Publish to Newswire
Add an EventFrom the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
Zionism Unmasked: Violent Racism
There is no word for this latest piece by Dave Kersting but BRILLIANT. I'm sure you'll all agree when you read it. (This could be called the "anti-Left-Zionist Manifesto.")
Zionism Unmasked: The "Invisable" Racism that is FINALLY becoming visable...
Read Dave Kersting's article below to find out why...
1.) We are all supposed to have learned, quite some time ago, that official policies of ethnic discrimination, preference, and prejudice are totally unacceptable, because they guarantee a pattern of ethnic injustice and a future of conflict - until the RACISM is ended.
The "two-state" scenario has always been pure undiluted Zionism. It demands that Palestinians surrender to ethnic-cleansing as a perpetual violation of individual refugees' human rights, within the territory of the "Jewish" state. It also demands that ALL Palestinians surrender to being cleansed from most of their national homeland, by openly racist invaders - thus, even the "Arab" side of this regressively racist scheme would have to surrender to the victory of Zionism in most of Palestine. Zionist supremacy would therefore reign even in the "Arab Zone," which could try to console itself by mimicking Zionism and erecting its own mirror-image supremacy for "the Arabs."
2.) We are also supposed to have learned long ago that, besides being unjust and violent, official racism DOES NOT WORK - is not sustainable, is a source of endless problems, and is no answer to anything.
3.) It is absurd to think that Sharon and his ilk have ever meant to bring peace. A little more thought shows that they don't have any long-term plans at all.
With limitless funding from Zionist-gulled US taxpayers, and with complete suppression of criticism - and long-term thought - Zionism has merely been a series of opportunities for criminals to launch themselves into prominence through gruesome policies which fully exploit the lack of scrutiny and prompt the counter-attacks for which these same persons offer themselves as defenders - eternally "defending" Jewish supremacy from the human-rights of its ethnically unwanted victims.
The initial need was real, but ever since the 1890s, the Zionist leaders who have emerged to prominence have been those who've exploited and cultivated that need to the max: that kind of selection process is assured, when critical thought is too easily quashed - under cries of "anti-Semitism," for example.
Zionism is a runaway elephant, as all its globally non-sustainable policies show. Corporate and other international influences are minor pressures in this rampant power-grab by violent psychopaths wielding a vast propaganda-machine and military. Any notion that Zionist leaders care about anything other than their personal prominence is the result of that propaganda machine.
Zionism in general - such as AIPAC and the Organized Jewish Community - is merely swept along by the lure of rising careers, cozy chauvinist conformity, and dread of censorious slander and violence. That's why it is impossible to convince any "pro-Israeli" that a sober grasp of reality is the only way to serve one's people. Zionism is itself the ideology of overwrought egos, in a stew of group denial; anyone who looks beyond those factors finds nothing at all, except a need to apologize and return Palestine to its owners.
4.) All the talk about a "two-state" solution has always been a pose of "sincerity," which rapacious killers assume when they have to face the cameras.
The "two-state" talk - the Zionist "peace" plan - is a necessary tactic in the Zionist plan to take all of Palestine as fast as a stupefied world will allow. The killers have to say SOMETHING - and if the "two-state" peace proposal, with all its obvious racism, is not transparent enough to elicit howls of scorn from all listeners, the uncomprehending listeners need to review the history of official ethnic-supremacy - and double-check to recall just how compatible with peace such policies really are.
Believers in the Zionist "peace" organizations, such as "Peace Now," Tikkkun, A.N.S.W.E.R., etc. might convince themselves that they are sincere, but only if they can excuse "indignant" violence and slander, disrupting "peace and justice" meetings in key moments of "upset" - quashing normal questions about the inadmissibility of racism, as if reason had collapsed into a license for general rancor the moment someone said "violent racism."
The time-honored arguments, which elicit those violent "upsets," merely touch (and draw forth) the racist violence at the heart of the "two-state" concept. Any belief that such a concept can bring peace depends on those "upsets" which suppress egalitarian principles, in the key moments. This is the process that so mysteriously fails to bring peace.
Those doing the suppressing might or might not be intentional Zionist moles: a system that encourages denial produces lots of neurotic "progressives," who may think they believe in ethnic equality, even though they're "not ready to give up the idea of a 'Jewish state.'" That neurotic hypocrisy is propagated quite intentionally, by the "two-state" deception, in official Zionist circles, such as Tikkkun - and by any number of moles, who, by definition, we do not suspect. Yet there is no need to distinguish between the motives of intentional Zionist deceivers and neurotic, demi-Zionist deniers.
Of course, the top Zionist leaders know that racism, including "two-state" racism, can't work. They are not blind to history; they are not as stupefied as those immersed in their propaganda. They do know how to get a job done, and they do know - as everyone is supposed to know - that racism does not work.
They also know they have to face some opposition somewhere, and they find it amazingly easy to arrange that front of "debate" deep inside their own racist ideological territory: so that even the "doves" present an openly racist "peace-plan" which is itself the ideal setting for endless boondoggles, "breakdowns," "overreactions," and perpetual Zionist conquest.
The scheme is perfectly tangible in the influence of Zionist "peace groups," such as Peace Now, Tikkkun, A.N.S.W.E.R., Not In Our Name, and our own "Social Justice Center," here in Marin County. These groups appeal to different sectors of the "peace movement," but they all promote exactly the same racist "two-state" Zionist "peace." This shifts the entire debate into Zionist territory, replacing moral principle with trendy moral relativism, and making real peace activists - those who can't forget the importance of ethnic-equality - seem "extreme," "radical," "unrealistic," even "anti-Semitic."
In reality, nothing could be more moderate than zero tolerance for racism: it IS taught in every American school, for example, and we DO remember the Bill of Rights and Martin Luther King.
The main effect of the Zionist anti-war movement is to divert peace efforts down a false and futile path, EXPRESSLY to avoid "dividing the movement" - or angering the Zionists. It is no accident that catering to the Zionists by making a discreet exception for JEWISH supremacy, deleting the equality argument - the only bulletproof anti-war argument - and keeping discussion tangled in endless negotiations about how to make racism work peacefully, maintains the ideal conditions for Zionist subjugation of the Middle East.
A racist war can hardly be stopped by anti-war arguments that delete any mention of the fundamental racism, so as not to
alienate the racists.
Those who see what is happening, through direct experience, and who say so in anti-war forums - even in ostensibly "anti-Zionist" forums - find defensive reactions from seemingly sincere anti-Zionists, who feel a need to angrily defend their pet illusions about prominent "two-state peace" activists. Again, no one can identify the gray area between intentional Zionist deception and neurotic demi-Zionist hostility and denial, but there is no need to do so.
Again, that is what Zionism IS - a historic need that makes one group of people particularly vulnerable to manipulation by fear-mongers, like Ben Gurion, Begin, Sharon, Foxman, Dershowitz, etc. That is why it is pointless to judge motives, or to analyze or compromise; we must simply look at the worst and most patent wrongs - such as violent ethnic prejudice - and demand a plain end to those wrongs directly. If any aspect of Zionism can get along without committing racist crimes, it should be allowed to; and if Zionism depends on those crimes, the best way to stop it is to stop the flagrant, regressive, highly prosecutable crimes directly.
The problem is racist supremacy; the answer is ethnic and religious EQUALITY. It is absurdly simple - and the Zionists know it.
The failure of pro-Palestinian leaders and progressives to comprehend a principle that has been the primary axiom of social progress for the past two centuries and which is vigorously taught to every American schoolchild is a testament to Zionist obfuscation and moral entanglement. It is no accident. The Zionists know that their whole balloon will pop the moment enough people wake up to this plain and fundamental reality.
All the "complexity" would resolve itself, bit by bit, if the principle of equality were applied to every issue, at every phase of discussion - just as it should be. An emphasis on equality is the best compass through the maze of racist complexities.
So when it turns out that the settlements are not dismantled by "two-state" talk, when in fact they continue to proliferate "despite" all the "two-state" talk, someone should at least be talking about their egregious "Jewish-only" RACISM - an issue every American can understand.
Israel must certainly be made to reform its racist immigration-policy, to reflect human equality, as opposed to the ethnic violence it currently enshrines: "Jewish yes; non-Jewish no."
Equality at every point and every level of discussion brings general progress toward peace, at whatever gradual pace is necessary, but mainly it keeps everyone aware that THE PROBLEM IS RACISM AND THE ANSWER IS EQUALITY. That is exactly what every Zionists would have us forget.
The primary error is thinking that Zionists wants peace, when what they demand is ethnic supremacy.
The next and equal error is thinking that ethnic supremacy can be made compatible with peace.
Peace will come when all claims are weighed on the basis of human rights, without any regard for the ethnicity, religion, or military might of the claimants.
Yes, such equality does lead to a "one state" solution, and no it does not offer amnesty to people or institutions that have imposed racist principles against the human rights of others. Those who oppose either of these outcomes of equality and argue against them find it hardest to argue against the moral necessity of equality itself.
Peace depends on justice. and justice means equality. Equality is the goal and it must be every in step.
Dave Kersting
------------------
Read Dave Kersting's article below to find out why...
1.) We are all supposed to have learned, quite some time ago, that official policies of ethnic discrimination, preference, and prejudice are totally unacceptable, because they guarantee a pattern of ethnic injustice and a future of conflict - until the RACISM is ended.
The "two-state" scenario has always been pure undiluted Zionism. It demands that Palestinians surrender to ethnic-cleansing as a perpetual violation of individual refugees' human rights, within the territory of the "Jewish" state. It also demands that ALL Palestinians surrender to being cleansed from most of their national homeland, by openly racist invaders - thus, even the "Arab" side of this regressively racist scheme would have to surrender to the victory of Zionism in most of Palestine. Zionist supremacy would therefore reign even in the "Arab Zone," which could try to console itself by mimicking Zionism and erecting its own mirror-image supremacy for "the Arabs."
2.) We are also supposed to have learned long ago that, besides being unjust and violent, official racism DOES NOT WORK - is not sustainable, is a source of endless problems, and is no answer to anything.
3.) It is absurd to think that Sharon and his ilk have ever meant to bring peace. A little more thought shows that they don't have any long-term plans at all.
With limitless funding from Zionist-gulled US taxpayers, and with complete suppression of criticism - and long-term thought - Zionism has merely been a series of opportunities for criminals to launch themselves into prominence through gruesome policies which fully exploit the lack of scrutiny and prompt the counter-attacks for which these same persons offer themselves as defenders - eternally "defending" Jewish supremacy from the human-rights of its ethnically unwanted victims.
The initial need was real, but ever since the 1890s, the Zionist leaders who have emerged to prominence have been those who've exploited and cultivated that need to the max: that kind of selection process is assured, when critical thought is too easily quashed - under cries of "anti-Semitism," for example.
Zionism is a runaway elephant, as all its globally non-sustainable policies show. Corporate and other international influences are minor pressures in this rampant power-grab by violent psychopaths wielding a vast propaganda-machine and military. Any notion that Zionist leaders care about anything other than their personal prominence is the result of that propaganda machine.
Zionism in general - such as AIPAC and the Organized Jewish Community - is merely swept along by the lure of rising careers, cozy chauvinist conformity, and dread of censorious slander and violence. That's why it is impossible to convince any "pro-Israeli" that a sober grasp of reality is the only way to serve one's people. Zionism is itself the ideology of overwrought egos, in a stew of group denial; anyone who looks beyond those factors finds nothing at all, except a need to apologize and return Palestine to its owners.
4.) All the talk about a "two-state" solution has always been a pose of "sincerity," which rapacious killers assume when they have to face the cameras.
The "two-state" talk - the Zionist "peace" plan - is a necessary tactic in the Zionist plan to take all of Palestine as fast as a stupefied world will allow. The killers have to say SOMETHING - and if the "two-state" peace proposal, with all its obvious racism, is not transparent enough to elicit howls of scorn from all listeners, the uncomprehending listeners need to review the history of official ethnic-supremacy - and double-check to recall just how compatible with peace such policies really are.
Believers in the Zionist "peace" organizations, such as "Peace Now," Tikkkun, A.N.S.W.E.R., etc. might convince themselves that they are sincere, but only if they can excuse "indignant" violence and slander, disrupting "peace and justice" meetings in key moments of "upset" - quashing normal questions about the inadmissibility of racism, as if reason had collapsed into a license for general rancor the moment someone said "violent racism."
The time-honored arguments, which elicit those violent "upsets," merely touch (and draw forth) the racist violence at the heart of the "two-state" concept. Any belief that such a concept can bring peace depends on those "upsets" which suppress egalitarian principles, in the key moments. This is the process that so mysteriously fails to bring peace.
Those doing the suppressing might or might not be intentional Zionist moles: a system that encourages denial produces lots of neurotic "progressives," who may think they believe in ethnic equality, even though they're "not ready to give up the idea of a 'Jewish state.'" That neurotic hypocrisy is propagated quite intentionally, by the "two-state" deception, in official Zionist circles, such as Tikkkun - and by any number of moles, who, by definition, we do not suspect. Yet there is no need to distinguish between the motives of intentional Zionist deceivers and neurotic, demi-Zionist deniers.
Of course, the top Zionist leaders know that racism, including "two-state" racism, can't work. They are not blind to history; they are not as stupefied as those immersed in their propaganda. They do know how to get a job done, and they do know - as everyone is supposed to know - that racism does not work.
They also know they have to face some opposition somewhere, and they find it amazingly easy to arrange that front of "debate" deep inside their own racist ideological territory: so that even the "doves" present an openly racist "peace-plan" which is itself the ideal setting for endless boondoggles, "breakdowns," "overreactions," and perpetual Zionist conquest.
The scheme is perfectly tangible in the influence of Zionist "peace groups," such as Peace Now, Tikkkun, A.N.S.W.E.R., Not In Our Name, and our own "Social Justice Center," here in Marin County. These groups appeal to different sectors of the "peace movement," but they all promote exactly the same racist "two-state" Zionist "peace." This shifts the entire debate into Zionist territory, replacing moral principle with trendy moral relativism, and making real peace activists - those who can't forget the importance of ethnic-equality - seem "extreme," "radical," "unrealistic," even "anti-Semitic."
In reality, nothing could be more moderate than zero tolerance for racism: it IS taught in every American school, for example, and we DO remember the Bill of Rights and Martin Luther King.
The main effect of the Zionist anti-war movement is to divert peace efforts down a false and futile path, EXPRESSLY to avoid "dividing the movement" - or angering the Zionists. It is no accident that catering to the Zionists by making a discreet exception for JEWISH supremacy, deleting the equality argument - the only bulletproof anti-war argument - and keeping discussion tangled in endless negotiations about how to make racism work peacefully, maintains the ideal conditions for Zionist subjugation of the Middle East.
A racist war can hardly be stopped by anti-war arguments that delete any mention of the fundamental racism, so as not to
alienate the racists.
Those who see what is happening, through direct experience, and who say so in anti-war forums - even in ostensibly "anti-Zionist" forums - find defensive reactions from seemingly sincere anti-Zionists, who feel a need to angrily defend their pet illusions about prominent "two-state peace" activists. Again, no one can identify the gray area between intentional Zionist deception and neurotic demi-Zionist hostility and denial, but there is no need to do so.
Again, that is what Zionism IS - a historic need that makes one group of people particularly vulnerable to manipulation by fear-mongers, like Ben Gurion, Begin, Sharon, Foxman, Dershowitz, etc. That is why it is pointless to judge motives, or to analyze or compromise; we must simply look at the worst and most patent wrongs - such as violent ethnic prejudice - and demand a plain end to those wrongs directly. If any aspect of Zionism can get along without committing racist crimes, it should be allowed to; and if Zionism depends on those crimes, the best way to stop it is to stop the flagrant, regressive, highly prosecutable crimes directly.
The problem is racist supremacy; the answer is ethnic and religious EQUALITY. It is absurdly simple - and the Zionists know it.
The failure of pro-Palestinian leaders and progressives to comprehend a principle that has been the primary axiom of social progress for the past two centuries and which is vigorously taught to every American schoolchild is a testament to Zionist obfuscation and moral entanglement. It is no accident. The Zionists know that their whole balloon will pop the moment enough people wake up to this plain and fundamental reality.
All the "complexity" would resolve itself, bit by bit, if the principle of equality were applied to every issue, at every phase of discussion - just as it should be. An emphasis on equality is the best compass through the maze of racist complexities.
So when it turns out that the settlements are not dismantled by "two-state" talk, when in fact they continue to proliferate "despite" all the "two-state" talk, someone should at least be talking about their egregious "Jewish-only" RACISM - an issue every American can understand.
Israel must certainly be made to reform its racist immigration-policy, to reflect human equality, as opposed to the ethnic violence it currently enshrines: "Jewish yes; non-Jewish no."
Equality at every point and every level of discussion brings general progress toward peace, at whatever gradual pace is necessary, but mainly it keeps everyone aware that THE PROBLEM IS RACISM AND THE ANSWER IS EQUALITY. That is exactly what every Zionists would have us forget.
The primary error is thinking that Zionists wants peace, when what they demand is ethnic supremacy.
The next and equal error is thinking that ethnic supremacy can be made compatible with peace.
Peace will come when all claims are weighed on the basis of human rights, without any regard for the ethnicity, religion, or military might of the claimants.
Yes, such equality does lead to a "one state" solution, and no it does not offer amnesty to people or institutions that have imposed racist principles against the human rights of others. Those who oppose either of these outcomes of equality and argue against them find it hardest to argue against the moral necessity of equality itself.
Peace depends on justice. and justice means equality. Equality is the goal and it must be every in step.
Dave Kersting
------------------
Add Your Comments
Comments
(Hide Comments)
The problem is racist supremacy; the answer is ethnic and religious EQUALITY. It is absurdly simple - and the Zionists know it.
The failure of pro-Palestinian leaders and progressives to comprehend a principle that has been the primary axiom of social progress for the past two centuries and which is vigorously taught to every American schoolchild is a testament to Zionist obfuscation and moral entanglement. It is no accident. The Zionists know that their whole balloon will pop the moment enough people wake up to this plain and fundamental reality.
All the "complexity" would resolve itself, bit by bit, if the principle of equality were applied to every issue, at every phase of discussion - just as it should be. An emphasis on equality is the best compass through the maze of racist complexities.
The failure of pro-Palestinian leaders and progressives to comprehend a principle that has been the primary axiom of social progress for the past two centuries and which is vigorously taught to every American schoolchild is a testament to Zionist obfuscation and moral entanglement. It is no accident. The Zionists know that their whole balloon will pop the moment enough people wake up to this plain and fundamental reality.
All the "complexity" would resolve itself, bit by bit, if the principle of equality were applied to every issue, at every phase of discussion - just as it should be. An emphasis on equality is the best compass through the maze of racist complexities.
Though he speaks in theoretical terms, Dave Kersting's words are not too difficult to translate into reality.
What he is speaking of is Christian and Muslim Palestinians' inability to live in Jewish only neighborhoods or apartment complexes or settlements; their far inferior level (within Israel) of education and healthcare funding despite the fact that they pay the same taxes; their inability to be promoted within Israeli society or to even get decent jobs (again in Israel).
Or the fact that dismantlement of all the settlements and vacating ALL the Occupied Territories of settlers and soldiers has never been part of the "two-state solution" as envisioned by most if its proponents (Occupied Territories here would mean the Gaza Strip, West Bank, Golan Heights, and Shebaa Farms in Lebanon).
The solution to the conflict is thinking in terms of EQUALITY. That is, Christian and Muslim Palestinians must get equal rights as Israel's Jewish population. Equal rights means equal rights not fewer rights.
That would mean "one man, one vote" for everyone within Israel/Palestine. It would also mean Palestinians who were expelled would receive a "right to return" that is currently accorded only to Jews worldwide (from Brooklyn, Eastern Europe, and Russia).
What he is speaking of is Christian and Muslim Palestinians' inability to live in Jewish only neighborhoods or apartment complexes or settlements; their far inferior level (within Israel) of education and healthcare funding despite the fact that they pay the same taxes; their inability to be promoted within Israeli society or to even get decent jobs (again in Israel).
Or the fact that dismantlement of all the settlements and vacating ALL the Occupied Territories of settlers and soldiers has never been part of the "two-state solution" as envisioned by most if its proponents (Occupied Territories here would mean the Gaza Strip, West Bank, Golan Heights, and Shebaa Farms in Lebanon).
The solution to the conflict is thinking in terms of EQUALITY. That is, Christian and Muslim Palestinians must get equal rights as Israel's Jewish population. Equal rights means equal rights not fewer rights.
That would mean "one man, one vote" for everyone within Israel/Palestine. It would also mean Palestinians who were expelled would receive a "right to return" that is currently accorded only to Jews worldwide (from Brooklyn, Eastern Europe, and Russia).
That would mean "one man, one vote" for everyone within Israel/Palestine.
It would also mean Palestinians who were expelled would receive a "right to return" that is currently accorded only to Jews worldwide (from Brooklyn, Eastern Europe, and Russia)."
Brooklyn, Russia and Europe....huh, obviously, for someone who has such grand plans for transforming the lives of 10 million people in the region, you obviously have never even been to Israel as you would have quickly noticed that HALF of the population are Sephardic Jews from Arab and Muslim countries (Iran, Iraw, Morroco, Yemen, Bukharia, Afghanistan, India, Syria, Algeria, Libya, Ethiopia, etc.)....And pray tell, my astute political planner, where are the Jewish populations in these countries. It seems awfully curious that these countries, which just 50 years ago (30+ years ago for Iraq, and only 20+ years ago for Iran) had large flourishing Jewish communities are now almost entirely devoid of Jews....Where did they go? And it's the funniest thing, I recently travelled to Poland, Slovakia, Lithuania, Latvia and the Ukraine, and for some reason I had an awfully hard time finding any Jews...which is curious, because in all my history books it seems that there used to be thriving communities in these countries....But I just couldn't seem to find them....Perhaps they were all out at the mall the day I was there.
Here's a proposal: Israel grants citizenship and compensation to the Palestinians for their losses following the Arab countries 2 unsuccesful wars to destroy Israel, and every Muslim and Arab country which expelled and destroyed their Jewish populations and expropriated their land and possessions because they were Jewish (I can't recall if the Egyptian Jewish community declared War on Egypt or whether the Iranian Jews declared war on the Islamic State) grant citizenship and restitution to their victims. I'm sure the 22 Arab states (especially Syria whichi until the late 1970's had a massive Jewish Population in Damascus and Aleppo) would be more than happy to agree to this principle as it owuld further their endless desires for peace and democratic solutions to real world problems.
It would also mean Palestinians who were expelled would receive a "right to return" that is currently accorded only to Jews worldwide (from Brooklyn, Eastern Europe, and Russia)."
Brooklyn, Russia and Europe....huh, obviously, for someone who has such grand plans for transforming the lives of 10 million people in the region, you obviously have never even been to Israel as you would have quickly noticed that HALF of the population are Sephardic Jews from Arab and Muslim countries (Iran, Iraw, Morroco, Yemen, Bukharia, Afghanistan, India, Syria, Algeria, Libya, Ethiopia, etc.)....And pray tell, my astute political planner, where are the Jewish populations in these countries. It seems awfully curious that these countries, which just 50 years ago (30+ years ago for Iraq, and only 20+ years ago for Iran) had large flourishing Jewish communities are now almost entirely devoid of Jews....Where did they go? And it's the funniest thing, I recently travelled to Poland, Slovakia, Lithuania, Latvia and the Ukraine, and for some reason I had an awfully hard time finding any Jews...which is curious, because in all my history books it seems that there used to be thriving communities in these countries....But I just couldn't seem to find them....Perhaps they were all out at the mall the day I was there.
Here's a proposal: Israel grants citizenship and compensation to the Palestinians for their losses following the Arab countries 2 unsuccesful wars to destroy Israel, and every Muslim and Arab country which expelled and destroyed their Jewish populations and expropriated their land and possessions because they were Jewish (I can't recall if the Egyptian Jewish community declared War on Egypt or whether the Iranian Jews declared war on the Islamic State) grant citizenship and restitution to their victims. I'm sure the 22 Arab states (especially Syria whichi until the late 1970's had a massive Jewish Population in Damascus and Aleppo) would be more than happy to agree to this principle as it owuld further their endless desires for peace and democratic solutions to real world problems.
Israeli Jews from Iraq have sued zionists for compensation after they maimed them in an attempt to frame Arab gentiles in the process.
The law case was settled out of court for obvious reasons.
Other Jews may follow in that foorsteps/
The law case was settled out of court for obvious reasons.
Other Jews may follow in that foorsteps/
From Palestinian-American Ali Abunimah:
"Palestinian private property remains inviolate and all property seized by Israel, even of those who choose not to return, must be returned to its owners or paid for at the fair market price, including use and interest. Clinton Administration Deputy Treasury Secretary Stuart Eizenstat set out some sensible principles for dealing with property confiscated from European Jews and others by Nazi Germany, which could be adopted here. The same principles should apply to any Jews who were forced to leave Arab states as a result of the Arab-Israeli conflict."
-Ali Abunimah
http://www.electronicintifada.net/v2/article896.shtml
As the above from Ali Abunimah suggests, the same principles of right of return and/or compensation should be apply to any Jews who were forced to leave Arab states.
This, of course, doesn't even take into account the fact that many Jews were tricked into leaving either by Zionists who convinced many to move claiming they would be going to a paradise (while many Sephardic Jews found themselves being pigeon-holed into labor intensive dead end jobs) and many others were prompted to leave due to actual Zionist bombs planted in Jewish neighborhoods in order to frighten them out.
From Jewish-Iraqi Naeim Giladi:
"After 750,000 Palestinians were uprooted and their lands confiscated in 1948-49, Ben Gurion had to look to the Islamic countries for Jews who could fill the resultant cheap labor market. "Emissaries" were smuggled into these countries to "convince" Jews to leave either by trickery or fear.
In the case of Iraq, both methods were used: uneducated Jews were told of a Messianic Israel in which the blind see, the lame walk, and onions grow as big as melons; educated Jews had bombs thrown at them.
A few years after the bombings, in the early 1950s, a book was published in Iraq, in Arabic, titled Venom of the Zionist Viper. The author was one of the Iraqi investigators of the 1950-51 bombings and, in his book, he implicates the Israelis, specifically one of the emissaries sent by Israel, Mordechai Ben-Porat. As soon as the book came out, all copies just disappeared, even from libraries. The word was that agents of the Israeli Mossad, working through the U.S. Embassy, bought up all the books and destroyed them. I tried on three different occasions to have one sent to me in Israel, but each time Israeli censors in the post office intercepted it.
In September 1949, Israel sent the spy Mordechai Ben-Porat, the one mentioned in Venom of the Zionist Viper, to Iraq. One of the first things Ben-Porat did was to approach el-Said and promise him financial incentives to have a law enacted that would lift the citizenship of Iraqi Jews.
Soon after, Zionist and Iraqi representatives began formulating a rough draft of the bill, according to the model dictated by Israel through its agents in Baghdad. The bill was passed by the Iraqi parliament in March 1950. It empowered the government to issue one-time exit visas to Jews wishing to leave the country. In March, the bombings began.
Sixteen years later, the Israeli magazine Haolam Hazeh, published by Uri Avnery, then a Knesset member, accused Ben-Porat of the Baghdad bombings. Ben-Porat, who would become a Knesset member himself, denied the charge, but never sued the magazine for libel. And Iraqi Jews in Israel still call him Morad Abu al-Knabel, Mordechai of the Bombs.
Alexis de Tocqueville once observed that it is easier for the world to accept a simple lie than a complex truth. Certainly it has been easier for the world to accept the Zionist lie that Jews were evicted from Muslim lands because of anti-Semitism, and that Israelis, never the Arabs, were the pursuers of peace."
-Naeim Giladi
http://www.ameu.org/printer.asp?iid=36&aid=72
"Palestinian private property remains inviolate and all property seized by Israel, even of those who choose not to return, must be returned to its owners or paid for at the fair market price, including use and interest. Clinton Administration Deputy Treasury Secretary Stuart Eizenstat set out some sensible principles for dealing with property confiscated from European Jews and others by Nazi Germany, which could be adopted here. The same principles should apply to any Jews who were forced to leave Arab states as a result of the Arab-Israeli conflict."
-Ali Abunimah
http://www.electronicintifada.net/v2/article896.shtml
As the above from Ali Abunimah suggests, the same principles of right of return and/or compensation should be apply to any Jews who were forced to leave Arab states.
This, of course, doesn't even take into account the fact that many Jews were tricked into leaving either by Zionists who convinced many to move claiming they would be going to a paradise (while many Sephardic Jews found themselves being pigeon-holed into labor intensive dead end jobs) and many others were prompted to leave due to actual Zionist bombs planted in Jewish neighborhoods in order to frighten them out.
From Jewish-Iraqi Naeim Giladi:
"After 750,000 Palestinians were uprooted and their lands confiscated in 1948-49, Ben Gurion had to look to the Islamic countries for Jews who could fill the resultant cheap labor market. "Emissaries" were smuggled into these countries to "convince" Jews to leave either by trickery or fear.
In the case of Iraq, both methods were used: uneducated Jews were told of a Messianic Israel in which the blind see, the lame walk, and onions grow as big as melons; educated Jews had bombs thrown at them.
A few years after the bombings, in the early 1950s, a book was published in Iraq, in Arabic, titled Venom of the Zionist Viper. The author was one of the Iraqi investigators of the 1950-51 bombings and, in his book, he implicates the Israelis, specifically one of the emissaries sent by Israel, Mordechai Ben-Porat. As soon as the book came out, all copies just disappeared, even from libraries. The word was that agents of the Israeli Mossad, working through the U.S. Embassy, bought up all the books and destroyed them. I tried on three different occasions to have one sent to me in Israel, but each time Israeli censors in the post office intercepted it.
In September 1949, Israel sent the spy Mordechai Ben-Porat, the one mentioned in Venom of the Zionist Viper, to Iraq. One of the first things Ben-Porat did was to approach el-Said and promise him financial incentives to have a law enacted that would lift the citizenship of Iraqi Jews.
Soon after, Zionist and Iraqi representatives began formulating a rough draft of the bill, according to the model dictated by Israel through its agents in Baghdad. The bill was passed by the Iraqi parliament in March 1950. It empowered the government to issue one-time exit visas to Jews wishing to leave the country. In March, the bombings began.
Sixteen years later, the Israeli magazine Haolam Hazeh, published by Uri Avnery, then a Knesset member, accused Ben-Porat of the Baghdad bombings. Ben-Porat, who would become a Knesset member himself, denied the charge, but never sued the magazine for libel. And Iraqi Jews in Israel still call him Morad Abu al-Knabel, Mordechai of the Bombs.
Alexis de Tocqueville once observed that it is easier for the world to accept a simple lie than a complex truth. Certainly it has been easier for the world to accept the Zionist lie that Jews were evicted from Muslim lands because of anti-Semitism, and that Israelis, never the Arabs, were the pursuers of peace."
-Naeim Giladi
http://www.ameu.org/printer.asp?iid=36&aid=72
where is your proof to this canard? Please post it.
If you fail to post proof or you post something from an unreliable source, I'll consider it an admission on your part you were peddling a lie.
If you fail to post proof or you post something from an unreliable source, I'll consider it an admission on your part you were peddling a lie.
The proof is here:
http://www.ameu.org/printer.asp?iid=36&aid=72
And the source is an Iraqi Jew who was forced out of Iraq due to the bombings that he later learned were done by Zionist agents (Morad Abu al-Knabel, Mordechai of the Bombs).
The excerpt above (in the above entitled post "response") speaks for itself.
"Sixteen years later, the Israeli magazine Haolam Hazeh, published by Uri Avnery, then a Knesset member, accused Ben-Porat of the Baghdad bombings. Ben-Porat, who would become a Knesset member himself, denied the charge, but never sued the magazine for libel. And Iraqi Jews in Israel still call him Morad Abu al-Knabel, Mordechai of the Bombs."
But I don't doubt that any Zionist worth his salt would deny this (just as they deny all the massacres against Palestinians in 1948, just as they deny the 20,000 civlians they killed in Lebanon in 1982, just as they deny having ever done A THING to Palestinians...).
Of course, in accord with Zionist denial, this is not going to be proof enough -- nothing ever is. Zionists can give Holocaust deniers a real run for their money.
http://www.ameu.org/printer.asp?iid=36&aid=72
And the source is an Iraqi Jew who was forced out of Iraq due to the bombings that he later learned were done by Zionist agents (Morad Abu al-Knabel, Mordechai of the Bombs).
The excerpt above (in the above entitled post "response") speaks for itself.
"Sixteen years later, the Israeli magazine Haolam Hazeh, published by Uri Avnery, then a Knesset member, accused Ben-Porat of the Baghdad bombings. Ben-Porat, who would become a Knesset member himself, denied the charge, but never sued the magazine for libel. And Iraqi Jews in Israel still call him Morad Abu al-Knabel, Mordechai of the Bombs."
But I don't doubt that any Zionist worth his salt would deny this (just as they deny all the massacres against Palestinians in 1948, just as they deny the 20,000 civlians they killed in Lebanon in 1982, just as they deny having ever done A THING to Palestinians...).
Of course, in accord with Zionist denial, this is not going to be proof enough -- nothing ever is. Zionists can give Holocaust deniers a real run for their money.
the democracy of the zionist state would make the archives available to all who seek written proof.
Your "the zionists _______" stuff really makes it hard to take you seriously.
Who are you referring to when you rant about "the zionists?"
You seem to switch around. Sometimes you use it to mean the jewish israelis. Sometimes you use it to mean the israeli government. Sometimes you mean it to mean everyone on earth who supports the existence of israel. It's very strange. IT's almostl like you've invented this creature called "the zionist" and you just use it to fill in the blank, attaching every negative adjective imaginable to it.
I support the concept of zionism, with my definition of zionism being the one normal people use, the support of the existence of a jewish homeland, not the harming of people, and I don't deny any of the things you claim "the zionists" deny, and as you then switched and said "The zionists did (insert an actual thing here), I certainly didn't fly overseas to do it.
IT's hard to have real discussions with the likes of you, because you basically just blame everything imaginable on "the zionists," accuse everyone who CORRECTS some misinformation and EXAGGERATED negatives about israel as "being a zionist" (and then applying horrible negatives), and are basically just on a mission to fight your "zionist" enemy, when all you're doing is making normal people consider you to be bonkers.
Who are you referring to when you rant about "the zionists?"
You seem to switch around. Sometimes you use it to mean the jewish israelis. Sometimes you use it to mean the israeli government. Sometimes you mean it to mean everyone on earth who supports the existence of israel. It's very strange. IT's almostl like you've invented this creature called "the zionist" and you just use it to fill in the blank, attaching every negative adjective imaginable to it.
I support the concept of zionism, with my definition of zionism being the one normal people use, the support of the existence of a jewish homeland, not the harming of people, and I don't deny any of the things you claim "the zionists" deny, and as you then switched and said "The zionists did (insert an actual thing here), I certainly didn't fly overseas to do it.
IT's hard to have real discussions with the likes of you, because you basically just blame everything imaginable on "the zionists," accuse everyone who CORRECTS some misinformation and EXAGGERATED negatives about israel as "being a zionist" (and then applying horrible negatives), and are basically just on a mission to fight your "zionist" enemy, when all you're doing is making normal people consider you to be bonkers.
Zionists are those who support an exclusionary Jewish state in Israel/Palestine.
By that definition, not all Jews (Israeli or otherwise) are Zionists. And, in fact, most Zionists are Christian Fundamentalists who are by most definitions truly anti-Semitic (as well as anti-Arab, anti-gay, anti-Muslim, etc.).
Not even all Israelis are Zionists. Jeff Halper who is an Israeli sociologist believes in a one-state solution in which everyone is equal under the law ("one man, one vote").
When I say "Zionists," I'm referring to people like "wtf" who may have not engaged directly in human rights abuses but who deny at the drop of a hat that they have ever occurred whenever anyone points them out. And then attempt to accuse those who point them out (as well as our complicity in them by paying for it) as "anti-Semites." This is little different than Holocaust deniers who also probably didn't participate directly in the Holocaust but deny that it ever happened or try to minimize it.
By that definition, not all Jews (Israeli or otherwise) are Zionists. And, in fact, most Zionists are Christian Fundamentalists who are by most definitions truly anti-Semitic (as well as anti-Arab, anti-gay, anti-Muslim, etc.).
Not even all Israelis are Zionists. Jeff Halper who is an Israeli sociologist believes in a one-state solution in which everyone is equal under the law ("one man, one vote").
When I say "Zionists," I'm referring to people like "wtf" who may have not engaged directly in human rights abuses but who deny at the drop of a hat that they have ever occurred whenever anyone points them out. And then attempt to accuse those who point them out (as well as our complicity in them by paying for it) as "anti-Semites." This is little different than Holocaust deniers who also probably didn't participate directly in the Holocaust but deny that it ever happened or try to minimize it.
Zionism was founded by some Jews but is not a Jewish ideology.
Neither is communism, which is founded by Jews but is not linked to Judaism and despite the fact that many of the Jews were communists, the Zionists who are anti communists are not considered to be antisemitic.
in fact zionists are the enemies of Communist Jews and they pull most of the strings to free a zionist jew for spying on their behalf, but were party to the extermination of Communists Jews of the soviet union.
Neither is communism, which is founded by Jews but is not linked to Judaism and despite the fact that many of the Jews were communists, the Zionists who are anti communists are not considered to be antisemitic.
in fact zionists are the enemies of Communist Jews and they pull most of the strings to free a zionist jew for spying on their behalf, but were party to the extermination of Communists Jews of the soviet union.
Someone said: Zionists are those who support an exclusionary Jewish state in Israel/Palestine.
MY RESPONSE: I want a jewish homeland to exist, but one that allows non-jewish citizens to be free to practice their religions, too. I don't want it for religious reaons - meaning, I don't want it because "god promised it" as judaism teaches me and others. I want it because jews came from tehre, jews were thrown all around the world for 2000 years, and now jews returned. So arabs control 99% of the middle east, jews control 1%, and I'm not on the same side as arabs who feel that what the jews control is "excessive."
Someone said: By that definition, not all Jews (Israeli or otherwise) are Zionists. And, in fact, most Zionists are Christian Fundamentalists who are by most definitions truly anti-Semitic (as well as anti-Arab, anti-gay, anti-Muslim, etc.).
MY RESPONSE: Yes, but the religion of the "world of zionists" is a separate issue from the meaning and motivation behind zionism in the 1800's, 1900's and today. The average jew who went to israel and supported zionism as a movement was going there to try to form a new, better life, not to hurt anyone.
Someone said: Not even all Israelis are Zionists. Jeff Halper who is an Israeli sociologist believes in a one-state solution in which everyone is equal under the law ("one man, one vote").
MY RESPONSE: As a regular everyday kind of jew who cares more about israel for "survival of the jews there" reasons than "god wants this" reasons, I and many people like me would be happy if such a thing was possible. That would be great. UNFORTUNATELY, I honestly don't see it as possible. I see a SMALL BUT SIZABLE percentage of the palestinians moving in and wanting to kill off or chase away as many jews as possible. If just 5% of palestinians are hamas-type extermists, that's 150,000 people who would be living directly with the jews of israel and they could attack and beat up or blow up the jews on a daily basis. Does 5% sound high? Fine, even if it's 1%, that's 1% too many. To expect jews of israel, who are 1/3 of jews on earth, to tolerate tens of thousands (1% would still be tens of thousands) of people who are dedicated to murdering the jews) came into israel, tragedy (for jews, at least, maybe not for you) would result.
Someone said: When I say "Zionists," I'm referring to people like "wtf" who may have not engaged directly in human rights abuses but who deny at the drop of a hat that they have ever occurred whenever anyone points them out.
MY RESPONSE: I don't deny things that happened. I deny exaggerated and dishonest accounts of what happened. Jenin, for example, was a mess. But jenin was not the "thousands dead" as originally reported. It was, APPARENTLY, 50something dead palestinians and 10 or 20-something dead israeli soldiers. Etc.
I don't deny that events occured. Be realistic and I'll say nothing. Shit on ariel sharon all you want. Mock israel's handling of various issues, fine. But make absurd exaggerated anti-israel claims in dishonest, offensive fashion and I'll speak up.
Someone said: And then attempt to accuse those who point them out (as well as our complicity in them by paying for it) as "anti-Semites."
MY RESPONSE: False. I rarely utter that word except when it blatantly applies. It's not antisemitic to make valid criticisms of tons of israel-related issues. However, there are many antisemites hiding in teh ranks of the "anti-zionists" and they are often easy to spot.
Someone said: This is little different than Holocaust deniers who also probably didn't participate directly in the Holocaust but deny that it ever happened or try to minimize it.
MY RESPONSE: YOu're totally off base. I don't deny that hundreds of thousands of palestinians were displaced in 1948. I DO, however, STATE THE TRUTH and point out that there was a "POPULATION EXCHANGE" over time, because arab countries responded by more or less displacing their own jews, and the result was jews moving into israel and buying available homes, and palesitnians winding up more in the west bank and gaza, where other arabs controlled the land yet didn't form a palestinain state even though they had all the way from 1948 to 1967 to do so.
Those are facts. I am denying nothing. I merely demand a balanced perspective. You want "right of return" for palestinians into israel? I ask you then to also provide compensation or "right of return" for the jews who now live there from the arab countries they used to live (the hundreds of thousands who did coem from arab countries, not europe). You want peace and a state for palestinians? Fine, me too, but I want that state run by responsible moderates who won't later just make full giant horrible war on israel like the likes of arafat or hamas would.
I don't deny that bad things happened to arabs. I ask for PERSPECTIVE, with all things taken into consideration. These events are all INTERRELATED. Antisemites, however, tend to just single out the jews of israel while leaving out the other side of the equation that balances things out a lot.
I'm the average american jewish zionist. There are millions here in nyc like me. Not massive religious. Not huge on yelling "god" stuff. But definitely jewish. Don't want arabs or muslims to die. ALso want my fellow jews to be safe. I've built up a genuine hatred of hamas, SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE I genuinely believe hamas want to kill the jews no matter what israel does. And I tend to be defensive when I see people exaggerating or singling out the jews in ways that indicate a dishonest unfair scapegoating session is in effect.
There. That's it. I've been honest and straightforward. Now, feel free to respond the way you guys always do, by lashing out at me, calling me an "evil zionist" or being sarcastic or blaming me for things that happen or whatever.
Later.
MY RESPONSE: I want a jewish homeland to exist, but one that allows non-jewish citizens to be free to practice their religions, too. I don't want it for religious reaons - meaning, I don't want it because "god promised it" as judaism teaches me and others. I want it because jews came from tehre, jews were thrown all around the world for 2000 years, and now jews returned. So arabs control 99% of the middle east, jews control 1%, and I'm not on the same side as arabs who feel that what the jews control is "excessive."
Someone said: By that definition, not all Jews (Israeli or otherwise) are Zionists. And, in fact, most Zionists are Christian Fundamentalists who are by most definitions truly anti-Semitic (as well as anti-Arab, anti-gay, anti-Muslim, etc.).
MY RESPONSE: Yes, but the religion of the "world of zionists" is a separate issue from the meaning and motivation behind zionism in the 1800's, 1900's and today. The average jew who went to israel and supported zionism as a movement was going there to try to form a new, better life, not to hurt anyone.
Someone said: Not even all Israelis are Zionists. Jeff Halper who is an Israeli sociologist believes in a one-state solution in which everyone is equal under the law ("one man, one vote").
MY RESPONSE: As a regular everyday kind of jew who cares more about israel for "survival of the jews there" reasons than "god wants this" reasons, I and many people like me would be happy if such a thing was possible. That would be great. UNFORTUNATELY, I honestly don't see it as possible. I see a SMALL BUT SIZABLE percentage of the palestinians moving in and wanting to kill off or chase away as many jews as possible. If just 5% of palestinians are hamas-type extermists, that's 150,000 people who would be living directly with the jews of israel and they could attack and beat up or blow up the jews on a daily basis. Does 5% sound high? Fine, even if it's 1%, that's 1% too many. To expect jews of israel, who are 1/3 of jews on earth, to tolerate tens of thousands (1% would still be tens of thousands) of people who are dedicated to murdering the jews) came into israel, tragedy (for jews, at least, maybe not for you) would result.
Someone said: When I say "Zionists," I'm referring to people like "wtf" who may have not engaged directly in human rights abuses but who deny at the drop of a hat that they have ever occurred whenever anyone points them out.
MY RESPONSE: I don't deny things that happened. I deny exaggerated and dishonest accounts of what happened. Jenin, for example, was a mess. But jenin was not the "thousands dead" as originally reported. It was, APPARENTLY, 50something dead palestinians and 10 or 20-something dead israeli soldiers. Etc.
I don't deny that events occured. Be realistic and I'll say nothing. Shit on ariel sharon all you want. Mock israel's handling of various issues, fine. But make absurd exaggerated anti-israel claims in dishonest, offensive fashion and I'll speak up.
Someone said: And then attempt to accuse those who point them out (as well as our complicity in them by paying for it) as "anti-Semites."
MY RESPONSE: False. I rarely utter that word except when it blatantly applies. It's not antisemitic to make valid criticisms of tons of israel-related issues. However, there are many antisemites hiding in teh ranks of the "anti-zionists" and they are often easy to spot.
Someone said: This is little different than Holocaust deniers who also probably didn't participate directly in the Holocaust but deny that it ever happened or try to minimize it.
MY RESPONSE: YOu're totally off base. I don't deny that hundreds of thousands of palestinians were displaced in 1948. I DO, however, STATE THE TRUTH and point out that there was a "POPULATION EXCHANGE" over time, because arab countries responded by more or less displacing their own jews, and the result was jews moving into israel and buying available homes, and palesitnians winding up more in the west bank and gaza, where other arabs controlled the land yet didn't form a palestinain state even though they had all the way from 1948 to 1967 to do so.
Those are facts. I am denying nothing. I merely demand a balanced perspective. You want "right of return" for palestinians into israel? I ask you then to also provide compensation or "right of return" for the jews who now live there from the arab countries they used to live (the hundreds of thousands who did coem from arab countries, not europe). You want peace and a state for palestinians? Fine, me too, but I want that state run by responsible moderates who won't later just make full giant horrible war on israel like the likes of arafat or hamas would.
I don't deny that bad things happened to arabs. I ask for PERSPECTIVE, with all things taken into consideration. These events are all INTERRELATED. Antisemites, however, tend to just single out the jews of israel while leaving out the other side of the equation that balances things out a lot.
I'm the average american jewish zionist. There are millions here in nyc like me. Not massive religious. Not huge on yelling "god" stuff. But definitely jewish. Don't want arabs or muslims to die. ALso want my fellow jews to be safe. I've built up a genuine hatred of hamas, SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE I genuinely believe hamas want to kill the jews no matter what israel does. And I tend to be defensive when I see people exaggerating or singling out the jews in ways that indicate a dishonest unfair scapegoating session is in effect.
There. That's it. I've been honest and straightforward. Now, feel free to respond the way you guys always do, by lashing out at me, calling me an "evil zionist" or being sarcastic or blaming me for things that happen or whatever.
Later.
P.S. Two wrongs don't make a right. Antisemites, however, tend to obsess upon and exaggerate the wrongs of jewish israelis ("the zionists" over there), while intentionally omitting wrongs from muslims/arabs that are DIRECTLY RELATED to actions jewish israelis are forced to take to keep their country alive.
Another thing. Have you guys noticed that the board is now FLOODED with topic after topic after topic about how bad zionism is, how bad the zionists are, then there's that one article about how they are sick of complaints of antisemitism, with other topics about how bad israel is? There are tens of millions of muslim women oppressed in saudia arabia, but you guys don't utter a single word about them, but half this message board is flooded with anti-israel stuff.
It's just strange. Demonizing every aspect of zionism and every aspect of zionists is like your obsessive hobby now. But it isn't just in san fran. It's from the leftist groups around the world. Which makes me wonder if someone is funding these groups to obsess upon this agenda in this manner. Like 80% of your time appears to be spent on under 10 million israelis/palestinians, and 20% of your time appears to be spent on the other SIX BILLION people on earth, many of whom have much bigger problems than either of those people.
Weird. Oh well. Have fun.
Another thing. Have you guys noticed that the board is now FLOODED with topic after topic after topic about how bad zionism is, how bad the zionists are, then there's that one article about how they are sick of complaints of antisemitism, with other topics about how bad israel is? There are tens of millions of muslim women oppressed in saudia arabia, but you guys don't utter a single word about them, but half this message board is flooded with anti-israel stuff.
It's just strange. Demonizing every aspect of zionism and every aspect of zionists is like your obsessive hobby now. But it isn't just in san fran. It's from the leftist groups around the world. Which makes me wonder if someone is funding these groups to obsess upon this agenda in this manner. Like 80% of your time appears to be spent on under 10 million israelis/palestinians, and 20% of your time appears to be spent on the other SIX BILLION people on earth, many of whom have much bigger problems than either of those people.
Weird. Oh well. Have fun.
Many Christian Fundamentalists are truly anti-Semitic indeed; they aren't Zionist. Many other Christian Fundamentalists are Zionist. Being a Zionist precludes being an anti-Semite.
In most occurrences where a non-Zionist or anti-Zionist person attempts to point out human rights abuses to a Zionist, the former is indeed doing it in an anti-Semitic manner (i.e. not fair nor balanced nor contextual criticism). The problem is the accuser vehemently denies s/he is being anti-Semitic and refuses to reflect and do some soul searching to notice the anti-Semitism that was inherent in the criticism. Sometimes the accuser falsely accuses the 'Zionist' of denying a wrong Israel committed, even though the 'Zionist' never did.
As to the bit about Communism vs. Zionism: Zionism is derived from the Jewish heritage and as such IS a Jewish ideology. That cannot be said of Communism. So what if a Jew (Karl Marx) created Communism?
The reason Zionists have been at odds with Communist Jews is Communism and its Jewish supporters have always been ideologically hostile to Zionism and Zionists in the extreme. What's more, what the above poster said of Zionist Jews is much more true of Communist Jews - they would pull all of the strings to free a Communist Jew for spying on their behalf, and eagerly participated in the extermination of all Zionist and other Jews of the Soviet Union.
In most occurrences where a non-Zionist or anti-Zionist person attempts to point out human rights abuses to a Zionist, the former is indeed doing it in an anti-Semitic manner (i.e. not fair nor balanced nor contextual criticism). The problem is the accuser vehemently denies s/he is being anti-Semitic and refuses to reflect and do some soul searching to notice the anti-Semitism that was inherent in the criticism. Sometimes the accuser falsely accuses the 'Zionist' of denying a wrong Israel committed, even though the 'Zionist' never did.
As to the bit about Communism vs. Zionism: Zionism is derived from the Jewish heritage and as such IS a Jewish ideology. That cannot be said of Communism. So what if a Jew (Karl Marx) created Communism?
The reason Zionists have been at odds with Communist Jews is Communism and its Jewish supporters have always been ideologically hostile to Zionism and Zionists in the extreme. What's more, what the above poster said of Zionist Jews is much more true of Communist Jews - they would pull all of the strings to free a Communist Jew for spying on their behalf, and eagerly participated in the extermination of all Zionist and other Jews of the Soviet Union.
There can be only one of two solutions at this point.
Either Israel vacates the Occupied Territories (Golan Heights, Gaza Strip, West Bank, Shebaa Farms) and allows a Palestinians to live free or it can become one state of Israel/Palestine in which everyone has equal rights. If two-states is what you want, then Palestinians living in Israel must be given equal rights. As it is now, they are treated as second class citizens and often have had their property confiscated and held in trust for Jews and Jews only.
The only thing the status quo is going to do is create an Apartheid situation there for perpetuity.
In any case, I think it is our responsibility here in the states to act in a fair fashion and at the very least become neutral. That would necessarily mean ending our overwhelming aid to the state of Israel (aid which is more than any country on earth gets and Israel isn't even a poor country).
The security problems that Israel has are of its own making. They have made it plainly clear to Palestinians that they will never leave the Occupied Territories and plan to continue integrating them into Israel proper.
I don't want my tax money to be used for this purpose or to subjugate an entire population anymore.
Either Israel vacates the Occupied Territories (Golan Heights, Gaza Strip, West Bank, Shebaa Farms) and allows a Palestinians to live free or it can become one state of Israel/Palestine in which everyone has equal rights. If two-states is what you want, then Palestinians living in Israel must be given equal rights. As it is now, they are treated as second class citizens and often have had their property confiscated and held in trust for Jews and Jews only.
The only thing the status quo is going to do is create an Apartheid situation there for perpetuity.
In any case, I think it is our responsibility here in the states to act in a fair fashion and at the very least become neutral. That would necessarily mean ending our overwhelming aid to the state of Israel (aid which is more than any country on earth gets and Israel isn't even a poor country).
The security problems that Israel has are of its own making. They have made it plainly clear to Palestinians that they will never leave the Occupied Territories and plan to continue integrating them into Israel proper.
I don't want my tax money to be used for this purpose or to subjugate an entire population anymore.
At the very least get your facts stright.
1. The Golan Heights are indeed occupied territory (were part of Syria prior to the 1967 Six Day War.) Yet all attempts to give them back to Syria have failed - all of them because of Syrian obstructionism. In the mid 1990s, when the last such attempt was inn swing, Rabin offered it all back to Assad Jr. but the latter refused to accept it back unless the IDF pulled out of Lebanon (which has been and is STILL illegally occupied by Syria!). So nothing came out of those negotiations. A country can't give a territory back to a country which refuses to take it back!
2. When Israel withdrew from all of Lebanon some 3 years ago, the UN acknowledged the so-called Shebaa Farms are Israeli territory. You (and many others) have been misled by Hizballah propaganda to believe it's Lebanese soil. Just because Hizballah claims something doesn't mean they're right.
3. The West Bank and the Gaza Strip are DISPUTED territories. The last owner was the Turkish Ottoman empire. The territories in question became distinct territories during Israel's independence war and have never exclusively belonged to either Arabs or Jews. These territories were illegally occupied by Jordan and Egypt and came under Israeli control during the Six Day War as war spoils.
If you sir really want the US and all Americans to become at the very least neutral, then you must similarly demand the US stop all aid to the PA (haven't you heard of the millions of $$$ that the PA - actually Arafat - has been given??). Do you agree?
Too bad you're quite ignorant to claim Israel has brought on itself its security problems. You're wrong FOR THE MOST PART because you are confuse cause and effect for the most part. Hamas, Islamic Jihad, al-Aqsa Martyr Brigades, PFLP and DFLP (not a complete list) don't want Israel to exist in ANY borders. To them the conflict is EXISTENTIAL, not territorial.
I certainly don't think our tax money should be used to give aid to the PA, Arafat or to support any of the above terror groups who have shown they essentially only want to massacre, murder the Israeli Jews and reject any peaceful solution or plan.
1. The Golan Heights are indeed occupied territory (were part of Syria prior to the 1967 Six Day War.) Yet all attempts to give them back to Syria have failed - all of them because of Syrian obstructionism. In the mid 1990s, when the last such attempt was inn swing, Rabin offered it all back to Assad Jr. but the latter refused to accept it back unless the IDF pulled out of Lebanon (which has been and is STILL illegally occupied by Syria!). So nothing came out of those negotiations. A country can't give a territory back to a country which refuses to take it back!
2. When Israel withdrew from all of Lebanon some 3 years ago, the UN acknowledged the so-called Shebaa Farms are Israeli territory. You (and many others) have been misled by Hizballah propaganda to believe it's Lebanese soil. Just because Hizballah claims something doesn't mean they're right.
3. The West Bank and the Gaza Strip are DISPUTED territories. The last owner was the Turkish Ottoman empire. The territories in question became distinct territories during Israel's independence war and have never exclusively belonged to either Arabs or Jews. These territories were illegally occupied by Jordan and Egypt and came under Israeli control during the Six Day War as war spoils.
If you sir really want the US and all Americans to become at the very least neutral, then you must similarly demand the US stop all aid to the PA (haven't you heard of the millions of $$$ that the PA - actually Arafat - has been given??). Do you agree?
Too bad you're quite ignorant to claim Israel has brought on itself its security problems. You're wrong FOR THE MOST PART because you are confuse cause and effect for the most part. Hamas, Islamic Jihad, al-Aqsa Martyr Brigades, PFLP and DFLP (not a complete list) don't want Israel to exist in ANY borders. To them the conflict is EXISTENTIAL, not territorial.
I certainly don't think our tax money should be used to give aid to the PA, Arafat or to support any of the above terror groups who have shown they essentially only want to massacre, murder the Israeli Jews and reject any peaceful solution or plan.
The West Bank and Gaza Strip are not "disputed territories" as Israel claims. They are Occupied Territories.
Israel attempted to exchange a *part* of the Golan Heights with Syria for a peace treaty -- not the whole thing. Israel insisted on retaining all the parts of the Golan Heights which contain water resources making such a deal ludicrous.
When Israel exited its 20 mile so called "Security Zone" in southern Lebanon, they remained in the Shebaa Farms. Israel claims that it is part of Syria and it got the US to force the UN to accept that even though both Lebanon (not just Hezbollah but the entire Lebanese leadership) and Syria state that it is a part of Lebanon. The reason Israel wants it designated as a part of Syria is so that the UN can disingenuously state that Israel has complied with all UN resolutions ordering it to vacate Lebanon which it invaded in 1978 and finally left in 2000 (except for Shebaa farms) due to Lebanese resistance.
I agree. End all aid to Israel ($12 billion) and end all aid to the PA (what is it $20 million?).
In addition, we should stop vetoing UN resolutions meant to bring some semblance of justice to the Palestinians.
Then the US can do as an honest bystander what it could never do as an "honest broker" -- i.e. it can allow real peace with justice to take hold in the Middle East as Israel would then be forced to negotiate in good faith with its neighbors.
Israel attempted to exchange a *part* of the Golan Heights with Syria for a peace treaty -- not the whole thing. Israel insisted on retaining all the parts of the Golan Heights which contain water resources making such a deal ludicrous.
When Israel exited its 20 mile so called "Security Zone" in southern Lebanon, they remained in the Shebaa Farms. Israel claims that it is part of Syria and it got the US to force the UN to accept that even though both Lebanon (not just Hezbollah but the entire Lebanese leadership) and Syria state that it is a part of Lebanon. The reason Israel wants it designated as a part of Syria is so that the UN can disingenuously state that Israel has complied with all UN resolutions ordering it to vacate Lebanon which it invaded in 1978 and finally left in 2000 (except for Shebaa farms) due to Lebanese resistance.
I agree. End all aid to Israel ($12 billion) and end all aid to the PA (what is it $20 million?).
In addition, we should stop vetoing UN resolutions meant to bring some semblance of justice to the Palestinians.
Then the US can do as an honest bystander what it could never do as an "honest broker" -- i.e. it can allow real peace with justice to take hold in the Middle East as Israel would then be forced to negotiate in good faith with its neighbors.
Someone above said: Either Israel vacates the Occupied Territories (Golan Heights, Gaza Strip, West Bank, Shebaa Farms) and allows a Palestinians to live free or it can become one state of Israel/Palestine in which everyone has equal rights.
RESPONSE: It's strange that you demand Israel give back LITERALLY EVERY INCH of land. You're even including a damn farm in it. How about a driveway, too? Hey, I heard there's an apple tree that should be returned as well. Syria still refuses to have diplomatic relations with Israel or recognize Israel as a country. Syria still houses Hezzbollah and other terrorists. The Golan Heights is under 1% of Syria and is high atop Israel and was used to bomb Israel, and it makes no sense for Israel to ever give that back as long as Hezzbollah and other lunatics are the ones who will sit at the edge of it to lob more bombs into Israel.
Someone above said: If two-states is what you want, then Palestinians living in Israel must be given equal rights.
EDUCATED RESPONSE: Palestinians don't live in Israel. Israelis live in Israel. There are arab Israelis, Jewish Israelis, some christian Israelis, some black Israelis, some white Israelis, etc. Israelis are Israelis. Palestinians are the people who live next door. ANd if your'e going to demand that israel not favor jews in any way, you should also demand that arab states become fair, too.
Someone above said: The security problems that Israel has are of its own making.
EDUCATED RESPONSE: That's an idiotic statement.
Someone above said: They (Israel) have made it plainly clear to Palestinians that they will never leave the Occupied Territories and plan to continue integrating them into Israel proper.
EDUCATED RESPONSE: For years now, every time Israel has left Palestinian towns, terrorist attacks against Israel have increased. And every time Israel has gone back and re-taken control of additional Palestinian towns, successful terrorist attacks against Israel have decreased. That sends quite a message to Israel, as it should to anyone with a brain.
RESPONSE: It's strange that you demand Israel give back LITERALLY EVERY INCH of land. You're even including a damn farm in it. How about a driveway, too? Hey, I heard there's an apple tree that should be returned as well. Syria still refuses to have diplomatic relations with Israel or recognize Israel as a country. Syria still houses Hezzbollah and other terrorists. The Golan Heights is under 1% of Syria and is high atop Israel and was used to bomb Israel, and it makes no sense for Israel to ever give that back as long as Hezzbollah and other lunatics are the ones who will sit at the edge of it to lob more bombs into Israel.
Someone above said: If two-states is what you want, then Palestinians living in Israel must be given equal rights.
EDUCATED RESPONSE: Palestinians don't live in Israel. Israelis live in Israel. There are arab Israelis, Jewish Israelis, some christian Israelis, some black Israelis, some white Israelis, etc. Israelis are Israelis. Palestinians are the people who live next door. ANd if your'e going to demand that israel not favor jews in any way, you should also demand that arab states become fair, too.
Someone above said: The security problems that Israel has are of its own making.
EDUCATED RESPONSE: That's an idiotic statement.
Someone above said: They (Israel) have made it plainly clear to Palestinians that they will never leave the Occupied Territories and plan to continue integrating them into Israel proper.
EDUCATED RESPONSE: For years now, every time Israel has left Palestinian towns, terrorist attacks against Israel have increased. And every time Israel has gone back and re-taken control of additional Palestinian towns, successful terrorist attacks against Israel have decreased. That sends quite a message to Israel, as it should to anyone with a brain.
Most "correctors of idiots" do support zionism and Israel's safety as a jewish homeland. Most "idiots" do not. Don't know about "propaganda" though.
--"EDUCATED RESPONSE"
Translation: "ZIONIST INDOCTRINATED RESPONSE"
Israel's population is 6 million. Of that number, 4.8 million are Israeli Jews and 1.2 million are Israeli Palestinians who are treated as second class citizens. These are Palestinians from before 1948 who have lived their for hundreds of years if not millenia. Yet they are treated as unwanted guests on their own lands and the Zionist above even denies their *Palestinian* heritage.
Suicide bombings are a relatively new phenomena. The first one happened in 1994 and came in response to Baruch Goldstein's massacre of 29 Palestinians and then the killing by Israeli police of another 20 Palestinians who were protesting the massacre the next day.
Between 1994 and 2000, I believe there was something like 20 suicide bombings. After the intifada started, and after Israel killed 84 Palestinian children before even the first Israeli child was killed (i.e. about three months into the second intifada) suicide bombings did indeed pick up, but only in response to extreme Israeli actions to rioting Palestinian children.
What is never mentioned in all this is how Israelis killed well over 1000 Palestinians during the first intifada and injured and maimed for life tens of thousands because of Yitzhak Shamir's policy of breaking the bones of protestors (and Yitzhak Shamir is considered a man of peace by most liberals!). And the first intifada was overwhelmingly non-violent and there were no suicide bombings at that time.
After Israel expanded its settlements in the Occupied Territories (indeed it doubled them) in violation of the Oslo Accords and after it killed a large number of civilians during the second intifada, then the suicide bombings did indeed pick up.
So, Israel's own greedy actions (if trying to steal yet more land is not greedy, I don't know what is) have resulted in its own insecurity.
And no. I don't accept the Israeli lie that it needs to put men, women and children settlers in the Occupied Territories for security!
Zionists are like the Energizer bunny. As soon as you address one of their lies, they come out with two more. They just keep going and going and going and going...
Translation: "ZIONIST INDOCTRINATED RESPONSE"
Israel's population is 6 million. Of that number, 4.8 million are Israeli Jews and 1.2 million are Israeli Palestinians who are treated as second class citizens. These are Palestinians from before 1948 who have lived their for hundreds of years if not millenia. Yet they are treated as unwanted guests on their own lands and the Zionist above even denies their *Palestinian* heritage.
Suicide bombings are a relatively new phenomena. The first one happened in 1994 and came in response to Baruch Goldstein's massacre of 29 Palestinians and then the killing by Israeli police of another 20 Palestinians who were protesting the massacre the next day.
Between 1994 and 2000, I believe there was something like 20 suicide bombings. After the intifada started, and after Israel killed 84 Palestinian children before even the first Israeli child was killed (i.e. about three months into the second intifada) suicide bombings did indeed pick up, but only in response to extreme Israeli actions to rioting Palestinian children.
What is never mentioned in all this is how Israelis killed well over 1000 Palestinians during the first intifada and injured and maimed for life tens of thousands because of Yitzhak Shamir's policy of breaking the bones of protestors (and Yitzhak Shamir is considered a man of peace by most liberals!). And the first intifada was overwhelmingly non-violent and there were no suicide bombings at that time.
After Israel expanded its settlements in the Occupied Territories (indeed it doubled them) in violation of the Oslo Accords and after it killed a large number of civilians during the second intifada, then the suicide bombings did indeed pick up.
So, Israel's own greedy actions (if trying to steal yet more land is not greedy, I don't know what is) have resulted in its own insecurity.
And no. I don't accept the Israeli lie that it needs to put men, women and children settlers in the Occupied Territories for security!
Zionists are like the Energizer bunny. As soon as you address one of their lies, they come out with two more. They just keep going and going and going and going...
"What is never mentioned in all this is how Israelis killed well over 1000 Palestinians during the first intifada and injured and maimed for life tens of thousands because of Yitzhak Shamir's policy of breaking the bones of protestors (and Yitzhak Shamir is considered a man of peace by most liberals!). And the first intifada was overwhelmingly non-violent and there were no suicide bombings at that time."
That should read (replace Shamir with Rabin):
What is never mentioned in all this is how Israelis killed well over 1000 Palestinians during the first intifada and injured and maimed for life tens of thousands because of Yitzhak Rabin's policy of breaking the bones of protestors (and Yitzhak Rabin is considered a man of peace by most liberals!). And the first intifada was overwhelmingly non-violent and there were no suicide bombings at that time.
That should read (replace Shamir with Rabin):
What is never mentioned in all this is how Israelis killed well over 1000 Palestinians during the first intifada and injured and maimed for life tens of thousands because of Yitzhak Rabin's policy of breaking the bones of protestors (and Yitzhak Rabin is considered a man of peace by most liberals!). And the first intifada was overwhelmingly non-violent and there were no suicide bombings at that time.
As usual, you got it wrong, or did you (being ironic)? I'm a truth propagandist; you read this as "Zionist propagandist". Ergo, all non-idiots (and truth fans) should dismiss your first three paragraphs in as much as they do not and cannot refute the historical facts I've stated.
The last sentence in your post is your own opinion and forecast. Things might turn out different than you forecast - perhaps Israel would deal the Palestinians a mammoth military defeat and/or kick them all out of the disputed territories and annex them to Israel proper.
The last sentence in your post is your own opinion and forecast. Things might turn out different than you forecast - perhaps Israel would deal the Palestinians a mammoth military defeat and/or kick them all out of the disputed territories and annex them to Israel proper.
I was disbelieving when I read your comment that Shamir was a man of peace; glad you corrected same.
Shamir was the leader of the Stern gang, which, together with the Irgun, introduced terrorist techniques such as assassinations, car bombings, kidnappings, etc., into Palestine in the 40s.
Of course, he did go on to become PM, though, didn't he? Guess the more things change!
Shamir was the leader of the Stern gang, which, together with the Irgun, introduced terrorist techniques such as assassinations, car bombings, kidnappings, etc., into Palestine in the 40s.
Of course, he did go on to become PM, though, didn't he? Guess the more things change!
--"Antisemites...tend to obsess upon and exaggerate the wrongs of jewish israelis ("the zionists" over there), while intentionally omitting wrongs from muslims/arabs that are DIRECTLY RELATED to actions jewish israelis are forced to take to keep their country alive..."
Actually it's the other way around.
Take just one example. Most people in this country accept Israel's invasion of Lebanon (which left 20,000 people dead, overwhelmingly civilian) as legitimate because they were led to believe that Israel did this in self-defense, due to being attacked.
The truth of the matter, however, is that Israel instigated the whole thing quite intentionally by continually bombing civilians in Lebanon in order to elicit a response it could then use to invade the country.
"From early 1981, Israel launched unprovoked attacks which finally elicited a response in July, leading to an exchange in which six Israelis and several hundred Palestinians and Lebanese were killed in Israeli bombing of densely populated civilian targets. Of these incidents, all that remains in the collective memory of the media is the tragic fate of the inhabitants of the northern Galilee, driven from their homes by katyusha rockets. After a cease-fire was arranged under U.S. auspices, Israel continued its attacks. The Israeli concern, according to Yaniv, was that the PLO would observe the cease-fire agreement and continue its efforts to achieve a diplomatic two-state settlement...Israel attempted with increasing desperation to evoke some PLO response that could be used as a pretext for the planned invasion of Lebanon, designed to destroy the PLO as a political force, establish Israeli control over the occupied territories, and -- in its broadest vision -- to establish Ariel Sharon's 'New Order' in Lebanon and perhaps beyond. These efforts failed to elicit a PLO response. The media reacted by urging 'respect for Israel's anguish' rather than 'sermons to Israel' as Israel bombed targets in Lebanon with many civilian casualties...the actual reasons and background for them [Israel's attacks] are completely foreign to the media, which assure us that the U.S.-Israeli search for peace has been thwarted by PLO terror. After the Israeli invasion, with perhaps 20,000 or more civilian casualties, Israeli terrorist actions in Lebanon continued, as they do today, though these are no part of 'the evil scourge of terrorism.' We may occasionally read that Lebanese farmers 'working in fields near Ain Khilwe were killed when the Israeli planes dropped incendiary bombs,' but nothing is suggested by this casual observation in the final sentence of a brief article on the shelling of the refugee camp at Rashidiye by Israeli gunboats, the day after forty-one people were killed and seventy wounded in the bombing of the refugee camp at Ain Khilwe."
-Noam Chomsky
http://www.zmag.org/chomsky/ni/ni-c10-s05.html
Also, see this (very important):
http://www.indybay.org/news/2003/06/1621818.php
Actually it's the other way around.
Take just one example. Most people in this country accept Israel's invasion of Lebanon (which left 20,000 people dead, overwhelmingly civilian) as legitimate because they were led to believe that Israel did this in self-defense, due to being attacked.
The truth of the matter, however, is that Israel instigated the whole thing quite intentionally by continually bombing civilians in Lebanon in order to elicit a response it could then use to invade the country.
"From early 1981, Israel launched unprovoked attacks which finally elicited a response in July, leading to an exchange in which six Israelis and several hundred Palestinians and Lebanese were killed in Israeli bombing of densely populated civilian targets. Of these incidents, all that remains in the collective memory of the media is the tragic fate of the inhabitants of the northern Galilee, driven from their homes by katyusha rockets. After a cease-fire was arranged under U.S. auspices, Israel continued its attacks. The Israeli concern, according to Yaniv, was that the PLO would observe the cease-fire agreement and continue its efforts to achieve a diplomatic two-state settlement...Israel attempted with increasing desperation to evoke some PLO response that could be used as a pretext for the planned invasion of Lebanon, designed to destroy the PLO as a political force, establish Israeli control over the occupied territories, and -- in its broadest vision -- to establish Ariel Sharon's 'New Order' in Lebanon and perhaps beyond. These efforts failed to elicit a PLO response. The media reacted by urging 'respect for Israel's anguish' rather than 'sermons to Israel' as Israel bombed targets in Lebanon with many civilian casualties...the actual reasons and background for them [Israel's attacks] are completely foreign to the media, which assure us that the U.S.-Israeli search for peace has been thwarted by PLO terror. After the Israeli invasion, with perhaps 20,000 or more civilian casualties, Israeli terrorist actions in Lebanon continued, as they do today, though these are no part of 'the evil scourge of terrorism.' We may occasionally read that Lebanese farmers 'working in fields near Ain Khilwe were killed when the Israeli planes dropped incendiary bombs,' but nothing is suggested by this casual observation in the final sentence of a brief article on the shelling of the refugee camp at Rashidiye by Israeli gunboats, the day after forty-one people were killed and seventy wounded in the bombing of the refugee camp at Ain Khilwe."
-Noam Chomsky
http://www.zmag.org/chomsky/ni/ni-c10-s05.html
Also, see this (very important):
http://www.indybay.org/news/2003/06/1621818.php
"the first intifada was overwhelmingly non-violent"
- What horseshit. There were rather few any non-violent events during that period. The Palestinians were using every sort of weapon save for firearms (except for a few cases where they used pistols and rifles). The person who typed that assertion MUST go back to school (unless he cannot even be put in a special class for the mentally retarded).
As to Angie's argument: the Arabs were the ones to first introduce terror into mandatory Palestine - in 1920. That was well before the Irgun was established and the LEHI aka Stern Gang split away from it in 1940. Angie (another closet anti-Semite, mind you) also never complains about Mahmoud Abbas or Ahmed Krea who have become Palestinian Prime Ministers even though they have barely taken a cool off period from their terroristic careers, whereas Shamir had had some 35 years to "cool off".
* As for the "energizer" loon's comments:
"Of that number, 4.8 million are Israeli Jews and 1.2 million are Israeli Palestinians who are treated as second class citizens. These are Palestinians from before 1948 who have lived their for hundreds of years if not millenia. "
- The vast majority of these Arabs have come to the country (including the disputed territories) only since 1882. Only a few have been living there for centuries, much less for some 1360 years. There's no such thing as an "Israeli Palestinian". Being one precludes the other. The Arabs within Israel proper are ISRAELI ARABS. Moreover, the Arabs in both Israel proper and the disputed territories hadn't even considered themselves 'Palestinians' until June 1967.
"Yet they are treated as unwanted guests on their own lands"
- This is not always true and is mostly an exaggerated claim in those cases where it has some truth to it.
"the Zionist above even denies their *Palestinian* heritage."
- I don't know about Ben, but I do deny such a heritage exists. There's still hardly any 'Palestinian' heritage to speak of.
"the killing by Israeli police of another 20 Palestinians who were protesting the massacre the next day."
- They were endangering the police officers life. That's how peaceful their protest was.
"Israel killed 84 Palestinian children before even the first Israeli child was killed"
- Most of these children were engaged in terror.
"suicide bombings did indeed pick up, but only in response to extreme Israeli actions to rioting Palestinian children. "
- Laughable claim. The picked up mainly because the groups perpetrating them found excuses to commit yet more massacres and genocide, which has been their goal all along.
"After Israel expanded its settlements in the Occupied Territories (indeed it doubled them) in violation of the Oslo Accords and after it killed a large number of civilians during the second intifada, then the suicide bombings did indeed pick up."
- Like these reasons actually morally excuse such a reprehensible "warfare" tactic. But... a SMALL number of non-combatants (innocents, non-terrorists) have been killed in the 2nd intifada.
"So, Israel's own greedy actions (if trying to steal yet more land is not greedy, I don't know what is) have resulted in its own insecurity. "
- This conclusion doesn't square with the Palestinian terror groups' STRATEGIC goals, wishes and plans, therefore it's mistaken.
I can only paraphrase this funny "anti-Zionist" and conclude: "anti-Zionists" are like the Energizer bunny. As soon as you address one of their lies, they come out with twenty more. They just keep going and going and going and going...ad infinitum.
* And now in response to the pro-Syria/Hizballah propagandist who frequently reemerges and spews half-truths and lies:
"Actually it's the other way around."
- Pure bullshit.
"Most people in this country accept Israel's invasion of Lebanon...as legitimate because they were led to believe that Israel did this in self-defense, due to being attacked.
- Yet another untrue (in understatement) and laughable argument. The reverse is true.
"The truth of the matter, however, is that Israel instigated the whole thing quite intentionally by continually bombing civilians in Lebanon in order to elicit a response it could then use to invade the country."
- Fact is the PLO had been staging many terror attacks and firing Katyusha rockets at northern Israel since the Litani Operation ended in 1978 when UNIFIL was first dispatched to south Lebanon (UNIFIL really wasn't of any help in preventing PLO terror).
During the Lebanon War in 1982, reporters "ran" with Arafat's claim that 10,000 Lebanese and Palestinians died, only to realize that they had been used.
>> Who are you referring to when you rant about "the zionists?"
>>You seem to switch around.
That's because you're talking to more than one person here.
>>You seem to switch around.
That's because you're talking to more than one person here.
Many "anti-Zionists" here can't make their minds up what they mean by "Zionists". So in all probability the "anti-Zionist" he was addressing was rather confused too.
Being a Zionist means you support the existance of the state of Israel. It does not necessarily mean you support the existance of the state of Israel for the benefit of the people who live there. A cses can be made that the existance of the state of Israel is a clever and subtle way to convince Jews to herd themselves into the world's biggest ghetto and build their own wall around it. It is certainly a way to convince Jews to walk into a death trap. Israel is a death trap for Jews.
Why can't Jews be citizens of Jordan?
No. your interpretation of Zionism is too vague and wrong.
Then you let your imagination run wild and proceeded to draw ridiculous conclusions.
A true Zionist cannot be an anti-Semite as s/he knows why Zionist Jews want a homeland in Israel, being aware of all that Jews have suffered over the last 2 milennia.
Then you let your imagination run wild and proceeded to draw ridiculous conclusions.
A true Zionist cannot be an anti-Semite as s/he knows why Zionist Jews want a homeland in Israel, being aware of all that Jews have suffered over the last 2 milennia.
the Zionists have taught Jordanians to hate Jews. Zionism promotes anti-Semitism because anti-Semitism is the Zionists bread and butter. Without anti-Semitism, how could they justify Zionism?
A little expose of "anti-bullshit's" moral level.
Fact: "Israel killed 84 Palestinian children before even the first Israeli child was killed"
anti-bullshit: "Most of these children were engaged in terror."
So, Palestinian children throwing stones on their own land or hiding behind objects to keep from being shot by Israeli soldiers are terrorists.
Now imagine how this guy would react if anyone suggested that Israeli children killed "were engaged in terror." I can already hear the screams of "ANTI-SEMITE!"
Fact: "Israel killed 84 Palestinian children before even the first Israeli child was killed"
anti-bullshit: "Most of these children were engaged in terror."
So, Palestinian children throwing stones on their own land or hiding behind objects to keep from being shot by Israeli soldiers are terrorists.
Now imagine how this guy would react if anyone suggested that Israeli children killed "were engaged in terror." I can already hear the screams of "ANTI-SEMITE!"
Jews can't be Jordanian citizens (or even reside in Jordan) because when Jordan became independent in 1946 it immediate put that prohibition into a law, whose motivation was religious and was inspired by Islam and not by the rivalry with Zionism.
Sunny, go back to school
Sunny, go back to school
Here's a large expose of your morally decrepit ignorance:
Some "anti-Zionist" said:
"Israel killed 84 Palestinian children before even the first Israeli child was killed"
MY RESPONSE WAS: Most of these children were engaged in terror.
A profoundly ignorant "anti-Zionist" counters:
"So, Palestinian children throwing stones on their own land or hiding behind objects to keep from being shot by Israeli soldiers are terrorists. "
MY RESPONSE: Many of these children were using firearms like pistols and rifles, others were hurling ROCKS and MOLOTOV COCKTAILS on DISPUTED LAND - MOSTLY OR NOT AT ALL FROM THEIR VERY OWN HOMES - and in many cases tried to harm Jewish CIVILIANS (NON-COMBATANTS, if you don't understand). **They mostly weren't sweetie cute stone throwers.**
A profoundly ignorant "anti-Zionist" counters:
"Now imagine how this guy would react if anyone suggested that Israeli children killed "were engaged in terror." I can already hear the screams of "ANTI-SEMITE!" "
MY RESPONSE: this situation is purely hypothetical and not worth dealing with as this clown has already determined how I'd react.
Some "anti-Zionist" said:
"Israel killed 84 Palestinian children before even the first Israeli child was killed"
MY RESPONSE WAS: Most of these children were engaged in terror.
A profoundly ignorant "anti-Zionist" counters:
"So, Palestinian children throwing stones on their own land or hiding behind objects to keep from being shot by Israeli soldiers are terrorists. "
MY RESPONSE: Many of these children were using firearms like pistols and rifles, others were hurling ROCKS and MOLOTOV COCKTAILS on DISPUTED LAND - MOSTLY OR NOT AT ALL FROM THEIR VERY OWN HOMES - and in many cases tried to harm Jewish CIVILIANS (NON-COMBATANTS, if you don't understand). **They mostly weren't sweetie cute stone throwers.**
A profoundly ignorant "anti-Zionist" counters:
"Now imagine how this guy would react if anyone suggested that Israeli children killed "were engaged in terror." I can already hear the screams of "ANTI-SEMITE!" "
MY RESPONSE: this situation is purely hypothetical and not worth dealing with as this clown has already determined how I'd react.
Why can't non-Moslems be citizens of Saudi Arabia?
Why do you keep trying to change the subject? Why don't you address the critique of Zionism being presented in this thread? If you want to talk about Saudi Arabia, why don';t you start a Saudi SArabia thread?
A dishonest rabid israel-hater said: "the Zionists have taught Jordanians to hate Jews."
EDUCATED RESPONSE: What drugs are you taking? What "zionists" did that, exactly? How did they do it? Jordan was created on 80% of former Palestine, and it was formed as an Islamic no-jews state right from the start. Your claims are absurd.
A dishonest rabid israel-hater said: "Without anti-Semitism, how could they justify Zionism?"
EDUCATED RESPONSE: Justify zionism? See 2000 previous years of history. The jewish people now have a homeland just as indian people have a homeland, muslim people have multiple homelands, the danish have a homeland, the french have a homeland, etc.
EDUCATED RESPONSE: What drugs are you taking? What "zionists" did that, exactly? How did they do it? Jordan was created on 80% of former Palestine, and it was formed as an Islamic no-jews state right from the start. Your claims are absurd.
A dishonest rabid israel-hater said: "Without anti-Semitism, how could they justify Zionism?"
EDUCATED RESPONSE: Justify zionism? See 2000 previous years of history. The jewish people now have a homeland just as indian people have a homeland, muslim people have multiple homelands, the danish have a homeland, the french have a homeland, etc.
Someone above said: "Why do you keep trying to change the subject? Why don't you address the critique of Zionism being presented in this thread? If you want to talk about Saudi Arabia, why don';t you start a Saudi SArabia thread?"
EDUCATED RESPONSE: It's not changing the subject. YOu want to isolate and single out Israel, but the FACT is, the very meaning of israel's existence, and the very motivation behind zionism and the feelings today are DIRECTLY RELATED to how other countries and groups act. Jewish people felt they needed a homeland because they are a distinct people, and they were "dimmhi" second class citizens in arab countries for 1300 years and repeatedly massacred and wiped out in europe for 2000 years, so zionism formed, and the jewish people needed and wanted a homeland. THe reason people point out that arab countries are anti-jew, and often don't even allow jews at all, is because israel's laws and israel's choices in what the do is directly related to what israel's neighbors do. Saudia arabia doesn't allow jews. Jordan kicked their jews out. iraq and iran wiped out 99.9% of their jewish communities. This is directly related to how israel must preserve itself. You don't seem to care how nations treat jews, you just seem to want to focus on how mean israel is for giving jews a few advantages over others, yet you want to disregard the fact that arab countries are anti-jew, so israel wants to be pro-jew.
Israel was the jewish homeland, originally. Jews were then thrown out and for far over 1000 years wandered around the world, being kicked all around. Now, jews are still free to live in regular countries, but tehre's a homeland once again, just like every other nation of people have.
EDUCATED RESPONSE: It's not changing the subject. YOu want to isolate and single out Israel, but the FACT is, the very meaning of israel's existence, and the very motivation behind zionism and the feelings today are DIRECTLY RELATED to how other countries and groups act. Jewish people felt they needed a homeland because they are a distinct people, and they were "dimmhi" second class citizens in arab countries for 1300 years and repeatedly massacred and wiped out in europe for 2000 years, so zionism formed, and the jewish people needed and wanted a homeland. THe reason people point out that arab countries are anti-jew, and often don't even allow jews at all, is because israel's laws and israel's choices in what the do is directly related to what israel's neighbors do. Saudia arabia doesn't allow jews. Jordan kicked their jews out. iraq and iran wiped out 99.9% of their jewish communities. This is directly related to how israel must preserve itself. You don't seem to care how nations treat jews, you just seem to want to focus on how mean israel is for giving jews a few advantages over others, yet you want to disregard the fact that arab countries are anti-jew, so israel wants to be pro-jew.
Israel was the jewish homeland, originally. Jews were then thrown out and for far over 1000 years wandered around the world, being kicked all around. Now, jews are still free to live in regular countries, but tehre's a homeland once again, just like every other nation of people have.
Could someone please define who these Zionists everyone is talking about are?
Most references I can find to ZIonism seem historical. As an ideology it seems like it might be similar to Manifest Destiny or the Back To Africa movement in the 1800s? Since a state of Israel already exists can anyone really be called a Zionist (unless there is a desire to start a new Jewish state somewhere else)?
You dont hear people in Liberia accusing each other of being for or against the back to Africa movement and most Americans probably support the "right for the US to exist" but would disagree with the idea of Manifest Destiny....
Is it possible for someone to be militantly supportive of the government of Israel but not be a Zionist? Is it possible for someone to be miltantly opposed to Sharon but be a Zionist? Would it be possible for someone to support a single secular state covering what is now the West Bank, Gaza and Isreal and still be a Zionist?
Most references I can find to ZIonism seem historical. As an ideology it seems like it might be similar to Manifest Destiny or the Back To Africa movement in the 1800s? Since a state of Israel already exists can anyone really be called a Zionist (unless there is a desire to start a new Jewish state somewhere else)?
You dont hear people in Liberia accusing each other of being for or against the back to Africa movement and most Americans probably support the "right for the US to exist" but would disagree with the idea of Manifest Destiny....
Is it possible for someone to be militantly supportive of the government of Israel but not be a Zionist? Is it possible for someone to be miltantly opposed to Sharon but be a Zionist? Would it be possible for someone to support a single secular state covering what is now the West Bank, Gaza and Isreal and still be a Zionist?
Possible defintions of Zionism:
"Zionism the national movement for the return of the Jewish people to their homeland and the resumption of Jewish sovereignty in the Land of Israel, advocated, from its inception, tangible as well as spiritual aims. Jews of all persuasions, left and right, religious and secular, joined to form the Zionist movement and worked together toward these goals. Disagreements led to rifts, but ultimately, the common goal of a Jewish state in its ancient homeland was attained. The term "Zionism" was coined in 1893 by Nathan Birnbaum"
http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/Zionism/zionism.html
"Definition: [n] a policy for establishing and developing a national homeland for Jews in Palestine
[n] a movement of world Jewry that arose late in the 19th century with the aim of creating a Jewish state in Palestine"
http://www.hyperdictionary.com/dictionary/zionism
"Zionism ['zaıəˌnızəm]
noun
1 a political movement for the establishment and support of a national homeland for Jews in Palestine, now concerned chiefly with the development of the modern state of Israel
2 a policy or movement for Jews to return to Palestine from the Diaspora
'Zionist noun, adjective
"Zion'istic adjective
"
http://www.wordreference.com/english/definition.asp?en=Zionism
"Zionism
(n.) Among the Jews, a theory, plan, or movement for colonizing their own race in Palestine, the land of Zion, or, if that is impracticable, elsewhere, either for religious or nationalizing purposes; -- called also Zion movement."
http://www.brainydictionary.com/words/zi/zionism186636.html
"In 1896 following the appearance of anti-Semitism in Europe, Theodore Herzl, the founder of Zionism tried to find a political solution for the problem in his book, 'The Jewish State'. He advocated the creation of a Jewish state in Argentina or Palestine. In 1897 the first Zionist Congress was held in Switzerland, which issued the Basle program on the colonization of Palestine and the establishment of the World Zionist Organization (WZO). In 1904 the Fourth Zionist Congress decided to establish a national home for Jews in Argentina. In 1906 the Zionist congress decided the Jewish homeland should be Palestine. In 1914 With the outbreak of World War I, Britain promised the independence of Arab lands under Ottoman rule, including Palestine, in return for Arab support against Turkey which had entered the war on the side of Germany. "
http://www.arab2.com/biography/conflict/Zionist-movement.htm
None of those definitions seem to imply support for Sharon, the Occupation, or opposition to "the right of return". Or am I missing something?
"Zionism the national movement for the return of the Jewish people to their homeland and the resumption of Jewish sovereignty in the Land of Israel, advocated, from its inception, tangible as well as spiritual aims. Jews of all persuasions, left and right, religious and secular, joined to form the Zionist movement and worked together toward these goals. Disagreements led to rifts, but ultimately, the common goal of a Jewish state in its ancient homeland was attained. The term "Zionism" was coined in 1893 by Nathan Birnbaum"
http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/Zionism/zionism.html
"Definition: [n] a policy for establishing and developing a national homeland for Jews in Palestine
[n] a movement of world Jewry that arose late in the 19th century with the aim of creating a Jewish state in Palestine"
http://www.hyperdictionary.com/dictionary/zionism
"Zionism ['zaıəˌnızəm]
noun
1 a political movement for the establishment and support of a national homeland for Jews in Palestine, now concerned chiefly with the development of the modern state of Israel
2 a policy or movement for Jews to return to Palestine from the Diaspora
'Zionist noun, adjective
"Zion'istic adjective
"
http://www.wordreference.com/english/definition.asp?en=Zionism
"Zionism
(n.) Among the Jews, a theory, plan, or movement for colonizing their own race in Palestine, the land of Zion, or, if that is impracticable, elsewhere, either for religious or nationalizing purposes; -- called also Zion movement."
http://www.brainydictionary.com/words/zi/zionism186636.html
"In 1896 following the appearance of anti-Semitism in Europe, Theodore Herzl, the founder of Zionism tried to find a political solution for the problem in his book, 'The Jewish State'. He advocated the creation of a Jewish state in Argentina or Palestine. In 1897 the first Zionist Congress was held in Switzerland, which issued the Basle program on the colonization of Palestine and the establishment of the World Zionist Organization (WZO). In 1904 the Fourth Zionist Congress decided to establish a national home for Jews in Argentina. In 1906 the Zionist congress decided the Jewish homeland should be Palestine. In 1914 With the outbreak of World War I, Britain promised the independence of Arab lands under Ottoman rule, including Palestine, in return for Arab support against Turkey which had entered the war on the side of Germany. "
http://www.arab2.com/biography/conflict/Zionist-movement.htm
None of those definitions seem to imply support for Sharon, the Occupation, or opposition to "the right of return". Or am I missing something?
>YOu want to isolate and single out Israel,
You’re changing the subject. This thread is about Zionism, not about it’s critics. If you want to talk about us, start a thread about us. This thread is not about us. It’s about Zionism.
>how other countries and groups act.
How other countries act is irrelevant. Or, as my grandma used to say, “If your friends all jumped off a cliff, does that mean you should jump off a cliff, too?”
Yeah, some other countries persecute minorities. Some even persecute Jews. So what? That does not justify Jews persecuting other people, too.
Two wrongs don’t make a right
>the jewish people needed and wanted a homeland.
Wrong. They needed a safe place to live. Finding a safe place to live is justified, even prudent. Taking it from other people by force is not. Better you should come to America.
See:
http://www.indybay.org/news/2003/01/1557878_comment.php#1557931
>Israel was the jewish homeland, originally.
That’s not true. When Jews first got to what is now called Israel, there were other people already living there. The were called Canaanites. And even they weren’t the first people to live there, not by a long chalk.
See:
http://www.indybay.org/news/2003/08/1637599_comment.php#1637601
You’re changing the subject. This thread is about Zionism, not about it’s critics. If you want to talk about us, start a thread about us. This thread is not about us. It’s about Zionism.
>how other countries and groups act.
How other countries act is irrelevant. Or, as my grandma used to say, “If your friends all jumped off a cliff, does that mean you should jump off a cliff, too?”
Yeah, some other countries persecute minorities. Some even persecute Jews. So what? That does not justify Jews persecuting other people, too.
Two wrongs don’t make a right
>the jewish people needed and wanted a homeland.
Wrong. They needed a safe place to live. Finding a safe place to live is justified, even prudent. Taking it from other people by force is not. Better you should come to America.
See:
http://www.indybay.org/news/2003/01/1557878_comment.php#1557931
>Israel was the jewish homeland, originally.
That’s not true. When Jews first got to what is now called Israel, there were other people already living there. The were called Canaanites. And even they weren’t the first people to live there, not by a long chalk.
See:
http://www.indybay.org/news/2003/08/1637599_comment.php#1637601
Israel has a right to exist and Palestinians should have a right to return. Peace with teh Palestinians was part of Herzl's original goal, Sharon and the Likud are the real antiZionists!
You're confused, you say? How do you think I felt five months ago when I landed here (figuratively speaking) from small city Canada?
There I was confronted (then and now) with terms I had never heard of (nor had any reason to so do),
For instance, zionism, anti-zionism, and then the curious zionazi. What?
There was the "anti-semites are anti-zionists", not to be confused with "anti-zionists are anti-semites".
I read about closet anti-semites, suspicious activists, anti-Gentiles , and Islamophobics, and just when I think I have heard it all, lo, I have not.
We have the liberal anarchy, the neo-cons, the neo-nazis, and from the keyboard of Mr. Gehrig the challenging "nutzo anti-semitic trying to pass for an anti-zionist". (Or was that "nutzo anti-semite trying to pass for an anti-zionist"). God forbid I misquote him even by accident.
Not being into labels, of course, I have never given any of these a second thought.
Oh, I forgot (how could I?) There is one other - and that's our "Concerned Zionist", a misnomer if ever there was one, and the most entertaining contributor on the Board. Pay attention to him.
So, "Confused", don't despair. Mr. Gehrig will no doubt gallop to your rescue and set you straight with respect to the Zionist ideology. He seems to know about this sort of thing.
You bet! When it comes to labels, Mr. Gehrig is quite good at it. In fact, he's the author of a lot of them.
Actually I think he's a scholar of ancient words and phrases. I mean, has anyone else ever used (or even heard of) the word "yammity"? Must learn to keep my dictionary handy.
There I was confronted (then and now) with terms I had never heard of (nor had any reason to so do),
For instance, zionism, anti-zionism, and then the curious zionazi. What?
There was the "anti-semites are anti-zionists", not to be confused with "anti-zionists are anti-semites".
I read about closet anti-semites, suspicious activists, anti-Gentiles , and Islamophobics, and just when I think I have heard it all, lo, I have not.
We have the liberal anarchy, the neo-cons, the neo-nazis, and from the keyboard of Mr. Gehrig the challenging "nutzo anti-semitic trying to pass for an anti-zionist". (Or was that "nutzo anti-semite trying to pass for an anti-zionist"). God forbid I misquote him even by accident.
Not being into labels, of course, I have never given any of these a second thought.
Oh, I forgot (how could I?) There is one other - and that's our "Concerned Zionist", a misnomer if ever there was one, and the most entertaining contributor on the Board. Pay attention to him.
So, "Confused", don't despair. Mr. Gehrig will no doubt gallop to your rescue and set you straight with respect to the Zionist ideology. He seems to know about this sort of thing.
You bet! When it comes to labels, Mr. Gehrig is quite good at it. In fact, he's the author of a lot of them.
Actually I think he's a scholar of ancient words and phrases. I mean, has anyone else ever used (or even heard of) the word "yammity"? Must learn to keep my dictionary handy.
Sept 24 - The campus Hillel at Rutgers University in New Jersey was vandalized this past Saturday morning.
The attack took place one day after a member of a pro-Palestinian group hit Minister-without-Portfolio Natan Sharansky in the face with a cream pie. Sharansky was visiting to address students on Judaism's role in promoting democracy, peace, and justice. The group, New Jersey Solidarity, recently canceled an upcoming anti-Israel conference after members failed to file the necessary paperwork with the university.
The attack, denounced as "cowardice" by Rutgers officials, included swastikas spray-painted on the Hillel building and a fraternity with mostly Jewish membership.
Previous
The attack took place one day after a member of a pro-Palestinian group hit Minister-without-Portfolio Natan Sharansky in the face with a cream pie. Sharansky was visiting to address students on Judaism's role in promoting democracy, peace, and justice. The group, New Jersey Solidarity, recently canceled an upcoming anti-Israel conference after members failed to file the necessary paperwork with the university.
The attack, denounced as "cowardice" by Rutgers officials, included swastikas spray-painted on the Hillel building and a fraternity with mostly Jewish membership.
Previous
The first time I came acoss the term zionist it was in the context of "jesus was a zionist" (the holy blood and the holy grail or a similar book).
I love you scotpi
oh my love
you're my heart my wallet and my PR.
haha
oh too much to say
you're mine!!
oh my love
you're my heart my wallet and my PR.
haha
oh too much to say
you're mine!!
The Zionists tried and failed to prevent the Palestine Conference in Rutgers from happening. The show will go on as planned!
back to the top
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!
Donate
$215.00 donated
in the past month
Get Involved
If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.
Publish
Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.
Topics
More
Search Indybay's Archives
Advanced Search
►
▼
IMC Network