doc Daneeka agreed.

Back to the topic...

Poster calls on Arab men to keep out of Jerusalem, away from Jewish girls

Following the recent lynch-style attack on Palestinian youths in Jerusalem, racist extremists are starting a campaign calling on Arab men to keep out of popular Jerusalem hangouts and avoid dating Jewish girls – for their own good.

The new racist poster, written in both Hebrew and Arabic by the extremist Kahana-style NGO “Lehava,” has been circulating in Facebook in recent hours and is gaining hundreds of “likes” and “shares.” The poster, which is aimed at young Palestinian men, comes in the aftermath of the attempted lynch in central Jerusalem, and warns that visiting popular areas in the city, like big malls and the pedestrian area off of Zion Square could lead to more similar attacks.

The poster fits into a growing trend of narrating anti-Arab racism as a means to “protect our daughters” – a form of discourse promoted by politicians and ministers also in relation to African asylum seekers.

The poster reads the following:

Dear Arab guy:

We don’t want you to get hurt!

Our daughters are valuable to us,

and just as you would not want a Jew to date your sister

we unwilling are also unwilling for an Arab to date a girl from among our people.

Just as you would do anything to stop a Jew from dating your sister – so do we!

If you are thinking of visiting Jerusalem malls or the pedestrian street [Midrechov] with the intention of dating Jewish girls – this isn’t the place for you.

You may walk around in your own village freely and find girlfriends there, not here!

Last week an Arab who thought he might find Jewish girls got hurt.

We don’t wish for you to get hurt,

So respect our daughters’ honor

As we mind it dearly!

Lehava organization

http://972mag.com/campaign-calls-on-arab-men-to-keep-out-of-jlem-away-from-jewish-girls/54263/

Lehava is an Israeli extremist organization with many members from the now-outlawed terrorist Kach political party. It is led by Baruch Marzel, an illegal settler living in Hebron and former senior activist for Kach, who is actually originally from Boston. Lehava's primary activity is the prevention of "assimilation," in particular, marriages between Jewish women and non-Jewish men (especially Palestinian Israelis, known as "Israeli Arabs," which Lehava refers to as "enemies.") It collects names of Jewish women in relationships with Palestinian Israelis, and publishes their names and photographs in order to "publicly shame them." It does the same thing to Israelis who rent homes to Palestinian Israelis, and offers "kashrut" certificates to businesses that do not employ Palestinian Israelis.

Jerusalem: Ads warn parents – keep daughters away from Arabs

In an ad made to look like an imaginary wedding invitation between Michal and her chosen groom Mohammad, distributed throughout Jerusalem's streets, the organization is seeking to demonstrate what would happen if parents fail to keep watch over their daughters.

The "invitation" asks you to join Michal and Mohammad as they celebrate their marriage on a Friday night at the Shahid (martyr) events hall in Ramallah. Next to the invitation the ad reads: "If you don't want your daughter's wedding invitation to look like this then...Don't let her work with Arabs or do national service with non-Jews, don't let her work in place that employs enemies and don't bring home migrant workers…"

The Lehava organization's goal is to "save the daughters of Israel who have been tempted into a romantic relationship with a non-Jew."

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4226495,00.html

For years, Israelis who find this sort of intimidation to be well outside the legal parameters of freedom of expression have made complaints about Lehava to the Israeli government for criminal incitement to racism and threats of violence. However, to date, no action has been taken.

http://www.mossawa.org/default.php?lng=3&pg=5&dp=2&fl=13

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

I think I get it. Some indigenous Africans who become indigenous Europeans who become indigenous Americans are different than some indigenous Africans who become indigenous Europeans who become indigenous Americans.

No that is incorrect, there is no difference. However the issue of equality is independent of national borders and immigration law.

[PalestineMyHeart 1,897]

No that is incorrect, there is no difference. However the issue of equality is independent of national borders and immigration law.

This is where it gets a little sticky. Because any nation can pass any law that it likes; however, it may not be in accordance with international law and conventions to which it has agreed (as in the case of Israel, which passed its own laws that it claims authorize actions that are expressly forbidden by international law and conventions, such as the expulsion of native populations and refusal to allow them to return to their homeland, the seizure and transferral to the state of private property belonging to refugee populations, the annexations of territory outside its recognized sovereign borders, etc., etc.)

"We have laws. And if you don't like them, well, we have others."

(paraphrasing Groucho Marx, so punctuate with exaggerated eyebrow wiggling.)

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

This is where it gets a little sticky. Because any nation can pass any law that it likes; however, it may not be in accordance with international law and conventions to which it has agreed (as in the case of Israel, which passed its own laws that it claims authorize actions that are expressly forbidden by international law and conventions, such as the expulsion of native populations and refusal to allow them to return to their homeland, the seizure and transferral to the state of private property belonging to refugee populations, the annexations of territory outside its recognized sovereign borders, etc., etc.)

"We have laws. And if you don't like them, well, we have others."

(paraphrasing Groucho Marx, so punctuate with exaggerated eyebrow wiggling.)

I totally agree.