Anti-Zionist Jews thread

[Yala]

I think we should compile a list of so-called anti-Zionist, anti-Israel Jews. I will list the usuals to get them out of the way and then we can get down to other dangerous ones who may even be in local arenas. These people need to be outed.

The usual suspects:
Chomsky
Finkelstein
Shulamit Aloni
Ilan Pappe
Jaqueline Rose
Fake "Rabbi" Michael Lerner
Netura Karta
Adam Shapiro
George Soros

To be clear the only anti-Israel Jews I have ever seen in my whole life have been NK. I have never come face to face with any others. Have you? Have you confronted them?

[KettleWhistle]

http://www.masada2000.org/list-A.html

[Yala]

http://www.masada2000.org/list-A.html

You know I saw that list a while back and it's a little extreme. They put Jason Alexander on there for G-d's sake. I think we need our own list and not just a list that throws on anybody. Thank you though.

[The Israeli Guy]

There are about 15 million Jews all over the world and you brought only couple of names!


Ovadia Yosef, the former Israeli chief Rabbi vote for the Israeli elections:
http://content.answers.com/main/content/wp/en/3/38/Rabbi_Ovadia_Yosef_Voting_in_Israelis_Elections.jp g

First of all the land of Israel belongs to the nation if Israel (the name Jews is because the Romans called in that name to the Israelis from the Judah tribe because 2700 years ago the Assyrians exiled the 10 tribes and those 10 tribes assimilated with the gentiles and lost their Torah and became Gentiles so that the children of Israel of today and in the last 2000 years are mainly from the tribe of Judah).

This is the land that God entered us when he took us from the slavery in ancient Egypt and commanded us to live in it, settle down in it and to live as a kingdom of priest in it.

It's true that God warned us that if we will not follow the commandments then the holy land will vomit us from herself but as long as Jews are living in the land of Israel and follow the commandments of the Torah and the 10 commandments then they got all the rights to live in it.

This is the reason why we had 2 main exiles and in both of them the temple of God was destroyed. Although the Romans deported us in 70 A.D, there were Jews who didn't go to the exile and stayed in Israel.

Jews can (and commanded) to live in the land of Israel as long as they follow the commandments of the Torah.

There is no prohibition to Jews to live in the land of Israel.

The Orthodox Jews do believe in the recreation of the state of Israel.

There is a very small group within the Orthodox group in the name of Neturei Karta which believe that the state of Israel is not to religious for them to live in and this is the reason why they don't live in Israel (except couple of hundreds of them who are living in the neighbourhood of Mea Shearim in Jerusalem).

They represent only themselves. They were many of them before the ww2 who didn't want to go to Israel and because of that they finished their lives in the gas chambers. And they also deal with anti semitism in America from hate groups.

They are not saying that there is a say in the Torah/Tanach that Isreal should not be created until the Messiah comes cause there isn't such a say at all!!

what there is is a prophecy about the Messiah who will do 3 things:

1. Built the third temple of God in Jerusalem.
2. Will bring the rest of the Jews who are living all over the world to the land of Israel.
3. Will fight the "Wars of God" to restore the greater Israel which include parts of Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Iraq etc.

It's not that that untill the Messiah will show himself then the Jews are forbidden from living in Israel, not at all. On the opposite, Jews must live in Israel cause Israel as the home of them and their presence in this land protect them.

Here's a list of Rabbis who will tell you that Jews must live in Israel:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel_Meir_Lau

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abraham_Isaac_Kook

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shlomo_Goren

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yitzhak_HaLevi_Herzog

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avraham_Shapira

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isser_Yehuda_Unterman

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mordechai_Eliyahu

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yona_Metzger

Couple of pictures:

http://masoret.hevre.co.il/hydepark/topic.asp?whichpage=1&topic_id=1990937

http://masoret.hevre.co.il/hydepark/topic.asp?whichpage=2&topic_id=1990937

http://masoret.hevre.co.il/hydepark/topic.asp?whichpage=3&topic_id=1990937

http://masoret.hevre.co.il/hydepark/topic.asp?whichpage=4&topic_id=1990937

http://masoret.hevre.co.il/hydepark/topic.asp?whichpage=5&topic_id=1990937

http://masoret.hevre.co.il/hydepark/topic.asp?whichpage=6&topic_id=1990937

http://masoret.hevre.co.il/hydepark/topic.asp?whichpage=7&topic_id=1990937

http://masoret.hevre.co.il/hydepark/topic.asp?whichpage=8&topic_id=1990937

http://www.ynetnews.com/PicServer2/20122005/796100/JRL155_wa.jpg

Shulamit Alony isn't anti Zionist at all!

Noam Chumsky is Jewish because his mother is BUT He doesn't see himself as Jewish, he declared more than once that he doesn't believe in God nor the Torah and he don't like to be considered as Jewish in the eyes of the environment.

Here's a good article about him by Sever Plocker. (http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3252326,00.html#n)

[KettleWhistle]

Shulamit Aloni's picture is in the dictionary under Anti-Zionist.

Others:

Yossi Beilin (Oslo criminal)
Shimon Peres (Oslo criminal, Arab collaborator)
Dalia Rabin
Dana Olmert
Membership of Gush Shoa(lom)
Jewish members of Meretz

Much of the Jewish anti-Israel activity is originating at Ben Gurion University. Here are a few bastards that this Israeli University payrolls:

Dan Bar-On
Yossi Amitay
Kobi Schnitz
Idan Landau
Neve Gordon (personal friend of Arafat, served as a human shield, publishes anti-Israel material at the anti-Semitic website Counterpunch). Massada2000 has contact information for the management at Ben-Gurion University: http://www.masada2000.org/list-G.html
Lev Luis Grinberg
Jeff Halper

[tzanchan]

One is a zionist if he believes that the jews are entitled to a homeland.
The meretz party, including yossi bellin support a jewish homeland thus any claim that they are anti zionist is false. One can even make the argument that chomsky is zionist based on his support for a jewish homeland as evidenced by his work on kibbutzs back in the 40s. One is not an anti zionist if he is critical of th state of Israel or supportive of Palestinians as well.

[KettleWhistle]

One is a zionist if he believes that the jews are entitled to a homeland.
The meretz party, including yossi bellin support a jewish homeland thus any claim that they are anti zionist is false. One can even make the argument that chomsky is zionist based on his support for a jewish homeland as evidenced by his work on kibbutzs back in the 40s. One is not an anti zionist if he is critical of th state of Israel or supportive of Palestinians as well.
Delusional claptrap. Zionism is about having a Jewish state in the Land of Israel. Not about having an Arab state named Israel in the Land of Israel. Meretz is a majority-Arab party with Jewish leadership that works hard to damage the Jewish State of Israel.

Meretz is as much Zionist as Democractic Republic of Congo is democratic.

[Yala]

I agree. I think some in Meretz may call themselves Zionists but most of the things they try to do undermine the State of Israel. Didn't a Meretz member support Israeli boycotts? Can this be considered Zionist? I think not. Furthermore, Yossi Beilin is a dreamer. Does he have any support in Israel whatsoever?

[Klovs]

Don't forget Uri Avnery

[Yala]

Don't forget Uri Avnery

Yes. Here's another - Dror Feiler , creator of Snow White and the Madness of Truth:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snow_White_and_The_Madness_of_Truth

[tzanchan]

Delusional claptrap. Zionism is about having a Jewish state in the Land of Israel. Not about having an Arab state named Israel in the Land of Israel. Meretz is a majority-Arab party with Jewish leadership that works hard to damage the Jewish State of Israel.

Meretz is as much Zionist as Democractic Republic of Congo is democratic.

No. Most definitions of zionism indicate that the criteria is the support of a jewish homeland. How that homeland will be created, and what kind of state will support that homeland have not been specified. You are trying to confne the broad concept of zionism to your fringe right wing zionism.

[KettleWhistle]

No. Most definitions of zionism indicate that the criteria is the support of a jewish homeland. How that homeland will be created, and what kind of state will support that homeland have not been specified.
Not only was it specified in a great detail, but it was implemented in the founding of the State of Israel.


You are trying to confne the broad concept of zionism to your fringe right wing zionism.
There is no broad concept of Zionism. Zionism is what it is: a political movement of national liberation for establishement of independent Jewish state in the Land of Israel. Some may word it differently, but the meaning is the same.

Certainly, entities who are working againt the State of Israel are by no means Zionist.

[Mil]

How do you people measure if one is Zionist-enough or not?

[Womble]

What's the point of this list? What are you going to do with it, put it onto the wall in a nice frame? Write it on toilet paper and wipe your backside?

[tzanchan]

Not only was it specified in a great detail, but it was implemented in the founding of the State of Israel..
This also called for equality for its non jewish citizens. And it did not specify what a 'Jewish state' is.


There is no broad concept of Zionism. Zionism is what it is: a political movement of national liberation for establishement of independent Jewish state in the Land of Israel. Some may word it differently, but the meaning is the same.

Certainly, entities who are working againt the State of Israel are by no means Zionist.

It was not specified in great deal. One is a zionist if he believes in a homeland for the Jews. How this homeland will be accomplished and what the definition of a jewish state means are all up for debate within the spectrum of zionism.

[tzanchan]

How do you people measure if one is Zionist-enough or not?

Ask Kettle. I served with many 'anti-zionist' meretz supporters in Lebanon. It is ironic, if not insulting, that kettle could call meretz supporters anti zionist when I am sure they did alot more than he did with their blood than he did with his internet forums.

[KettleWhistle]

And it did not specify what a 'Jewish state' is.
Because it is obvious.



It was not specified in great deal. One is a zionist if he believes in a homeland for the Jews. How this homeland will be accomplished and what the definition of a jewish state means are all up for debate within the spectrum of zionism.Wrong. It was all described in great deatail, voted upon, and agreed upon, mainly within the framework of the Zionist Congresses of late 1800s. Insane ideas along the lines of settling Jews in Uganda, Argentina, or Birobijan were rejected. If you are ignorant of these issues, go read a book or two.

Now you are trying to change the definitions in order to call people who work to destroy Israel "Zionists". Well, that's jut an oxymoron. What Meretz does is not Zionism, never has been, and if you want to call them Zionists, then you MUST also call Balad and Neturei Karta Zionists as well. So are you ready to do that? Are you ready to defend Neturei Karta and Balad as Zionists, since according to your twisted worldview, anything is up for interpretation, and hense anyone could be called a Zionist. Also please tell who'll be next. Adolf Hitler?

[KettleWhistle]

Definitions of Zionism:

From Jewish Virtual Library:
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Zionism/zionism.html

Zionism, the national movement for the return of the Jewish people to their homeland and the resumption of Jewish sovereignty in the Land of Israel, advocated, from its inception, tangible as well as spiritual aims. Jews of all persuasions, left and right, religious and secular, joined to form the Zionist movement and worked together toward these goals. Disagreements led to rifts, but ultimately, the common goal of a Jewish state in its ancient homeland was attained. The term "Zionism" was coined in 1890 by Nathan Birnbaum.

From Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zionism

Zionism is a political movement that supports a homeland for the Jewish people in the Land of Israel, where Jewish nationhood is thought to have evolved somewhere between 1200 BCE and late Second Temple times,[1] [2] and where Jewish kingdoms and self-governing states existed up to the 2nd century CE.
It has been described as a diaspora nationalism.[3] Its proponents regard it as a national liberation movement.[4]

While Zionism is based in part upon religious tradition linking the Jewish people to the Land of Israel, the modern movement was mainly While Zionism is based in part upon religious traditionsecular, beginning largely as a response to rampant antisemitism in Europe during the 19th century.[5] At first one of several Jewish political movements offering alternative responses to the position of Jews in Europe, Zionism gradually gained more support. The destruction of the existing Jewish society in Europe during the Holocaust accelerated migration to Palestine, in turn accelerating the creation of the State of Israel in 1948. Since 1948 Zionism is a national ideology within the State of Israel, [6] and outside it primarily a movement in support of that state.

The word "Zionism" itself derived from the word "Zion (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zion)" (Hebrew (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hebrew_language): ציון, Tziyyon), one of the names of Jerusalem (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerusalem), as mentioned in the Bible (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bible).

It was coined as a term for Jewish nationalism by Austrian Jewish publisher Nathan Birnbaum in his journal Self Emancipation in 1890.

Since the founding of the State of Israel, the term Zionism is generally considered to mean support for Israel as a Jewish nation state (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nation_state). However, a variety of different, and sometimes competing, ideologies that support Israel fit under the general category of Zionism, such as Religious Zionism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_Zionist_Movement), Revisionist Zionism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revisionist_Zionism), and Labor Zionism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_Zionism). Thus, the term is also sometimes used to refer specifically to the programs of these ideologies, such as efforts to encourage Jewish emigration to Israel. The term Zionism is also sometimes used retroactively to describe the millennia-old Biblical connection between the Jewish people and the Land of Israel, which existed long before the birth of the modern Zionist movement.
Certain individuals and groups have used the term "Zionism" as a pejorative to justify attacks on Israel. In some cases, the label "Zionist" is also used as a euphemism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euphemism) for Jews in general by apologists for anti-Semitism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Semitism) (as in the Polish anti-Zionist campaign (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish_1968_political_crisis) and Zionology (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zionology)).

[tzanchan]

Because it is obvious.?
No. What constitutes a jewish state is not obvious. Some think that a Jewish state requires Jewish law to be the ruling authority. Others may feel that simply an emphasis on Hebrew culture is enough. Still, others may argue that by virtue of providing asylum to all Jewry of the world, this is good enough to constitute as a Jewish state. Others may disagree on the composition of the populace, how many jews are required, and how minorities are to be viewed in the Jewish state There is a vast spectrum in betwen of what may constitute a Jewish state, and there is certainly no agreement. So it is certainly not obvious.



Wrong. It was all described in great deatail, voted upon, and agreed upon, mainly within the framework of the Zionist Congresses of late 1800s. Insane ideas along the lines of settling Jews in Uganda, Argentina, or Birobijan were rejected. If you are ignorant of these issues, go read a book or two.

Now you are trying to change the definitions in order to call people who work to destroy Israel "Zionists". Well, that's jut an oxymoron. What Meretz does is not Zionism, never has been, and if you want to call them Zionists, then you MUST also call Balad and Neturei Karta Zionists as well. So are you ready to do that? Are you ready to defend Neturei Karta and Balad as Zionists, since according to your twisted worldview, anything is up for interpretation, and hense anyone could be called a Zionist. Also please tell who'll be next. Adolf Hitler?


It is quite the logical fallacy to argue that because I support meretz (who are open advocates of zionism) that I have to also support openly non zionist groups. Again, Meretz, and many other 'leftist' organizations support the idea of a Jewish homeland. This as you quoted in wikipedia is one of the main defenitions of zionism. Balad does not support a Jewish homeland in the land of Israel thus they cannot be considered zionists. The fact that you (rightly or wrongly) consider the actions of Meretz detrimental to the state of Israel is irrelevant to the fact that they feel that they are helping the state of Israel. One cannot call every party that one disagrees with 'anti-zionist' simply because one does think that they are doing what is good for Israel (whether or not these beliefs are accurate is another issue).

[KettleWhistle]

No. What constitutes a jewish state is not obvious. Some think that a Jewish state requires Jewish law to be the ruling authority. Others may feel that simply an emphasis on Hebrew culture is enough. Still, others may argue that by virtue of providing asylum to all Jewry of the world, this is good enough to constitute as a Jewish state. Others may disagree on the composition of the populace, how many jews are required, and how minorities are to be viewed in the Jewish state There is a vast spectrum in betwen of what may constitute a Jewish state, and there is certainly no agreement. So it is certainly not obvious.
Yes, it is. All of the above encompass the Jewish nature of the state, as opposed to a goy (that means foreign) nature of the state.


It is quite the logical fallacy to argue that because I support meretz (who are open advocates of zionism) that I have to also support openly non zionist groups. They are not open advocates of Zionism. They advocate same things as Balad. They work to undermine the Zionist nature of the State of Israel. They can say whatever they want, but they will be judged by their actions. And those are as anti-Zionist as anti-Zionist gets.

I understand why the Meretz politicians lie about their anti-Zionism. But at the same time I find their lies to be absolutely despicable. It is just like anti-Semites who fabricated a faux differentiation between Jewish and Zionist, and claim that they are not anti-Semitic. I'd love for some of either the anti-Zionist Jews like Beilin and Aloni, or for anti-Semites like Chomsky to just be honest for once. Frankly, I'd at least respect them, despite finding their stances on most issues to be outright deplorable.

[tandem]

I think we should compile a list of so-called anti-Zionist, anti-Israel Jews. I will list the usuals to get them out of the way and then we can get down to other dangerous ones who may even be in local arenas. These people need to be outed.

The usual suspects:
...
George Soros

To be clear the only anti-Israel Jews I have ever seen in my whole life have been NK. I have never come face to face with any others. Have you? Have you confronted them?
who is an atheist.. he was born jewish, father converted to catholicism to escape the wrath of the nazis, became who he is after claiming that the british jews refused to "help" him after the war. he hasn't been jewish since he was a kid and even then he wasn't exactly thrilled about being one so he doesn't really count as a jew, at least not in my view.

as for the israeli anti zionists like most of these idiots in meretz, not all of them are so anti zionist. for example when the paleos were saying that the peace process has to include the right of return of paleos to israel proper yossi beilin was one of the first people to lash out at the paleos out right. they support peace oh yes, and are even willing to lick some arab balls, but not if peace comes at their destruction. believe me they're stupid but not THAT stupid. the israeli anti zionists at least earned the right to express their views. all these other anti zionist jews who live outside israel, who are not israeli and have never really done anything for israel or the jewish cause, are irrelevant.

[tzanchan]

Yes, it is. All of the above encompass the Jewish nature of the state, as opposed to a goy (that means foreign) nature of the state.

They are not open advocates of Zionism. They advocate same things as Balad. They work to undermine the Zionist nature of the State of Israel. They can say whatever they want, but they will be judged by their actions. And those are as anti-Zionist as anti-Zionist gets.

I understand why the Meretz politicians lie about their anti-Zionism. But at the same time I find their lies to be absolutely despicable. It is just like anti-Semites who fabricated a faux differentiation between Jewish and Zionist, and claim that they are not anti-Semitic. I'd love for some of either the anti-Zionist Jews like Beilin and Aloni, or for anti-Semites like Chomsky to just be honest for once. Frankly, I'd at least respect them, despite finding their stances on most issues to be outright deplorable.


No, the meretz zionist platform as depicted by numerous sources:

"The Zionist aim of the State of Israel is to be a welcoming home for every Jew who so wishes; and immigration to Israel is also a source of strength for the State of Israel. The large wave of immigration in recent years is a blessing for Israeli society, and its generally successful absorption is a badge of honor for our society and the absorption system. "
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Politics/meretz.html

or

meretz as a zionist party (in contrast to Balad):

http://www.zionism-israel.com/dic/politicalsystem.htm

Again their platforms speak for themselves which are all zionist platforms. Again, please refer me to an "anti zionist action" which they support. Based on your logic, they could accuse you of being a closet anti zionist and say that your actions are bringing down the state.

[Yala]

What's the point of this list? What are you going to do with it, put it onto the wall in a nice frame? Write it on toilet paper and wipe your backside?

Maybe both :)

[Yala]

who is an atheist.. he was born jewish, father converted to catholicism to escape the wrath of the nazis, became who he is after claiming that the british jews refused to "help" him after the war. he hasn't been jewish since he was a kid and even then he wasn't exactly thrilled about being one so he doesn't really count as a jew, at least not in my view.

as for the israeli anti zionists like most of these idiots in meretz, not all of them are so anti zionist. for example when the paleos were saying that the peace process has to include the right of return of paleos to israel proper yossi beilin was one of the first people to lash out at the paleos out right. they support peace oh yes, and are even willing to lick some arab balls, but not if peace comes at their destruction. believe me they're stupid but not THAT stupid. the israeli anti zionists at least earned the right to express their views. all these other anti zionist jews who live outside israel, who are not israeli and have never really done anything for israel or the jewish cause, are irrelevant.


OK, good points. But I believe at least one idiot in Meretz supported an Israeli boycott. Correct me if I'm wrong. Can we agree that anyone who supports boycotts against Israel cannot be considered a Zionist?

Furthermore, I think anyone who calls themself a Zionist but works to undermine the state of Israel cannot be considered a true Zionist. That's why I put Shulamit Aloni on the list but not Yossi Beilin, who I loathe, but I suppose in most circles can still be considered a Zionist.

[KettleWhistle]

What's Zionist about what Beilin stands for? People like tsanchan may consider him Zionist, but only because they are stupid, so they buy anything that Meretz says. Just because they say that, doesn't make it so. Because they are lying, much like Chomsky, who also claims to be a Zionist.

Zionism is about Jewish nation-state in the Land of Israel. By definition. How does the work Meretz and/or Beilin do contribute to that? And the argument that they called for aliah doesn't really hold water. Many Neo-Nazi groups call for all Jews to return to Israel too.

[Yala]

What's Zionist about what Beilin stands for? People like tsanchan may consider him Zionist, but only because they are stupid, so they buy anything that Meretz says. Just because they say that, doesn't make it so. Because they are lying, much like Chomsky, who also claims to be a Zionist.

Zionism is about Jewish nation-state in the Land of Israel. By definition. How does the work Meretz and/or Beilin do contribute to that? And the argument that they called for aliah doesn't really hold water. Many Neo-Nazi groups call for all Jews to return to Israel too.

Listen I loathe Beilin and think he lives in a fantasy but I guess in some circles they would still consider him a Zionist and maybe Chomsky too. We can even argue if Peres is a true Zionist b/c of all the stupid things he has done but I didn't want to go there. I wanted to list people that 95% of us would agree with. I know the 100% was impossible to shoot for.:)

[KettleWhistle]

Listen I loathe Beilin and think he lives in a fantasy but I guess in some circles they would still consider him a Zionist and maybe Chomsky too. We can even argue if Peres is a true Zionist b/c of all the stupid things he has done but I didn't want to go there. I wanted to list people that 95% of us would agree with. I know the 100% was impossible to shoot for.:)
I don't understand how definition of Zionist or anti-Zionist can be considered to be ambiguous. In reality, there is no ambiguity. It is very simple and straight-forward. Like definition of Nazi. We wouldn't say that Rommel was anti-Nazi because he was only somewhat Nazi. So how can we say that people who's work is the antithesis of Zionism, like Beilin AND Peres, are Zionists? Sure some people may agree with what they stand for. Fine. Just don't not lie about this. These people are the face of Jewish anti-Zioinsm as much as the Neturei Karta characters.

[hworta69]

What about a pro zionist Christian?

[tzanchan]

What's Zionist about what Beilin stands for? People like tsanchan may consider him Zionist, but only because they are stupid, so they buy anything that Meretz says. Just because they say that, doesn't make it so. Because they are lying, much like Chomsky, who also claims to be a Zionist.

Zionism is about Jewish nation-state in the Land of Israel. By definition. How does the work Meretz and/or Beilin do contribute to that? And the argument that they called for aliah doesn't really hold water. Many Neo-Nazi groups call for all Jews to return to Israel too.


Zionism is not about a jewish nation state strictly. The definitions you provided called for a 'jewish homeland'.
Regardless, the provisions of most democratic nation states call for equality towards all of its citizens irrespective of their ethnic background. You have yet to show how Poland is discrimnatory towards Polish jews.

[Mil]

Zionism is not about a jewish nation state strictly. The definitions you provided called for a 'jewish homeland'.
Regardless, the provisions of most democratic nation states call for equality towards all of its citizens irrespective of their ethnic background. You have yet to show how Poland is discrimnatory towards Polish jews.

I don't think you would want to be a Jew in Poland.

Anyways, I would rather God give Jews Australia and not some cra**phole which does not even have oil.

Austria would also do.

[tzanchan]

Zionism is not about a jewish nation state strictly. The definitions you provided called for a 'jewish homeland'.
Regardless, the provisions of most democratic nation states call for equality towards all of its citizens irrespective of their ethnic background. You have yet to show how Poland is discrimnatory towards Polish jews.

I don't think you would want to be a Jew in Poland.

Anyways, I would rather God give Jews Australia and not some cra**phole which does not even have oil.

Austria would also do.

I wouldnt want to be an Arab in Israel as well.

In either case, kettle made the case that in all nation states, the minority in the state is discriminated against by virtue of not being apart of the nation state. He made the case that all nation-states such as poland and japan and portugal discriminate against their minorities. I was curious of Polish law that discriminates against Polish Jews. In another thread he made a reference to their educational system but did not elaborate.

[tzanchan]

I don't understand how definition of Zionist or anti-Zionist can be considered to be ambiguous. In reality, there is no ambiguity. It is very simple and straight-forward. Like definition of Nazi. We wouldn't say that Rommel was anti-Nazi because he was only somewhat Nazi. So how can we say that people who's work is the antithesis of Zionism, like Beilin AND Peres, are Zionists? Sure some people may agree with what they stand for. Fine. Just don't not lie about this. These people are the face of Jewish anti-Zioinsm as much as the Neturei Karta characters.

Beilin and Peres' work are not the antithesis of zionism because you dont agree with them.

[Yala]

I wouldnt want to be an Arab in Israel as well.

In either case, kettle made the case that in all nation states, the minority in the state is discriminated against by virtue of not being apart of the nation state. He made the case that all nation-states such as poland and japan and portugal discriminate against their minorities. I was curious of Polish law that discriminates against Polish Jews. In another thread he made a reference to their educational system but did not elaborate.


Well I don't think you could give an example of ANY country where minorities will say they are treated equally to the majority. Polish law may not discriminate against Polish Jews or other minorities but just b/c discrimination isn't institutionalized does not make it any less real. For example, there are no laws against hiring African Americans in the US, but a huge majority will tell you they are discriminated against when it comes to getting a job. They will also tell you that their schools do not receive as much money as schools in all white neighborhoods. And they are 100% right.

[Yala]

What about a pro zionist Christian?

They help Israel a lot and should be thanked, of course. :)

[KettleWhistle]

Beilin and Peres' work are not the antithesis of zionism because you dont agree with them.

Beilin and Peres are anti-Zionists because they work against the Jewish nation-state, which is what Zionism is all about.

It has nothing to do with my agreement or disagreement. I don't like Bibi either, but I wouldn't say he is anti-Zionist. I find Ben Gurion to be a despicable character, but I wouldn't say he was anti-Zionist.

Regarding Poland, I told already, several times, that they have education quotas.

[Ricky]

I have argued with Kettlewhistle elsewhere about Zionism and a democratic state, and I should like to summarise his views (which, naturally, I abhor), particularly for tzanchan. If Kettlewhistle considers that I have not stated any views of his correctly, he is welcome to say so. Kettlewhistle holds that Israel is a nation state- that is a state with an ethnic majority (the Jews) and some minorities (Arabs, Druze etc). Kettlewhistle holds that, in a nation state, only the majority group should be entitled to civil rights. Thus, in Israel only Jews should be permitted to vote for the Knesset. Indeed, in Kettlewhistle's view, generally discriminatary laws are entirely legitimate. Thus, if there is a law requiring employers to pay their workers a minimum wage, such a law will only be applicable to the Jews. An employer may pay a non-Jewish worker whatever he wishes. Kettlewhistle is entirely consistent in his attitude. He holds that in other countries, minorities, including the Jews, have no right to demand civil rights. Thus, minorities, such as Jews, Indians, North Africans, who live in, say, England, France, Canada, to name just a few, are not entitled to demand civil rights in those countries. Indeed, Kettlewhistle considers it entirely legitimate for the majority group to expell minorities from the country in which they were born, if that is the wish of the majority group. Thus, for instance, Kettlewhistle considers that it was entirely legitimate for the Serbian leader, Milosevicz, to expell Albanian men, women and children from their homes in Kosova, where they had lived for hundreds of years. (Thank God, NATO leaders did not agree with Kettlewhistle, and bombed Serbia until Milosovitz agreed to allow the Albanina refugees to return. Afterwards, NATO countries ensured that Milosovitz was arrested and tried for crimes against humanity).What lies behind all of Kettlewhistle's views is the fact that all that interests him is that Jews should live in Israel (whether they wish to or not). Thus, Kettlewhistle has no real problem with the possibility that anti semites abroad will oppress the Jews living there. Such persecution may increase the desire of those Jews to come on aliya, which is all that interests Kettlewhistle.
Kettlewhistle claims that in Israel, the Jews will enjoy full civil rights. At a late stage in our debate, I tried to discover how much civil liberties he personally believed the Jews should be given in the Jewish state he approves of. I asked him if, in his personal opinion, it should be possible in Israel for a Cohen to marry a divorcee. I asked him if, in his opinion, a woman who has an unwanted pregnancy should be permitted to abort the fetus, if that is her wish. I asked him how much social and legal freedom should, in his personal opinion, be afforded to homosexual and lesbian couples living in Israel. Kettlewhistle did not give clear replies to these questions, so I cannot report his views on these issues

[KettleWhistle]

I have argued with Kettlewhistle elsewhere about Zionism and a democratic state, and I should like to summarise his views (which, naturally, I abhor), particularly for tzanchan. If Kettlewhistle considers that I have not stated any views of his correctly, he is welcome to say so.
No, you have not reinterated them correctly.


Kettlewhistle holds that Israel is a nation state- that is a state with an ethnic majority (the Jews) and some minorities (Arabs, Druze etc). Kettlewhistle holds that, in a nation state, only the majority group should be entitled to civil rights.
Wrong. While Israel is a nation-state, by definition and by law, it is up to the nation-states' ethnic majority to decide by the means of democracy (that means voting) what civil rights its citizens have, and who is entitled to full citizenship.


Thus, in Israel only Jews should be permitted to vote for the Knesset.
Actually, I don't have a problem with friendly minorities, like Druze, or even Russians (and by Russians I mean Russians, not Russian-speaking Jews) voting. Perhaps it could be tied to millitary services, thus elegantly excluding Arabs from the process.


Indeed, in Kettlewhistle's view, generally discriminatary laws are entirely legitimate. Thus, if there is a law requiring employers to pay their workers a minimum wage, such a law will only be applicable to the Jews.
An employer may pay a non-Jewish worker whatever he wishes.
Actually, I fully support better legislation of the foreign workers' rights.


Kettlewhistle is entirely consistent in his attitude. He holds that in other countries, minorities, including the Jews, have no right to demand civil rights. Thus, minorities, such as Jews, Indians, North Africans, who live in, say, England, France, Canada, to name just a few, are not entitled to demand civil rights in those countries.
I have never said such a thing. You are trying to make simplton's mockery of what I wrote. For example, Canadian Jews, Indians, Blacks, and all others are all Canadians, and certainly they cannot be discriminated against. On the other hand, Jews who live in nation-states like Poland are not Poles, so they may be discriminated against, based on the political situation and that country's particular needs and constrains. So if they don't want to provide higher education to Jews, it's their right, since their primary responsibility is to the Poles, not to foreigners.


Indeed, Kettlewhistle considers it entirely legitimate for the majority group to expell minorities from the country in which they were born, if that is the wish of the majority group. Thus, for instance, Kettlewhistle considers that it was entirely legitimate for the Serbian leader, Milosevicz, to expell Albanian men, women and children from their homes in Kosova, where they had lived for hundreds of years. (Thank God, NATO leaders did not agree with Kettlewhistle, and bombed Serbia until Milosovitz agreed to allow the Albanina refugees to return. Afterwards, NATO countries ensured that Milosovitz was arrested and tried for crimes against humanity).What lies behind all of Kettlewhistle's views is the fact that all that interests him is that Jews should live in Israel (whether they wish to or not).
Again you twist what I said. Nation-states have the right to excersise their sovereignty and to expell foreign populations from their country. So Serbs had every right to expell the Albanian population out to Albania. The NATO's war, which was illegal under the international law, violated Serbian sovereignty, and brought nothing but prolongation of the conflict, death, and massive destruction to Serbia. And Milosevic was never convicted of anything, despite years and years of the kangaroo court proceedings against him.


Thus, Kettlewhistle has no real problem with the possibility that anti semites abroad will oppress the Jews living there. Such persecution may increase the desire of those Jews to come on aliya, which is all that interests Kettlewhistle. Kettlewhistle claims that in Israel, the Jews will enjoy full civil rights.
No, I never said such a thing. And I don't support the idea of universal aliah. There is nothing wrong with having Diaspora communities. Many nations have these. More Irish live abroad than in Ireland. Millions of Italians live outside of Italy. There is nothing wrong or abnormal with that. That said, when Jews live in nation-states (that excludes non-nation states like the U.S., Canada, Mexico, S. American countries, etc.) they are foreigners in those countries, and they should keep in mind that those countries are not theirs.


At a late stage in our debate, I tried to discover how much civil liberties he personally believed the Jews should be given in the Jewish state he approves of. I asked him if, in his personal opinion, it should be possible in Israel for a Cohen to marry a divorcee. I asked him if, in his opinion, a woman who has an unwanted pregnancy should be permitted to abort the fetus, if that is her wish. I asked him how much social and legal freedom should, in his personal opinion, be afforded to homosexual and lesbian couples living in Israel. Kettlewhistle did not give clear replies to these questions, so I cannot report his views on these issues
And I told you that in a Jewish democracy these issues are to be decided by a democratic vote of the Jewish citizens of the Jewish state. My personal views (which are very liberal) are irrelevant.

[tzanchan]

Well I don't think you could give an example of ANY country where minorities will say they are treated equally to the majority. Polish law may not discriminate against Polish Jews or other minorities but just b/c discrimination isn't institutionalized does not make it any less real. For example, there are no laws against hiring African Americans in the US, but a huge majority will tell you they are discriminated against when it comes to getting a job. They will also tell you that their schools do not receive as much money as schools in all white neighborhoods. And they are 100% right.

But most counries dont have explicit laws differentiating between minority and the majority of the ethnic state. While, they cant control the tendencies of man and how they will act, they can at least worry about the morality of a state as a whole by preventing the differentiation of a people legally based on ethnicity. In Israel this is not the case, unfortunatelly, specifically in East Jerusalem-- considered Israeli territory by the government-- yet not subject to Israel's democratic values as stipulated in the declaration of independence.

[tzanchan]

Beilin and Peres are anti-Zionists because they work against the Jewish nation-state, which is what Zionism is all about. ..
For one I have showed (as you did with your wikipedia source), that a jewish nation state is not a sole criteria for zionism. Supporting a jewish homeland is the criteria. How that is to be exhibited, and how this nation state will be exhibited, were not specified.




It has nothing to do with my agreement or disagreement. I don't like Bibi either, but I wouldn't say he is anti-Zionist. I find Ben Gurion to be a despicable character, but I wouldn't say he was anti-Zionist..
And there are numerous politicians that support minority rights in other countries. That doesnt make them 'anti- that nation state'.



Regarding Poland, I told already, several times, that they have education quotas.

They do not have educational quotas. " All forms of discrimination were abolished in Poland after 1989."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Numerus_clausus

Try again.

But it is interesting that you seem to support such discriminatory measures, when most states have worked so hard to abolish them.

[KettleWhistle]

For one I have showed (as you did with your wikipedia source), that a jewish nation state is not a sole criteria for zionism. Supporting a jewish homeland is the criteria. How that is to be exhibited, and how this nation state will be exhibited, were not specified.

Jewish nation-state is defined in the Wikipedia article as Zionism:
"Since the founding of the State of Israel, the term Zionism is generally considered to mean support for Israel as a Jewish nation state (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nation_state)."

The very idea of a Jewish homeland without a Jewish nation-state is simply absurd and is a mere invention of the likes of Chomsky in order to damage the State of Israel and attack Jewish sovereignty.


They do not have educational quotas. " All forms of discrimination were abolished in Poland after 1989."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Numerus_clausus

Try again.

But it is interesting that you seem to support such discriminatory measures, when most states have worked so hard to abolish them.

This is protectionism, not discrimination. It still exists. And I do support it in the same way that I support free speach, even when I may disagree with others.

[tzanchan]

Jewish nation-state is defined in the Wikipedia article as Zionism:
"Since the founding of the State of Israel, the term Zionism is generally considered to mean support for Israel as a Jewish nation state (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nation_state)."

The very idea of a Jewish homeland without a Jewish nation-state is simply absurd and is a mere invention of the likes of Chomsky in order to damage the State of Israel and attack Jewish sovereignty.
.

And the first sentence of the article where they define what zionism is: "Zionism is a political movement that supports a homeland for the Jewish people in the Land of Israel"

Regardless, your quote says that 'generally' zionists have to support the state of Israel. That doesnt mean as you said 'by definition' they have to. And still, Meretz supports the state of Israel. The fact that they critisize her actions in some cases (like every party does), does not make them anti zionist.

In addition, the fact that chomsky's idea of a jewish homeland may be absurd, doesnt change the fact that according to the definition of the word he was a zionist.




This is protectionism, not discrimination. It still exists. And I do support it in the same way that I support free speach, even when I may disagree with others.

You have yet to show that these quota laws exist in poland. All you did was write that it is so. In addition, a supporter of any discriminatory law could cry 'protectionism', that doesnt make it so or right

[CanDo]

One is not an anti zionist if he is critical of the state of Israel or supportive of Palestinians as well.

One can be supportive of Palestinians, but not supportive of the "Palestinian Cause", which is the destruction of the State of Israel and the murder of all Jews.

One can't be supportive of the "Palestinian Cause" without being both an anti-Zionist and an antiSemite.

[CanDo]

I wouldnt want to be an Arab in Israel as well.

If you were Arab, instead of Israel where would you prefer to live, Gaza? Jenin? Ain Hilweh, Lebanon? Baqa'a, Jordan?

[tzanchan]

If you were Arab, instead of Israel where would you prefer to live, Gaza? Jenin? Ain Hilweh, Lebanon? Baqa'a, Jordan?

kuwait

[tzanchan]

One can be supportive of Palestinians, but not supportive of the "Palestinian Cause", which is the destruction of the State of Israel and the murder of all Jews.

One can't be supportive of the "Palestinian Cause" without being both an anti-Zionist and an antiSemite.

The Palestinian cause is the destruction of all jews? I dont know about that. If I feel the Palestinian cause is equal rights with an Israel, than I could be suportive of that.

[CanDo]

The Palestinian cause is the destruction of all jews? I dont know about that. If I feel the Palestinian cause is equal rights with an Israel, than I could be suportive of that.

Palestinians can't have equal rights with Israelis, no more than Mexicans can have equal rights with Americans, or Iraqis can have equal rights with Kuwaitis.

They are two separate nations, so to speak.

The charter of the Palestinians does not recognize Israel's right to exist. There are daily Palestinian terrorist threats against the Jews of Israel, with the eventual purpose of destroying Israel and killing all Jews.

If Palestinians want equal rights with Israelis than the Palestinians should form a government that has a charter to form a system of government that is identical to Israel's, instead of calling for the destruction of Israel.

[Yala]

kuwait

Arab Israelis would fare better in Kuwait????

"PA Demands Kuwaiti Apology

Secretary General of the PA Presidency, Al-Tayeb 'Abd Al-Rahim, asked, "…Why should we apologize? We have not committed a sin in our relations with our Kuwaiti brothers. First of all - we built Kuwait, we protected it in the fifties, and we demanded an Arab solution to the [Iraqi-] Kuwaiti problem. We had a relative triumph on that issue when the Iraqi forces began withdrawing from Kuwait. Later, the efforts [to solve the crisis peacefully] failed.

"We don’t know what to apologize for, we haven’t committed any sin against Kuwait. On the contrary, the Kuwaitis made us suffer more than anyone else. The losses of the Palestinian community in Kuwait are estimated at $12.6 billion. Also, our frozen money in Kuwait is estimated at $200 million... We are the only ones who were not compensated for our losses in Kuwait. In addition, more than 420,000 Palestinians were deported from Kuwait. We suffered more damages than anyone else, while we were doing nothing. Why should we apologize? On the contrary, they should apologize for what they did to our people after Kuwait's liberation and for what they did to the Palestinian community there."[3]"

Palestinians Recall Gulf War

According to Jamal Abu 'Ida, a Palestinian resident of Kuwait since the mid-50’s, during the crisis with Iraq, "many Palestinians risked their lives assisting their Kuwaiti brothers who were hiding from the Iraqi intelligence apparatus.… [Also,] many Palestinians guarded the property of Kuwaitis who were abroad at the time of the invasion. [However, the Kuwaitis] collectively punished our people and their security apparatuses have acted shamelessly to the point of violating the honor and [sexually] attacking [Palestinian] women. When their prisons became full of our people, they turned some schools to jails, and sometimes they even threw into dumpsters corpses of people who died of torture. There is a well-known place in Kuwait where there is a mass grave of Palestinians."

"In addition to all these inhumane acts, they deported our people from Kuwait in the most barbaric manner completely detached from moral and religious values." Abu 'Ida concludes with a rhetorical question: "Does the PLO have to apologize to the Kuwaiti government after this brutal behavior?!"[4]

[tzanchan]

Arab Israelis would fare better in Kuwait????

"PA Demands Kuwaiti Apology

Secretary General of the PA Presidency, Al-Tayeb 'Abd Al-Rahim, asked, "…Why should we apologize? We have not committed a sin in our relations with our Kuwaiti brothers. First of all - we built Kuwait, we protected it in the fifties, and we demanded an Arab solution to the [Iraqi-] Kuwaiti problem. We had a relative triumph on that issue when the Iraqi forces began withdrawing from Kuwait. Later, the efforts [to solve the crisis peacefully] failed.

"We don’t know what to apologize for, we haven’t committed any sin against Kuwait. On the contrary, the Kuwaitis made us suffer more than anyone else. The losses of the Palestinian community in Kuwait are estimated at $12.6 billion. Also, our frozen money in Kuwait is estimated at $200 million... We are the only ones who were not compensated for our losses in Kuwait. In addition, more than 420,000 Palestinians were deported from Kuwait. We suffered more damages than anyone else, while we were doing nothing. Why should we apologize? On the contrary, they should apologize for what they did to our people after Kuwait's liberation and for what they did to the Palestinian community there."[3]"

Palestinians Recall Gulf War

According to Jamal Abu 'Ida, a Palestinian resident of Kuwait since the mid-50’s, during the crisis with Iraq, "many Palestinians risked their lives assisting their Kuwaiti brothers who were hiding from the Iraqi intelligence apparatus.… [Also,] many Palestinians guarded the property of Kuwaitis who were abroad at the time of the invasion. [However, the Kuwaitis] collectively punished our people and their security apparatuses have acted shamelessly to the point of violating the honor and [sexually] attacking [Palestinian] women. When their prisons became full of our people, they turned some schools to jails, and sometimes they even threw into dumpsters corpses of people who died of torture. There is a well-known place in Kuwait where there is a mass grave of Palestinians."

"In addition to all these inhumane acts, they deported our people from Kuwait in the most barbaric manner completely detached from moral and religious values." Abu 'Ida concludes with a rhetorical question: "Does the PLO have to apologize to the Kuwaiti government after this brutal behavior?!"[4]

Thats fine then Bahrain. I think you missed the point where I said that I would hope the Jews would discriminate less against minorities than others. My comparison was Polish Jews in Poland actually. If you want to be proud over the fact that Israel treats her minorites better than how Arabs treat theirs, I think is the problem. Personally I would prefer to hold my people to a higher level than that.

[KettleWhistle]

Thats fine then Bahrain. I think you missed the point where I said that I would hope the Jews would discriminate less against minorities than others. My comparison was Polish Jews in Poland actually. If you want to be proud over the fact that Israel treats her minorites better than how Arabs treat theirs, I think is the problem. Personally I would prefer to hold my people to a higher level than that.

If you're so concerned over the supposed "discrimination" of the hostile foreigners, why discrimination against your own people doesn't concern you? Russian-speaking Jews are being discriminated in this country, including by law. Many still look down on Jews from Yemen because they speak with an accent. The so-called "settlers" are being discriminated on the daily basis and demonized by scumbag politicians and the media just because they have the courage to live on their native land and fight to reclaim it from foreigners. Yet, instead of fighting true injustice, your ilk would try to forster it, while helping the foreign squatters damage Israel and kill more Jews. And you have the gall to talk about people rejoicing over murder of Jews? You're helping Arabs, so you should be the last one talking about that. People like you bombed Altalena (http://rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0oGkkVGwiRFZmUB2TNXNyoA;_ylu=X3oDMTE2ZXYybGF uBGNvbG8DdwRsA1dTMQRwb3MDMQRzZWMDc3IEdnRpZANpMDIxX zQ3/SIG=12lmqukv5/EXP=1160123334/**http%3a//www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/Altalena.html).

[Yala]

Thats fine then Bahrain. I think you missed the point where I said that I would hope the Jews would discriminate less against minorities than others. My comparison was Polish Jews in Poland actually. If you want to be proud over the fact that Israel treats her minorites better than how Arabs treat theirs, I think is the problem. Personally I would prefer to hold my people to a higher level than that.

I think the whole thing can be explained using the chicken or the egg theory. What came first -discrimination or fear? For example, I can't fault Israeli Jews for being fearful of the Israeli Arabs when they see them on TV praising Nasrallah. Aren't the Druze loyal citizens of Israel? They are not Jewish, but wouldn't you say they are treated fairly? I'd say there's more discrimination towards people who don't serve in the army, wouldn't you? Isn't that one of the first things that's asked when one applies for a job?

On the other hand, there is discrimination on so many levels in Israel, especially by Jews towards Jews. Of this, I am truly disgusted. But again, compared to other countries in the "West", there is a comparable, if not lower, level of discrimination in Israel. That's not even taking into account the situation or neighborhood that Israel is in. Not excusing it, but being realistic. Then we can always discuss discrimination in Saudi Arabia.... And just to point out the obvious, not holding Arabs to the same standard as Jews is in itself inherently racist.

[KettleWhistle]

On the other hand, there is discrimination on so many levels in Israel, especially by Jews towards Jews. Of this, I am truly disgusted. But again, compared to other countries in the "West", there is a comparable, if not lower, level of discrimination in Israel.
Where? Not that we should seek to be like those others--we should seek to be better--but I don't think that's true.

[Ricky]

Tzanchan says that if the meaning of the Palestinian cause is equal rights with Israel he could agree with that. If by equal rights with Israel, Tzanchan means an independent Palestinian state on (most) of the West Bank and Gaza, I too could accept that. The trouble is that the Palestinians prove time and again that they will not be satisfied with just the establishment of a Palestinian state, but demand that Israel accept that every 1948 Palestinian refugee has the right to return to Israel, and this is entirely unacceptable, as this would demographically destroy Israel as a Jewish state. However, the fact is that the present chairman of the Palestinian Authority abhors violence and very much wants to engage in negotiations with Israel. I believe that, in order to leave no stone unturned, as former premier Barak would have put it, Israel should make every effort to carry out negotiations with Abu Mazan, above the heads of the Hamas government

[tzanchan]

If you're so concerned over the supposed "discrimination" of the hostile foreigners, why discrimination against your own people doesn't concern you? Russian-speaking Jews are being discriminated in this country, including by law. Many still look down on Jews from Yemen because they speak with an accent. The so-called "settlers" are being discriminated on the daily basis and demonized by scumbag politicians and the media just because they have the courage to live on their native land and fight to reclaim it from foreigners. Yet, instead of fighting true injustice, your ilk would try to forster it, while helping the foreign squatters damage Israel and kill more Jews. And you have the gall to talk about people rejoicing over murder of Jews? You're helping Arabs, so you should be the last one talking about that. People like you bombed Altalena (http://rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0oGkkVGwiRFZmUB2TNXNyoA;_ylu=X3oDMTE2ZXYybGF uBGNvbG8DdwRsA1dTMQRwb3MDMQRzZWMDc3IEdnRpZANpMDIxX zQ3/SIG=12lmqukv5/EXP=1160123334/**http%3a//www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/Altalena.html).

How are russian speaking Jews being discriminated against in the law? You have a habit of making vague arguments without any specification, and then when requested for proof you act like you are doing a favor by providing it... if you ever do.


For one, I dont consider the Arabs here foreigners. Just like I dont consider a German born in Russia a foreigner, or a Frenchman born in Belgium a 'foreigner'. Additionally, I dont consider France the 'native land' of French person born in Beligum. I actually think these are ridiculous concepts which should not be a consideration on ones policies or morals-- "your 'native land' is in another country where you never lived, thus even though you were born here, you are still a 'foreigner' and have a right to be discriminated against"...


As far as the discrimination against Yemenite Jews, it is certainly not on the same level as against arabs (unless they are mistaken for one).
As far as discrimination against settlers, this is not ethnicity based discrimination. It is discriminating against a policy. Personally, I am against people that would prefer to erase borders, living amongst a million non Israeli arabs, expecting Israel to extend sovereignty to their towns. They could have been equally as productive for their 'native land' in the negeve desert where population is also needed, and where Israeli sovereignty is actually supposed to be.

People like us bombed the atleana after they wanted to form a separate militia apart from that of the yishuv
People like you contacted the nazis to forge an alliance against the British as well as to commit acts of 'terror':
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lehi_(group)#Contact_with_Nazi_authorities

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lehi_(group)#Justifying_.22terror.22

[Mediocrates]

Add that mamzer Tony Judt

http://www.thejewishweek.com/news/newscontent.php3?artid=13081

[Yala]

Where? Not that we should seek to be like those others--we should seek to be better--but I don't think that's true.

Have you spoken to an African Americans in the US? Dude, there is so much racism in the US it is not even funny. People here are afraid of the law and that's why it doesn't get out of hand. And it is far better here than in Europe. At least in major cities in the US people of different cultures/ethnicities live in the same neighborhoods. However, In France and Australia, for example, they have their Arab/Muslim communities in virtual ghettoes. These are "no - go zones" for police. They have ethnic crime lords running sections of their countries. Again we can relate this to the chicken or the egg theory. Did the western gov't refuse to integrate the immigrants b/c they were racist or did the immigrants refuse to integrate themselves. Whatever the case, there are HUGE problems in the "west."

[Yala]

Tzanchan says that if the meaning of the Palestinian cause is equal rights with Israel he could agree with that. If by equal rights with Israel, Tzanchan means an independent Palestinian state on (most) of the West Bank and Gaza, I too could accept that. The trouble is that the Palestinians prove time and again that they will not be satisfied with just the establishment of a Palestinian state, but demand that Israel accept that every 1948 Palestinian refugee has the right to return to Israel, and this is entirely unacceptable, as this would demographically destroy Israel as a Jewish state. However, the fact is that the present chairman of the Palestinian Authority abhors violence and very much wants to engage in negotiations with Israel. I believe that, in order to leave no stone unturned, as former premier Barak would have put it, Israel should make every effort to carry out negotiations with Abu Mazan, above the heads of the Hamas government

I agreed with everything you said up until the Abu Mazen part. Whatever it is, he doesn't have it. He doesn't have Arafat's charisma and he just can't get most of the Palestinians behind him. Trying to build him up is just an effort in futility. Besides the fact that it was tried already. Israel thought the Palestinians would give Abbas credit for leaving Gaza. If you remember they were trying to build him up for months before but instead all the credit went to Hamas.

Maybe it's b/c he doesn't wear army fatigues or hasn't killed enough Jews. I'm not sure. Whatever it is, he won't be their new Arafat and they will not unite behind him.

[Ricky]

Well, the reason I suggest that Israel negotiate with Abu Mazan is that IF Israel wishes to hold negotiations, she must hold them with someone who has at least de jure authority. There are two options for this: either the Hamas government or Abu Alah, the chairman of the Palestinian Authority. I am not sure if it would be possible to engage in negotiations with Abu Alah, I am even less sure that any meaningfull agreement could be reached from such negotiations, but if Israel wishes to try negotiation, Abu Alah is the better option. Furthermore, I believe that if Abu Allah and Israel were able to reach an agreement on some issue of substance, I believe that such an agreement would make Abu Allah much stronger, and Abu Alah would be able to persuade the Palestinian population to lend its support for the agreement, and such Palestinian public support would create great difficulties for Hamas, if they should wish to reject the agreement

[The Israeli Guy]

Well, the reason I suggest that Israel negotiate with Abu Mazan is that IF Israel wishes to hold negotiations, she must hold them with someone who has at least de jure authority. There are two options for this: either the Hamas government or Abu Alah, the chairman of the Palestinian Authority. I am not sure if it would be possible to engage in negotiations with Abu Alah, I am even less sure that any meaningfull agreement could be reached from such negotiations, but if Israel wishes to try negotiation, Abu Alah is the better option. Furthermore, I believe that if Abu Allah and Israel were able to reach an agreement on some issue of substance, I believe that such an agreement would make Abu Allah much stronger, and Abu Alah would be able to persuade the Palestinian population to lend its support for the agreement, and such Palestinian public support would create great difficulties for Hamas, if they should wish to reject the agreement
You suggest...you are not sure... you are even less sure... you believe that...Abu Alah would...they should.

ONE THING FOR SURE: Our enemies want us dead. All of us. So please stop bother us with your nonsence!

[Yala]

If Abass is fully in control and can be as influential as you think then why hasn't he held his referendum on the 2 state solution that he's been talking about since Hamas got elected?

Second of all, even if the referendum was held and by some miracle Palestinians accept a 2 state solution based on the Saudi Initiative, it still includes a clause that Israel must admit the 4 million Palestinians who left Israel in 1948. I am sorry but that is a nonstarter and you are right back to square one - Oslo, the Roadmap, etc.

[tzanchan]

I think the whole thing can be explained using the chicken or the egg theory. What came first -discrimination or fear? For example, I can't fault Israeli Jews for being fearful of the Israeli Arabs when they see them on TV praising Nasrallah. Aren't the Druze loyal citizens of Israel? They are not Jewish, but wouldn't you say they are treated fairly? I'd say there's more discrimination towards people who don't serve in the army, wouldn't you? Isn't that one of the first things that's asked when one applies for a job?.

Part of the problem I think is the exagerrated hostilities attributed to Israeli arabs. Part of this is due to their own leaders who tend to be more radical than the normal Israeli Arab. However, you said yourself that on Israeli TV we see the hezbolla supporting arabs. Yet polls say, they are not the norm:

A survey conducted last week by Mina Tzemach, Israel's leading pollster, revealed that the vast majority of Israeli Arabs did not support Hezbollah during the Lebanon War. According to Tzemach, only 18 percent of Israeli Arabs backed Hezbollah, yet 55 percent of Israeli Jews thought that all or most Israeli Arabs supported Hezbollah. An additional 21 percent felt that half of Israeli Arabs sympathized with Israel's Lebanese Shiite enemy.

http://www.nif.org/content.cfm?id=2749&currBody=1

In addition, the great majority of druze support the anti Israel jubalatt. But we dont hold that against them. Still, they are smarter than the Arabs because they do the army. Though, religious jews who dont do the army and are also not so pro Israel tend to be less discriminated against than the Muslim Israeli Arab.




On the other hand, there is discrimination on so many levels in Israel, especially by Jews towards Jews. Of this, I am truly disgusted. But again, compared to other countries in the "West", there is a comparable, if not lower, level of discrimination in Israel. That's not even taking into account the situation or neighborhood that Israel is in. Not excusing it, but being realistic. Then we can always discuss discrimination in Saudi Arabia.... And just to point out the obvious, not holding Arabs to the same standard as Jews is in itself inherently racist.

I am a Jew. I dont want Israel to base how it should behave on Saudi Arabian morality.

[Ricky]

I was very interested (and encouraged) by Tzanchan's remark that only 18% of the Israeli Arabs supported Hizbulla. Another statistic that I have heard is that about 40% of Arab voters, even today, vote for one of the Zionist parties. It has been said that the Arab MKs do not reflect the views of most Arab voters, however I do feel that if this were so, the Arabs would have an opportunity to create new, more moderate parties. Indeed, at the last election there was a new Arab party, headed by a lady, which is a refreshing change in itself, who stressed the economic and social plight of the Arab population and wished to put the main emphasis on this in her platform. The party was unable to get any one elected. (Mind you it should be remembered that also in the Jewish section of the Israeli population, new, small parties usually have difficulty in getting elected to the Knesset).
Yala claims that I wrote that Abu Mazan has control in the West Bank. No, I said (virtually) the opposite. Abu Mazan has an official function, even though he does not have much practical clout in the Palestinian Authority.But he abhors violence, so I believe that Israel should do its maximum to negotiate with him, in the sense that there is nothing to lose from such negotiations, and everything to gain, should some agreement be reached.

[Yala]

Part of the problem I think is the exagerrated hostilities attributed to Israeli arabs. Part of this is due to their own leaders who tend to be more radical than the normal Israeli Arab. However, you said yourself that on Israeli TV we see the hezbolla supporting arabs. Yet polls say, they are not the norm:

A survey conducted last week by Mina Tzemach, Israel's leading pollster, revealed that the vast majority of Israeli Arabs did not support Hezbollah during the Lebanon War. According to Tzemach, only 18 percent of Israeli Arabs backed Hezbollah, yet 55 percent of Israeli Jews thought that all or most Israeli Arabs supported Hezbollah. An additional 21 percent felt that half of Israeli Arabs sympathized with Israel's Lebanese Shiite enemy.

http://www.nif.org/content.cfm?id=2749&currBody=1

In addition, the great majority of druze support the anti Israel jubalatt. But we dont hold that against them. Still, they are smarter than the Arabs because they do the army. Though, religious jews who dont do the army and are also not so pro Israel tend to be less discriminated against than the Muslim Israeli Arab.


Well I saw a similar poll on YNET from 8/24 (http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3295194,00.html). It concluded:

"Israel's Arabs themselves, on the other hand, think otherwise. When asked "Who did you want to win the second war in Lebanon?" 27 of them answered "Israel," only 18 percent said they were on Nasrallah's side, and 36 percent did not support either side."

Less than a 1/3 of them wanted their own country to win a war??? And as far as supporting Nasrallah you have to remember that 18% of 1.2 million people is a hell of a lot of people.

And about Jumbalat, he is not as anti-Israel as you think. He was back in the day but these days he is very anti-Hezbollah and anti-Syria. In fact he is probably the most anti-Hez and Syria politician in Lebanon today. In a normal situation that would make his party and Israel natural allies but this is the Middle East...so while his party is by no means allied with Israel, they are today very far from enemies. He is at times accused by pro-Hez Lebanese of being an Israeli agent. Go figure.

[KettleWhistle]

I was very interested (and encouraged) by Tzanchan's remark that only 18% of the Israeli Arabs supported Hizbulla. Another statistic that I have heard is that about 40% of Arab voters, even today, vote for one of the Zionist parties.

40% of Arabs vote for Herut and Moledet?

[The Israeli Guy]

40% of Arabs vote for Herut and Moledet?
Let go, she doesn't have any clue about the things she is talking about. She is a new immigrant and didn't live her life in Israel. Most of the Israeli Arabs do not vote at all!

[Mediocrates]

What to make of people like Alex Stein ?

www.falsedichotomies.com

Who while are not overtly antizionist on their own, they're awfully understanding of people who are. It's a creepy relationship between monsters and people who want to be their friends.

[tzanchan]

40% of Arabs vote for Herut and Moledet?

According to this site there are about 20+ parties that you left out. http://www.zionism-israel.com/dic/politicalsystem.htm

[tzanchan]

I was very interested (and encouraged) by Tzanchan's remark that only 18% of the Israeli Arabs supported Hizbulla. Another statistic that I have heard is that about 40% of Arab voters, even today, vote for one of the Zionist parties. It has been said that the Arab MKs do not reflect the views of most Arab voters, however I do feel that if this were so, the Arabs would have an opportunity to create new, more moderate parties. Indeed, at the last election there was a new Arab party, headed by a lady, which is a refreshing change in itself, who stressed the economic and social plight of the Arab population and wished to put the main emphasis on this in her platform. The party was unable to get any one elected. (Mind you it should be remembered that also in the Jewish section of the Israeli population, new, small parties usually have difficulty in getting elected to the Knesset).
.

Radicalness sometimes does better in politics than moderate-- especially for minorities.

In any case the numbers were encouraging, and a change of face from what the news presents. But I frequently get positive news from good zionists when reading on the works of the New Israel Fund.

[Yala]

Yala claims that I wrote that Abu Mazan has control in the West Bank. No, I said (virtually) the opposite. Abu Mazan has an official function, even though he does not have much practical clout in the Palestinian Authority.

If the guy has no control over the Palestinians (which he doesn't) then why bother negotiating with him? Israel can make a deal with Abbas and then Hamas and their supporters will say "well we didn't agree to it" and continue shooting rockets. Besidesssss I already explained Israel did try to build him up once before and the credit only went to Hamas. This is a pointless strategy.



But he abhors violence, so I believe that Israel should do its maximum to negotiate with him, in the sense that there is nothing to lose from such negotiations, and everything to gain, should some agreement be reached.

What makes you think he abhors violence? Because he tells that to Bush? You are aware that he may have had a significant role in the Munich olympic murders among others? I mean people change, but I still don't trust the guy...

[KettleWhistle]

According to this site there are about 20+ parties that you left out. http://www.zionism-israel.com/dic/politicalsystem.htm

Neither claiming to be Zionist or having it written on a web site makes them Zionist. Meretz and Labor are anti-Zionist parties. Kadima is neither Zionist nor anti-Zionist. Ditto Shui. Ditto Shas, which talks tough but partook in the Oslo treason. Likud is only slightly Zionist, and it doesn't get 40% of the Arab vote.

[tzanchan]

Neither claiming to be Zionist or having it written on a web site makes them Zionist. Meretz and Labor are anti-Zionist parties. Kadima is neither Zionist nor anti-Zionist. Ditto Shui. Ditto Shas, which talks tough but partook in the Oslo treason. Likud is only slightly Zionist, and it doesn't get 40% of the Arab vote.

Similarly, you claiming them to be anti zionist on an internet forum does not make them anti zionist.

[KettleWhistle]

Similarly, you claiming them to be anti zionist on an internet forum does not make them anti zionist.
No, the reality makes them anti-Zionist. Zionism is about relcaiming our land from foreigners, about living here and being free and independent. People who oppose it, be it a Jew or a foreigners, Peres or Arafat, Beilin or Mashal, are anti-Zionists.

Those like you simply lie about it for the purposes of demagoguery.

[tzanchan]

No, the reality makes them anti-Zionist. Zionism is about relcaiming our land from foreigners, about living here and being free and independent. People who oppose it, be it a Jew or a foreigners, Peres or Arafat, Beilin or Mashal, are anti-Zionists.

Those like you simply lie about it for the purposes of demagoguery.

There is no mention of who and what a 'foreigner' is in the defenition of zionism, or how we should treat them.
In addition, the great majority of the israeli populace doesnt vote for herut or likud. Yet they still fight in the army, went to war this past summer, and even support the rights of 'foreigners'. It is interesting that you have the audacity to cause these people as well 'anti zionists' when I am assuming that their actions were alot more helpful and zionist than yours.

[Ricky]

Yala asks why try to reach an agreement with Abas, if he has no control over the Palestinians. The reason is that, if Abas were to succeed in reaching an agreement, this would greatly enhance his position in the Palestinian population. Again, when I say he has no control, every thing is relative. He has a following in the Palestinian population, after all, he won the elections for the post of Chairman of the PA, but I accept that his position is much weaker now than it was at the time of the elections for the chairmanship of the PA. Still, if Abas were to be able to reach an agreement with Israel, this would doubtless enhance his standing again in the Palestinian population

[tzanchan]

What makes you think he abhors violence? Because he tells that to Bush? You are aware that he may have had a significant role in the Munich olympic murders among others? I mean people change, but I still don't trust the guy...

What part did he play in the munich massacres? According to wikipedia, he had no knowledge of what was to happen:

"Mohammed Daoud Oudeh, one of those believed to have planned or executed the Munich attack, fingered Mahmoud Abbas as responsible for funding the operation. In his autobiography, Memoirs of a Palestinian Terrorist, Daoud writes:

Though he didn't know what the money was being spent for, longtime Fatah official Mahmoud Abbas, aka Abu Mazen, was responsible for the financing of the Munich attack. ― Daoud, M. (Abu Daoud) (New York, 2002) Memoirs of a Palestinian Terrorist ISBN 1-55970-429-2"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahmoud_Abbas#1972_Olympic_Massacre

one can also credit it him for seeking out Jewish peace groups for talks:

"He is credited with initiating secretive contacts with left-wing and pacifist Jewish groups during the 1970s and 80s" (same wikipedia source)

While perhaps he should have been more insightful to where his financial support was going, the same could be said about former PM Ariel Sharon who should have been more insightful of where his support of the Maronites was going. Though we managed to quickly overlook Sharon's past.

[Yala]

What part did he play in the munich massacres? According to wikipedia, he had no knowledge of what was to happen:

"Mohammed Daoud Oudeh, one of those believed to have planned or executed the Munich attack, fingered Mahmoud Abbas as responsible for funding the operation. In his autobiography, Memoirs of a Palestinian Terrorist, Daoud writes:

Though he didn't know what the money was being spent for, longtime Fatah official Mahmoud Abbas, aka Abu Mazen, was responsible for the financing of the Munich attack. ― Daoud, M. (Abu Daoud) (New York, 2002) Memoirs of a Palestinian Terrorist ISBN 1-55970-429-2"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahmoud_Abbas#1972_Olympic_Massacre

one can also credit it him for seeking out Jewish peace groups for talks:

"He is credited with initiating secretive contacts with left-wing and pacifist Jewish groups during the 1970s and 80s" (same wikipedia source)

While perhaps he should have been more insightful to where his financial support was going, the same could be said about former PM Ariel Sharon who should have been more insightful of where his support of the Maronites was going. Though we managed to quickly overlook Sharon's past.

Why do you insist on whitewashing this guy? B/c it was written in a Palestinian terrorist's memoirs and on Wikipedia that Abbas is innocent you believe it? Anyway, the guy is the most impotent politician I have ever seen and I believe it to be a deliberate impotence. He is nothing but a frontman for a secular band of terrorists known as Fatah. He is a Holocaust denier who wears a three piece suit and renounces violence to receive the checks from Washington and the EU. If he's so great, so in control, where is the 2 state referendum? Where is Gilad Shalit? I apologize for not thinking his motives are sincere. Maybe it's b/c he's accomplished zero since he's been in charge. At least Arafat had power, even if he used it the wrong way.

And Sharon was SMART to side with the Maronites. Had Bashir Gemayel not been assassinated Israel and Lebanon would've signed a peace treaty decades ago. Sharon could not have predicted the assassination, give me a break. Unlike Abbas, Gemayal had power and support and a peace treaty would've meant something.

[tzanchan]

Why do you insist on whitewashing this guy? B/c it was written in a Palestinian terrorist's memoirs and on Wikipedia that Abbas is innocent you believe it? Anyway, the guy is the most impotent politician I have ever seen and I believe it to be a deliberate impotence. He is nothing but a frontman for a secular band of terrorists known as Fatah. He is a Holocaust denier who wears a three piece suit and renounces violence to receive the checks from Washington and the EU. If he's so great, so in control, where is the 2 state referendum? Where is Gilad Shalit? I apologize for not thinking his motives are sincere. Maybe it's b/c he's accomplished zero since he's been in charge. At least Arafat had power, even if he used it the wrong way.

And Sharon was SMART to side with the Maronites. Had Bashir Gemayel not been assassinated Israel and Lebanon would've signed a peace treaty decades ago. Sharon could not have predicted the assassination, give me a break. Unlike Abbas, Gemayal had power and support and a peace treaty would've meant something.
Sharon may have been smart enough to side with the Maronites. Too bad he wasnt smart enough to see what their actions would be after the assasination...



"Why do you insist on whitewashing this guy? B/c it was written in a Palestinian terrorist's memoirs and on Wikipedia that Abbas is innocent you believe it?"

The Palestinian terrorist was accusing him in the crime; not excusing him of it. In any case, wikipedia is not perfect, but it is a good start for research. It is better than the source that you provided me to look at on the matter.

[Yala]

It is better than the source that you provided me to look at on the matter.

I didn't provide a source b/c it is still a well known fact that Abbas was involved in the Munich massacres in one way or another. Should I provide a source to show that Bashir Gemayal was assassinated too or will you take my word for it?

[KettleWhistle]

There is no mention of who and what a 'foreigner' is in the defenition of zionism, or how we should treat them.
Because some things are obvious. The original Hebrew word for foreigner or alien is goy.


In addition, the great majority of the israeli populace doesnt vote for herut or likud. Yet they still fight in the army, went to war this past summer, and even support the rights of 'foreigners'.
Which has nothing to do with Zionism.

[Ricky]

Yala asks why we should trust Abas. It is not a question of trust. When Sadat offered to make peace with Israel, Begin did not just simply offer him the Sinai desert back. He also insisted that the area should be demiliterised and an international peace keeping force be put in the peninsula, so that if Sadat, or some later ruler of Egypt should decide to make war in Israel, the rule would have to demand the withdrawal of international troops (itself not an easy thing to accomplish, since in accordance with the Israel-Egypt peace treaty, both Israel and Egypt must agree to the withdrawal of the troops before such a move can be affected) and such a demand would be a clear sign to Israel that Egypt is changing its tune and could go to war if the need arose.
Thus concerning Abas, his statements have baeen consistent for a number of years, including when Arafat was still in power. Abas claims that the Palestinians will never make substantial gains by violence and should try to achieve their aims by means of negotiation. This is enough a priori justification to engage in negotiations with Abas to see where such negotiations will lead

[Yala]

Yala asks why we should trust Abas. It is not a question of trust. When Sadat offered to make peace with Israel, Begin did not just simply offer him the Sinai desert back. He also insisted that the area should be demiliterised and an international peace keeping force be put in the peninsula, so that if Sadat, or some later ruler of Egypt should decide to make war in Israel, the rule would have to demand the withdrawal of international troops (itself not an easy thing to accomplish, since in accordance with the Israel-Egypt peace treaty, both Israel and Egypt must agree to the withdrawal of the troops before such a move can be affected) and such a demand would be a clear sign to Israel that Egypt is changing its tune and could go to war if the need arose.
Thus concerning Abas, his statements have baeen consistent for a number of years, including when Arafat was still in power. Abas claims that the Palestinians will never make substantial gains by violence and should try to achieve their aims by means of negotiation. This is enough a priori justification to engage in negotiations with Abas to see where such negotiations will lead

How can you even compare Abbas to Sadat? Sadat was a powerful, smart man who knew he could never beat Israel. So, he did what was best for Egypt. He did not demand nonsensical things such as "Right of Return" (like Abbas) which we all know to be a non-starter, but demanded reasonable things that would hurt Israel but would enable the peace agreement to become a reality. This cost him his life. Which is what Arafat was afraid of and why he did not sign on the dotted line at camp David w/o the "RoR" issue. You see, if they are not giving up on the "Right of Return" then there really is nothing to talk about. Like Hezbollah uses "Sheba Farms" , Palestinian groups will always use the "RoR" issue to foment the hate and rally the masses. You see, to many of them, all of Israel is occupied Palestinian territory.

I think everything else can be worked out, even giving back East Jerusalem (which was part of many deals already). When a Palestinian leader steps forward and says the "Right of Return" issue is off the table, then that will be an actual step towards reality. Before that everything else is just daydreaming.

[tzanchan]

Because some things are obvious. The original Hebrew word for foreigner or alien is goy..
"Which has nothing to do with zionism"



Which has nothing to do with Zionism.

It is a testament to their zionism. Anti zionists dont fight in the zionist army on behalf of the jewish homeland.

[tzanchan]

I didn't provide a source b/c it is still a well known fact that Abbas was involved in the Munich massacres in one way or another. Should I provide a source to show that Bashir Gemayal was assassinated too or will you take my word for it?

I could say alot of things are a 'well know fact'. Wikipedia (a decent source for a start) quotes evidence of his financial support. I have seen no other evidence of the support you claim other than "it is a well known fact".

[Yala]

I could say alot of things are a 'well know fact'. Wikipedia (a decent source for a start) quotes evidence of his financial support. I have seen no other evidence of the support you claim other than "it is a well known fact".

I think you just like to play devil's advocate. Hey, whatever makes you happy. I'll go on believing Abbas played a role in Munich and you can go on believing he wants to hold hands and sing kumbaya around the campfire with Israelis.

[tzanchan]

I think you just like to play devil's advocate. Hey, whatever makes you happy. I'll go on believing Abbas played a role in Munich and you can go on believing he wants to hold hands and sing kumbaya around the campfire with Israelis.

Yes I do have a tendency to play devils advocate. But I also have a tendency to look at things objectively. Would I be able to accept any argument about Ariel Sharon's participation in a massacre based on some guys testimony on an internet forum that it is 'a well known fact'. Probabaly not.

[Ricky]

Yala says that Abbas demands the right of return for the 1948 Palestinians refugees, which makes it impossible to reach an agreement. He may well be right. Nonetheless, it must be remembered that "right of return" is a linguistic expression and it depends what interpretation is ultimately given to this linguistic expression that counts. Thus former President Clinton in his (excellent) plan for peace between Israel and the Palestinians suggested the formula that Israel will recognise the right of Palestinian refugees to return to their homeland. Such a formulation opens up the possibilty that the refugees will be absorbed in that part of their homeland which will comprise the Palestinian state. Will Abas accept such a formulation, or perhaps some other which also ensures that Israel must not commit itself to allowing the Palestinian refugees into the state of Israel? I have my own idea as to what the answer is, but I believe that since Abas opposes violence, greatly wants to engage in negotiation, Israel should make every effort to engage in such talks and see exactly how far the two parties can approach an agreement.
In another thread, Kettlewhistle refers to the Biblical word for stranger .In the Torah a non Israelite living in the Land of Israel is refered to as "ger". (In the Bible a "ger" is not a proselyte). And as Shulamit Aloni often points out, the Torah states about 30 times that it demands that the Israelites should treat the "gerim" living with them with complete equality

[Yala]

Would I be able to accept any argument about Ariel Sharon's participation in a massacre based on some guys testimony on an internet forum that it is 'a well known fact'. Probabaly not.

Ok, well here is some information on your favourite person with sources researched by none other than the head of the ZOA:

FP: What do you make of Mahmoud Abbas?

Klein: One of the extraordinary blind spots of contemporary Middle East history is the obsession of calling Mahmoud Abbas, whose nom de guerre or war name is Abu Mazen, a peace-loving moderate. If it were only true. However, the facts are that Mahmoud Abbas was not only Yasser Arafat’s deputy for 40 years, he also co-founded with him the terrorist group Fatah, masterminded the Munich massacre and wrote a PhD thesis and book denying the Holocaust. He has completely failed as PA president to honor the Oslo Accords and other signed agreements, including the 2003 Roadmap peace plan by fighting arresting, extraditing and jailing terrorists and confiscating their weaponry and ending the incitement to hatred and murder in the PA-controlled media, mosques, schools and youth camps that feeds it. When the PA opened its own Rafah border crossing in Gaza last year, he named it after the terrorist killer Al-Moayed Bihokmillah Al-Aqha, who was killed in December 2004 carrying out a terrorist attack that killed five Israelis.

Mahmoud Abbas has repeatedly spoken of the importance of “implementing the principles of Yasser Arafat” (Haaretz, January 3, 2005). He has praised the Lebanese Islamist terrorist group, Hizballah, for its hostilities with Israel, saying that it is a source of pride and sets an example for what he termed the “Arab resistance” (Jerusalem Post, August 6, 2006). He calls Israel the “Zionist enemy” (CNN.com, January 7, 2005). He condemned Israel’s killing of four Palestinian terrorists in a military operation as a “barbarous slaughter” (Voice of Palestine, May 30, 2006). He sometimes criticizes Palestinian terrorism only on tactical grounds, because “It harms the Palestinian interests” (New York Times, October 26, 2005).

Although it is an explicit Palestinian commitment under the Oslo agreements and the Roadmap peace plan, he calls dismantling terrorist groups a “red line” that must not be crossed (Washington Times, January 3, 2005). But then what would you expect from someone who has said of Palestinian terrorists that “Israel calls them terrorists, we call them strugglers” (Jerusalem Post, December 25, 2004) that “Allah loves the martyr” (Wall Street Journal, January 5, 2005) and that wanted Palestinian terrorists are “heroes fighting for freedom” (The Age [Melbourne], January 3, 2005). When President Bush asked Abbas to announce that he supports Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state, he refused. Lastly, it should also not be forgotten that Mahmoud Abbas heads the Fatah Party, a movement whose Charter to this day calls for terrorism against Israel and its destruction. Mahmoud Abbas has never even amended the Charter of his own party, let alone provided moderate or courageous leadership for the Palestinian Arabs. Someone with so blatant a record of extremism should not be thought of as a moderate or peace maker but only as Yasser Arafat in a suit.
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=24681

[Yala]

Yala says that Abbas demands the right of return for the 1948 Palestinians refugees, which makes it impossible to reach an agreement. He may well be right. Nonetheless, it must be remembered that "right of return" is a linguistic expression and it depends what interpretation is ultimately given to this linguistic expression that counts. Thus former President Clinton in his (excellent) plan for peace between Israel and the Palestinians suggested the formula that Israel will recognise the right of Palestinian refugees to return to their homeland. Such a formulation opens up the possibilty that the refugees will be absorbed in that part of their homeland which will comprise the Palestinian state. Will Abas accept such a formulation, or perhaps some other which also ensures that Israel must not commit itself to allowing the Palestinian refugees into the state of Israel? I have my own idea as to what the answer is, but I believe that since Abas opposes violence, greatly wants to engage in negotiation, Israel should make every effort to engage in such talks and see exactly how far the two parties can approach an agreement.
In another thread, Kettlewhistle refers to the Biblical word for stranger .In the Torah a non Israelite living in the Land of Israel is refered to as "ger". (In the Bible a "ger" is not a proselyte). And as Shulamit Aloni often points out, the Torah states about 30 times that it demands that the Israelites should treat the "gerim" living with them with complete equality

Calling Clinton's plan for Israel "excellent", saying repeatedly with confidence that Abbas opposes violence and quoting Shulamit Aloni's interpretation of the Torah - Do you really believe this or are you trying to be sarcastic?

[KettleWhistle]

It is a testament to their zionism. Anti zionists dont fight in the zionist army on behalf of the jewish homeland.
IDF stands for Israel Defense Force. Nor for "Zionist Army."

[Ricky]

I most cetainly am serious when I describe Clinton's peace proposal as excellent. His plan offered the Palestinian's the maximum that they could be offered (assuming that they truly are interested in a two state solution to the Israel-Palestine conflict). An independent, demilitarised Palestinian state on the equivalent of 97% of the West Bank of Gaza, including East Jerusalem and the Temple Mount under Palestinian sovereignty, a declaration by Israel that the latter accepts the right of return of Palestinian refugees to their homeland but the further paragraphs made it clear that the refugees would be absorbed either in the countries in which they are living at present or in the Palestinian state. Such a solution would not have been easy for an Israeli government to swallow, though Barak accepted it in principle, but I can think of no reason for the Palestinians to reject it, but of course, Arafat did. But this is all water under the bridge. The Palestinians are entitled to learn from past mistakes just as much as the Israelis are. I want the Israeli government to engage in negotiation with Abas, to test if this time the Palestinians will be more pragmatic than the last time .As I say, I have grave doubts whether this will prove to be the case, but I want the Israeli government to find out what the position is through negotiation , and not through assumtions.
As for your remarks about Shulamit Aloni, the latter is a former Bible teacher (in secular Israeli schools). Indeed, one of the things that annoys religious politicians about Aloni is that she is very knowledgeable about Jewish and Biblical matters, so it is not easy to fool her by telling her half truths about matters concerning Judaism

[tzanchan]

IDF stands for Israel Defense Force. Nor for "Zionist Army."

and Israel is another word for zion. The israeli army defends zion. Anti zionists dont fight in the Israeli defense forces, rather they post radical stuff on internet forums instead...sounds familiar.

[Ricky]

Indeed, before the establishment of the State, when discussing what name to chose for the new state, some suggested the State of Zion. I don't remember the reason why "Israel" was prefered

[KettleWhistle]

and Israel is another word for zion. The israeli army defends zion.
Zion is another word for Jerusalem. Anti-Zionists waste space in the Army, and then advocate giving Jerusalem, and other parts of the Jewish homeland to the Arabs.

[The Israeli Guy]

I don't remember the reason why "Israel" was prefered
Are you Jewish Ricky? Well if so then you would have know that Zion is the name of Jerusalem and the land itself belongs to the children of Israel thus its called the land of Israel. Israel is the name of the nation.

[tzanchan]

Zion is another word for Jerusalem. Anti-Zionists waste space in the Army, and then advocate giving Jerusalem, and other parts of the Jewish homeland to the Arabs.

Ya, they were just a waste of space fighting in the last war while you were moderating israel forum... The majority of soldiers by your definition are not zionists. Einstein himself who was strongly against ultranationalists such as yourself and also supported a Jewish homeland with equal rights for the 'foreigners' would also be a 'stupid anti zionist'...

[KettleWhistle]

Ya, they were just a waste of space fighting in the last war while you were moderating israel forum... The majority of soldiers by your definition are not zionists. Einstein himself who was strongly against ultranationalists such as yourself and also supported a Jewish homeland with equal rights for the 'foreigners' would also be a 'stupid anti zionist'...
Einstein supported the Jewish state of Israel, not an Arab state in place of Israel. And yes, they were a waste of space who fought a needless war. If the IDF was really a Zionist army, and not an army of cowards (http://www.israelforum.com/board/showthread.php?t=10192), I would've glady joined to fight the Arabs, to remove the atrocities that the Arabs built on our Temple Mount, to kick the Arabs out of our homeland, and to engage in other Zionist activities that would actually benefit this country in the long term. The anti-Zionists like you can continue your failed policies of checkpoints and bombings of cars with children that tar the image of the State and in the long term amount to a big fat nothing. I'm not game for this BS.

[tzanchan]

Einstein supported the Jewish state of Israel, not an Arab state in place of Israel. And yes, they were a waste of space who fought a needless war. If the IDF was really a Zionist army, and not an army of cowards (http://www.israelforum.com/board/showthread.php?t=10192), I would've glady joined to fight the Arabs, to remove the atrocities that the Arabs built on our Temple Mount, to kick the Arabs out of our homeland, and to engage in other Zionist activities that would actually benefit this country in the long term. The anti-Zionists like you can continue your failed policies of checkpoints and bombings of cars with children that tar the image of the State and in the long term amount to a big fat nothing. I'm not game for this BS.

As far as einstein, I will just quote from spark notes though I would be interested to see any contrasting information on the matter: "He remained a staunch pacifist, highly critical of nationalism and committed to the idea of a single world government free of a military...Although Einstein disliked Zionism's nationalist aspect, he was interested in the establishment of a Hebrew University in Palestine. After witnessing the anti-Semitism of the European university system, Einstein was determined to create a place where Jews could gain an education unrestrained by prejudice. He saw Israel as a cultural center of Jewry ratherr than a Jewish homeland or a Jewish state. "
http://www.sparknotes.com/biography/einstein/section8.rhtml

Thus it seems if einstein was around today or if you were around then, he would have been staunchly opposed to Kettlewhistle, and your rampant nationalism.


Perhaps if I was a coward like you I would have also made absurd claims that fighting in the IDF is not zionistic, and that I would have fought if I thought it was meaningful, just as a means of finding an excuse. Better to be an internet forum moderator where I can propogate radicalism and what 'I would do if', all the while critisizing those that actually work defending the zionist state.

[KettleWhistle]

Einstein gave a great deal of support to the Jewish State of Israel. He never worked to undermine it. As for you calling me a coward, LOL. IDF was Zionist when the soldiers who liberated the Temple Mount cried and kissed the ground there. That was Zionism. When "Yerushaim shel Zahav" became and equivalent of a second Jewish national anthem, that was Zionism. Not the calls to give our homeland away to the Arab enemy.

[tzanchan]

Einstein gave a great deal of support to the Jewish State of Israel. He never worked to undermine it. As for you calling me a coward, LOL. IDF was Zionist when the soldiers who liberated the Temple Mount cried and kissed the ground there. That was Zionism. When "Yerushaim shel Zahav" became and equivalent of a second Jewish national anthem, that was Zionism. Not the calls to give our homeland away to the Arab enemy.

The IDF also gives a great deal of support to the Jewish state of Israel. That doesnt change the fact that both the IDF and Einstein work against ultra nationalism.

[KettleWhistle]

The IDF also gives a great deal of support to the Jewish state of Israel. That doesnt change the fact that both the IDF and Einstein work against ultra nationalism.
Einstein doesn't work for or against anthing, and the IDF is a part of the State of Israel, not an independent entity. And it's actions, done upon the orders of various politicians, has been doing more damage than good to the Jewish State of Israel. That's because the IDF has long stopped being a Zionist army, and became an army of cowards (http://www.israelforum.com/board/showthread.php?t=10192) capable only of failed strategies or manning checkpoints and shooting down old passenger sedans on Gaza roads. This is not the army that liberated Jerusalem, and cried from joy when the capital was reunited, and the Jews were finally free as written in the last two lines of our national anthem.

[Ricky]

Yes I forgot. Zion is one of the names for Jerusalem. That was presumably the reason why it was not chosen as the name for the Jewish State, which would have opened up the opportunity to claim that the borders of the country should be limited to the area of Jerusalem. One has to admit that Kettlewhistle is original. Now even the IDF are traitors to the Zionist cause. Israel is in a really bad way. Apart from Kettlewhistle and the Kahanists, there do not seem to be any Israelis left who are loyal to the country

[Yala]

Many people in the gov't are not true Zionists and the gov't gives orders to the IDF. The IDF only do as they're told, like an army should. Therefore, this has nothing to do with the IDF. They are the greatest patriots Israel has.* Especially the reservists.

*Except for Halutz.

[KettleWhistle]

Many people in the gov't are not true Zionists and the gov't gives orders to the IDF. The IDF only do as they're told, like an army should. Therefore, this has nothing to do with the IDF. They are the greatest patriots Israel has.* Especially the reservists.

*Except for Halutz.
Government does't just give orders to the IDF. It also takes advice from the IDF. Also, the ground commanders have plenty of leeway in what they do. But overall, you judge army as a whole by its modus operandi. The one of IDF is for the very least ineffective and near-sighted. Sure, it will bring some results for a few years. But what's after that? Few seem to care.

[Yala]

What are you suggeting the IDF do?

[tzanchan]

Many people in the gov't are not true Zionists and the gov't gives orders to the IDF. The IDF only do as they're told, like an army should. Therefore, this has nothing to do with the IDF. They are the greatest patriots Israel has.* Especially the reservists.

*Except for Halutz.

Many people arent, but the great majority in the government are zionist.

Secondly what is wrong with halutz except that he sold his stocks?

[Ricky]

Tzanchan asks what else to Halutz do wrong apart from selling his stocks. Well there is a commision who will, I hope, examing in detail every aspect of this war and will, hopefull, come up with definitive answers, but, in the mean time I can say that I was amazed to hear that Halutz was of the opinion that the IAF alone could bring victory for Israel. My knowledge of military matters is negligible to the extreme, but even I have heard that military experts have concluded that air strikes alone cannot bring victory in war. I believe that I read this first in a copy of the Economist some years ago. But this also raises other questions. When it was announced at the time of the Sharon government that the next Commander in Chief of the IDF would come from the IAF I was surprised but thought nothing more of it, but now that I have come to learn about the concept of how to win wars that developed during the time of Halutz as CinC, I wonder why did two former Generals, Sharon and Mophaz also consider that the most suitable candidate to head the army was a man from the IAF?

[KettleWhistle]

What are you suggeting the IDF do?
Perhaps a better question would be what the government ought to be doing. Looking at their actions over the past 25 years, the only question that comes up in my mind is who the hell is running this whole show. Because, despite the outrageous trust that the Israeli public has in the government and the IDF, every single policy has been a pathetic failure. It seems that the Israeli establishment just doesn't have anyone involved in any sort of long-term strategic planning.

As for what I would have IDF do, that's a big question. For once, I believe they need to be harsher in enforcing the law. Say, there are Pallywood "gunmen" running around shooting their AKs in the air. The question that comes up is why is that allowed? The IDF has enough manpower and resources to go into the territories and root out all of these "gunmen," yet they don't. They waste millions upon millions of dollars bombing empty fields in Gaza, yet the Kassams keep on falling on Sderot and Ashkelon. Why aren't they spending this money to develop Nautilus instead? Or why instead of "retaliating" by bombing cars that carry children, even if they are terrorist children, they don't retaliate against Hamas by bombing the "Palestinian" parliament? Don't you think that would have more of an effect on them then giving them a PR victory after PR victory when they show off bodies of dead civilians who became collateral casualties?