Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

16 countries forbid admission to Israeli passport holders. Where are the protests? Watch

    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Iridocyclitis)
    Where are the mass protests in London, etc. in light of this ban on Jews? Where's the huge petition to stop the leaders of these 16 countries paying state visits to Britain?
    Israel as a country has systematically dehumanized it's neighbors (the indeginous people mind you) in the name of peace and security. It's gone on for so long, terrorist ideals are the seeds that nurtures a segment of that young population today.

    Few people will shower such a country with sympathy and support.
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by joe cooley)
    So, now we have established that the Muslim states ban on Israelis is not reciprocated by Israel there is no reason for the left to ignore the travel ban imposed by many Muslim countries is there?

    For the purposes of this thread the rights and wrongs of Trumps travel ban are immaterial.

    The thread is dedicated to the hypocrisy of the left ignoring the similar bans put in place by 16 Muslim nations.
    Right, in which case I'm fully against those bans. But it's a whole separate issue and due to many factors, a significant one being they've had no diplomatic relations for years
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by homeland.lsw)


    states in black do not allow israeli passport holders from entering



    states in beige that need Israeli government permission to enter israel.

    Well, Iran doesn't ban Jews from entering, Iran has a large Jewish population themselves other countries i don't know of so can't comment.

    Trump has banned Muslim yes, considering Christian syrians are allowed to enter the US
    So Israel has no ban in place, you merely need permission.

    Like nearly every other country in the world.

    Got it.

    Trump has banned Muslim yes, considering Christian syrians are allowed to enter the US

    Again, i think you're mistaken.

    Can you back this claim up with proof?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fullofsurprises)
    We're going to have to beg to differ on the legitimacy thing - just managing an entry into the UN does not maketh a moral and genuine statehood.

    Nonetheless, I don't approve of banning ordinary respectable people from visiting, especially on things like scientific, academic and cultural exchanges, just because they come from a country that does bad things.

    However, we can and should be able to ban undesirable people, dangerous people, etc. Thus when Trump was not even the candidate, but just a mouthy yob spreading hate speech and inciting violence, we were happy to call for him to be banned from the UK.
    I'm sorry but what? Please name a single state which is legitimate under your definition.

    Let's look at the UN security council shall we? China? Yes, what a beacon of absolute legitimacy. Russia, or formerly the USSR? Ask Eastern Europeans what they think of the motherland would you. The UK? It still had India when it was a member.

    I cannot name a single state in the world which would be legitimate under your definition. The only thing legitimate states have in common is power and diplomatic representation.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by homeland.lsw)


    states in black do not allow israeli passport holders from entering



    states in beige that need Israeli government permission to enter israel.

    Well, Iran doesn't ban Jews from entering, Iran has a large Jewish population themselves :rofl: other countries i don't know of so can't comment.

    Trump has banned Muslim yes, considering Christian syrians are allowed to enter the US
    Notice the percentage of Muslim states which have banned Jews so it is clearly a religious issue. I agree Trump has banned Muslims, however Christians are minorities and very likely to experience persecution in countries which have very poor law enforcement (Somalia)
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TaintedLight)
    Israel as a country has systematically dehumanized it's neighbors (the indeginous people mind you) in the name of peace and security. It's gone on for so long, terrorist ideals are the seeds that nurtures a segment of that young population today.

    Few people will shower such a country with sympathy and support.
    I have a question for you.

    Which country was it who invaded Israel in 1967?

    Oh yes, Jordan, Egypt and Syria.

    Maybe the reason Israel is so annoyed with its neighbours is because the 'indigenous' peoples are so anti-Semitic they wouldn't even let holocaust survivers into their homes?
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dat Tall Guy)
    I'm sorry but what? Please name a single state which is legitimate under your definition.

    Let's look at the UN security council shall we? China? Yes, what a beacon of absolute legitimacy. Russia, or formerly the USSR? Ask Eastern Europeans what they think of the motherland would you. The UK? It still had India when it was a member.

    I cannot name a single state in the world which would be legitimate under your definition. The only thing legitimate states have in common is power and diplomatic representation.
    Hmm... there's a fairly significant difference you seem to be overlooking... can you guess what it is?
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dat Tall Guy)
    I have a question for you.

    Which country was it who invaded Israel in 1967?

    Oh yes, Jordan, Egypt and Syria.

    Maybe the reason Israel is so annoyed with its neighbours is because the 'indigenous' peoples are so anti-Semitic they wouldn't even let holocaust survivers into their homes?
    Irrelevant question...? Irrelevant answer...?

    when i said neighbors I was referring to the palestinians.

    Alternatively, if someone came to my ...estate... and said this is a his homeland according to his religious texts I'm not going to agree with that ********. I pay the compliment that you don't either. >_>
    • Offline

      21
      (Original post by Dat Tall Guy)
      Notice the percentage of Muslim states which have banned Jews so it is clearly a religious issue. I agree Trump has banned Muslims, however Christians are minorities and very likely to experience
      persecution in countries which have very poor law enforcement (Somalia)
      i wholeheartedly agree that there is a clear ban on israelis but not on jews. french jews can enter iran, bulgarian jews can enter iran, russian jews can enter iran. Israeli citizens cannot.
      for obvious reasons, both countries think that the other should be wiped off the map.

      i think the ban was rushed out, unfair in terms of banning those 7 particular countries. Why didn't trump just ban the whole middle east?

      on paper it has substance, but irl it doesn't
      Offline

      2
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by zayn008)
      You're right, having read deeper it turns out they're banned to travel to Israel but from their own government. Whilst I'm still against the ban and I'm happy to hear Israel don't impose such bans (although they aren't very kind at the boarder), you have understand these bans are completely different and is due to a conflict dating way back that has caused numerous wars and attacks and is still an on-going conflict due to Israel's ongoing abuse of international law as they see it (I don't want to debate this issue but it is a valid arguement in their view).
      That's an interesting justification. I mean, in the case of Syria, the US supports the rebel groups so is at war with the Syrian government by proxy. Further, Assad's war crimes are fairly indisputable. So by the above reasoning, Trump was absolutely justified in banning Syrians from entering the United States?
      Offline

      2
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by joe cooley)
      So Israel has no ban in place, you merely need permission.

      Like nearly every other country in the world.

      Got it.

      Trump has banned Muslim yes, considering Christian syrians are allowed to enter the US

      Again, i think you're mistaken.

      Can you back this claim up with proof?
      i really don't understand the claim that Trump is banning Muslims. His ban has affected a fairly small fraction - approximately 12% - of the 1.6 billion or so Muslims in the world, and in fact only Iran features in the list of the ten countries with the largest Muslim populations. If his aim was to ban Muslims, then he has chosen his seven targets spectacularly poorly. What seems the common thread - Iran notwithstanding quite so much - is the lawlessness of these countries. I actually don't think the ban will achieve the goal of reducing the US' exposure to terrorism, but the suggestion he is actively trying to ban Muslims with this move is a bit daft.
      Offline

      2
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by joe cooley)
      Ah, the strange moral standards of the left.

      If you believe something to be wrong, it is wrong regardless of who is doing it.

      Perhaps you believe the Muslim world incapable of civilized behaviour and thus hold them to a lower standard.

      Ever heard the phrase "the soft bigotry of low expectations" ?
      Not strange at all.
      Something that is wrong regardless of wrongdoer, doesn't mean every wrongdoing is surprising nor does it mean every wrongdoing is equally relevant in global stage. Saudi Arabia is doing **** stuff because Saudi government has always been doing **** stuff, and we should stop selling them weapons, this has been something that has been established for about a decade if not more. Not surprising when Saudi government then goes and does another *****y thing. Saudi government while notable regional power isn't a global one, so *****y things it does isn't of a equal global relevance.

      Same with countries like North Korea, Belarus, Turkey, Venezuela etc. etc. If you want record of their *****y doings I think there's an annual report that comes out. It isn't even just limited to human rights, when there's a shooting in US it is hardly news because shootings happen in US because US has *****y gun laws. Doesn't therefore justify UK choosing to implement US gun laws, because despite lack of outrage over American gun laws it is still a *****y policy - we just don't get outraged over it because its routinely *****y.

      If you're so concerned over outrage over US actions, wait for two to three years - if Trump is still president by then we'll probably start treating his actions as being routinely *****y like that of Saudi government.
      Online

      21
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by Luke Kostanjsek)
      That's an interesting justification. I mean, in the case of Syria, the US supports the rebel groups so is at war with the Syrian government by proxy. Further, Assad's war crimes are fairly indisputable. So by the above reasoning, Trump was absolutely justified in banning Syrians from entering the United States?
      The USA can be seen as a key reason to the existence of ISIS (agreed with by trump) and is certainly the reason for the extreme level of instability. As for rebels, the funding of them is what's caused the civil war to go on for so long, the USA was funding these groups without knowing they were linked to terrorist organisations because they were blindly funding them so they're ultimately the reason why the scale of civil war is so big and again this is a view agreed with by trump. So no, America is still a huge player even in the Syrian war, it's like they haven't learnt from the taliban, Iraq or Libya. Add Syria to the list with Iraq and Libya of countries America has destroyed. He's not justified for refusing those in need, harsher regulations might've been understandable and justifiable.
      Offline

      1
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by swanderfeild)
      Not strange at all.
      Something that is wrong regardless of wrongdoer, doesn't mean every wrongdoing is surprising nor does it mean every wrongdoing is equally relevant in global stage. Saudi Arabia is doing **** stuff because Saudi government has always been doing **** stuff, and we should stop selling them weapons, this has been something that has been established for about a decade if not more. Not surprising when Saudi government then goes and does another *****y thing. Saudi government while notable regional power isn't a global one, so *****y things it does isn't of a equal global relevance.

      Same with countries like North Korea, Belarus, Turkey, Venezuela etc. etc. If you want record of their *****y doings I think there's an annual report that comes out. It isn't even just limited to human rights, when there's a shooting in US it is hardly news because shootings happen in US because US has *****y gun laws. Doesn't therefore justify UK choosing to implement US gun laws, because despite lack of outrage over American gun laws it is still a *****y policy - we just don't get outraged over it because its routinely *****y.

      If you're so concerned over outrage over US actions, wait for two to three years - if Trump is still president by then we'll probably start treating his actions as being routinely *****y like that of Saudi government.
      Let me get this right.

      Because Saudi do *****y stuff we should stop selling them arms.

      But

      Because Saudi do *****y stuff there is no need to protest their ban on Israelis traveling to their country.

      See the problem with that?

      FYI I support Trumps policy.
      Offline

      3
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by yudothis)
      No, it only exists because people felt sorry, didn't know what to do, didn't want the problem in their own land.
      Or because the Jews fought valiantly against hordes of genocidal Arabs for the right to live there?
      Offline

      2
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by zayn008)
      The USA can be seen as a key reason to the existence of ISIS (agreed with by trump) and is certainly the reason for the extreme level of instability. As for rebels, the funding of them is what's caused the civil war to go on for so long, the USA was funding these groups without knowing they were linked to terrorist organisations because they were blindly funding them so they're ultimately the reason why the scale of civil war is so big and again this is a view agreed with by trump. So no, America is still a huge player even in the Syrian war, it's like they haven't learnt from the taliban, Iraq or Libya. Add Syria to the list with Iraq and Libya of countries America has destroyed. He's not justified for refusing those in need, harsher regulations might've been understandable and justifiable.
      I don't actually disagree with you on ISIS nor Syria; I think Western foreign policy failings in the Middle East are largely responsible for the problems we see arising now. But that is essentially moot. You justified the refusal of Israelis by multiple Muslim countries on the grounds of their conflicts with Israel, and Israel's breach of international law. The US is by proxy at war with the Assad regime, which has committed all manner of war crimes, and so fulfills the two criteria that you gave in the comment I originally quoted. It just seems a little bit hypocritical, and as I think was pointed out by someone else, smacks of the soft bigotry of low expectations.

      Also, I believe Trump's reasoning for this ban was as a temporary measure, pending the implementation of a more stringent vetting process. Whether this pans out remains to be seen, but should this be the case then I don't see how it is particularly unreasonable. I think it's doomed to fail, as it doesn't really tackle the issue of the threat posed by terrorists on home soil, but it isn't something which can be reasonably likened to the actions of the Nazis, as people seem to have been doing.
      Offline

      20
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by Cato the Elder)
      Or because the Jews fought valiantly against hordes of genocidal Arabs for the right to live there?
      The only genocidal people in that region are Israelis.

      They were put there and helped to fight. There is nothing valiant about that.
      Online

      18
      ReputationRep:
      It is very hard to counter this point, I was completely unaware of the Jewish ban.

      Seriously though, why does Religion have to exist?
      • Very Important Poster
      Offline

      19
      (Original post by the bear)
      Israel is a legitimate state. Building settlements on the soil of Eretz Israel is the right thing to do. Jews from the whole diaspora including Ethiopia are welcome to here.
      Accroding to the UN the settlements are illegal and in breach of international law.




      7853rd Meeting (PM)

      Israel’s Settlements Have No Legal Validity, Constitute Flagrant Violation of International Law, Security Council Reaffirms


      14 Delegations in Favour of Resolution 2334 (2016) as United States Abstains

      The Security Council reaffirmed this afternoon that Israel’s establishment of settlements in Palestinian territory occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem, had no legal validity, constituting a flagrant violation under international law and a major obstacle to the vision of two States living side-by-side in peace and security, within internationally recognized borders.

      Adopting resolution 2334 (2016) by 14 votes, with the United States abstaining, the Council reiterated its demand that Israel immediately and completely cease all settlement activities in the occupied Palestinian territory, including East Jerusalem. It underlined that it would not recognize any changes to the 4 June 1967 lines, including with regard to Jerusalem, other than those agreed by the two sides through negotiations.


      https://www.un.org/press/en/2016/sc12657.doc.htm
      • Very Important Poster
      Offline

      19
      (Original post by Iridocyclitis)
      Where are the mass protests in London, etc. in light of this ban on Jews? Where's the huge petition to stop the leaders of these 16 countries paying state visits to Britain?
      The protests arent just about banning particular states. Trump has a right as POTUS to carry out his own immigration policy. Its a dumb one though with massive holes considering he has conveniently missed out obvious countries whose citizens were involved in 9//11 andincluded ones which were not.

      In terms of these restrictions, then it has to do with the conflict between the Arabs and Israel that has been going on since 1948. Several of these countries have been at war, so they are no friends to each other. Its not as though Israelis are interested in going there.

      You missed out the fact that Israel has declared several of the countries enemy states and forbids israelis from going there since 1954.

      It now designates 9 countries as enemies of Israel: Afghanistan, Iran, Pakistan, Iraq, Lebanon, Libya, Sudan, Somalia, Syria, and Yemen as well as the Hamas-administered Gaza Strip. Hardly surpising they reply in kind. The other countries are all Arab League and continue their boycott, especially as the situation over the occupied territories is unresolved.
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_L...cott_of_Israel

      As for protests for these countries paying state visist, then am not sure they are awared that honour? Cant remember any in recent times. the Saudis in 2007 There were protests at the time.

      http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/7ef6371a-8...n&desktop=true
     
     
     
  1. See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  2. Poll
    What newspaper do you read/prefer?
    Useful resources
  3. See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  4. The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.