'Anti-Zionism Is Anti-Semitic'?

[flacaltenn]

An interesting article...

I think the title is 'wrong' however...

I just don't buy into the 'zionist' belief that any word said against the Israeli government and policies is 'anti-semitic'...

If I were to make a negative comment about the South African government, for example, that would not make me a racist...

5 Intellectuals Smash the Anti-Zionism Is Anti-Semitic Argument

Anti-Israeli government is not the same as anti-Semitism. Two different things. It's like saying if you are against the US government, you hate all Americans.

"Anti Israel govt" is not anti Zionism, you ignoramus.

The thing is, I've never heard any criticism of Israel, other than related to the Palestinians. Not in the way other "normal" countries are criticised.

It's an abnormal obsession, the justifications meandering into the land of myths.

Correct. They never voice any objection to any policy or political leaders. It's always Israel as a whole. Most of them also use the IslamoNazi term "Zionist entity" for Israel. The retards can't even bring themselves to use the word Israel.

There was no criticism of South Africa other than that related to the South African white's treatment of the non-white population, during Apartheid. Why would it be different for Israel?

Largely because there was never a demand for SEPARATISM from the folks that wanted equal treatment and a seat at the table. You keep bringing that up.. But there is NOTHING in common. Palestinians WANT Apartheid. They don';t desire to BE Israelis. They had multiple chances to make that happen early in the game.

This is not about citizen RIGHTS. The OCCUPIED Palestinians never ceased hostilities with the State of Israel. Eventually you'll figure that out.

 

[flacaltenn]

While it would be preferable to arrive at a peaceful solution, what would make you think that the Israelis would move away from their stated goal to expand Israel's borders to what they call Eretz Israel? The Palestinians were never offered full sovereignty even when Likud was out of power. There was never any thought to removing Israeli troops from the West Bank or East Jerusalem. If there is little cost to doing so, Israel intends to maintain control of all the land it now controls one way or another.

Sadly, in every case in the recent past, the occupied/oppressed have always had to put up enough resistance which makes the occupier/oppressor uncomfortable enough to cause him to give serious consideration to relinquishing control. Ireland, Algeria, South Africa, Rhodesia, Kenya, etc.

Other ways to recognize anti-Zionism/anti-semitism:

Lies and exaggerations, such as "never offered full sovereignty"
Assumptions of intent which are not in evidence
Changes in meanings of words
Justifications for violence, especially for pointless violence

I disagree. Lies and exaggerations are part and parcel of the arguments in both sides of the conflict - that isn't anti-semitism.

Assumption of intent - same thing, in any conflict and this one is no different. There is deep distrust of the other's intent on BOTH sides here.

Changes in meanings of words...not sure, can you give some examples?

Justifications for violence - again, that is not uncommon in conflicts, I don't see that as "anti-semitic" unless the person is holding double standards.

The Israelis are well aware of the intent from Hamas..

And the Palestinians firmly believe Israel intends to expel them in entirety. What's your point?

Certainly that was not gonna happen in Gaza in 2004. Or now.. But they ARE in danger of losing land in the West Bank because they are not prepared to negotiate. They are farther from gaining sovereignty there then they were 10 years ago. And that's not Israel's fault. There is NO ONE to negotiate with. It's been over 50 years.. And other than Arafat and the brief existence of the PA -- there was no opportunity to negotiate.

 

[flacaltenn]

Other ways to recognize anti-Zionism/anti-semitism:

Lies and exaggerations, such as "never offered full sovereignty"
Assumptions of intent which are not in evidence
Changes in meanings of words
Justifications for violence, especially for pointless violence

I disagree. Lies and exaggerations are part and parcel of the arguments in both sides of the conflict - that isn't anti-semitism.

Assumption of intent - same thing, in any conflict and this one is no different. There is deep distrust of the other's intent on BOTH sides here.

Changes in meanings of words...not sure, can you give some examples?

Justifications for violence - again, that is not uncommon in conflicts, I don't see that as "anti-semitic" unless the person is holding double standards.

The Israelis are well aware of the intent from Hamas..

And the Palestinians firmly believe Israel intends to expel them in entirety. What's your point?

You've just contradicted your self by talking about distrust on both sides.

When you've implied that the Palestinians think they know the Israalis' nefarious intentions.

And that the Israeli's think they know the Palestinians nafarious intentions.

How am I contradicting myself?

What is accurate? Major poll: About half of Israeli Jews want to expel Arabs

That's largely a religious division among Israeli Jews. They would STILL be fighting over whether the state should stay Secular or Religious if there WERE no Arabs around.. There is no political mandate for deporting Arab Israelis.

 

[flacaltenn]

Palis are living IN CAMPS in Syria, Lebanon, Jordan and other neighborhoods. Have those countries exchange that land for CONTIGUOUS land to the West Bank and the Northern reaches of the Green Zone. Have Egypt kick in parcels in the Sinai and CONTIGUOUS to Gaza. That's what a Zionist Congress would do. Put together an INTERNATIONAL effort to make the Big Deal happen..

All of a sudden -- you've put together a rather impressive real estate Portfolio for a Pali Homeland. All that requires is for a NATIONALIST movement to spring up that WANTS a sovereign country to build.

Zionists started on SAND DUNES.. There is the potential to gain MUCH MORE than that for the Palis if they BECOME Zionists and stop killing their children in useless "resistance" against Israel. .

 

[montelatici]

Anti-Israeli government is not the same as anti-Semitism. Two different things. It's like saying if you are against the US government, you hate all Americans.

"Anti Israel govt" is not anti Zionism, you ignoramus.

The thing is, I've never heard any criticism of Israel, other than related to the Palestinians. Not in the way other "normal" countries are criticised.

It's an abnormal obsession, the justifications meandering into the land of myths.

Correct. They never voice any objection to any policy or political leaders. It's always Israel as a whole. Most of them also use the IslamoNazi term "Zionist entity" for Israel. The retards can't even bring themselves to use the word Israel.

There was no criticism of South Africa other than that related to the South African white's treatment of the non-white population, during Apartheid. Why would it be different for Israel?

Largely because there was never a demand for SEPARATISM from the folks that wanted equal treatment and a seat at the table. You keep bringing that up.. But there is NOTHING in common. Palestinians WANT Apartheid. They don';t desire to BE Israelis. They had multiple chances to make that happen early in the game.

This is not about citizen RIGHTS. The OCCUPIED Palestinians never ceased hostilities with the State of Israel. Eventually you'll figure that out.

The Palestinians never wanted Apartheid, that is what the Jews wanted. They wanted a Jewish state, not a secular state for all the inhabitants of Palestine.

This is what the Muslims and Christians wanted as articulated in their first official correspondence with the British in 1922:

"...........The Delegation requests that the constitution for Palestine should—

• 
  
  (1) Safeguard the civil, political and economic interests of the People.
  (2) Provide for the creation of a national independent Government in accordance with the spirit of paragraph 4, Article 22, of the Covenant of the League of Nations.
  
  (3) Safeguard the legal rights of foreigners.
  
  (4) Guarantee religious equality to all peoples.
  
  (5) Guarantee the rights of minorities.
  
  (6) Guarantee the rights of the Assisting Power.
  

The Delegation is quite confident that the justice of the British Government and its sense of fair play will make it consider the above remarks with a sympathetic mind, since the Delegation's chief object is to lay in Palestine the foundation of a stable Government that would command the respect of the inhabitants and guarantee peace and prosperity to all.............."

UK correspondence with Palestine Arab Delegation and Zionist Organization/British policy in Palestine: "Churchill White Paper" - UK documentation Cmd. 1700/Non-UN document (excerpts) (1 July 1922)

The Jews began violently evicting the Muslims and Christians long before the Arab states intervened to attempt to stop the ethnic cleansing. Native inhabitants rarely cease to be hostile to a foreign invader. The French, the collaborators excepted, never ceased to be hostile to the Germans, why should the Palestinians be judged differently.

 

[montelatici]

Palis are living IN CAMPS in Syria, Lebanon, Jordan and other neighborhoods. Have those countries exchange that land for CONTIGUOUS land to the West Bank and the Northern reaches of the Green Zone. Have Egypt kick in parcels in the Sinai and CONTIGUOUS to Gaza. That's what a Zionist Congress would do. Put together an INTERNATIONAL effort to make the Big Deal happen..

All of a sudden -- you've put together a rather impressive real estate Portfolio for a Pali Homeland. All that requires is for a NATIONALIST movement to spring up that WANTS a sovereign country to build.

Zionists started on SAND DUNES.. There is the potential to gain MUCH MORE than that for the Palis if they BECOME Zionists and stop killing their children in useless "resistance" against Israel. .

The Zionists started on the best land available. The photos of the sand dunes were taken on a beach, as the documentary 1913 Seeds of Conflict revealed:

1913: Seeds of Conflict | PBS Programs | PBS

As far as taking land from the current inhabitants to give it to the Palestinians, it is the same sort of bonehead idea that got the two peoples into this conflict. It would just result in another conflict.

 

[Roudy]

An Inuit who is displaced from northern Canada remains Inuit no matter where she happens to be living. Her children remain Inuit. And her children's children.

But you are missing the larger point here. It doesn't matter what argument you use to deny the Jewish people AS a people -- one whose ancestors originated on the territory in question. ANY argument which prevents the Jewish people from having the same rights as other peoples is fundamentally an anti-semitic argument.

The Jews were not the first people there nor were they ever the only people there. There is no historic precedence for an exclusive Jewish state.

But - this is a big but - it is not an exclusive Jewish state, and in point of fact it is more diverse than many of it's neighbors. Granted there are inequities and injustices but it's not an exclusive Jewish state and it's foundational documents encorporate diversity.

It won't be an exclusive Jewish state until Israel kicks out the remaining Palestinians.

Israel has no intention of kicking out the two million Arab Muslims living inside Israel as Israeli citizens with full Israeli rights. In fact, they are happy to be Israelis.

I would hope not, and most Israeli Arab citizens, plus the Arab residents of Jerusalem would rather have Israeli citizenship, with it's greater rights and freedoms than that of a Palestinian state. But, there is a poll that Pew conducted that showed almost half Israeli Jews want to expel Arabs and that is noteworthy if you're talking about what each side believes about the other.

We're the Arabs in the poll those in the West Bank, or Israel proper?

 

[Roudy]

Anti-Israeli government is not the same as anti-Semitism. Two different things. It's like saying if you are against the US government, you hate all Americans.

"Anti Israel govt" is not anti Zionism, you ignoramus.

The thing is, I've never heard any criticism of Israel, other than related to the Palestinians. Not in the way other "normal" countries are criticised.

It's an abnormal obsession, the justifications meandering into the land of myths.

Correct. They never voice any objection to any policy or political leaders. It's always Israel as a whole. Most of them also use the IslamoNazi term "Zionist entity" for Israel. The retards can't even bring themselves to use the word Israel.

There was no criticism of South Africa other than that related to the South African white's treatment of the non-white population, during Apartheid. Why would it be different for Israel?

Largely because there was never a demand for SEPARATISM from the folks that wanted equal treatment and a seat at the table. You keep bringing that up.. But there is NOTHING in common. Palestinians WANT Apartheid. They don';t desire to BE Israelis. They had multiple chances to make that happen early in the game.

This is not about citizen RIGHTS. The OCCUPIED Palestinians never ceased hostilities with the State of Israel. Eventually you'll figure that out.

The same "occupied" Palestinians were occupied before, for 20 years by the Jordanians and Egyptians. Nobody ever brought up a Palestine, and there were no suicide bombings in Cairo or Amman. Suddenly, after the '67 war they became these people who's land was stolen and that's when the hostilities began.

 

[Coyote]

The Jews were not the first people there nor were they ever the only people there. There is no historic precedence for an exclusive Jewish state.

But - this is a big but - it is not an exclusive Jewish state, and in point of fact it is more diverse than many of it's neighbors. Granted there are inequities and injustices but it's not an exclusive Jewish state and it's foundational documents encorporate diversity.

It won't be an exclusive Jewish state until Israel kicks out the remaining Palestinians.

Israel has no intention of kicking out the two million Arab Muslims living inside Israel as Israeli citizens with full Israeli rights. In fact, they are happy to be Israelis.

I would hope not, and most Israeli Arab citizens, plus the Arab residents of Jerusalem would rather have Israeli citizenship, with it's greater rights and freedoms than that of a Palestinian state. But, there is a poll that Pew conducted that showed almost half Israeli Jews want to expel Arabs and that is noteworthy if you're talking about what each side believes about the other.

We're the Arabs in the poll those in the West Bank, or Israel proper?

I don't know - I'll look at the methodology to see if I can tell.

 

[Coyote]

I disagree. Lies and exaggerations are part and parcel of the arguments in both sides of the conflict - that isn't anti-semitism.

Assumption of intent - same thing, in any conflict and this one is no different. There is deep distrust of the other's intent on BOTH sides here.

Changes in meanings of words...not sure, can you give some examples?

Justifications for violence - again, that is not uncommon in conflicts, I don't see that as "anti-semitic" unless the person is holding double standards.

The Israelis are well aware of the intent from Hamas..

And the Palestinians firmly believe Israel intends to expel them in entirety. What's your point?

You've just contradicted your self by talking about distrust on both sides.

When you've implied that the Palestinians think they know the Israalis' nefarious intentions.

And that the Israeli's think they know the Palestinians nafarious intentions.

How am I contradicting myself?

What is accurate? Major poll: About half of Israeli Jews want to expel Arabs

That's largely a religious division among Israeli Jews. They would STILL be fighting over whether the state should stay Secular or Religious if there WERE no Arabs around.. There is no political mandate for deporting Arab Israelis.

There is no political mandate, but - keep in mind - while the largest grouping in support was the religious, the overall was just under 50% - a large enough grouping to be of concern, if you did not trust.

I do not think they would or really could without a substantial shift - but do you see how it feeds the Palestinian fears and distrust?

 

[Coyote]

While it would be preferable to arrive at a peaceful solution, what would make you think that the Israelis would move away from their stated goal to expand Israel's borders to what they call Eretz Israel? The Palestinians were never offered full sovereignty even when Likud was out of power. There was never any thought to removing Israeli troops from the West Bank or East Jerusalem. If there is little cost to doing so, Israel intends to maintain control of all the land it now controls one way or another.

Sadly, in every case in the recent past, the occupied/oppressed have always had to put up enough resistance which makes the occupier/oppressor uncomfortable enough to cause him to give serious consideration to relinquishing control. Ireland, Algeria, South Africa, Rhodesia, Kenya, etc.

Other ways to recognize anti-Zionism/anti-semitism:

Lies and exaggerations, such as "never offered full sovereignty"
Assumptions of intent which are not in evidence
Changes in meanings of words
Justifications for violence, especially for pointless violence

I disagree. Lies and exaggerations are part and parcel of the arguments in both sides of the conflict - that isn't anti-semitism.

Assumption of intent - same thing, in any conflict and this one is no different. There is deep distrust of the other's intent on BOTH sides here.

Changes in meanings of words...not sure, can you give some examples?

Justifications for violence - again, that is not uncommon in conflicts, I don't see that as "anti-semitic" unless the person is holding double standards.

The Israelis are well aware of the intent from Hamas..

And the Palestinians firmly believe Israel intends to expel them in entirety. What's your point?

Certainly that was not gonna happen in Gaza in 2004. Or now.. But they ARE in danger of losing land in the West Bank because they are not prepared to negotiate. They are farther from gaining sovereignty there then they were 10 years ago. And that's not Israel's fault. There is NO ONE to negotiate with. It's been over 50 years.. And other than Arafat and the brief existence of the PA -- there was no opportunity to negotiate.

They shouldn't lose any land in the WB - those that own the land should be able to keep it. Yes? No?

 

[Coyote]

While it would be preferable to arrive at a peaceful solution, what would make you think that the Israelis would move away from their stated goal to expand Isral's borders to what they call Eretz Israel? The Palestinians were never offered full sovereignty even when Likud was out of power. There was never any thought to removing Israeli troops from the West Bank or East Jerusalem. If there is little cost to doing so, Israel intends to maintain control of all the land it now controls one way or another.

Sadly, in every case in the recent past, the occupied/oppressed have always had to put up enough resistance which makes the occupier/oppressor uncomfortable enough to cause him to give serious consideration to relinquishing control. Ireland, Algeria, South Africa, Rhodesia, Kenya, etc.

Other ways to recognize anti-Zionism/anti-semitism:

Lies and exaggerations, such as "never offered full sovereignty"
Assumptions of intent which are not in evidence
Changes in meanings of words
Justifications for violence, especially for pointless violence

I disagree. Lies and exaggerations are part and parcel of the arguments in both sides of the conflict - that isn't anti-semitism.

Assumption of intent - same thing, in any conflict and this one is no different. There is deep distrust of the other's intent on BOTH sides here.

Changes in meanings of words...not sure, can you give some examples?

Justifications for violence - again, that is not uncommon in conflicts, I don't see that as "anti-semitic" unless the person is holding double standards.

Well, there are lies and exaggerations and there are lies and exaggerations. I agree that both sides do tend to exaggerate somewhat. I entirely disagree that the pro-Israel sides tells outright lies to the extent that the anti-Israel side does, thinking back to the threads which falsely accuse Israel of keeping children in cages comes to mind immediately. There are others. [/quote]

I don't agree. I think the pro-Israeli tells outright lies just as much. I remember one article and it was single sourced, of Palestinians handing out candy after some terrorist activities - all articles sourced to the same one article with a photo. But the photo was actually handing out candy for something else entirely and there was no independent verification of the claim - it was all unnamed sources.

I recall another one - a frequently repeated canard of mass Hamas child weddings, complete with photos. What's the reality? They are mass weddings alright - of Hamas fighters to ADULT women, and the children shown are part of the celebration NOT the brides.

That's two distinct occassions where outright lies are propigated.

While I agree that there is a deep distrust on both sides -- it is relatively easy to find evidence for the reasons behind the distrust for the one side rather than the other. For example -- there is absolutely no evidence that Israel intends to prevent Muslims from worship on the Temple Mount and yet that is a common belief of most Muslims, especially Palestinian Muslims.

When it comes to "belief" - does it matter how much evidence there is? Belief isn't necessarily rational. And, as far as the belief that the Israeli's want to expel the Arabs - there is a public opinion poll supporting it.

My favourite change in the meaning of words is "slow genocide" -- you know, a "genocide" where the population is actually increasing. Also "open air prison", Bantustan, apartheid, indigenous. One of the others is the change in the legal meaning of "occupation".

I admit - I never heard the term "slow genocide" before, and while I think ethnic cleansing has some accuracy, genocide does not.


Yet, Israel DOES have serious problems - serious enough that they were forced to address - with the juvinile justice system in regards to Palestinians. There ARE inequities here, and they should not be swept under the carpet because it's just "Palestinians".

 

[Coyote]

And that the Israeli's think they know the Palestinians nafarious intentions.

How am I contradicting myself?

What is accurate? Major poll: About half of Israeli Jews want to expel Arabs

You've misunderstand what I was getting at.

Then enlighten me

And the Palestinians firmly believe Israel intends to expel them in entirety. What's your point?

From Israel or Gaza and the West Bank??

Greg

Major poll: About half of Israeli Jews want to expel Arabs
At the same time, public opinion among Jews is divided on the question of whether Israel can be a national home for the Jewish people while maintaining the Arab minority in the country. Nearly half of Israeli Jews, 48 percent, say Arabs should be deported or exiled from Israel. Religious people tend to be particularly supportive of such a move: about 71 percent agree that Arabs should be expelled.

I think the question sounds like it may be dodgy. I'll have a look.

Greg

Here's the actual survey source - it's actually a very interesting survey overall: Israel’s Religiously Divided Society

That's not entirely accurate.

The term "Hiloni" is referred to a Jewish Israeli with no connection to the Jewish religion, meaning, leading no religious lifestyle whatsoever. But we know it's not true. If you look at it more correctly, you'll find that most Jews in Israel have connection to religion. The Holiday of Passover is celebrated in almost every Jewish house. Even the most secular people will fast on Yom Kippur, because they're living in an environment which teaches the importance of respecting this holy day. The main holidays are kept in Israel.

But many Jews don't keep the Shabbat or pray each day, or fast each fasting-holiday, which categorizes them as "Secular". And again, that's far from accurate. I'd classify most Jews in Israel as traditional. Those without any connection AT ALL to their Jewish heritage, are very few.

This is fascinating - for one, before reading this study, I was unaware of these distinctions, and second - what you add.

Coming from a predominately secular/Christian cultural background, and the Jews I knew were largely secular - I really don't know this. And I'll add - the same applies to divisions in Islam. It's easy to assume it's monolithic in both religions and we see this all the time HERE...but it isn't. It is fascinating and varied, especially in Israel. It's rich.

 

[Coyote]

The question was "expelled OR TRANSFERRED".......as I expected. "Transferred" is one of those dodgy terms that "soften" the question. I would like to see other polls before I make further comment though.

Among Israeli Arabs and Jews, limited optimism about a two-state solution

Greg

I think it is also important to think about the context of that question. It came up as "proof" of Israel's nefarious intentions. Proof that "all along" Israel and the Jewish people have intended an exclusively Jewish State. Yet the evidence over the past 100 years of conflict has demonstrated the opposite -- the Jewish people and the State of Israel have consistently expressed the desire for a democratic and multi-cultural State. And Israel is indeed those things in action.

However, now, only after a hundred years of conflict with no progress and where Jews are being stabbed in the streets by citizens of Israel (!) do a good number of Israelis feel that perhaps it is not possible to live in a mixed community with Arabs.

One of the other questions in the poll was: Do you think a Jewish State is necessary for the long term survival of the Jewish people? And the answer is an overwhelming YES! 91% (BTW, that link will take you to a list of the actual survey questions).
So WHY do the Jewish people want to expel the Arabs? Is it because they have a "nefarious plan" to ethnically cleanse the territory and have always had? Or is it because the Jewish people believe (with cause, imo) that our very survival depends on it?

See? This is a really good example of examining actual intent rather than assigning a negative intent.

This is a bit of an aside Shusha, but some DID invision an exclusively Jewish state - this came up when I was reading about the Dar Yassin massacre - there were factions that DID want exactly that.

 

[Roudy]

The problem is that the Zionist fanatics do not understand that this particular section is dedicated to the Israel/Palestine conflict. So of course every post should be about the Israel/Palestine conflict.

The other problem is that Zionists do not understand that non Jews do not have a different moral compass for Jews. If Jews bombard Gaza and kill thousands, they are treated no differently than Russians when they did the same to Grozny, claiming that the civilian deaths were unintentional. Nor do most non Jews (Christian Zionists excluded) feel that just because they were of the Jewish faith and/or had been oppressed in Europe, they had a right to expropriate the native inhabitants of Palestine.

If the people had been Roma (who also were subjects of extermination by the Nazis) that had expropriated the native inhabitants of Palestine, they would receive the same criticism as the Jews for doing the same thing.

Except that Jews have always lived in Palestine - they ARE one of the native inhabitants.

Let's get our definitions straight. An Inuit that converts to Judaism becomes a Jew. An Inuit is not a native inhabitant of Palestine likewise a European that converts to Judaism is a Jew but not a native of Palestine.

There were a "handful" of native inhabitants prior to 1850 that had not converted to the Roman religions, Christianity and Islam through the years. These few followers of Judaism were native inhabitants, they were Arab Jews, they spoke Arabic and were culturally Arabs.

Not Europeans from Spain, Portugal, Germany, Russia, Poland, North Africa etc.

Conversely, native inhabitants of Palestine that changed religion through the ages did not magically become foreigners, just as native americans that adopted Christianity (or Judaism), for example, did not lose their status as native inhabitants of the americas.

Yeah, except....Almost all Jews have always been Jews ancestrally. Europeans, Middle Eastern, etc. so your argument discrediting today's Jews as real Jews, is null and void. That is a another favorite antisemite / antizionist argument "today's Jews aren't really Jews, they're actually all converts to Judaism, so no ties to Israel". That's just about the most delusional moronic thing that I've heard. Funny part is they actually think that people believe this stupid crap.

 

[SAYIT]

The question was "expelled OR TRANSFERRED".......as I expected. "Transferred" is one of those dodgy terms that "soften" the question. I would like to see other polls before I make further comment though.

Among Israeli Arabs and Jews, limited optimism about a two-state solution

Greg

I think it is also important to think about the context of that question. It came up as "proof" of Israel's nefarious intentions. Proof that "all along" Israel and the Jewish people have intended an exclusively Jewish State. Yet the evidence over the past 100 years of conflict has demonstrated the opposite -- the Jewish people and the State of Israel have consistently expressed the desire for a democratic and multi-cultural State. And Israel is indeed those things in action.

However, now, only after a hundred years of conflict with no progress and where Jews are being stabbed in the streets by citizens of Israel (!) do a good number of Israelis feel that perhaps it is not possible to live in a mixed community with Arabs.

One of the other questions in the poll was: Do you think a Jewish State is necessary for the long term survival of the Jewish people? And the answer is an overwhelming YES! 91% (BTW, that link will take you to a list of the actual survey questions).
So WHY do the Jewish people want to expel the Arabs? Is it because they have a "nefarious plan" to ethnically cleanse the territory and have always had? Or is it because the Jewish people believe (with cause, imo) that our very survival depends on it?

See? This is a really good example of examining actual intent rather than assigning a negative intent.

This is a bit of an aside Shusha, but some DID invision an exclusively Jewish state - this came up when I was reading about the Dar Yassin massacre - there were factions that DID want exactly that.

Woo ... I'm shocked! Some Jews in the 1940s thought the only place they could be safe - and their children be safe - would be a Jewish state ruled by Jews and only for Jews! I can't imagine what would have led them to feel that way!

 

[theliq]

There is a flip side to that though, and that is that any criticism of Israel get's the anti-semitism label. It is rather like walking on eggs.

Well, no. Not ANY criticism of Israel gets an anti-semitism label. And honestly, there is very little real criticism of Israel's polices and actions floating around. And this forum is a good example of that. Actually, you, Coyote, are pretty much the only pro-Palestinian poster who discusses and criticizes polices AS policies -- rather than blanket statements against "Zionists", or, let's be honest, Jews.

Pick a topic that is one of the current discussions about Israel as listed on page one of this forum:

Tunnels, for example. How many people are actually discussing whether or not destroying the tunnels is a good (moral) policy or not?

What exactly is a "Pro-Palestinian"??? I take it to mean supporting a People living in a State near Israel that includes Gaza and the West Bank living in Peace with its neighbours. It is an artificial entity as Palestinians already have a homeland in Jordan; one from which many were evicted because of Arafat's violent tendencies. Hamas is just a Stalinist terrorist org without claim to legitimacy. Not possible to create a State while Hamas is in control of Gaza. I would suggest that the first move of Palestinian supporters is to get rid of Hamas and free the people.

Greg

Considering Israel and the US CREATED HAMAS IN THE FIRST PLACE your Ignorant Comment,IS A JOKE.......Why are you people so Thick?

 

[theliq]

The problem is that the Zionist fanatics do not understand that this particular section is dedicated to the Israel/Palestine conflict. So of course every post should be about the Israel/Palestine conflict.

The other problem is that Zionists do not understand that non Jews do not have a different moral compass for Jews. If Jews bombard Gaza and kill thousands, they are treated no differently than Russians when they did the same to Grozny, claiming that the civilian deaths were unintentional. Nor do most non Jews (Christian Zionists excluded) feel that just because they were of the Jewish faith and/or had been oppressed in Europe, they had a right to expropriate the native inhabitants of Palestine.

If the people had been Roma (who also were subjects of extermination by the Nazis) that had expropriated the native inhabitants of Palestine, they would receive the same criticism as the Jews for doing the same thing.

Except that Jews have always lived in Palestine - they ARE one of the native inhabitants.

Let's get our definitions straight. An Inuit that converts to Judaism becomes a Jew. An Inuit is not a native inhabitant of Palestine likewise a European that converts to Judaism is a Jew but not a native of Palestine.

There were a "handful" of native inhabitants prior to 1850 that had not converted to the Roman religions, Christianity and Islam through the years. These few followers of Judaism were native inhabitants, they were Arab Jews, they spoke Arabic and were culturally Arabs.

Not Europeans from Spain, Portugal, Germany, Russia, Poland, North Africa etc.

Conversely, native inhabitants of Palestine that changed religion through the ages did not magically become foreigners, just as native americans that adopted Christianity (or Judaism), for example, did not lose their status as native inhabitants of the americas.

Yeah, except....Almost all Jews have always been Jews ancestrally. Europeans, Middle Eastern, etc. so your argument discrediting today's Jews as real Jews, is null and void. That is a another favorite antisemite / antizionist argument "today's Jews aren't really Jews, they're actually all converts to Judaism, so no ties to Israel". That's just about the most delusional moronic thing that I've heard. Funny part is they actually think that people believe this stupid crap.

No they have not....Most were other peoples who converted to Judiaism,really Roudy.

 

[Shusha]

Considering Israel and the US CREATED HAMAS IN THE FIRST PLACE your Ignorant Comment,IS A JOKE.......Why are you people so Thick?

Ah, yes. Another way to recognize anti-zionism/anti-semitism -- this little thing called victim-blaming.

 

[Mindful]

The question was "expelled OR TRANSFERRED".......as I expected. "Transferred" is one of those dodgy terms that "soften" the question. I would like to see other polls before I make further comment though.

Among Israeli Arabs and Jews, limited optimism about a two-state solution

Greg

I think it is also important to think about the context of that question. It came up as "proof" of Israel's nefarious intentions. Proof that "all along" Israel and the Jewish people have intended an exclusively Jewish State. Yet the evidence over the past 100 years of conflict has demonstrated the opposite -- the Jewish people and the State of Israel have consistently expressed the desire for a democratic and multi-cultural State. And Israel is indeed those things in action.

However, now, only after a hundred years of conflict with no progress and where Jews are being stabbed in the streets by citizens of Israel (!) do a good number of Israelis feel that perhaps it is not possible to live in a mixed community with Arabs.

One of the other questions in the poll was: Do you think a Jewish State is necessary for the long term survival of the Jewish people? And the answer is an overwhelming YES! 91% (BTW, that link will take you to a list of the actual survey questions).
So WHY do the Jewish people want to expel the Arabs? Is it because they have a "nefarious plan" to ethnically cleanse the territory and have always had? Or is it because the Jewish people believe (with cause, imo) that our very survival depends on it?

See? This is a really good example of examining actual intent rather than assigning a negative intent.

This is a bit of an aside Shusha, but some DID invision an exclusively Jewish state - this came up when I was reading about the Dar Yassin massacre - there were factions that DID want exactly that.

Woo ... I'm shocked! Some Jews in the 1940s thought the only place they could be safe - and their children be safe - would be a Jewish state ruled by Jews and only for Jews! I can't imagine what would have led them to feel that way!

Well said.