("Wipe off the map" XV) Iranian military official: We have 100,000 missiles in Lebanon ready to hit

[P F Tinmore]

Not true. There were Muslim, Christian, and Jewish Palestinians with equal rights. They were all one people. They agreed in the important issues of the tines. They all, including the Jews, wanted a single democratic state with equal rights for all. They all, including the Jews, were opposed to the creation of a Jewish.

I am on the side of the native Jews.

Whose side are you on?

I am on the side of both the Jewish people and the Arab Palestinian people in their quest for self-determination and sovereignty over some portion of the territory in question.

So let's say you are correct, that the Jewish people and the Arab people residing in the territory on August 1, 1925 wanted a single democratic state to be jointly governed by the Jewish people and the Arab people. (I don't think you are correct, let me be clear. And I don't know what you would produce to prove it to me, but let's say...)

How do you propose to employ this "truth" to provide a solution to the problem going forward? What do you propose as a solution, given the realities of the situation now, a hundred years on where there is most clearly two distinct peoples, each wishing self-government? What do you think should happen? What would be a just solution?

Do you want everyone (both Jews and Arabs) expelled who were not residents in 1925, or descendants of such residents? How would each resident prove such a status? If a current citizen has one of four grandparents who was such a resident, would that be enough, or need it be all four?

See the problem I have with your position, is it is based on your personal sense of history and justice that is a 100 years gone. It has no practical value, other than constantly undermining the rights of the Jewish people.

Here again you are blurring the distinction between peoples. This skews the issues.

The position if the Palestinian, or Arab, Jews was well known and oft reported. This fact, however, is not mentioned in Israel's version of history.

Zionism had no attraction for the Arab Jewish population. Before the establishment of the state, no single Arab Jew went to Palestine as a Zionist settler. Certainly a Jew from the Yemen or Morocco had no cultural links with a Jew from Poland or France.

Thus, the Israeli population was led to believe that one is either a Zionist (and, therefore, a defender of the Israeli State) or else one is anti-Semitic (and, therefore, wants to throw all the Jews into the sea). Those Jews who stood against Zionism were considered traitors to the Jewish state.

http://pdfproc.lib.msu.edu/?file=/DMC/African Journals/pdfs/Utafiti/vol1no1/aejp001001004.pdf​

Of course there are still anti Zionist Jews who do not believe in the legitimacy of the Jewish state.

 

[Shusha]

Not true. There were Muslim, Christian, and Jewish Palestinians with equal rights. They were all one people. They agreed in the important issues of the tines. They all, including the Jews, wanted a single democratic state with equal rights for all. They all, including the Jews, were opposed to the creation of a Jewish.

I am on the side of the native Jews.

Whose side are you on?

I am on the side of both the Jewish people and the Arab Palestinian people in their quest for self-determination and sovereignty over some portion of the territory in question.

So let's say you are correct, that the Jewish people and the Arab people residing in the territory on August 1, 1925 wanted a single democratic state to be jointly governed by the Jewish people and the Arab people. (I don't think you are correct, let me be clear. And I don't know what you would produce to prove it to me, but let's say...)

How do you propose to employ this "truth" to provide a solution to the problem going forward? What do you propose as a solution, given the realities of the situation now, a hundred years on where there is most clearly two distinct peoples, each wishing self-government? What do you think should happen? What would be a just solution?

Do you want everyone (both Jews and Arabs) expelled who were not residents in 1925, or descendants of such residents? How would each resident prove such a status? If a current citizen has one of four grandparents who was such a resident, would that be enough, or need it be all four?

See the problem I have with your position, is it is based on your personal sense of history and justice that is a 100 years gone. It has no practical value, other than constantly undermining the rights of the Jewish people.

Here again you are blurring the distinction between peoples. This skews the issues.

The position if the Palestinian, or Arab, Jews was well known and oft reported. This fact, however, is not mentioned in Israel's version of history.

Zionism had no attraction for the Arab Jewish population. Before the establishment of the state, no single Arab Jew went to Palestine as a Zionist settler. Certainly a Jew from the Yemen or Morocco had no cultural links with a Jew from Poland or France.

Thus, the Israeli population was led to believe that one is either a Zionist (and, therefore, a defender of the Israeli State) or else one is anti-Semitic (and, therefore, wants to throw all the Jews into the sea). Those Jews who stood against Zionism were considered traitors to the Jewish state.

http://pdfproc.lib.msu.edu/?file=/DMC/African Journals/pdfs/Utafiti/vol1no1/aejp001001004.pdf​

Of course there are still anti Zionist Jews who do not believe in the legitimacy of the Jewish state.

Was that article intended to prove that the Jews resident in 1925 resisted a Jewish State? Fail.

Did you want to address the rest of my post, then?

 

[P F Tinmore]

Not true. There were Muslim, Christian, and Jewish Palestinians with equal rights. They were all one people. They agreed in the important issues of the tines. They all, including the Jews, wanted a single democratic state with equal rights for all. They all, including the Jews, were opposed to the creation of a Jewish.

I am on the side of the native Jews.

Whose side are you on?

I am on the side of both the Jewish people and the Arab Palestinian people in their quest for self-determination and sovereignty over some portion of the territory in question.

So let's say you are correct, that the Jewish people and the Arab people residing in the territory on August 1, 1925 wanted a single democratic state to be jointly governed by the Jewish people and the Arab people. (I don't think you are correct, let me be clear. And I don't know what you would produce to prove it to me, but let's say...)

How do you propose to employ this "truth" to provide a solution to the problem going forward? What do you propose as a solution, given the realities of the situation now, a hundred years on where there is most clearly two distinct peoples, each wishing self-government? What do you think should happen? What would be a just solution?

Do you want everyone (both Jews and Arabs) expelled who were not residents in 1925, or descendants of such residents? How would each resident prove such a status? If a current citizen has one of four grandparents who was such a resident, would that be enough, or need it be all four?

See the problem I have with your position, is it is based on your personal sense of history and justice that is a 100 years gone. It has no practical value, other than constantly undermining the rights of the Jewish people.

Here again you are blurring the distinction between peoples. This skews the issues.

The position if the Palestinian, or Arab, Jews was well known and oft reported. This fact, however, is not mentioned in Israel's version of history.

Zionism had no attraction for the Arab Jewish population. Before the establishment of the state, no single Arab Jew went to Palestine as a Zionist settler. Certainly a Jew from the Yemen or Morocco had no cultural links with a Jew from Poland or France.

Thus, the Israeli population was led to believe that one is either a Zionist (and, therefore, a defender of the Israeli State) or else one is anti-Semitic (and, therefore, wants to throw all the Jews into the sea). Those Jews who stood against Zionism were considered traitors to the Jewish state.

http://pdfproc.lib.msu.edu/?file=/DMC/African Journals/pdfs/Utafiti/vol1no1/aejp001001004.pdf​

Of course there are still anti Zionist Jews who do not believe in the legitimacy of the Jewish state.

Was that article intended to prove that the Jews resident in 1925 resisted a Jewish State? Fail.

Did you want to address the rest of my post, then?

Within Palestine itself, the Old Yishuv was alarmed by the influx of non-religious Jews who wished to establish a secular state in the Holy Land.[21] The chief rabbi of the Ashkenazi community in Jerusalem, Rabbi Joseph Hayyim Sonnenfeld, often referred to the Zionists as "evil men and ruffians" and claimed that "Hell had entered the Land of Israel with Herzl."[22] Sonnenfeld did not want the Orthodox Jewish community to become subject to secular Zionist authority.

Haredim and Zionism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia​

You can't use the term "the Jews." There is no such thing as "the Jews." It is said that those who oppose Israel are anti Jew or anti Semitic. That is just Israeli propaganda.

 

[irosie91]

Not true. There were Muslim, Christian, and Jewish Palestinians with equal rights. They were all one people. They agreed in the important issues of the tines. They all, including the Jews, wanted a single democratic state with equal rights for all. They all, including the Jews, were opposed to the creation of a Jewish.

I am on the side of the native Jews.

Whose side are you on?

I am on the side of both the Jewish people and the Arab Palestinian people in their quest for self-determination and sovereignty over some portion of the territory in question.

So let's say you are correct, that the Jewish people and the Arab people residing in the territory on August 1, 1925 wanted a single democratic state to be jointly governed by the Jewish people and the Arab people. (I don't think you are correct, let me be clear. And I don't know what you would produce to prove it to me, but let's say...)

How do you propose to employ this "truth" to provide a solution to the problem going forward? What do you propose as a solution, given the realities of the situation now, a hundred years on where there is most clearly two distinct peoples, each wishing self-government? What do you think should happen? What would be a just solution?

Do you want everyone (both Jews and Arabs) expelled who were not residents in 1925, or descendants of such residents? How would each resident prove such a status? If a current citizen has one of four grandparents who was such a resident, would that be enough, or need it be all four?

See the problem I have with your position, is it is based on your personal sense of history and justice that is a 100 years gone. It has no practical value, other than constantly undermining the rights of the Jewish people.

Here again you are blurring the distinction between peoples. This skews the issues.

The position if the Palestinian, or Arab, Jews was well known and oft reported. This fact, however, is not mentioned in Israel's version of history.

Zionism had no attraction for the Arab Jewish population. Before the establishment of the state, no single Arab Jew went to Palestine as a Zionist settler. Certainly a Jew from the Yemen or Morocco had no cultural links with a Jew from Poland or France.

Thus, the Israeli population was led to believe that one is either a Zionist (and, therefore, a defender of the Israeli State) or else one is anti-Semitic (and, therefore, wants to throw all the Jews into the sea). Those Jews who stood against Zionism were considered traitors to the Jewish state.

http://pdfproc.lib.msu.edu/?file=/DMC/African Journals/pdfs/Utafiti/vol1no1/aejp001001004.pdf​

Of course there are still anti Zionist Jews who do not believe in the legitimacy of the Jewish state.

Was that article intended to prove that the Jews resident in 1925 resisted a Jewish State? Fail.

Did you want to address the rest of my post, then?

Within Palestine itself, the Old Yishuv was alarmed by the influx of non-religious Jews who wished to establish a secular state in the Holy Land.[21] The chief rabbi of the Ashkenazi community in Jerusalem, Rabbi Joseph Hayyim Sonnenfeld, often referred to the Zionists as "evil men and ruffians" and claimed that "Hell had entered the Land of Israel with Herzl."[22] Sonnenfeld did not want the Orthodox Jewish community to become subject to secular Zionist authority.

Haredim and Zionism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia​

You can't use the term "the Jews." There is no such thing as "the Jews." It is said that those who oppose Israel are anti Jew or anti Semitic. That is just Israeli propaganda.

watta joke is the islamo Nazis------the issue of jews IN DEBATE seems to them some kind of "proof" dat JOOOOS
don't know what they are doing --------kinda like Shiites and sunnis who put bombs on the asses of their daughters to MURDER EACH OTHER and Baathist scum pour nitrogen mustard gas on the heads of arab children. For those who do not know----there is no "DEBATE" amongst the islamo Nazi scum---it all boils down to slitting the throats of the other guy. The most prominent Baathist dogs of the past 60 years have EACH murdered in the hundreds of thousands-----Gamel Abdel Nasser, Saddam Hussein and Papa and Baby Assad.
It is CERTAINLY true that the ultra religious among the jews prefer Israel to be in THEIR EXCLUSIVE CONTROL---because such is their definition of ZIONISM. try again Mr. Tin

 

[irosie91]

Not true. There were Muslim, Christian, and Jewish Palestinians with equal rights. They were all one people. They agreed in the important issues of the tines. They all, including the Jews, wanted a single democratic state with equal rights for all. They all, including the Jews, were opposed to the creation of a Jewish.

I am on the side of the native Jews.

Whose side are you on?

I am on the side of both the Jewish people and the Arab Palestinian people in their quest for self-determination and sovereignty over some portion of the territory in question.

So let's say you are correct, that the Jewish people and the Arab people residing in the territory on August 1, 1925 wanted a single democratic state to be jointly governed by the Jewish people and the Arab people. (I don't think you are correct, let me be clear. And I don't know what you would produce to prove it to me, but let's say...)

How do you propose to employ this "truth" to provide a solution to the problem going forward? What do you propose as a solution, given the realities of the situation now, a hundred years on where there is most clearly two distinct peoples, each wishing self-government? What do you think should happen? What would be a just solution?

Do you want everyone (both Jews and Arabs) expelled who were not residents in 1925, or descendants of such residents? How would each resident prove such a status? If a current citizen has one of four grandparents who was such a resident, would that be enough, or need it be all four?

See the problem I have with your position, is it is based on your personal sense of history and justice that is a 100 years gone. It has no practical value, other than constantly undermining the rights of the Jewish people.

Here again you are blurring the distinction between peoples. This skews the issues.

The position if the Palestinian, or Arab, Jews was well known and oft reported. This fact, however, is not mentioned in Israel's version of history.

Zionism had no attraction for the Arab Jewish population. Before the establishment of the state, no single Arab Jew went to Palestine as a Zionist settler. Certainly a Jew from the Yemen or Morocco had no cultural links with a Jew from Poland or France.

Thus, the Israeli population was led to believe that one is either a Zionist (and, therefore, a defender of the Israeli State) or else one is anti-Semitic (and, therefore, wants to throw all the Jews into the sea). Those Jews who stood against Zionism were considered traitors to the Jewish state.

http://pdfproc.lib.msu.edu/?file=/DMC/African Journals/pdfs/Utafiti/vol1no1/aejp001001004.pdf​

Of course there are still anti Zionist Jews who do not believe in the legitimacy of the Jewish state.

Was that article intended to prove that the Jews resident in 1925 resisted a Jewish State? Fail.

Did you want to address the rest of my post, then?

Within Palestine itself, the Old Yishuv was alarmed by the influx of non-religious Jews who wished to establish a secular state in the Holy Land.[21] The chief rabbi of the Ashkenazi community in Jerusalem, Rabbi Joseph Hayyim Sonnenfeld, often referred to the Zionists as "evil men and ruffians" and claimed that "Hell had entered the Land of Israel with Herzl."[22] Sonnenfeld did not want the Orthodox Jewish community to become subject to secular Zionist authority.

Haredim and Zionism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia​

You can't use the term "the Jews." There is no such thing as "the Jews." It is said that those who oppose Israel are anti Jew or anti Semitic. That is just Israeli propaganda.

notice that SONNENFELD said "LAND OF ISRAEL"-----not "LAND OF BAATHIST PIGS IN PALESTINE"

 

[José]

"Land of Israel" not the State of Israel.

The idea of any kind of jewish state in Palestine, be it secular or religious, was considered a blasphemy by the tiny pre-zionist european jewish community in Palestine.

 

[irosie91]

"Land of Israel" not the State of Israel.

The idea of any kind of jewish state in Palestine, be it secular or religious, was considered a blasphemy by the tiny pre-zionist european jewish community in Palestine.

Nope----the idea of a jewish state in the land or Palestine----developed by the "wrong kind of jews" was considered a blasphemy by a small minority of jews who had already been residing in Palestine pre 1880. I have no idea why you refer to them as "pre-Zionist European jewish community" or when you imagine was the "pre-Zionist" era. The Zionist project which resulted in the state of Israel in 1948 started in the early 1800s and only some of the jews in Palestine at that time
originated from Europe. Your statement indicates that you do
not know much about the situation. There is no question that there is something like "sectarian" disagreement amongst jews------there is a kind of "sectarian disagreement" even amongst catholics. You seem to be markedly influenced by islamo Nazi propaganda which MAGNIFIES the dispute

 

[José]

Originally posted by irosie91
I have no idea why you refer to them as "pre-Zionist European jewish community" or when you imagine was the "pre-Zionist" era.

For someone who claims to deny the fact that political zionism started in the late 19th century, you seem to have a pretty good idea of exactly when the movement really started:

Originally posted by irosie91
jews who had already been residing in Palestine pre 1880.

 

[José]

Originally posted by irosie91
The Zionist project which resulted in the state of Israel in 1948 started in the early 1800s

Originally posted by irosie91
jews who had already been residing in Palestine pre 1880

Make up your mind, rosie...

Either political zionism started "in the early 1800's" or around "1880".

At least one of the two dates has to be wrong.

 

[irosie91]

Originally posted by irosie91
I have no idea why you refer to them as "pre-Zionist European jewish community" or when you imagine was the "pre-Zionist" era.

For someone who claims to deny the fact that political zionism started in the late 19th century, you seem to have a pretty good idea of exactly when the movement really started:

Originally posted by irosie91
jews who had already been residing in Palestine pre 1880.

"claims to deny the fact..." what fact? Herzl pushed the idea of POLITICAL ZIONISM----(ie unrelated to religion) in the late 19th century----which opened the movement to secularists----HOWEVER ...at that point the Zionist project which resulted in
the state of Israel in 1948 was already in FULL SWING----Tel aviv already existed as did RISHON L'tZION-----REAL CITIES IN the land of Israel (ERETZ YISRAEL) There were hospitals and schools and a kind of government.----ie the nation------kinda pre-existed Herzl. Feel free to ask questions. THE RELIGIOUS PEOPLE were more or less----that is MORE OR LESS----opposed to the policies of the SECULARISTS-----and that is about it----some of the religious were VERY OPPOSED AND BITTERLY OPPOSED----that is the group that islamo Nazi dogs love the most

 

[irosie91]

Originally posted by irosie91
The Zionist project which resulted in the state of Israel in 1948 started in the early 1800s

Originally posted by irosie91
jews who had already been residing in Palestine pre 1880

Make up your mind, rosie...

Either political zionism started "in the early 1800's" or around "1880".

At least one of the two dates has to be wrong.

try again-----the significance of 1880 is----that is about the time that the ISRAELI CITIES----tel aviv and rishon l'tzion were founded------I used it as a MARKER in the development of
THE STATE------the modern Zionist movement began in the early 1800s ----that was when the Turks decided to make it legal for jews to buy land in Palestine.

 

[José]

Originally posted by irosie91
Herzl pushed the idea of POLITICAL ZIONISM----(ie unrelated to religion) in the late 19th century----which opened the movement to secularists----HOWEVER ...at that point the Zionist project which resulted in the state of Israel in 1948 was already in FULL SWING----Tel aviv already existed as did RISHON L'tZION-----REAL CITIES IN the land of Israel (ERETZ YISRAEL)

Rishon LeZion - founded in 1882 by Russian Jews fleeing anti-jewish pogroms in Eastern Europe (political not religious reasons) and financed by Edmond de Rothschild, the founder of PICA (Palestine Jewish Colonization Association).

Rothschild is almost a synonym with political zionism.

Tel Aviv - founded in 1909, a city whose name was the subject of a heated debate among zionists, with many Jews wanting to name it "Herzliya" and then finally settling for a compromise solution: Tel Aviv, the title in Hebrew of one of Theodor Herzl's books.

You really should choose your examples more carefully, rosie, because Rishon and Tel Aviv are two historical testaments to the fact that political zionism (the colonization of Palestine) did start around 1880 and not in the early 1800's.

 

[José]

Originally posted by irosie91
only some of the jews in Palestine at that time originated from Europe.

Of course the anti-zionist european Jews were only a portion of the total jewish population in Palestine.

The arab Jews comprised the majority of the population and they were as opposed to the idea of a jewish state in Palestine as their ashkhenazi counterparts.

Either due to religious or "practical" reasons... meaning that european mass immigration would upset the muslims and christians and destroy their status as a protected minority.

So PF Tinmore is absolutely right:

In Palestine, in the late decades of the 19th century, you had an overwhelming majority of Jews from Europe and from Palestine itself forming a united front that opposed the political goal of creating a jewish state in Palestine.

 

[José]

Originally posted by irosie91
Nope----the idea of a jewish state in the land or Palestine----developed by the "wrong kind of jews" was considered a blasphemy by a SMALL MINORITY of jews who had already been residing in Palestine pre 1880.

Israeli historian Tom Segev (and every other authority on the history of the Yeshuv who does not get his salary from the israeli government) says:

"Rosie, you're full of ****!!"

"Many of the Jews living in Palestine did not support Zionism; indeed, much of the pre-Zionist Jewish population - that is, those who lived in Palestine before the 1880's - were ultra-Orthodox. They were deeply hostile to the notion of secular autonomy in the Holy Land, which, according to religious doctrine, would be redeemed only through divine intervention in the messianic age."

Tom Segev, One Palestine, Complete, pag. 16

"To the traditional Jewish population of Palestine, the Zionist ideal of secular redemption was sacrilegious."

Tom Segev, One Palestine, Complete, pag. 17

 

[irosie91]

Originally posted by irosie91
Herzl pushed the idea of POLITICAL ZIONISM----(ie unrelated to religion) in the late 19th century----which opened the movement to secularists----HOWEVER ...at that point the Zionist project which resulted in the state of Israel in 1948 was already in FULL SWING----Tel aviv already existed as did RISHON L'tZION-----REAL CITIES IN the land of Israel (ERETZ YISRAEL)

Rishon LeZion - founded in 1882 by Russian Jews fleeing anti-jewish pogroms in Eastern Europe (political not religious reasons) and financed by Edmond de Rothschild, the founder of PICA (Palestine Jewish Colonization Association).

Rothschild is almost a synonym with political zionism.

Tel Aviv - founded in 1909, a city whose name was the subject of a heated debate among zionists, with many Jews wanting to name it "Herzliya" and then finally settling for a compromise solution: Tel Aviv, the title in Hebrew of one of Theodor Herzl's books.

You really should choose your examples more carefully, rosie, because Rishon and Tel Aviv are two historical testaments to the fact that political zionism (the colonization of Palestine) did start around 1880 and not in the early 1800's.

wrong again ---the FACTS are that Rishon L'Tzion had a population of Russian jews in 1880 when it was founded----but it ALSO had a population of jews from lands which are called
"arab lands" At to TEL AVIV-----it was settled OWNED land---by jews ----long before it got its NAME. There were at THAT TIME many OTHER jewish owned cities----with names----eg PETAH TIKVAH -----made in 1878----this one---virtually all very orthodox jews------PURCHASED LAND. Hebron----a complex history of PURCHASE from the OTTOMAN empire and------confiscation ----all thru the 17 and 18 hundreds---
In any case the UPTICK in land purchase in Palestine by jews
happened from the beginning of the 1800s and continued thruout that century---rendering MOST privately owned property in the area that became Israel----owned by jews and virtually none owned by non jews------under the AEGIS of the
Zionist project of the early 1800s----during the 1800s---before Herzl was born----there were also specifically jewish hospitals and schools------popping up Herzl was born in 1860----the vigorous land buying happened when he was a baby. HIS concept of political Zionism was INVENTED in 1897 when he was 37------ 16 years AFTER Rishon L'tzion was founded---when he was 21. By the time he was 21----the city of Rishon Ltzion (early to Zion) was already a city made up of ZIONISTS for a few decades----ie since he was a baby

 

[irosie91]

Originally posted by irosie91
only some of the jews in Palestine at that time originated from Europe.

Of course the anti-zionist european Jews were only a portion of the total jewish population in Palestine.

The arab Jews comprised the majority of the population and they were as opposed to the idea of a jewish state in Palestine as their ashkhenazi counterparts.

Either due to religious or "practical" reasons... meaning that european mass immigration would upset the muslims and christians and destroy their status as a protected minority.

So PF Tinmore is absolutely right:

In Palestine, in the late decades of the 19th century, you had an overwhelming majority of Jews from Europe and from Palestine itself forming a united front that opposed the political goal of creating a jewish state in Palestine.

LOL you got a source for that idiotic essay? Of all the people in Israel-----those most OVERWHELMINGLY ZIONIST----are those people YOU CALL "arab jews" I will not tell hubby that you called him an "ARAB JEW" -----he might vomit-----rishon is his home town FULL OF what you call "arab jews"-------with histories in that city going back before its 1882
founding. While his immediate family did not get there until
1940 his COMMUNITY is chock full of other ""arab jews""

 

[irosie91]

When I go back to Rishon L'tzion I will inform the people there about Tom Segev. Jose---you are talking about the NATUREI KARTA---------a very small minority that likes to magnify its numbers --------especially since Al Gore invented the Internet

 

[irosie91]

According to Jose-----all of the jews of the Palestine Mandate---DEFECTED to the arab side and converted to islam in 1947

 

[Shusha]

You can't use the term "the Jews." There is no such thing as "the Jews."

I didn't use the term "the Jews". I used the phrase "the Jews who were resident in 1925". That was YOUR criteria for citizenship and therefore, self-determination and sovereignty.

So, still waiting for you to answer my post about what your proposed solution to the conflict is.

 

[irosie91]

You can't use the term "the Jews." There is no such thing as "the Jews."

I didn't use the term "the Jews". I used the phrase "the Jews who were resident in 1925". That was YOUR criteria for citizenship and therefore, self-determination and sovereignty.

So, still waiting for you to answer my post about what your proposed solution to the conflict is.

it is not clear to me why there is no such thing as "the jews"---
is there ----"the French"?