I personally have long been critical of this new-wave of socially acceptable xenophobism that has sprung up since the rise of conviction-based conservatism borne as an answer to the 'third-way' centrist platforms of Clinton, Blair and to a (much) lesser extent Schroeder. Leaders, perhaps best characterized by Rasmussen and John Howard (Michael Howard followed their lead - but failed), have played to these basic human fears as a way to ply their, for the most part, non faith-based constituants. If they could have pulled the faith card, as did Bush, they would have. In other words faith and/or xenophobism was the catalyst of change from the centrist norm, and it has worked/resonated. What does that have to do with Israel? Well, unlike in Australia and Denmark, the Citizenship Law cannot be directly linked to a defining political platform, rather as a means controlling the process of integration. Yes, the previous system was imperfect, but the reaction was a knee-jerk attempt to protect the religious purity of the State. In my humble opinion this is discrimination above and beyond what should be acceptable in a state that prides itself on being 'a bastion of democracy in a sea of tyranny.'
Gunmen in Egypt kill guard outside Niger embassy (Reuters)
from the article: Does Israel want peace?