What makes you support one or the other?

[Phoenall]

What has Israel stolen then, that was not theirs to begin with.

The West Bank, basically.

Historically, Jews have never really lived in any of the land except Jericho. There is really no question amongst Israelis that towns like Nablus and Ramallah are Palestinian towns, anymore so than there is any question amongst Palestinians that Tel Aviv or Qiryat Shemonah are Jewish areas.

I don't see this issue as being particularly complex. It may be that a just settlement would see Israel now keep 10% - 15% of the West Bank and trade land for it, and in some cases that might be best for everyone, but I don't think anyone who really understands a thing about this conflict honestly believes a town like Nablus belongs in Israel.

Strange that as it is under P.A. control apart from the occupation and being under military law. It is not part of Israel as much as you would like it to be.

Historically the Jews/Hebrews/ Israelites/Samarians/Judeans lived in the M.E. and inhabited all of what you call Palestine today.
It is the arabs that have never lived on any other land but that of Arabia until a psychopathic camel herder invented islam

Nablus was created before islam cameintgo existence and was originally called Flavia Neapolis built on the site of the Jewish city of Shechem Ramallah was originally the Jewish city of Ram until the arab invaders stole it from the Jews and changed its name to Ramallah.


So I cant see how anyone with any intelligence and decency could allow invaders to steal land from the Jews just because they are arab muslims.

 

[Coyote]

What is Zionism?

It's hard to get a clear answer because it seems to depend upon whom you ask.

It's heart: Zionism - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia
Zionism (Hebrew: צִיּוֹנוּת, translit. Tsiyonut) is a nationalist and political movement of Jews and Jewish culture that supports the reestablishment of a Jewish homeland, a Jewish nation state in the territory defined as the historic Land of Israel

​

it's modern post-zionist legacy?

• 3.1 Labor Zionism
• 3.2 Liberal Zionism
• 3.3 Nationalist Zionism
• 3.4 Religious Zionism
• 3.5 Green Zionism
• 3.6 Neo-Zionism and Post-Zionism
• 3.7 Zionism and Haredi Judaism

So the question is - what is Zionism and what do people mean when they make the distinction between Zionism and Judaism?

 

[Dogmaphobe]

What is Zionism?

It's hard to get a clear answer because it seems to depend upon whom you ask.

It's heart: Zionism - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia
Zionism (Hebrew: צִיּוֹנוּת, translit. Tsiyonut) is a nationalist and political movement of Jews and Jewish culture that supports the reestablishment of a Jewish homeland, a Jewish nation state in the territory defined as the historic Land of Israel

​

it's modern post-zionist legacy?

• 
  
  
  • 3.1 Labor Zionism
  • 3.2 Liberal Zionism
  • 3.3 Nationalist Zionism
  • 3.4 Religious Zionism
  • 3.5 Green Zionism
  • 3.6 Neo-Zionism and Post-Zionism
  • 3.7 Zionism and Haredi Judaism

So the question is - what is Zionism and what do people mean when they make the distinction between Zionism and Judaism?

Zionism is the term for the self determination of the Jewish people.

Anti-zionists, therefore, have selected Jews out of all the people in the world as the one ethnicity that shouldn't have any.

Since these haters do not indulge in this same idiotic blather in regards to the French or the Japanese or the Brazilians or any other group, it is obvious to anybody with a working brain what they are all about. Especially since so many of these benightedly dishonest and unintelligent creatures prattle on about the right of a people that was invented out of whole cloth a few decades ago to do whatever they fucking well please, such hypocritical sophistry should only be ridiculed as the product of a weak mind rather than provided any legitimacy.

 

[Lipush]

What's the point of this thread, again?

 

[Coyote]

What is Zionism?

It's hard to get a clear answer because it seems to depend upon whom you ask.

It's heart: Zionism - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia
Zionism (Hebrew: צִיּוֹנוּת, translit. Tsiyonut) is a nationalist and political movement of Jews and Jewish culture that supports the reestablishment of a Jewish homeland, a Jewish nation state in the territory defined as the historic Land of Israel

​

it's modern post-zionist legacy?

• 
  
  
  • 3.1 Labor Zionism
  • 3.2 Liberal Zionism
  • 3.3 Nationalist Zionism
  • 3.4 Religious Zionism
  • 3.5 Green Zionism
  • 3.6 Neo-Zionism and Post-Zionism
  • 3.7 Zionism and Haredi Judaism

So the question is - what is Zionism and what do people mean when they make the distinction between Zionism and Judaism?

Zionism is the term for the self determination of the Jewish people.

Anti-zionists, therefore, have selected Jews out of all the people in the world as the one ethnicity that shouldn't have any.

Since these haters do not indulge in this same idiotic blather in regards to the French or the Japanese or the Brazilians or any other group, it is obvious to anybody with a working brain what they are all about. Especially since so many of these benightedly dishonest and unintelligent creatures prattle on about the right of a people that was invented out of whole cloth a few decades ago to do whatever they fucking well please, such hypocritical sophistry should only be ridiculed as the product of a weak mind rather than provided any legitimacy.

Doesn't seem that simple. Zionism seems to have branched out into a variety of subspecies much like conservatism and liberalism.

All people people deserve basic rights, whether you like them or not.

 

[Phoenall]

Dogmaphobe -

I hold the right of all people to a homeland to be entirely equal. Yes, there are Kurds, Sikhs and Tibetans who will never have those rights, and I think that is genuinely a loss to the international community. I also hope those issues will be solved one day, although I'm not wildly hopeful.

I really have no idea what you mean by 'supremacism' here. Certainly there is no shortage of messiainic visions and heavenly visions on either side. Ever heard of extremist Jews envisaging a Jewish homeland that extends all the way to Babylon?!

Of course the Palestinians aren't going to 'let the damn thing go', and neither should they. Neither should the Jews.

I think it's a popular misconception that Palestinians could have, at any point in the past 50 years, simply melted back into Egypt or Jordan, but I've never felt that was realistic or desirable. They'd have been outcasts and outsiders there too, much as Bengalis were in Pakistan during the 1950's. They would never really have settled entirely, even if many Palestinians are fairly happy and settled in Jordan today. It's always been a kind of interim solution for both sides.

There is another difference between the Palestinians and many of these other groups. As it stands now, manyPalestinians lack not only a homeland, but citizenship in any state. They are stateless and have no rights because they are not citzens of any state.

So why are so many nations recognising the state of Palestine, what you mean is the Palestinians are not yet ready for self determination and statehood so play the game of landless vagabonds and persecuted savages and in the process tug on pinko liberal heart strings. While they get charity and handouts from the rest of the world they will not TAKE ON THE FULL RESPONCIBILITY OF STATEHOOD. That is what should be handed to them on a plate, the chance to start a state in full and become worthwhile citizens of the human race. Until then they will allow themselves to be seen as victims

 

[Coyote]

Dogmaphobe -

I hold the right of all people to a homeland to be entirely equal. Yes, there are Kurds, Sikhs and Tibetans who will never have those rights, and I think that is genuinely a loss to the international community. I also hope those issues will be solved one day, although I'm not wildly hopeful.

I really have no idea what you mean by 'supremacism' here. Certainly there is no shortage of messiainic visions and heavenly visions on either side. Ever heard of extremist Jews envisaging a Jewish homeland that extends all the way to Babylon?!

Of course the Palestinians aren't going to 'let the damn thing go', and neither should they. Neither should the Jews.

I think it's a popular misconception that Palestinians could have, at any point in the past 50 years, simply melted back into Egypt or Jordan, but I've never felt that was realistic or desirable. They'd have been outcasts and outsiders there too, much as Bengalis were in Pakistan during the 1950's. They would never really have settled entirely, even if many Palestinians are fairly happy and settled in Jordan today. It's always been a kind of interim solution for both sides.

There is another difference between the Palestinians and many of these other groups. As it stands now, manyPalestinians lack not only a homeland, but citizenship in any state. They are stateless and have no rights because they are not citzens of any state.

So why are so many nations recognising the state of Palestine,

It doesn't exist yet - the recognition is more a recognition of the right of the Palestinians to have a state in that region.

what you mean is the Palestinians are not yet ready for self determination and statehood so play the game of landless vagabonds and persecuted savages and in the process tug on pinko liberal heart strings. While they get charity and handouts from the rest of the world they will not TAKE ON THE FULL RESPONCIBILITY OF STATEHOOD. That is what should be handed to them on a plate, the chance to start a state in full and become worthwhile citizens of the human race. Until then they will allow themselves to be seen as victims

No, that is not what I mean.

Give them a state, then they'll have to step up to the plate and show they can govern and keep it.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

All people people deserve basic rights, whether you like them or not.

Except for Jews, of course, who do not even have the right to live, apparently.

Killing people is not a right. Terrorism is not a right. The desire for genocide as quite clearly stated in the very charter of those in governance is not a right -- even if you happen to think it is.

When you scream constantly about the "rights" of people whose foremost desire is the destruction of another people, you are simply part of that process. The day the Arabs who now call themselves "Palestinian" place the actual establishment of a peaceful country of their own above that of their bloodthirsty desire for dead Jews, then they can be said to have inherent rights.

Until then, they do not deserve any.

 

[toastman]

At least you agree you were deceiving by presenting a partial as the whole.
You really are a silly Tosser Tossy, to think that you would get away with the deceit.

I love how you tried to weezle your way out of your false accusation Weezle. Talk about deceit

Be a man , for once, and admit your accusation against me was false.

Let me clarify for you toasty.

You made up the definition. You claimed in your made up definition that the invader had to be armed to be an invader. That is not true. It is false. It is a lie. You are a liar.

Which bit don't you understand?

Let ME clarify it for you weezle. YOU claimed that I MADE UP the definition to suit my agenda. I responded by posting a link that gave the SAME definition that I did, therefore refuting your lie that I made up the definition.
The fact that you are incapable of comprehending such a simple thing Weezle is...well....not surprising.
It's like I'm talking to a monkey.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Let ME clarify it for you weezle. YOU claimed that I MADE UP the definition to suit my agenda. I responded by posting a link that gave the SAME definition that I did, therefore refuting your lie that I made up the definition.
The fact that you are incapable of comprehending such a simple thing Weezle is...well....not surprising.
It's like I'm talking to a monkey.

Damn it, man, now look what you've done!

My rhesus is going to have an enormous chip on his shoulder all day because of you!

 

[Phoenall]

I thought it was supposed to be a no propaganda thread. Oh, well.

A smart saying claims that 'each conflict has two sides. Unless it personally involves you. In that case, there's only one'.

I come from a family of Ashkenazi immigrant Jews, family of Weiszmann. They were sent to Israel under the sponsorship of Rotchild, and lived in the area since 1883.

My great grandmother, Hadassah, was born in Israel. So was my grandmother, and so wasmy mom.

These days people call them 'illegal settlers' for some reason, even though their IDs pointed at them as native Palestinian.

They were in Israel before all those 'free Palestine' movements were invented, and when the Arab riots started, the great rebellions, they had a huge farm. The farm was burned down by Arabs and they were forced out of their own lands, escaped further south.

They call us land thiefs, but I reject the thinking, as my own lands were stolen back then.

And THAT tthe slighest diffefence between truths and half truths.

My faher's family escaped Europe after the wad, and my father grew up here.

My family, from both sides, has a praised military background. My parents served in the IDF each more than 20 years. My father served in battle in 1967, and 1973. His older brother was one of the soldiers who freed Jerusalem.

I served in the navy for 2 years. I lived in the south my entire life. I plan to have my future cchildren raised here.

That's my story. There is no 'side' to choose. I will follow my family's legacy, and so willthe next generation.

So your third generation then, many Pals have more generations behind them. As you said
" Ashkenazi immigrant Jews" you are immigrants. I understand your position but the actions of your government I do not agree with, and well to be frank, not knowing your age, you can't deny that your gov had been confiscating the land of the Pals for years, and your family has helped in that.

I don't speak as defender ofmy government, as I said before, and you yourself played the offended for some reason , I believe them all to be no goods. 120 LOSERS.

I am 25. Pretty young and still have dreams. M parents fought wars and the government is using them like they know best. I didn't vote Likud and I don't like Netanyahu.

But I cherish my homeland, because my family sacrifised iitself for it and because it's my home.

I love my district, even though its views as ''god forsakened desert''.

'''Immigrants''? Of couse we are immigrants, but so were the Palestinians, or did the land creat them to sit on it out of the blue??

I'm rooted in this land, so who is anybody to call us 'land thieves'? They may have burned our ranch but history cannot be changesd, and it is as it is.

Dogmpahobe -

The right for people to live where they live is not a beauty contest. Germany and France do not exist because we want them to, or because we admire their art or food. Those countries exist based on thousands of years of living on that land.

Palestinians have lived in the Levant for 3,000 years in some form or another, and on that basis they have a right to stay there, surely.

There was no such thing as "Palestinian" until very recent times. If you are referring to Arabs, they arose 1400 years ago, not 3000. Since it is Jews who have lived in the Levant for over 3000 years, and Arabs persecute Jews relentlessly, about the only sensible thing to do would be to form a Jewish state in part of the Levant and an Arab in another.

.....which, is precisely what occurred with the establishment of Jordan


You don't seem to understand the difference between D.N.A. and culture. Modern day Palestinians differ little from modern day Jews in terms of D.N.A. They both arose in the same region, so this should be expected. What differentiates them is the fact that Jewish identity dates back over 3000 years, while Palestinian identity stretches back a mere 50-100. With this in mind, and with the inability of Arabs to stop hating anybody who isn't Arab, why should Arabs get it all?

Are you trying to make Abraham a Jew, as that doesn't work. Now we know there was a tribe back then that spoke Hebrew and were called Hebrews and that is what Abraham was. He surely did not follow the laws of Moses who was also said to be Hebrew, but Jews were not invented back then.

Hebrew was a lost language until taught again in the 1900's.

He was one of the founders of Judaism, just as St Hilda was one of the founders of Christianity in Northumberland. Does this make her any less of a Christian.
If Hebrew was lost as you claim then how could it have been taught, that is like saying English was a lost language until it was taught again in 1900. There were always Hebrew speakers in every nation as the Torah is spoken in Hebrew.

Yet again you are out to demonise Jews with your NAZI ANTISEMITIC RACIAL HATREDS

 

[toastman]

Let ME clarify it for you weezle. YOU claimed that I MADE UP the definition to suit my agenda. I responded by posting a link that gave the SAME definition that I did, therefore refuting your lie that I made up the definition.
The fact that you are incapable of comprehending such a simple thing Weezle is...well....not surprising.
It's like I'm talking to a monkey.

Damn it, man, now look what you've done!

My rhesus is going to have an enormous chip on his shoulder all day because of you!

As oppose to NOT having a chip on his shoulder? The guy is a fuckin loon and he keeps stalking me. Be careful with the weezle, he's an odd fella

 

[Humanity]

At least you agree you were deceiving by presenting a partial as the whole.
You really are a silly Tosser Tossy, to think that you would get away with the deceit.

I love how you tried to weezle your way out of your false accusation Weezle. Talk about deceit

Be a man , for once, and admit your accusation against me was false.

Let me clarify for you toasty.

You made up the definition. You claimed in your made up definition that the invader had to be armed to be an invader. That is not true. It is false. It is a lie. You are a liar.

Which bit don't you understand?

Let ME clarify it for you weezle. YOU claimed that I MADE UP the definition to suit my agenda. I responded by posting a link that gave the SAME definition that I did, therefore refuting your lie that I made up the definition.
The fact that you are incapable of comprehending such a simple thing Weezle is...well....not surprising.
It's like I'm talking to a monkey.

Will you two stop bickering!

It's like watching a couple of children in the playground!

Thats BOTH of you!

 

[toastman]

At least you agree you were deceiving by presenting a partial as the whole.
You really are a silly Tosser Tossy, to think that you would get away with the deceit.

I love how you tried to weezle your way out of your false accusation Weezle. Talk about deceit

Be a man , for once, and admit your accusation against me was false.

Let me clarify for you toasty.

You made up the definition. You claimed in your made up definition that the invader had to be armed to be an invader. That is not true. It is false. It is a lie. You are a liar.

Which bit don't you understand?

Let ME clarify it for you weezle. YOU claimed that I MADE UP the definition to suit my agenda. I responded by posting a link that gave the SAME definition that I did, therefore refuting your lie that I made up the definition.
The fact that you are incapable of comprehending such a simple thing Weezle is...well....not surprising.
It's like I'm talking to a monkey.

Will you two stop bickering!

It's like watching a couple of children in the playground!

Thats BOTH of you!

Yes sire !

 

[Beelzebub]

Sorry Humanity.

It just Toasty is so easy to wind up. Ok. Stopped.

 

[Phoenall]

There is another difference between the Palestinians and many of these other groups. As it stands now, manyPalestinians lack not only a homeland, but citizenship in any state. They are stateless and have no rights because they are not citzens of any state.

If they actually wanted a state, they would have had one at the camp David accords.

They chose yet more terrorism, instead.

They were not included in the Camp David Accords.

UN Rejection of the Middle East Framework
The UN General Assembly rejected the Framework for Peace in the Middle East, because the agreement was concluded without participation of UN and PLO and did not comply with the Palestinian right of return, of self-determination and to national independence and sovereignty. December 1978, she declared in Resolution 33/28 A, that agreements were only valid if they are within the framework of the United Nations and its Charter and its resolutions, include the Palestinian right of return and the right to national independence and sovereignty in Palestine, and concluded with the participation of the PLO. Also the passive attitude of the Security Council was criticised.[18] On 6 December 1979, the UN condemned in Resolution 34/70 all partial agreements and separate treaties that did not meet the Palestinian rights and comprehensive solutions to peace; she condemned Israel's continued occupation and demanded withdrawal from all occupied territories.[19] On 12 December, in Resolution 34/65 B, she rejected more specific parts of the Camp David Accords and similar agreements, which were not in accordance with mentioned requirements. All such partial agreements and separate treaties were strongly condemned. The part of the Camp David accords regarding the Palestinian future and all similar ones were declared invalid.[20]

So there we have it the UN deciding what the Palestinians could and could not do, and not a Jew in sight. If Arafat as leader of the PLO and Palestine had signed and agreed the accords you can bet that Palestine would have been a country the very next day. The UN would not have a say in it apart from not recognising Palestine until the member states said otherwise. The UN would have welcomed the agreement and would have claimed their part in it. It also shows that the people doing the outside interference on the Palestinian people were the UN and not the Jews.


But I think you might find the camp david accords and the framework for peace were two separate incidents.

 

[Phoenall]

The truth of the matter is that it is the very low IQ antisemites who think they are being oh, so clever when they substitute the term "Zionist" for "Jew" as they rail away with their hatred.

Quality humans see through this stupid ruse that only works on morons.

Nah.

Is that why it is now racist to call a Jew a Zionist

 

[Coyote]

There is another difference between the Palestinians and many of these other groups. As it stands now, manyPalestinians lack not only a homeland, but citizenship in any state. They are stateless and have no rights because they are not citzens of any state.

If they actually wanted a state, they would have had one at the camp David accords.

They chose yet more terrorism, instead.

They were not included in the Camp David Accords.

UN Rejection of the Middle East Framework
The UN General Assembly rejected the Framework for Peace in the Middle East, because the agreement was concluded without participation of UN and PLO and did not comply with the Palestinian right of return, of self-determination and to national independence and sovereignty. December 1978, she declared in Resolution 33/28 A, that agreements were only valid if they are within the framework of the United Nations and its Charter and its resolutions, include the Palestinian right of return and the right to national independence and sovereignty in Palestine, and concluded with the participation of the PLO. Also the passive attitude of the Security Council was criticised.[18] On 6 December 1979, the UN condemned in Resolution 34/70 all partial agreements and separate treaties that did not meet the Palestinian rights and comprehensive solutions to peace; she condemned Israel's continued occupation and demanded withdrawal from all occupied territories.[19] On 12 December, in Resolution 34/65 B, she rejected more specific parts of the Camp David Accords and similar agreements, which were not in accordance with mentioned requirements. All such partial agreements and separate treaties were strongly condemned. The part of the Camp David accords regarding the Palestinian future and all similar ones were declared invalid.[20]

So there we have it the UN deciding what the Palestinians could and could not do, and not a Jew in sight. If Arafat as leader of the PLO and Palestine had signed and agreed the accords you can bet that Palestine would have been a country the very next day. The UN would not have a say in it apart from not recognising Palestine until the member states said otherwise. The UN would have welcomed the agreement and would have claimed their part in it. It also shows that the people doing the outside interference on the Palestinian people were the UN and not the Jews.


But I think you might find the camp david accords and the framework for peace were two separate incidents.

The UN decided for the Jews so why are you bothered if they decide for the Palestinians?

Edited to add: There is a difference between the UN recognizing the right of the Palestinians to have a state and the subsequent negotiations involved in establishing that state which will ultimately have to include Israel.

 

[Coyote]

All people people deserve basic rights, whether you like them or not.

Except for Jews, of course, who do not even have the right to live, apparently.

Accordiing to who?

Killing people is not a right.

No it isn't.

Terrorism is not a right.

No it isn't.

The desire for genocide as quite clearly stated in the very charter of those in governance is not a right -- even if you happen to think it is.

That part is debatable, as was argued elsewhere in looking at the PLO, Hamas, and Fatah and their charters. You're trying to rationalize a way to deny a people their basic rights based on a dishonest claim that they desire genocide.

When you scream constantly about the "rights" of people whose foremost desire is the destruction of another people, you are simply part of that process. The day the Arabs who now call themselves "Palestinian" place the actual establishment of a peaceful country of their own above that of their bloodthirsty desire for dead Jews, then they can be said to have inherent rights.

Until then, they do not deserve any.

Everyone deserves the same fundamental rights by nature of their being human until they've abrogated those rights, as individuals. They can't prove they can govern in an acceptable manner until they have a state, free of foreign interference, in which to govern. Genocide, not just poorly supported claims of "wanting genocide" has occurred and is occurring in many parts of the world yet I don't hear a peep from you on how they should forfeit their nations or national aspirations.

 

[Beelzebub]

The truth of the matter is that it is the very low IQ antisemites who think they are being oh, so clever when they substitute the term "Zionist" for "Jew" as they rail away with their hatred.

Quality humans see through this stupid ruse that only works on morons.

Nah.

Is that why it is now racist to call a Jew a Zionist

Is that the position of someone?
I would not think it to make sense. The person might be both Jewish and Zionist.

But even if not, it would be like calling a Christian a Republican. Even if not accurate is not racist.