'Anti-Zionism Is Anti-Semitic'?

[Roudy]

Not all Jews are Zionists, and a great many Jews are actually opposed to Zionism.

Remember that poll I posted yesterday? The one that noted 91% of Jews believe that having a Jewish State is essential to the survival of the Jewish people? All of us are Zionists.

There are no Jews who are opposed to Zionism -- opposed to the idea of the Jewish people being liberated, safe, secure and free to pursue self-determination. There should be no PEOPLE who are opposed to a concept as simple and obviously morally correct as that.

The small percentage of Jews who do not actively pursue Zionism or who reject it are not rejecting the CONCEPT of Zionism -- they are only rejecting the manner in which it comes about. They believe it should come from G-d and not from the people. They believe that certain signs must be in place, certain events much happen BEFORE Zionism. But they don't reject Zionism itself.

Exactly even those Jews aren't rejecting Zionism, they are rejecting the timing of it with regards to today's Israel.

 

[Roudy]

"Overall, about seven-in-ten Jews surveyed say they feel either very attached (30%) or somewhat attached (39%) to Israel..."

http://www.pewforum.org/files/2013/10/jewish-american-beliefs-attitudes-culture-survey-overview.pdf

Its a discussion. Not dodgeball. What's your point as it relates to my post?

That 91% of Jews are supporters of Zionism is out of line with the results of Pew's survey. It is not clear to me how a Jew can be a Zionist if he/she isn't at least "somewhat attached to Israel".

Who cares what's clear to an antisemite. Zionism is insperable from the Jewish faith.

 

[montelatici]

The

I would agree with 1, 3 and 4.

#2 - not so much. Look at the people who post here. Many tend to have their own particular areas of interest and specialization and passion. What drives people to "single out" Israel might be the same thing which drives people to, at one time, "single out" South Africa, or "single out" Burma. There seems to be this expectation that once must be equitable in condemnations around the world and that expectation only comes up with Israel.[/QUOTE

I know you feel compelled to defend your Islamist and Nazi friends here, but when your fellow antisemites single out Israel, they do so because it is the one Jewish state in the world.

The double standards used to attack the Jewish state are so obvious in the way that NOBODY else in the world is attacked for anything even remotely similar removes any doubt as to the ethnic basis of your hatred. Especially considering your automatic defense of those with the very worst human rights abuses in the world, your concern here has nothing to do with human rights and everything to do with antisemitism.

re

Excluding very few Islamist fanatics that post here, the neutral's position vis-a-vis the Israeli Jews is no different than their position was or would have been towards the whites in Apartheid South Africa, the French in Algeria, the whites in Rhodesia etc.

For example, there was no hate for the Europeans that ruled South Africa, what was hated was their policies and their insistence that South Africa would have to remain a white-ruled nation through the disenfranchisement of a large part of the population.

Accusing anyone that criticizes Israel in this section of the forum, dedicated to the I/P conflict, is childish and absurd. You demand that Israeli Jews be given a pass for their brutal treatment of a population as large as their own, forget about it, it isn't going to happen. There is plenty of Muslim bashing, for good reason, in the Middle East and Europe sections, and I am one of the bashers, go there if you want to observe the criticizing of the actions of Muslim ruled states for behaving as the Israeli state behaves.

How many times have you been told that nobody's buying your Israel / South Africa comparison? Whites were not in South Africa thousands of years before the blacks, nor did they maintain a presence and keep coming back to South Africa for thousands of years despite the many invasions and pogroms, nor is South Africa the religious, spiritual, and cultural holy land of the whites for 3000 years, as it is with Israel and the Jews. And that's just the tip of the iceberg with regards to the differences. Other things could be mentioned such as equal rights to the two million Arab Muslim citizens in Israel, and Arab Muslim representatives in the Israeli Parlaiment.

Nor does it have anything absolutely to do with the topic of this thread and in fact anything on this forum. But hey, go ahead and post it another 5000 times, just like those five irrelevant loser documents you somehow inject into every thread.

Well, not that it makes any difference. The European Jews hadn't been going "back", they had never been to Palestine. That's a bunch of self-serving bullshit. A myth that only Jews believe does not change the moral compass. The Koran might tell Muslims that non-believers must be converted, I not only reject that, I find it absurd and despicable, just as I reject and find despicable the biblical justification for the expropriation of the non-Jews of Palestine.

But, we have a more recent example of expropriation of the native people. Former American slave groups expropriated the native people living in what was to become Liberia and colonized. They lived separate from the natives and were able to maintain absolute rule for 130 years until finally overthrown by the native people, led by the native leader Samuel Doe in 1980.

The colonization and exploitation of the native people by the Americo-Liberians for 130 years can't be justified by the suffering caused by slavery or by the claim that the Americo-Liberian's ancestors came from Africa.

That notwithstanding, the dynamics of the European colonization of Rhodesia and South Africa are no different than the European colonization of Palestine.

Again your comparison is totally useless, because most of today's Jews come from thousands of years of Jewish ancestry, there has always been a Jewish presence in Israel and especially in the last 700 years of the Ottoman Empire where Jews were invited from all over to repopulate their holy land.

Clearly the Ottomans who were Muslims themselves realized that the land is Jewish holy land first and foremost. So Jews from the Middle East, Europe and elsewhere had every right to go back and join their brethern in re-establishing their ancestral homeland, free from persecution and the genocide they had faced over the last two millennia.

So your comparisons to South Africa are null and void as the Whites had no ancestral, religious, historical, or cultural ties to South Africa, nor did they maintain a presence for 2000 years, like the Jews did to Israel.

But like I said, if you want to repeat the same ineffective, irrelvant bullshit comparison, go right ahead, It won't change any of the facts of the ground. Israel moves on.

I don't recognize the right of any people from anywhere, of any religion to colonize/invade/migrate to somewhere else, to dispossess the native inhabitants of their land and homes.

The Americo-Liberians had far closer ties to Africa than European Jews to Palestine. And they, the Americo-Liberians had no right to dispossess the native people and rule over them oppressively for 130 years.

 

[Mindful]

The

re

Excluding very few Islamist fanatics that post here, the neutral's position vis-a-vis the Israeli Jews is no different than their position was or would have been towards the whites in Apartheid South Africa, the French in Algeria, the whites in Rhodesia etc.

For example, there was no hate for the Europeans that ruled South Africa, what was hated was their policies and their insistence that South Africa would have to remain a white-ruled nation through the disenfranchisement of a large part of the population.

Accusing anyone that criticizes Israel in this section of the forum, dedicated to the I/P conflict, is childish and absurd. You demand that Israeli Jews be given a pass for their brutal treatment of a population as large as their own, forget about it, it isn't going to happen. There is plenty of Muslim bashing, for good reason, in the Middle East and Europe sections, and I am one of the bashers, go there if you want to observe the criticizing of the actions of Muslim ruled states for behaving as the Israeli state behaves.

How many times have you been told that nobody's buying your Israel / South Africa comparison? Whites were not in South Africa thousands of years before the blacks, nor did they maintain a presence and keep coming back to South Africa for thousands of years despite the many invasions and pogroms, nor is South Africa the religious, spiritual, and cultural holy land of the whites for 3000 years, as it is with Israel and the Jews. And that's just the tip of the iceberg with regards to the differences. Other things could be mentioned such as equal rights to the two million Arab Muslim citizens in Israel, and Arab Muslim representatives in the Israeli Parlaiment.

Nor does it have anything absolutely to do with the topic of this thread and in fact anything on this forum. But hey, go ahead and post it another 5000 times, just like those five irrelevant loser documents you somehow inject into every thread.

Well, not that it makes any difference. The European Jews hadn't been going "back", they had never been to Palestine. That's a bunch of self-serving bullshit. A myth that only Jews believe does not change the moral compass. The Koran might tell Muslims that non-believers must be converted, I not only reject that, I find it absurd and despicable, just as I reject and find despicable the biblical justification for the expropriation of the non-Jews of Palestine.

But, we have a more recent example of expropriation of the native people. Former American slave groups expropriated the native people living in what was to become Liberia and colonized. They lived separate from the natives and were able to maintain absolute rule for 130 years until finally overthrown by the native people, led by the native leader Samuel Doe in 1980.

The colonization and exploitation of the native people by the Americo-Liberians for 130 years can't be justified by the suffering caused by slavery or by the claim that the Americo-Liberian's ancestors came from Africa.

That notwithstanding, the dynamics of the European colonization of Rhodesia and South Africa are no different than the European colonization of Palestine.

Again your comparison is totally useless, because most of today's Jews come from thousands of years of Jewish ancestry, there has always been a Jewish presence in Israel and especially in the last 700 years of the Ottoman Empire where Jews were invited from all over to repopulate their holy land.

Clearly the Ottomans who were Muslims themselves realized that the land is Jewish holy land first and foremost. So Jews from the Middle East, Europe and elsewhere had every right to go back and join their brethern in re-establishing their ancestral homeland, free from persecution and the genocide they had faced over the last two millennia.

So your comparisons to South Africa are null and void as the Whites had no ancestral, religious, historical, or cultural ties to South Africa, nor did they maintain a presence for 2000 years, like the Jews did to Israel.

But like I said, if you want to repeat the same ineffective, irrelvant bullshit comparison, go right ahead, It won't change any of the facts of the ground. Israel moves on.

I don't recognize the right of any people from anywhere, of any religion to colonize/invade/migrate to somewhere else, to dispossess the native inhabitants of their land and homes.

The Americo-Liberians had far closer ties to Africa than European Jews to Palestine. And they, the Americo-Liberians had no right to dispossess the native people and rule over them oppressively for 130 years.

You could always retire to the library.

 

[Shusha]

I don't recognize the right of any people from anywhere, of any religion to colonize/invade/migrate to somewhere else, to dispossess the native inhabitants of their land and homes.

Don't be ridiculous -- of course you do. You recognize the rights of the Romans and the Arabs to migrate to Palestine, introduce and replace the original culture with an entirely new culture, and hold exclusive right to the territory and the exclusive right to be called "native".

The only migration you reject is the migration of the Jewish people back to their homeland.

 

[Lipush]

The

re

Excluding very few Islamist fanatics that post here, the neutral's position vis-a-vis the Israeli Jews is no different than their position was or would have been towards the whites in Apartheid South Africa, the French in Algeria, the whites in Rhodesia etc.

For example, there was no hate for the Europeans that ruled South Africa, what was hated was their policies and their insistence that South Africa would have to remain a white-ruled nation through the disenfranchisement of a large part of the population.

Accusing anyone that criticizes Israel in this section of the forum, dedicated to the I/P conflict, is childish and absurd. You demand that Israeli Jews be given a pass for their brutal treatment of a population as large as their own, forget about it, it isn't going to happen. There is plenty of Muslim bashing, for good reason, in the Middle East and Europe sections, and I am one of the bashers, go there if you want to observe the criticizing of the actions of Muslim ruled states for behaving as the Israeli state behaves.

How many times have you been told that nobody's buying your Israel / South Africa comparison? Whites were not in South Africa thousands of years before the blacks, nor did they maintain a presence and keep coming back to South Africa for thousands of years despite the many invasions and pogroms, nor is South Africa the religious, spiritual, and cultural holy land of the whites for 3000 years, as it is with Israel and the Jews. And that's just the tip of the iceberg with regards to the differences. Other things could be mentioned such as equal rights to the two million Arab Muslim citizens in Israel, and Arab Muslim representatives in the Israeli Parlaiment.

Nor does it have anything absolutely to do with the topic of this thread and in fact anything on this forum. But hey, go ahead and post it another 5000 times, just like those five irrelevant loser documents you somehow inject into every thread.

Well, not that it makes any difference. The European Jews hadn't been going "back", they had never been to Palestine. That's a bunch of self-serving bullshit. A myth that only Jews believe does not change the moral compass. The Koran might tell Muslims that non-believers must be converted, I not only reject that, I find it absurd and despicable, just as I reject and find despicable the biblical justification for the expropriation of the non-Jews of Palestine.

But, we have a more recent example of expropriation of the native people. Former American slave groups expropriated the native people living in what was to become Liberia and colonized. They lived separate from the natives and were able to maintain absolute rule for 130 years until finally overthrown by the native people, led by the native leader Samuel Doe in 1980.

The colonization and exploitation of the native people by the Americo-Liberians for 130 years can't be justified by the suffering caused by slavery or by the claim that the Americo-Liberian's ancestors came from Africa.

That notwithstanding, the dynamics of the European colonization of Rhodesia and South Africa are no different than the European colonization of Palestine.

Again your comparison is totally useless, because most of today's Jews come from thousands of years of Jewish ancestry, there has always been a Jewish presence in Israel and especially in the last 700 years of the Ottoman Empire where Jews were invited from all over to repopulate their holy land.

Clearly the Ottomans who were Muslims themselves realized that the land is Jewish holy land first and foremost. So Jews from the Middle East, Europe and elsewhere had every right to go back and join their brethern in re-establishing their ancestral homeland, free from persecution and the genocide they had faced over the last two millennia.

So your comparisons to South Africa are null and void as the Whites had no ancestral, religious, historical, or cultural ties to South Africa, nor did they maintain a presence for 2000 years, like the Jews did to Israel.

But like I said, if you want to repeat the same ineffective, irrelvant bullshit comparison, go right ahead, It won't change any of the facts of the ground. Israel moves on.

I don't recognize the right of any people from anywhere, of any religion to colonize/invade/migrate to somewhere else, to dispossess the native inhabitants of their land and homes.

The Americo-Liberians had far closer ties to Africa than European Jews to Palestine. And they, the Americo-Liberians had no right to dispossess the native people and rule over them oppressively for 130 years.

That must be the stupidest thing you've said, yet.

Every country in the world was established by grabbing, migrating, and occupying. You must be ignorant or naive to believe people in such states have no rights. You basically say no one in this world does.

America and England are the poster states of occupation and genocide of other states. So when coming from the Americans it ia even more delusional

 

[Shusha]

That 91% of Jews are supporters of Zionism is out of line with the results of Pew's survey. It is not clear to me how a Jew can be a Zionist if he/she isn't at least "somewhat attached to Israel".

Its not clear to you how one can support the idea that a people be free and safe and secure and liberated from persecution and able to determine their own fate through a nation of their own?

Are you Palestinian? Are you "attached" to Palestine? Do you still support the survival of Palestinians and Palestine?

Are you Tibetan? Are you "attached" to Tibet? Do you still support the survival of Tibet and Tibetan culture?

Are you Catalan? Are you "attached" to Catalonia? Do you still support the survival of the Catalan language and its culture?

Kurdish? Quebecois? First Nations? Roma? Cypriot? Western Saharan?

This isn't rocket science.

 

[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. .

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.

1) The early MAPS of Haifa, Tel Aviv SHOW the state of the land the Israelis started with. I don't need a whole documentary about a few "photos"..

2) You're not thinking broadly enough about the ADVANTAGES of reclaiming those "camps" with the poor living conditions and developing them for the RESIDENTS of Jordan and Lebanon and Syria. Land exchanges would have NET BENEFITS to the countries currently ignoring "their Palestinian Problem".. And Egypt has no pressure to "develop" across the Canal and into the Sinai. Giving a bit to Gaza or enabling a transportation corridor between Gaza and the WB would be a HUGE incentive to a political settlement.

Anti-Zionists concentrate way too much on a TWO PARTY deal between JUST Israel and the Palis. But the countries hosting the REST of the Pali nation are also vital to any deal..

To make this into a "Jewish-Zionist" problem is not looking at the whole situation for the Pali nation right now.. It's an EXCUSE to repeatedly play the anti- Jew/Zionist card. And it's why most of "anti-Zionism = anti-semitic".. Because Anti-Zionists who CLAIM to care about the Palestinians --- only want to look at Israel's relationship with the Palis -- and not the other Arab country relationships..

 

[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?

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?

There are SOME valid Jewish ties to the West Bank. Like the monument in Hebron where some think Abraham is buried. In this case --- "land swaps" could be arranged. But having 500 settlers in Hebron --- does NOT make Hebron "an Israeli city".. Israel completely swept out Jewish settlers by force to release Gaza. There will have to be some of that again. But after 60 years -- it's getting increasingly difficult to FORCE an Apartheid like deal.

When do you think the Palis are gonna be ready to form a government? If it's another 50 years -- there are NO guarantees to land claims..

 

[flacaltenn]

OK -- Somewhere about page 20 -- the "topic" was fading away. And by Page 23 it got real personal
with many post violations. And NOW -- you couldn't find the topic with a pack of 5 bloodhounds.

Back to the topic or at least CLOSER than just flaming each other.

 

[Roudy]

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?

There are SOME valid Jewish ties to the West Bank. Like the monument in Hebron where some think Abraham is buried. In this case --- "land swaps" could be arranged. But having 500 settlers in Hebron --- does NOT make Hebron "an Israeli city".. Israel completely swept out Jewish settlers by force to release Gaza. There will have to be some of that again. But after 60 years -- it's getting increasingly difficult to FORCE an Apartheid like deal.

When do you think the Palis are gonna be ready to form a government? If it's another 50 years -- there are NO guarantees to land claims..

To add to that, anti-Zionists could care less about the so called Palestinians. The reason they are so obsessed with this conflict has to do with their antisemitism, hence the title of this thread. Especially when you look at the number of Muslims (and Christians and other non Muslims) that are being killed at the hands of other Muslims it becomes even more obvious what the motivation is.

 

[flacaltenn]

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?

There are SOME valid Jewish ties to the West Bank. Like the monument in Hebron where some think Abraham is buried. In this case --- "land swaps" could be arranged. But having 500 settlers in Hebron --- does NOT make Hebron "an Israeli city".. Israel completely swept out Jewish settlers by force to release Gaza. There will have to be some of that again. But after 60 years -- it's getting increasingly difficult to FORCE an Apartheid like deal.

When do you think the Palis are gonna be ready to form a government? If it's another 50 years -- there are NO guarantees to land claims..

To add to that, anti-Zionists could care less about the so called Palestinians. The reason they are so obsessed with this conflict has to do with their antisemitism, hence the title of this thread. Especially when you look at the number of Muslims (and Christians and other non Muslims) that are being killed at the hands of other Muslims it becomes even more obvious what the motivation is.

The whole exercise of separating anti-zionism from anti-Jewish is ridiculous when you apply it to ISRAELIS. When attacked, THEY are not gonna ponder whether they are being attacked because they are Jewish or because they are Israelis.

WE -- wouldn't make that distinction either if ISIS came across our borders and attacked Jewish targets or Christian targets. Oh my -- did they do it because we're Americans? Or did they do it because we're Christians?


Zionism WAS an effort in nationalism. Today -- it's an EXCUSE to hate on Israelis or just any ole Jew..

So tell me.. If you are an Israeli Jew --- how could you love your country, but HATE Zionism --- if not for Biblical justifications? (which a handful of Orthodox proclaim as "competing with God's Plan")

Or if you're an American (or Aussie) --- You can't be vehemently anti-Zionist and support Israels' Right to Exist. So on WHAT PLANET is being anti-Zionist NOT anti-Jewish if you deeply desire to see a forced Exodus of Jews from Israel?

OR -- if you are one of the regulars here that sling that Z-Word repeatedly -- don't be advertising how many Jew friends you have.. There's a difference between protesting and objecting to the POLICIES of the State of Israel and using the Z-word....

 

[montelatici]

I don't recognize the right of any people from anywhere, of any religion to colonize/invade/migrate to somewhere else, to dispossess the native inhabitants of their land and homes.

Don't be ridiculous -- of course you do. You recognize the rights of the Romans and the Arabs to migrate to Palestine, introduce and replace the original culture with an entirely new culture, and hold exclusive right to the territory and the exclusive right to be called "native".

The only migration you reject is the migration of the Jewish people back to their homeland.

Neither the Romans nor the Arabians nor the Crusaders nor the Ottomans migrated to Palestine to replace the existing inhabitants with their own people. They conquered and ruled the native people, exploiting them of course. Much like the Romans did in Britain or the Moors in Spain. Once they left or were forced to leave other rulers replaced them, the people stayed the same, adopting some aspects of the culture of the rulers. Even as recently as 100 years ago, once the Ottoman rulers left Palestine, the people remained the same, they didn't magically become Turks. I just wonder why this is so difficult to understand.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

'Anti-Zionism Is Anti-Semitic'

…is an idiotic notion.

Which is why any ‘debate’ in this forum is pointless.

 

[montelatici]

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?

There are SOME valid Jewish ties to the West Bank. Like the monument in Hebron where some think Abraham is buried. In this case --- "land swaps" could be arranged. But having 500 settlers in Hebron --- does NOT make Hebron "an Israeli city".. Israel completely swept out Jewish settlers by force to release Gaza. There will have to be some of that again. But after 60 years -- it's getting increasingly difficult to FORCE an Apartheid like deal.

When do you think the Palis are gonna be ready to form a government? If it's another 50 years -- there are NO guarantees to land claims..

To add to that, anti-Zionists could care less about the so called Palestinians. The reason they are so obsessed with this conflict has to do with their antisemitism, hence the title of this thread. Especially when you look at the number of Muslims (and Christians and other non Muslims) that are being killed at the hands of other Muslims it becomes even more obvious what the motivation is.

The whole exercise of separating anti-zionism from anti-Jewish is ridiculous when you apply it to ISRAELIS. When attacked, THEY are not gonna ponder whether they are being attacked because they are Jewish or because they are Israelis.

WE -- wouldn't make that distinction either if ISIS came across our borders and attacked Jewish targets or Christian targets. Oh my -- did they do it because we're Americans? Or did they do it because we're Christians?


Zionism WAS an effort in nationalism. Today -- it's an EXCUSE to hate on Israelis or just any ole Jew..

So tell me.. If you are an Israeli Jew --- how could you love your country, but HATE Zionism --- if not for obscure Biblical justifications? (which a handful of Orthodox proclaim)

Or if you're an American (or Aussie) --- You can't be vehemently anti-Zionist and support Israels' Right to Exist. So on WHAT PLANET is being anti-Zionist NOT anti-Jewish if you deeply desire to see a forced Exodus of Jews from Israel?

OR -- if you are one of the regulars here that sling that Z-Word repeatedly -- don't be advertising how many Jew friends you have.. There's a difference between protesting and objecting to the POLICIES of the State of Israel and using the Z-word....

Zionism, just as Manifest Destiny, justified the dispossession of the native people. One can criticize Manifest Destiny (and what it did to the native americans) and not be anti-American.

 

[flacaltenn]

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?

There are SOME valid Jewish ties to the West Bank. Like the monument in Hebron where some think Abraham is buried. In this case --- "land swaps" could be arranged. But having 500 settlers in Hebron --- does NOT make Hebron "an Israeli city".. Israel completely swept out Jewish settlers by force to release Gaza. There will have to be some of that again. But after 60 years -- it's getting increasingly difficult to FORCE an Apartheid like deal.

When do you think the Palis are gonna be ready to form a government? If it's another 50 years -- there are NO guarantees to land claims..

To add to that, anti-Zionists could care less about the so called Palestinians. The reason they are so obsessed with this conflict has to do with their antisemitism, hence the title of this thread. Especially when you look at the number of Muslims (and Christians and other non Muslims) that are being killed at the hands of other Muslims it becomes even more obvious what the motivation is.

The whole exercise of separating anti-zionism from anti-Jewish is ridiculous when you apply it to ISRAELIS. When attacked, THEY are not gonna ponder whether they are being attacked because they are Jewish or because they are Israelis.

WE -- wouldn't make that distinction either if ISIS came across our borders and attacked Jewish targets or Christian targets. Oh my -- did they do it because we're Americans? Or did they do it because we're Christians?


Zionism WAS an effort in nationalism. Today -- it's an EXCUSE to hate on Israelis or just any ole Jew..

So tell me.. If you are an Israeli Jew --- how could you love your country, but HATE Zionism --- if not for obscure Biblical justifications? (which a handful of Orthodox proclaim)

Or if you're an American (or Aussie) --- You can't be vehemently anti-Zionist and support Israels' Right to Exist. So on WHAT PLANET is being anti-Zionist NOT anti-Jewish if you deeply desire to see a forced Exodus of Jews from Israel?

OR -- if you are one of the regulars here that sling that Z-Word repeatedly -- don't be advertising how many Jew friends you have.. There's a difference between protesting and objecting to the POLICIES of the State of Israel and using the Z-word....

Zionism, just as Manifest Destiny, justified the dispossession of the native people. One can criticize Manifest Destiny (and what it did to the native americans) and not be anti-American.

Not to sound confrontational -- But so what are you gonna do about it?

I mean -- now when Zionism AND Manifest Destiny are both Historical curiosities..

If your plan involves lots of moving vans and armed guards -- that might answer the OP question..

 

[montelatici]

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?

There are SOME valid Jewish ties to the West Bank. Like the monument in Hebron where some think Abraham is buried. In this case --- "land swaps" could be arranged. But having 500 settlers in Hebron --- does NOT make Hebron "an Israeli city".. Israel completely swept out Jewish settlers by force to release Gaza. There will have to be some of that again. But after 60 years -- it's getting increasingly difficult to FORCE an Apartheid like deal.

When do you think the Palis are gonna be ready to form a government? If it's another 50 years -- there are NO guarantees to land claims..

To add to that, anti-Zionists could care less about the so called Palestinians. The reason they are so obsessed with this conflict has to do with their antisemitism, hence the title of this thread. Especially when you look at the number of Muslims (and Christians and other non Muslims) that are being killed at the hands of other Muslims it becomes even more obvious what the motivation is.

Bullshit. The anti-semitism canard is used to attempt to stifle any criticism of Israel's policies. There is plenty of criticism of Muslim behavior in the appropriate sections of this site.

 

[flacaltenn]

'Anti-Zionism Is Anti-Semitic'

…is an idiotic notion.

Which is why any ‘debate’ in this forum is pointless.

Well gee -- something that clear to you that is widely discussed worldwide -- you must be a freakin' genius..
What IS a Zionist today --- CCJones? Does it have a meaning to you? Is there ANOTHER Israel about to be created that we don't know about?

 

[Hollie]

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?

There are SOME valid Jewish ties to the West Bank. Like the monument in Hebron where some think Abraham is buried. In this case --- "land swaps" could be arranged. But having 500 settlers in Hebron --- does NOT make Hebron "an Israeli city".. Israel completely swept out Jewish settlers by force to release Gaza. There will have to be some of that again. But after 60 years -- it's getting increasingly difficult to FORCE an Apartheid like deal.

When do you think the Palis are gonna be ready to form a government? If it's another 50 years -- there are NO guarantees to land claims..

To add to that, anti-Zionists could care less about the so called Palestinians. The reason they are so obsessed with this conflict has to do with their antisemitism, hence the title of this thread. Especially when you look at the number of Muslims (and Christians and other non Muslims) that are being killed at the hands of other Muslims it becomes even more obvious what the motivation is.

The whole exercise of separating anti-zionism from anti-Jewish is ridiculous when you apply it to ISRAELIS. When attacked, THEY are not gonna ponder whether they are being attacked because they are Jewish or because they are Israelis.

WE -- wouldn't make that distinction either if ISIS came across our borders and attacked Jewish targets or Christian targets. Oh my -- did they do it because we're Americans? Or did they do it because we're Christians?


Zionism WAS an effort in nationalism. Today -- it's an EXCUSE to hate on Israelis or just any ole Jew..

So tell me.. If you are an Israeli Jew --- how could you love your country, but HATE Zionism --- if not for obscure Biblical justifications? (which a handful of Orthodox proclaim)

Or if you're an American (or Aussie) --- You can't be vehemently anti-Zionist and support Israels' Right to Exist. So on WHAT PLANET is being anti-Zionist NOT anti-Jewish if you deeply desire to see a forced Exodus of Jews from Israel?

OR -- if you are one of the regulars here that sling that Z-Word repeatedly -- don't be advertising how many Jew friends you have.. There's a difference between protesting and objecting to the POLICIES of the State of Israel and using the Z-word....

Zionism, just as Manifest Destiny, justified the dispossession of the native people. One can criticize Manifest Destiny (and what it did to the native americans) and not be anti-American.

Lamenting the collapse of the invading / colonizing Turk empire.

Learn to live with it. The era of your muhammedan heroes slaughtering their way across North Africa and Europe is in the past. It was the collapse of the Turk empire that allowed the allied powers to facilitate the emergence of Israel - a western style democracy in an otherwise theocratic-totalitarian dystopia.

One can criticize a crushing islamo-theocracy and the slaughter that accompanied the wars of conquest and colonization that occurred after the death of Islam's inventor and be correct in denigrating islamo-fascism.

 

[montelatici]

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

There are SOME valid Jewish ties to the West Bank. Like the monument in Hebron where some think Abraham is buried. In this case --- "land swaps" could be arranged. But having 500 settlers in Hebron --- does NOT make Hebron "an Israeli city".. Israel completely swept out Jewish settlers by force to release Gaza. There will have to be some of that again. But after 60 years -- it's getting increasingly difficult to FORCE an Apartheid like deal.

When do you think the Palis are gonna be ready to form a government? If it's another 50 years -- there are NO guarantees to land claims..

To add to that, anti-Zionists could care less about the so called Palestinians. The reason they are so obsessed with this conflict has to do with their antisemitism, hence the title of this thread. Especially when you look at the number of Muslims (and Christians and other non Muslims) that are being killed at the hands of other Muslims it becomes even more obvious what the motivation is.

The whole exercise of separating anti-zionism from anti-Jewish is ridiculous when you apply it to ISRAELIS. When attacked, THEY are not gonna ponder whether they are being attacked because they are Jewish or because they are Israelis.

WE -- wouldn't make that distinction either if ISIS came across our borders and attacked Jewish targets or Christian targets. Oh my -- did they do it because we're Americans? Or did they do it because we're Christians?


Zionism WAS an effort in nationalism. Today -- it's an EXCUSE to hate on Israelis or just any ole Jew..

So tell me.. If you are an Israeli Jew --- how could you love your country, but HATE Zionism --- if not for obscure Biblical justifications? (which a handful of Orthodox proclaim)

Or if you're an American (or Aussie) --- You can't be vehemently anti-Zionist and support Israels' Right to Exist. So on WHAT PLANET is being anti-Zionist NOT anti-Jewish if you deeply desire to see a forced Exodus of Jews from Israel?

OR -- if you are one of the regulars here that sling that Z-Word repeatedly -- don't be advertising how many Jew friends you have.. There's a difference between protesting and objecting to the POLICIES of the State of Israel and using the Z-word....

Zionism, just as Manifest Destiny, justified the dispossession of the native people. One can criticize Manifest Destiny (and what it did to the native americans) and not be anti-American.

Not to sound confrontational -- But so what are you gonna do about it?

I mean -- now when Zionism AND Manifest Destiny are both Historical curiosities..

If your plan involves lots of moving vans and armed guards -- that might answer the OP question..

When Zionism becomes an historical curiosity, it will probably be looked upon are Manifest Destiny or the American Colonization Society (Liberia) Charter is looked upon today. Your buddies are the ones that see "flattening" Gaza and ethnically cleansing the West Bank as solutions. I have always said, the only solution now is the establishment of a democratic and secular state for all the people of Palestine. And, that's what I believe will happen eventually.