Israel bans Arab Parties from running in Israeli election

**Каие** · January 12, 2009, 04:09 PM

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/0..._n_157207.html
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1054867.html
http://english.aljazeera.net/news/mi...350696500.html

Interesting move for the ''only democracy in the middle east''. What do we think about this? Good for democracy? Justified? True motives behind it?

Considering they tried this 2 years ago too....
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/mid...st/4760134.stm

Taking for a moment the false allegation that these parties ''support terrorism, and don't recognise Israel''.....

The arguments that in a democratic society, and the ''only democracy in the middle east'', it is justified to ban a party from running because they do not recognise the current make up of the state is absolutley absurd and completely stupid.

Britain is a Capitalist Democratic Christian English speaking Kingdom with no separation of Church and State.

therefore under this crappy logic, then anyone who disagrees with that should be banned, The following Parties should be banned from elections;

Liberal Democrats - 3rd largest party - Wants to disenfranchise the Church of England, I.e. Secularism.
Scottish National Party - 2nd largest party in Scotland - does not recognise the United Kingdom and aims to destroy it
Welsh - 2nd largest party in Wales - Want official recognition of Welsh above/similar to English constitutionally.
Irish Republicans - 2nd largest party in Northern Ireland - They neither recognise Britain, the Union, or the Queen.
Socialist Parties - Do not want capitalism.
Republican Party - Do not want a Queen.
Labour Party - Largest Party in the UK, ruling party - Do not like democracy or human rights much
UKIP - 3rd largest EU party - Do not recognise the EU, and do not want to be European

Absolutely pathetic argument for the suspension and bastardisation of ''the only democracy in the middle east'', and to be honest plain proof that we have certain principles which no one can break, until Israel breaks those principles in which case it is OK I.e. this party ban, nuclear weapons, occupation, etc. 1 rule for earth, another rule for the US + Israel.

Anyway that whole argument all moot, because the Parties in question do recognise Israel and do not support terrorism. I posted an article showing what names you are called for not supported the Gazan offensive, even if your Jewish, you are called a terrorist and traitor. This is merely right wing fanatical religious extremist racist parties wanting Arabs out of Parliament and out of the democratic process. They are bitter the Arab parties have chosen to side with their Arab brethren then with the Israeli government, and for them opposing a mess of a war. In addition this has been tried before under exactly the same pretext, under surprise surprise, the Lebanese war, where the same parties did not support the massacre of fellow Arabs.

Is it a coincidence, the motion was put forward by the same parties whose policy it is to ban Arabs from voting all together?

**Farnan** · January 12, 2009, 04:12 PM

What would Amos Yarkoni say?

**fieldmarshal** · January 12, 2009, 04:13 PM

Quiet undemocratic imo. But if there accusations of the Arab parties are true, then i guess it can be justified.

**Barry Goldwater** · January 12, 2009, 04:17 PM

Unjustified and undemocratic...
________
Chrysler Pt Platform

**Ishoss** · January 12, 2009, 04:21 PM

It will be justified if the parties don't acknowledge their right to exist, fund terrorist groups and the other accusations are true.

If not, then this is racist and undemocratic.

**Каие** · January 12, 2009, 04:30 PM

The allegations are due to the parties being outspoken against the offensive and standing with their Arab brethren over their Jewish brethren. It was tried before by far-rightest when it turned out all they wanted was a 2 state solution and to give up Jerusalem.

**Exarch** · January 12, 2009, 04:31 PM

disgusting, undemocratic and i can say i'm surprised
this is israel we're talking about

**Chaigidel** · January 12, 2009, 05:29 PM

totally justified when a political groups stated aim is the destruction of the state in which they are a member, and nothing less can be expected of any and all arabs.

**Каие** · January 12, 2009, 05:32 PM

Originally Posted by Chaigidel

totally justified when a political groups stated aim is the destruction of the state in which they are a member, and nothing less can be expected of any and all arabs.

Except they didn't say that.

**Chaigidel** · January 12, 2009, 05:32 PM

but they imply it by genetics

**Каие** · January 12, 2009, 05:42 PM

Originally Posted by Chaigidel

but they imply it by genetics

What does that even mean? You mean because they are Arab, and not Jewish, there very existence undermines the Jewish state? How disgustingly racist.

**saglam2000** · January 12, 2009, 05:42 PM

Originally Posted by ЯoMe kb8

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/0..._n_157207.html
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1054867.html
http://english.aljazeera.net/news/mi...350696500.html

Interesting move for the ''only democracy in the middle east''. What do we think about this? Good for democracy? Justified? True motives behind it?

Considering they tried this 2 years ago too....
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/mid...st/4760134.stm

that statement is so stupid....what the

is Turkey then?......a freaking monarchy?

**Chaigidel** · January 12, 2009, 05:43 PM

yes existance of jordanians in the jewish state undermine the jewish state-- as evident by hamas and fatah

**antares24** · January 12, 2009, 05:55 PM

well the banning of parties isn't uneard of in democracies, for a recent examples see the ban of a basque party in Spain, that was accused of supporting Eta.

To say if the arab parties ban was justified one have to know if this statement is true:

Parliament spokesman Giora Pordes said the election committee voted overwhelmingly in favor of the motion, accusing the country's Arab parties of incitement, supporting terrorist groups and refusing to recognize Israel's right to exist. Arab lawmakers have traveled to some of Israel's staunchest enemies, including Lebanon and Syria.

If that's true the ban is justified for the sake of the safety of the state, otherwise not, even if i can understand the Israeli positions.

**Chaigidel** · January 12, 2009, 05:56 PM

technically they should be arrested and executed for treason for good measure.

**Каие** · January 12, 2009, 05:59 PM

Originally Posted by Chaigidel

yes existance of jordanians in the jewish state undermine the jewish state-- as evident by hamas and fatah

In other words, you are pro-Genocide? An echo of Ben-Gurion I see.

Originally Posted by antares24

To say if the arab parties ban was justified one have to know if this statement is true: If that's true the ban is justified for the sake of the safety of the state, otherwise not, even if i can understand the Israeli positions.

It is not true. It has been tried before, in 2006 because they were opposed to the invasion of Lebanon. This is nothing but veiled censorship and democratic infringement. All justified because Arabs mean nothing (!)

**Captain Blackadder** · January 12, 2009, 06:23 PM

Originally Posted by saglam2000

that statement is so stupid....what the

is Turkey then?......a freaking monarchy?

But aren't you trying to join the European Union? So we are just going by your wishes that we call you European.

**fieldmarshal** · January 12, 2009, 06:31 PM

Wait, so these Arab parties do not recognize Israel's right to exist? I mean how they can run for positions in a state that they themselves don't recognize?