Explanation of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict

[P F Tinmore]

There is certain amount of "imperialist baggage" that applies. The Zionist movement sought to occupy a land already populated, and re-create an ancient state based on one ethnicity/religion. Pilgrims are travelers who journey to sacred places for religious reasons.

Both fit, no?

I suppose the Zionist movement is like Imperial colonization, in much the way a dolphin is like a fish.

The Zionist colonization is the same as any other colonization project. More like a shark is like a shark

What nation were these "colonists" citizens of? You neglect to tell. Again. Still.

Several European nations, just as the colonists of South Africa were.

Europe is not a sovereign nation, Cupcake.

While I admit that Netherlands is in Europe, Europe sent no colonists anywhere... not even to South Africa.

So. What nation were these Jewish "colonists" you refer to citizens of? You neglect to tell. Again. Still.

It was an inside job. The yet to be named state of Israel was created inside Palestine under the wing (or the gun) of the British in the mandate period.

"In the life of the Jewish community, the Jewish Agency occupies a special place in virtue both of its status under article 4 of the Mandate and as a representative organization of world Jewry. Organized in Palestine into some 20 departments corresponding in general to the departments of State in a self-governing country, the Agency concerns itself with every aspect of Jewish economic and social development in Palestine and exercises a decisive influence in major questions of policy and administration, particularly in regard to immigration and agricultural development.

"The Yishuv (Jewish community in Palestine) is thus a highly organized and closely knit society which, partly on a basis of communal effort, has created a national life distinctive enough to merit the Royal Commission's title of a State within a State ..." 36/
- See more at: The Origins and Evolution of the Palestine Problem - CEIRPP DPR study part II 1947-1977 30 June 1979 ​

The Zionists imported settlers from wherever they could find them and created or expand the colonies. In 1947 the yet to be named Israel conscripted settlers into its military and proceeded to cleanse Palestine of its native inhabitants. Over 300,000 Palestinians were dispossessed before Israel's declaration of independence.

The foreign Jewish Agency, that was created in Zurich by the foreign World Zionist Organization, declared Israel's independence. Of the thirty seven people who signed Israel's declaration of independence, only one was born in Palestine and he was the son of settlers. Israel's intended population was recently imported settlers.

Israel is a settler colonial project occupying Palestine.

 

[Phoenall]

So where is the link showing that this was put in place and actioned ?

Do you need a link to Israel? Proof that it was put in place and "actioned".

I still think you mean to say they were "pilgrims." Pilgrims from numerous nations (primarily European) who settled in "Palestine proper." Pilgrims who settled in Palestine for the purpose of realizing, and living in, a Jewish nation.

You can go further to say that they were: Pilgrims from numerous nations (primarily European) settled in "Palestine proper" for the purpose of realizing, and living in, a Jewish nation; under the direction of the Zionist Organization; of which Dr. Chaim Weizmann was president.

Of course, if your purpose--and I mean your purpose, Pumpkin--in your use of the term "colonization" is to illicitly attach all the imperialist baggage that is associated with colonialism, then certainly, "pilgrim" doesn't serve that purpose.

"Pilgrim" is the proper term (regardless of whoever used an improper term previously), and it's the precise term someone interested in conveying accurate information would use; it's the term someone with intellectual integrity would use.

After all, just because Dr. Weizmann was sloppy with his vocabulary, it does not follow that you must also be so sloppy. Correct?

But, if you disagree, you need only identify the European nation these so-called "colonists" were citizens of. Be specific, Cupcake.

No colonists. No colony. No colonization.

Colonist is as accurate a term as "Pilgrim".

col·o·nize
ˈkäləˌnīz/
verb
verb: colonize; 3rd person present: colonizes; past tense: colonized; past participle: colonized; gerund or present participle: colonizing; verb: colonise; 3rd person present: colonises; past tense: colonised; past participle: colonised; gerund or present participle: colonising

1. (of a country or its citizens) send a group of settlers to (a place) and establish political control over it.
   "the Greeks colonized Sicily and southern Italy"
   synonyms: settle (in), people, populate;More
   occupy, take over, seize, capture, subjugate
   "the Germans colonized Tanganyika in 1885"
   • come to settle among and establish political control over (the indigenous people of an area).
     "a white family that tries to colonize a Caribbean island"
   • appropriate (a place or domain) for one's own use.
   • Ecology
     (of a plant or animal) establish itself in an area.
     "mussels can colonize even the most inhospitable rock surfaces"

So which Jewish country in Europe sent its Jews to colonise Palestine ? This is what your definition says is the meaning

Please review the definition of colonize - in particular, the highlighted part.

First entry is

(of a country or its citizens) send a group of settlers to (a place) and establish political control over it.



So my question stands which Jewish nation sent colonists to palestine

 

[Phoenall]

I suppose the Zionist movement is like Imperial colonization, in much the way a dolphin is like a fish.

The Zionist colonization is the same as any other colonization project. More like a shark is like a shark

What nation were these "colonists" citizens of? You neglect to tell. Again. Still.

Several European nations, just as the colonists of South Africa were.

Europe is not a sovereign nation, Cupcake.

While I admit that Netherlands is in Europe, Europe sent no colonists anywhere... not even to South Africa.

So. What nation were these Jewish "colonists" you refer to citizens of? You neglect to tell. Again. Still.

A colonial enterprise need not be undertaken by a nation, sweetie. But the Zionist colonists were of various European nationalities, as you well know who were facilitated/financed by Britain and the Jewish Colonial Trust.

The British South Africa Company financed the colonization of a large part of Africa and populated the colony with citizens of nearly every nationality known.

Your dog won't hunt I'm afraid.

Read the definition again as it clearly states the colonists must come from a specified nation. So which European Jewish nations sent their people to colonise palestine

 

[montelatici]

I suppose the Zionist movement is like Imperial colonization, in much the way a dolphin is like a fish.

The Zionist colonization is the same as any other colonization project. More like a shark is like a shark

What nation were these "colonists" citizens of? You neglect to tell. Again. Still.

Several European nations, just as the colonists of South Africa were.

Europe is not a sovereign nation, Cupcake.

While I admit that Netherlands is in Europe, Europe sent no colonists anywhere... not even to South Africa.

So. What nation were these Jewish "colonists" you refer to citizens of? You neglect to tell. Again. Still.

It was an inside job. The yet to be named state of Israel was created inside Palestine under the wing (or the gun) of the British in the mandate period.

"In the life of the Jewish community, the Jewish Agency occupies a special place in virtue both of its status under article 4 of the Mandate and as a representative organization of world Jewry. Organized in Palestine into some 20 departments corresponding in general to the departments of State in a self-governing country, the Agency concerns itself with every aspect of Jewish economic and social development in Palestine and exercises a decisive influence in major questions of policy and administration, particularly in regard to immigration and agricultural development.

"The Yishuv (Jewish community in Palestine) is thus a highly organized and closely knit society which, partly on a basis of communal effort, has created a national life distinctive enough to merit the Royal Commission's title of a State within a State ..." 36/
- See more at: The Origins and Evolution of the Palestine Problem - CEIRPP DPR study part II 1947-1977 30 June 1979 ​

The Zionists imported settlers from wherever they could find them and created or expand the colonies. In 1947 the yet to be named Israel conscripted settlers into its military and proceeded to cleanse Palestine of its native inhabitants. Over 300,000 Palestinians were dispossessed before Israel's declaration of independence.

The foreign Jewish Agency, that was created in Zurich by the foreign World Zionist Organization, declared Israel's independence. Of the thirty seven people who signed Israel's declaration of independence, only one was born in Palestine and he was the son of settlers. Israel's intended population was recently imported settlers.

Israel is a settler colonial project occupying Palestine.

Not to mention the financing for the colonization provided by the Jewish Colonial Trust.

 

[Coyote]

Do you need a link to Israel? Proof that it was put in place and "actioned".

I still think you mean to say they were "pilgrims." Pilgrims from numerous nations (primarily European) who settled in "Palestine proper." Pilgrims who settled in Palestine for the purpose of realizing, and living in, a Jewish nation.

You can go further to say that they were: Pilgrims from numerous nations (primarily European) settled in "Palestine proper" for the purpose of realizing, and living in, a Jewish nation; under the direction of the Zionist Organization; of which Dr. Chaim Weizmann was president.

Of course, if your purpose--and I mean your purpose, Pumpkin--in your use of the term "colonization" is to illicitly attach all the imperialist baggage that is associated with colonialism, then certainly, "pilgrim" doesn't serve that purpose.

"Pilgrim" is the proper term (regardless of whoever used an improper term previously), and it's the precise term someone interested in conveying accurate information would use; it's the term someone with intellectual integrity would use.

After all, just because Dr. Weizmann was sloppy with his vocabulary, it does not follow that you must also be so sloppy. Correct?

But, if you disagree, you need only identify the European nation these so-called "colonists" were citizens of. Be specific, Cupcake.

No colonists. No colony. No colonization.

Colonist is as accurate a term as "Pilgrim".

col·o·nize
ˈkäləˌnīz/
verb
verb: colonize; 3rd person present: colonizes; past tense: colonized; past participle: colonized; gerund or present participle: colonizing; verb: colonise; 3rd person present: colonises; past tense: colonised; past participle: colonised; gerund or present participle: colonising

1. (of a country or its citizens) send a group of settlers to (a place) and establish political control over it.
   "the Greeks colonized Sicily and southern Italy"
   synonyms: settle (in), people, populate;More
   occupy, take over, seize, capture, subjugate
   "the Germans colonized Tanganyika in 1885"
   • come to settle among and establish political control over (the indigenous people of an area).
     "a white family that tries to colonize a Caribbean island"
   • appropriate (a place or domain) for one's own use.
   • Ecology
     (of a plant or animal) establish itself in an area.
     "mussels can colonize even the most inhospitable rock surfaces"

So which Jewish country in Europe sent its Jews to colonise Palestine ? This is what your definition says is the meaning

Please review the definition of colonize - in particular, the highlighted part.

First entry is

(of a country or its citizens) send a group of settlers to (a place) and establish political control over it.



So my question stands which Jewish nation sent colonists to palestine

This too, is in the definition:

come to settle among and establish political control over (the indigenous people of an area).
"a white family that tries to colonize a Caribbean island"

 

[Phoenall]

Israel has lands that were bought.

The Jews had purchased about 5% of the land before partition. The non-Jews owned 85% or more of the land before partition.

OFFICIAL RECORDS OF THE SECOND SESSION OF
THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY


SUPPLEMENT No. 11



UNITED NATIONS
SPECIAL COMMITTEE
ON PALESTINE



REPORT TO THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY

VOLUME 1





Lake Success
New York
1947

"164. The Arab population, despite the strenuous efforts of Jews to acquire land in Palestine, at present remains in possession of approximately 85 per cent of the land. The provisions of the land transfer regulations of 1940, which gave effect to the 1939 White Paper policy, have severely restricted the Jewish efforts to acquire new land."


A 364 of 3 September 1947

Possession does not mean owned legally, as you can posses stolen goods but you can never own them

Possession means legal ownership and is further confirmed by the results of the analysis depicted in the Survey of Palestine.

View attachment 42797

Survey of Palestine Vol. 2 page 566

A Survey of Palestine Volume 2 Berman Jewish Policy Archive NYU Wagner

So if I steal your car and it is in my possession then I own it do I. Then why is there laws against theft..

Possession is not ownership look up the definition

Haven't you ever heard of the term [URL='https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uti_possidetis']uti possidetis? You can't equate land with complex claims to a modern car. Much of America was taken from the indiginous peoples through that principle.[/URL]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Possession_is_nine-tenths_of_the_law




The land passed from one sovereign power to another who partitioned the land and passed sovereignty to other parties. In the case of Jewish Palestine it was granted to the Jews for their national home. International law of 1923 allowed this to happen, if it didn't then none of the Islamic nations are valid.

 

[Phoenall]

I suppose the Zionist movement is like Imperial colonization, in much the way a dolphin is like a fish.

The Zionist colonization is the same as any other colonization project. More like a shark is like a shark

What nation were these "colonists" citizens of? You neglect to tell. Again. Still.

Several European nations, just as the colonists of South Africa were.

Europe is not a sovereign nation, Cupcake.

While I admit that Netherlands is in Europe, Europe sent no colonists anywhere... not even to South Africa.

So. What nation were these Jewish "colonists" you refer to citizens of? You neglect to tell. Again. Still.

It was an inside job. The yet to be named state of Israel was created inside Palestine under the wing (or the gun) of the British in the mandate period.

"In the life of the Jewish community, the Jewish Agency occupies a special place in virtue both of its status under article 4 of the Mandate and as a representative organization of world Jewry. Organized in Palestine into some 20 departments corresponding in general to the departments of State in a self-governing country, the Agency concerns itself with every aspect of Jewish economic and social development in Palestine and exercises a decisive influence in major questions of policy and administration, particularly in regard to immigration and agricultural development.

"The Yishuv (Jewish community in Palestine) is thus a highly organized and closely knit society which, partly on a basis of communal effort, has created a national life distinctive enough to merit the Royal Commission's title of a State within a State ..." 36/
- See more at: The Origins and Evolution of the Palestine Problem - CEIRPP DPR study part II 1947-1977 30 June 1979 ​

The Zionists imported settlers from wherever they could find them and created or expand the colonies. In 1947 the yet to be named Israel conscripted settlers into its military and proceeded to cleanse Palestine of its native inhabitants. Over 300,000 Palestinians were dispossessed before Israel's declaration of independence.

The foreign Jewish Agency, that was created in Zurich by the foreign World Zionist Organization, declared Israel's independence. Of the thirty seven people who signed Israel's declaration of independence, only one was born in Palestine and he was the son of settlers. Israel's intended population was recently imported settlers.

Israel is a settler colonial project occupying Palestine.

Your source is islamonazi propaganda so is not valid as evidence. The rest of your post is just propaganda

 

[LOki]

I suppose the Zionist movement is like Imperial colonization, in much the way a dolphin is like a fish.

The Zionist colonization is the same as any other colonization project. More like a shark is like a shark

What nation were these "colonists" citizens of? You neglect to tell. Again. Still.

Several European nations, just as the colonists of South Africa were.

Europe is not a sovereign nation, Cupcake.

While I admit that Netherlands is in Europe, Europe sent no colonists anywhere... not even to South Africa.

So. What nation were these Jewish "colonists" you refer to citizens of? You neglect to tell. Again. Still.

A colonial enterprise need not be undertaken by a nation, sweetie.

It pretty much does, Cupcake.

When a sovereign nation charters an organization with colonizing new territory, that colonial enterprise is still considered undertaken by that nation.

But the Zionist colonists were of various European nationalities, as you well know who were facilitated/financed by Britain and the Jewish Colonial Trust.

"Palestine" was not a British colony.

Nation-building. You're talking about nation-building.

Financing colonists is not colonizing.

The British South Africa Company financed the colonization of a large part of Africa and populated the colony with citizens of nearly every nationality known.

Your dog won't hunt I'm afraid.

Financing colonists is not colonizing. And South Africa was colonized by the Dutch.

You're only about 200 years off. No bad for you.

 

[Phoenall]

I still think you mean to say they were "pilgrims." Pilgrims from numerous nations (primarily European) who settled in "Palestine proper." Pilgrims who settled in Palestine for the purpose of realizing, and living in, a Jewish nation.

You can go further to say that they were: Pilgrims from numerous nations (primarily European) settled in "Palestine proper" for the purpose of realizing, and living in, a Jewish nation; under the direction of the Zionist Organization; of which Dr. Chaim Weizmann was president.

Of course, if your purpose--and I mean your purpose, Pumpkin--in your use of the term "colonization" is to illicitly attach all the imperialist baggage that is associated with colonialism, then certainly, "pilgrim" doesn't serve that purpose.

"Pilgrim" is the proper term (regardless of whoever used an improper term previously), and it's the precise term someone interested in conveying accurate information would use; it's the term someone with intellectual integrity would use.

After all, just because Dr. Weizmann was sloppy with his vocabulary, it does not follow that you must also be so sloppy. Correct?

But, if you disagree, you need only identify the European nation these so-called "colonists" were citizens of. Be specific, Cupcake.

No colonists. No colony. No colonization.

Colonist is as accurate a term as "Pilgrim".

col·o·nize
ˈkäləˌnīz/
verb
verb: colonize; 3rd person present: colonizes; past tense: colonized; past participle: colonized; gerund or present participle: colonizing; verb: colonise; 3rd person present: colonises; past tense: colonised; past participle: colonised; gerund or present participle: colonising

1. (of a country or its citizens) send a group of settlers to (a place) and establish political control over it.
   "the Greeks colonized Sicily and southern Italy"
   synonyms: settle (in), people, populate;More
   occupy, take over, seize, capture, subjugate
   "the Germans colonized Tanganyika in 1885"
   • come to settle among and establish political control over (the indigenous people of an area).
     "a white family that tries to colonize a Caribbean island"
   • appropriate (a place or domain) for one's own use.
   • Ecology
     (of a plant or animal) establish itself in an area.
     "mussels can colonize even the most inhospitable rock surfaces"

So which Jewish country in Europe sent its Jews to colonise Palestine ? This is what your definition says is the meaning

Please review the definition of colonize - in particular, the highlighted part.

First entry is

(of a country or its citizens) send a group of settlers to (a place) and establish political control over it.



So my question stands which Jewish nation sent colonists to palestine

This too, is in the definition:

come to settle among and establish political control over (the indigenous people of an area).
"a white family that tries to colonize a Caribbean island"

No it is an example of aggressive invasion under the banner of colonisation, which is what monte claims happened in Palestine.

 

[P F Tinmore]

The Zionist colonization is the same as any other colonization project. More like a shark is like a shark

What nation were these "colonists" citizens of? You neglect to tell. Again. Still.

Several European nations, just as the colonists of South Africa were.

Europe is not a sovereign nation, Cupcake.

While I admit that Netherlands is in Europe, Europe sent no colonists anywhere... not even to South Africa.

So. What nation were these Jewish "colonists" you refer to citizens of? You neglect to tell. Again. Still.

It was an inside job. The yet to be named state of Israel was created inside Palestine under the wing (or the gun) of the British in the mandate period.

"In the life of the Jewish community, the Jewish Agency occupies a special place in virtue both of its status under article 4 of the Mandate and as a representative organization of world Jewry. Organized in Palestine into some 20 departments corresponding in general to the departments of State in a self-governing country, the Agency concerns itself with every aspect of Jewish economic and social development in Palestine and exercises a decisive influence in major questions of policy and administration, particularly in regard to immigration and agricultural development.

"The Yishuv (Jewish community in Palestine) is thus a highly organized and closely knit society which, partly on a basis of communal effort, has created a national life distinctive enough to merit the Royal Commission's title of a State within a State ..." 36/
- See more at: The Origins and Evolution of the Palestine Problem - CEIRPP DPR study part II 1947-1977 30 June 1979 ​

The Zionists imported settlers from wherever they could find them and created or expand the colonies. In 1947 the yet to be named Israel conscripted settlers into its military and proceeded to cleanse Palestine of its native inhabitants. Over 300,000 Palestinians were dispossessed before Israel's declaration of independence.

The foreign Jewish Agency, that was created in Zurich by the foreign World Zionist Organization, declared Israel's independence. Of the thirty seven people who signed Israel's declaration of independence, only one was born in Palestine and he was the son of settlers. Israel's intended population was recently imported settlers.

Israel is a settler colonial project occupying Palestine.

Your source is islamonazi propaganda so is not valid as evidence. The rest of your post is just propaganda

Even if it is all true.

 

[montelatici]

The Zionist colonization is the same as any other colonization project. More like a shark is like a shark

What nation were these "colonists" citizens of? You neglect to tell. Again. Still.

Several European nations, just as the colonists of South Africa were.

Europe is not a sovereign nation, Cupcake.

While I admit that Netherlands is in Europe, Europe sent no colonists anywhere... not even to South Africa.

So. What nation were these Jewish "colonists" you refer to citizens of? You neglect to tell. Again. Still.

A colonial enterprise need not be undertaken by a nation, sweetie.

It pretty much does, Cupcake.

When a sovereign nation charters an organization with colonizing new territory, that colonial enterprise is still considered undertaken by that nation.

But the Zionist colonists were of various European nationalities, as you well know who were facilitated/financed by Britain and the Jewish Colonial Trust.

"Palestine" was not a British colony.

Nation-building. You're talking about nation-building.

Financing colonists is not colonizing.

The British South Africa Company financed the colonization of a large part of Africa and populated the colony with citizens of nearly every nationality known.

Your dog won't hunt I'm afraid.

Financing colonists is not colonizing. And South Africa was colonized by the Dutch.

You're only about 200 years off. No bad for you.

No, South Africa was colonized by the Vereenigde Landsche Ge-Oktroyeerde Oostindische Compagnie or "Dutch East India Company" which brought settlers from all over Europe and Asia to the colony.

You are just making a fool of yourself insisting that Zionists who called themselves colonists were not colonists. It's silly really.

It isn't a runner, trust me sweetie.

 

[fanger]

 

[LOki]

Of course, if the purpose in your use of the term "colonization" is to illicitly attach all the imperialist baggage that is associated with colonialism, then certainly, "pilgrim" doesn't serve that purpose.

Right?

There is certain amount of "imperialist baggage" that applies. The Zionist movement sought to occupy a land already populated, and re-create an ancient state based on one ethnicity/religion. Pilgrims are travelers who journey to sacred places for religious reasons.

Both fit, no?

I suppose the Zionist movement is like Imperial colonization, in much the way a dolphin is like a fish.

Maybe you suppose wrong then.

How is it different, say, than the colonial experiences of the U.S.?

The English Empire sent colonists to North America to expand the English Empire. England--not merely some collection of Englishmen--declared sovereignty over the territory it laid claim to; over the colonies it created; over the colonists it sent.

-There was no Jewish Empire.
-There were no citizens of some "Jewish Empire."
-No citizens of some "Jewish Empire" were sent anywhere.
-The non-existent "Jewish Empire" was not expanded by the European Jews who settled in "Palestine."
-Organized Jewish "Palestinians" (Israelis) stood up as the valid sovereign organization on the eve that Great Britain abandoned its administrative control of the region.
​

There was no Jewish Empire; there was no Jewish nation that acquired and settled "Palestine" as part of an imperial, or national expansion. The region known as "Palestine" was patently "up for grabs" when the British mandate expired--evidenced not only by the action of the Jewish Agency, but also by the behavior of the nations surrounding the region. The nation of Israel proclaimed its sovereignty, and validated such sovereignty by successfully defending itself against hostile foreign nations and the belligerents those nations sponsored within Israel.

There doesn't NEED to be an empire to colonize. That's the fallacy in your argument. The region - up for grabs - as you say, had indiginous peoples already there with claims, again like the Americas.

From Wikipedia (note - the entry has some notes about it's research and lack of enough sourcing but this particular paragraph seems well sourced):

In 1967 the French historian Maxime Rodinson wrote an article later translated and published in English as Israel: A Colonial Settler-State?[16] Lorenzo Veracini describes Israel as a colonial state and writes that Jewish settlers could expel the British in 1948 only because they had their own colonial relationships inside and outside Israel's new borders.[17] Veracini believes the possibility of an Israeli disengagement is always latent and this relationship could be severed, through an "accommodation of a Palestinian Israeli autonomy within the institutions of the Israeli state" (Veracini 2006)[18] Other commentators, such as Daiva Stasiulis, Nira Yuval-Davis,[19] and Joseph Massad in the "Post Colonial Colony: time, space and bodies in Palestine/ Israel in the persistence of the Palestinian Question".[20] have included Israel in their global analysis of settler societies. Ilan Pappé describes Zionism and Israel in similar terms.[21] Scholar Amal has stated, "Israel was created by a settler-colonial movement of Jewish immigrants".[22]​

Israel continues to act like a colonial power with it's encourgement of Jewish immigration, refusal to return occupied territories and it's expansion of "settlers" into those occupied territories. It mirrors the American experience only instead of Manifest Destiny and the expansion of Christianity, it's Zionism and the expansion of Judaism as the expense of the original inhabitants.

"Israel continues to act like a colonial power..." and dolphins continue to act like fish... you know, swimming and such.

Not just it's founding but it's expansion across the continent and it's treatment of the indiginous peoples?

The nation of the United States of America expanded primarily through the purchase of territory from other sovereign nations, through annexation, through cession, through treaty, and through conquest of existing nations. The U.S. treated the "indigenous" peoples of North America with equal disregard, regardless of the attitude those people presented to the U.S.

-The nation of Israel has expanded it's holdings somewhat, as a result of military conflict with the surrounding nations hostile to the existence of Israel. It maintains those holdings through settlement by Israeli citizens.
-The nation of Israel treats non-belligerent indigenous citizens of Israel the same as they treat the non-belligerent naturalized citizens of Israel. Israel asserted at it's founding, a commitment to "foster the development of the country for the benefit of all its inhabitants; ... be based on freedom, justice and peace as envisaged by the prophets of Israel; ... ensure complete equality of social and political rights to all its inhabitants irrespective of religion, race or sex; it will guarantee freedom of religion, conscience, language, education and culture;..." The U.S.? No so much.​

​

On the paper, that sounds just super but in practice and in the actual legal and political system, it is false.

This is evident by the inequities in the justice system, building and expansion permits, educational funding, ability to travel, family reunification, immigration, where they can live, and the different levels of citizenship.

You're talking about a nation that, for practical purposes, has been under a state of continuous martial law because of the hostility the neighboring nations hold to the existence of Israel. Hostility those same states cultivated in a specific segment of the "indigenous" population, a hostility that those same nations continue to cultivate in the progeny of that segment.

So yeah. It didn't work out as intended, but the intent is still there, and the source of the social/political/economic stratification you cite has more to do with one's "belligerent" status, and less to do with one's "indigenous" status.

​

I think it's appropriate to assert that generally speaking, belonging to Israel is substantially about being a Jew. You see, regardless of how you wish to parse the term "indigenous", it is inarguable that Jews (not all, obviously) are indigenous to "Palestine"; and Palestinian Jews are just as "indigenous" as Palestinian Arabs. Israel had (and has) an entirely different attitude regarding the "indigenous" peoples of "Palestine", than the U.S. has for the "indigenous" peoples of North America.

So, I think I'll just stand by my earlier statement with regard to your questions: "I suppose the Zionist movement is like Imperial colonization, in much the way a dolphin is like a fish."

I absolutely agree that indiginous Palestinian Jews are as indiginous as indiginous Palestinian Arabs. And no, Israel does not have an "entirely different attitude" regarding indigenous peoples as the US - only when those indiginous peoples are Jews.

HAHAHA! Does cognitive dissonance just make you high, or what?

I swear to God everybody, I did not coach him in any way!

The building and expansion of settlements (and the comparable squeezing and curtailing of any expansion of Arab villages, restrictions on where they are allowed to live and demolishing of their homes) is not too different than the American treatment of indiginous people. Palestinians are being squeezed into ever more fragmented areas. It kind of resembles the reservation system or even the "black homeland" system of aparthied South Africa - both, a common attribute of colonialism.

Yes. "It resembles..." like dolphins resemble fish.

 

[LOki]

What nation were these "colonists" citizens of? You neglect to tell. Again. Still.

Several European nations, just as the colonists of South Africa were.

Europe is not a sovereign nation, Cupcake.

While I admit that Netherlands is in Europe, Europe sent no colonists anywhere... not even to South Africa.

So. What nation were these Jewish "colonists" you refer to citizens of? You neglect to tell. Again. Still.

A colonial enterprise need not be undertaken by a nation, sweetie.

It pretty much does, Cupcake.

When a sovereign nation charters an organization with colonizing new territory, that colonial enterprise is still considered undertaken by that nation.

But the Zionist colonists were of various European nationalities, as you well know who were facilitated/financed by Britain and the Jewish Colonial Trust.

"Palestine" was not a British colony.

Nation-building. You're talking about nation-building.

Financing colonists is not colonizing.

The British South Africa Company financed the colonization of a large part of Africa and populated the colony with citizens of nearly every nationality known.

Your dog won't hunt I'm afraid.

Financing colonists is not colonizing. And South Africa was colonized by the Dutch.

You're only about 200 years off. No bad for you.

No, South Africa was colonized by the Vereenigde Landsche Ge-Oktroyeerde Oostindische Compagnie or "Dutch East India Company" which brought settlers from all over Europe and Asia to the colony.

And from where did the VOC get the charter that authorized the colonization of South Africa?

Was it the European Jewish Empire, Cupcake?

You are just making a fool of yourself insisting that Zionists who called themselves colonists were not colonists. It's silly really.

It isn't a runner, trust me sweetie.

You can call yourself whatever you like, Cupcake. Call yourself Caitlyn; declare yourself Dragon-kin, if you like. Whatever.

 

[LOki]

I suppose the Zionist movement is like Imperial colonization, in much the way a dolphin is like a fish.

The Zionist colonization is the same as any other colonization project. More like a shark is like a shark

What nation were these "colonists" citizens of? You neglect to tell. Again. Still.

Several European nations, just as the colonists of South Africa were.

Europe is not a sovereign nation, Cupcake.

While I admit that Netherlands is in Europe, Europe sent no colonists anywhere... not even to South Africa.

So. What nation were these Jewish "colonists" you refer to citizens of? You neglect to tell. Again. Still.

It was an inside job. The yet to be named state of Israel was created inside Palestine under the wing (or the gun) of the British in the mandate period.

"In the life of the Jewish community, the Jewish Agency occupies a special place in virtue both of its status under article 4 of the Mandate and as a representative organization of world Jewry. Organized in Palestine into some 20 departments corresponding in general to the departments of State in a self-governing country, the Agency concerns itself with every aspect of Jewish economic and social development in Palestine and exercises a decisive influence in major questions of policy and administration, particularly in regard to immigration and agricultural development.

"The Yishuv (Jewish community in Palestine) is thus a highly organized and closely knit society which, partly on a basis of communal effort, has created a national life distinctive enough to merit the Royal Commission's title of a State within a State ..." 36/
- See more at: The Origins and Evolution of the Palestine Problem - CEIRPP DPR study part II 1947-1977 30 June 1979 ​

The Zionists imported settlers from wherever they could find them and created or expand the colonies. In 1947 the yet to be named Israel conscripted settlers into its military and proceeded to cleanse Palestine of its native inhabitants. Over 300,000 Palestinians were dispossessed before Israel's declaration of independence.

The foreign Jewish Agency, that was created in Zurich by the foreign World Zionist Organization, declared Israel's independence. Of the thirty seven people who signed Israel's declaration of independence, only one was born in Palestine and he was the son of settlers. Israel's intended population was recently imported settlers.

Israel is a settler colonial project occupying Palestine.

I take your point. I don't care about the "not born in Palestine" business (it ends up just being meaningless), and I disagree with your use of the term "cleanse," but I take your point. It's a good one... one that I've been considering for a while.

You may have missed that my objection to the term "colonist" is the imperialist baggage attached to the term. Settler-colonialism is a different animal from Imperial-colonialism.

 

[montelatici]

Several European nations, just as the colonists of South Africa were.

Europe is not a sovereign nation, Cupcake.

While I admit that Netherlands is in Europe, Europe sent no colonists anywhere... not even to South Africa.

So. What nation were these Jewish "colonists" you refer to citizens of? You neglect to tell. Again. Still.

A colonial enterprise need not be undertaken by a nation, sweetie.

It pretty much does, Cupcake.

When a sovereign nation charters an organization with colonizing new territory, that colonial enterprise is still considered undertaken by that nation.

But the Zionist colonists were of various European nationalities, as you well know who were facilitated/financed by Britain and the Jewish Colonial Trust.

"Palestine" was not a British colony.

Nation-building. You're talking about nation-building.

Financing colonists is not colonizing.

The British South Africa Company financed the colonization of a large part of Africa and populated the colony with citizens of nearly every nationality known.

Your dog won't hunt I'm afraid.

Financing colonists is not colonizing. And South Africa was colonized by the Dutch.

You're only about 200 years off. No bad for you.

No, South Africa was colonized by the Vereenigde Landsche Ge-Oktroyeerde Oostindische Compagnie or "Dutch East India Company" which brought settlers from all over Europe and Asia to the colony.

And from where did the VOC get the charter that authorized the colonization of South Africa?

Was it the European Jewish Empire, Cupcake?

You are just making a fool of yourself insisting that Zionists who called themselves colonists were not colonists. It's silly really.

It isn't a runner, trust me sweetie.

You can call yourself whatever you like, Cupcake. Call yourself Caitlyn; declare yourself Dragon-kin, if you like. Whatever.

There was no charter for colonizing South Africa for the Dutch East India Company, The company's charter was exclusive to Asia. The Cape was a private initiative, originally a way station.

The colonizer need not be a state or empire. I have no idea where you got that absurd idea.

But if you want a charter, the British with the Balfour Declaration provided the charter for the colonization of Palestine by the Jews.

 

[aris2chat]

Ouch, less than a pin prick. Think about what was happening to the jew. Think about all the anti-semitic propaganda an libels being published.

There was no war on germany, it was nazi PR against the jews

 

[montelatici]

The Zionist colonization is the same as any other colonization project. More like a shark is like a shark

What nation were these "colonists" citizens of? You neglect to tell. Again. Still.

Several European nations, just as the colonists of South Africa were.

Europe is not a sovereign nation, Cupcake.

While I admit that Netherlands is in Europe, Europe sent no colonists anywhere... not even to South Africa.

So. What nation were these Jewish "colonists" you refer to citizens of? You neglect to tell. Again. Still.

It was an inside job. The yet to be named state of Israel was created inside Palestine under the wing (or the gun) of the British in the mandate period.

"In the life of the Jewish community, the Jewish Agency occupies a special place in virtue both of its status under article 4 of the Mandate and as a representative organization of world Jewry. Organized in Palestine into some 20 departments corresponding in general to the departments of State in a self-governing country, the Agency concerns itself with every aspect of Jewish economic and social development in Palestine and exercises a decisive influence in major questions of policy and administration, particularly in regard to immigration and agricultural development.

"The Yishuv (Jewish community in Palestine) is thus a highly organized and closely knit society which, partly on a basis of communal effort, has created a national life distinctive enough to merit the Royal Commission's title of a State within a State ..." 36/
- See more at: The Origins and Evolution of the Palestine Problem - CEIRPP DPR study part II 1947-1977 30 June 1979 ​

The Zionists imported settlers from wherever they could find them and created or expand the colonies. In 1947 the yet to be named Israel conscripted settlers into its military and proceeded to cleanse Palestine of its native inhabitants. Over 300,000 Palestinians were dispossessed before Israel's declaration of independence.

The foreign Jewish Agency, that was created in Zurich by the foreign World Zionist Organization, declared Israel's independence. Of the thirty seven people who signed Israel's declaration of independence, only one was born in Palestine and he was the son of settlers. Israel's intended population was recently imported settlers.

Israel is a settler colonial project occupying Palestine.

I take your point. I don't care about the "not born in Palestine" business (it ends up just being meaningless), and I disagree with your use of the term "cleanse," but I take your point. It's a good one... one that I've been considering for a while.

You may have missed that my objection to the term "colonist" is the imperialist baggage attached to the term. Settler-colonialism is a different animal from Imperial-colonialism.

I can agree with settler colonialism with Imperial assistance. LOL

 

[LOki]

Europe is not a sovereign nation, Cupcake.

While I admit that Netherlands is in Europe, Europe sent no colonists anywhere... not even to South Africa.

So. What nation were these Jewish "colonists" you refer to citizens of? You neglect to tell. Again. Still.

A colonial enterprise need not be undertaken by a nation, sweetie.

It pretty much does, Cupcake.

When a sovereign nation charters an organization with colonizing new territory, that colonial enterprise is still considered undertaken by that nation.

But the Zionist colonists were of various European nationalities, as you well know who were facilitated/financed by Britain and the Jewish Colonial Trust.

"Palestine" was not a British colony.

Nation-building. You're talking about nation-building.

Financing colonists is not colonizing.

The British South Africa Company financed the colonization of a large part of Africa and populated the colony with citizens of nearly every nationality known.

Your dog won't hunt I'm afraid.

Financing colonists is not colonizing. And South Africa was colonized by the Dutch.

You're only about 200 years off. No bad for you.

No, South Africa was colonized by the Vereenigde Landsche Ge-Oktroyeerde Oostindische Compagnie or "Dutch East India Company" which brought settlers from all over Europe and Asia to the colony.

And from where did the VOC get the charter that authorized the colonization of South Africa?

Was it the European Jewish Empire, Cupcake?

You are just making a fool of yourself insisting that Zionists who called themselves colonists were not colonists. It's silly really.

It isn't a runner, trust me sweetie.

You can call yourself whatever you like, Cupcake. Call yourself Caitlyn; declare yourself Dragon-kin, if you like. Whatever.

There was no charter for colonizing South Africa for the Dutch East India Company, The company's charter was exclusive to Asia. The Cape was a private initiative, originally a way station.

The VOC's charter was not exclusive to Asia, but rather exclusive to the boundaries described by the charter... which included, The Cape.

That charter empowered the VOC to establish colonies...which were under the sovereign dominion of an as-of-yet unidentified Jewish nation the Netherlands.

Sorry about your luck.

The colonizer need not be a state or empire. I have no idea where you got that absurd idea.

Colony: "a group of people who leave their native country to form in a new land a settlement subject to, or connected with, the parent nation."

FYI: Absurd: "utterly or obviously senseless, illogical, or untrue; contrary to all reason or common sense; laughably foolish or false"​

But if you want a charter, the British with the Balfour Declaration provided the charter for the colonization of Palestine by the Jews.

Nation building... not the same as colonization.

 

[montelatici]

A colonial enterprise need not be undertaken by a nation, sweetie.

It pretty much does, Cupcake.

When a sovereign nation charters an organization with colonizing new territory, that colonial enterprise is still considered undertaken by that nation.

But the Zionist colonists were of various European nationalities, as you well know who were facilitated/financed by Britain and the Jewish Colonial Trust.

"Palestine" was not a British colony.

Nation-building. You're talking about nation-building.

Financing colonists is not colonizing.

The British South Africa Company financed the colonization of a large part of Africa and populated the colony with citizens of nearly every nationality known.

Your dog won't hunt I'm afraid.

Financing colonists is not colonizing. And South Africa was colonized by the Dutch.

You're only about 200 years off. No bad for you.

No, South Africa was colonized by the Vereenigde Landsche Ge-Oktroyeerde Oostindische Compagnie or "Dutch East India Company" which brought settlers from all over Europe and Asia to the colony.

And from where did the VOC get the charter that authorized the colonization of South Africa?

Was it the European Jewish Empire, Cupcake?

You are just making a fool of yourself insisting that Zionists who called themselves colonists were not colonists. It's silly really.

It isn't a runner, trust me sweetie.

You can call yourself whatever you like, Cupcake. Call yourself Caitlyn; declare yourself Dragon-kin, if you like. Whatever.

There was no charter for colonizing South Africa for the Dutch East India Company, The company's charter was exclusive to Asia. The Cape was a private initiative, originally a way station.

The VOC's charter was not exclusive to Asia, but rather exclusive to the boundaries described by the charter... which included, The Cape.

That charter empowered the VOC to establish colonies...which were under the sovereign dominion of an as-of-yet unidentified Jewish nation the Netherlands.

Sorry about your luck.

The colonizer need not be a state or empire. I have no idea where you got that absurd idea.

Colony: "a group of people who leave their native country to form in a new land a settlement subject to, or connected with, the parent nation."

FYI: Absurd: "utterly or obviously senseless, illogical, or untrue; contrary to all reason or common sense; laughably foolish or false"​

But if you want a charter, the British with the Balfour Declaration provided the charter for the colonization of Palestine by the Jews.

Nation building... not the same as colonization.

Now you are being silly. I don't think it's necessary to beat a dead horse. The Zionists were self proclaimed colonists and it isn't a coincidence that the colonization process was administered by the British Colonial Office.