Israel's election results
Kadima won, it looks like, by a single seat. Of course, "won" is always relative. There are 120 seats in the Knesset and the largest party has won 30 seats. That's why our governments are so unstable. The threshold for representation is only 2.5%. It should be 4-5%.
Everyone tends to talk about the "rightist" block being bigger, with France 24 even using the idiotic phrase "fascist" to refer to Lieberman's Israel Beitenu. However, as usual, they miss the big picture.
Israel is the only country where "left" and "right" is purely defined by a party's view of how to deal with the 60 year long war the Arabs have waged against Israel's existence. On that basis, it's no surprise that more and more Israelis are finally having to admit the Arabs have been given enough opportunities for peace and always choose to refuse it and resume violence. That's why the idiots who think more accommodations for nothing in return have fewer and fewer people voting for them.
However, look at how far-left Meretz and far-right Shas work together to get funds for non-working Israelis. For different reasons, but both want subsidies to be increased for things that would look "left" in any other nation.
A for Lieberman. His biggest statement in the election run-up was about loyalty oaths. Now, if I remember correctly, the US demands one of people becoming citizens. So do all other Western nations. So if Lieberman's a fascist for saying that, there are no democracies. "But," you may cry, "Arabs are already citizens, why should they have to swear an oath?" Good question. The answer is in how they became citizens and what kind of citizens they are.
After WWII, the Jews of British Palestine were represented by the Jewish Agency and the Arabs were represented by the Arab Higher Committee. When the UN suggested and passed UNR181, the JA accepted it while the AHC rejected it. When the Mandate ended, the AHC proudly joined with the Arab League in declaring war against Israel's existence. The current Arab parties proudly follow that legacy. Their leaders regularly and openly agree with non-Israeli Arabs calling for Israel's destruction, and one of Balad's former Mks now lives abroad because he openly supported Hizbullah and Syria in the summer of 2006. Arab-Israeli leaders, who don't like that word, say that their kids shouldn't do National Service. Why? Because it would make them "feel Israeli."
These are people who, for the most part, openly say there will be no peace in the Middle East while Israel exists, say they're Palestinian and not Israeli, and support enemies dedicated to our nations' destruction. In any other nation, they'd be labeled traitors and jailed. Here they sit in the Knesset. Maybe it is time, as Lieberman says, to demand that any Arab who wishes to partake in Israel's democracy openly and clearly support Israel's existence and say they are loyal to said nation. How is that fascist?
As a note: I didn't vote for his party but for Kadima. Why? Not because of a problem with the loyalty oath. Some of his other policies are too hard-line for me.
Everyone tends to talk about the "rightist" block being bigger, with France 24 even using the idiotic phrase "fascist" to refer to Lieberman's Israel Beitenu. However, as usual, they miss the big picture.
Israel is the only country where "left" and "right" is purely defined by a party's view of how to deal with the 60 year long war the Arabs have waged against Israel's existence. On that basis, it's no surprise that more and more Israelis are finally having to admit the Arabs have been given enough opportunities for peace and always choose to refuse it and resume violence. That's why the idiots who think more accommodations for nothing in return have fewer and fewer people voting for them.
However, look at how far-left Meretz and far-right Shas work together to get funds for non-working Israelis. For different reasons, but both want subsidies to be increased for things that would look "left" in any other nation.
A for Lieberman. His biggest statement in the election run-up was about loyalty oaths. Now, if I remember correctly, the US demands one of people becoming citizens. So do all other Western nations. So if Lieberman's a fascist for saying that, there are no democracies. "But," you may cry, "Arabs are already citizens, why should they have to swear an oath?" Good question. The answer is in how they became citizens and what kind of citizens they are.
After WWII, the Jews of British Palestine were represented by the Jewish Agency and the Arabs were represented by the Arab Higher Committee. When the UN suggested and passed UNR181, the JA accepted it while the AHC rejected it. When the Mandate ended, the AHC proudly joined with the Arab League in declaring war against Israel's existence. The current Arab parties proudly follow that legacy. Their leaders regularly and openly agree with non-Israeli Arabs calling for Israel's destruction, and one of Balad's former Mks now lives abroad because he openly supported Hizbullah and Syria in the summer of 2006. Arab-Israeli leaders, who don't like that word, say that their kids shouldn't do National Service. Why? Because it would make them "feel Israeli."
These are people who, for the most part, openly say there will be no peace in the Middle East while Israel exists, say they're Palestinian and not Israeli, and support enemies dedicated to our nations' destruction. In any other nation, they'd be labeled traitors and jailed. Here they sit in the Knesset. Maybe it is time, as Lieberman says, to demand that any Arab who wishes to partake in Israel's democracy openly and clearly support Israel's existence and say they are loyal to said nation. How is that fascist?
As a note: I didn't vote for his party but for Kadima. Why? Not because of a problem with the loyalty oath. Some of his other policies are too hard-line for me.