"Jerusalem Is Not a Settlement" Netanyahu Reminds Obama Administration

May the tyrannical ayatollahs in Iran, and their terrorist minions in hamas and hezbollah, cease to exist.

How is it a mistake? Are you unaware of the history of the area?

Israel is a mistke because it was made by the the West (read: Us) as some sort of reperations for Jewish community after WWII.

It is a mistake because it put the Jewish people is place where they have NEVER been liked by ANYONE.

It is a mistake because some idiot thought it would be a good idea to empower this religion. (Or any religion, for that matter.)

It is a mistake because we gave this little up-start country our support, which they then used to bitch-slap everyone else in the region, and then acted shocked and "oppressed" when they hit back.

I'd like to see how "bold" and "righteous" Israel is when the big boy standing behind it suddenly leaves.

Israel is a glorious success in an otherwise very primitive, barbaric, undemocratic part of the world!

Paragon, the Jews have controlled the area many times in the few thousands years, but now it's a mistake?

They had not controlled it in a recongized, official state. Which is a big bone of contention.

Further, Irsael isn't even supposed to exist, by nature of the Jewish teaching, as they not supposed to have a reconigized state of their own.

Wow Paragon I guess you don't like Israel.. at least from what I have read. Palestine didn't exist It was created by the Roman boy lovers who destroyed the region.. Damn Hamas and Hezbollah may they all die a thousand deaths and any who sympathise and harbor these sick perverted animals. The State of Israel has prospered 8)....I hope they continue to prosper long after we are all gone. They the Israel's have all rights to this land and they can build all they want on it. Long Live Israel 8)

Hey, I got a great idea. Let's kick the Jews out of their home again! I mean, they've been chucked out of their homes a bunch of times, what's one more? At least their used to it.

That's what I'm hearing from you, Paragon. And it's offensive. We Jews have been kicked out of our homes plenty of times in the past. We're done. We're not getting kicked out of anywhere ever again. Whether or not establishing Israel was a good idea in 1948, Israel exists now. Period.

(And besides, only a few wacko Jews believe that Israel oughtn't exist until the Messiah comes. That's like judging Islam by Al-Qaida: neither group is at all representative of the whole.)

At least their used to it.

*they're.

Goddamnit.

phrase originated by zionist jewish religionists who, beginning with their neighbors, hate, routinely undermine and destroy anyone of other religious "faith", including americans, and most especially christians

Jews destroy anyone of other faith, huh?

while zionist jews continue to blackmail us for more and more.

The Jews run the banks and the government, huh?

Rob, wanna delete this anti-Semite? (It's not the anti-Israel political opinions to which I'm objecting, obviously. It's the explicit hatred of Jews to which I object..)

I'd like to see how "bold" and "righteous" Israel is when the big boy standing behind it suddenly leaves.

Israel can handle their own. Remember the 6 DAY WAR?

Remember the USS Liberty that was attacked and destroyed by Israel during that 6 day war? Had any other country done the same thing we would have gone to war. But thanks to LBJ and AIPAC it was "swept under the rug".

palestine alwasy existed since it has been a named place.
muslism and christians are also jews.
he whole place should be made into a religious heritgae site.
OPEN TO ALL PEOPLE OF THE WORLD.
.

and yeah isreal is such a democracyy they banned the arba parties from running in the last election and are now trying to ban protests,.

as far as calling them successful in a barabaric part of the world(as if we havent been keepign them that way so we can control the oil) belies the barbarism of isreal.
Unless you think just cause hamas uses human sheilds it is a-ok for isreal to do the same.

Whether or not establishing Israel was a good idea in 1948, Israel exists now. Period.

That's the truth of the matter. Israel exists and it has a right to exist. We could disagree with its policies, however.

My apologies, because the comment has already been collapsed I cannot delete it.

It's all good; thought that counts, I guess. Although I would like to know which idiots voted up such a blatantly racist comment.

(For the record, to avoid being accused of hypocrisy, I make a point of not voting up pro-Israel comments which are blatantly anti-Muslim.)

Israel exists and it has a right to exist. We could disagree with its policies, however.

I agree. You're definitely welcome to disagree with Israel's policies. As I've said before, I don't particularly like Netanyahu or Lieberman.

I'm glad that you agree that Israel has a right to exist! My argument above was against Paragon, who seems to have it in mind to kick the Jews out of Israel entirely.

Rob, I think you can still delete collapsed comments, but I'm not sure.

I'm glad that you agree that Israel has a right to exist! My argument above was against Paragon

So was mine, buddy. Glad we're on the same page, although I know we disagree on a lot of other things.

You act as if I say it only against Israel. I'd say it about any theorcracy or religion-based country.

Either abandon the religious pre-texts, or abandon the facade of "democracy".

You act as if I say it only against Israel. I'd say it about any theorcracy or religion-based country.

Then denounce the UK. Denounce Denmark. Hell, denounce the United States, since the US clearly is based in the Western tradition of monotheism, even if it allows minimal deviance from the norm in acceptance of different denominations of Christianity and of Judaism and suspicious tolerance of other religions like Sikhs.

Or had you really not given much thought to the fact that no nation is truly secular because religion, being the root of culture, cannot be excised from any culture in the world?

You think it cannot be excised.

No has tried hard enough yet. Religion is a plaque and a cancer. Either it will fail, or it will destroy all good that is left. That, and how can something that came after something else be the cause of something?

And I said "drop or the religious pre-texts or". I'd be more than happy to let any number of contries on their way, if they'd drop the religious relations.

That, and how can something that came after something else be the cause of something?

A feedback loop. Culture strengthens religion and religion strengthens culture. You can't have one without the other.

The "American way" of hard work and self-betterment comes from Luther and Calvin. Excising religion from American culture means excising that culture itself. The two are inseparable.

And besides, claiming that religion is "a plaque [sic?] and a cancer" is really a rather juvenile view. Religion is certainly a positive experience for many people -- and besides, you can't prove that God doesn't exist*.

*Of course you can't. It's impossible. But the burden of proof does not lie with me to prove God's existence, since I'm not trying to tell you to believe in God. You let me believe, and I'll let you not believe.

I'm going to skirt a deletion here but I can't resist ...

*fights the urge and wins*

sorry everyone, I just couldn't pull the trigger on my Robert-786653 bashing.

It did have to do with his parasite comment though ...

Paragon says...

They had not controlled it in a recognized, official state. Which is a big bone of contention.

Obviously the UN resolution recognizing Israel as a nation alludes this poster.

Further, Irsael isn't even supposed to exist, by nature of the Jewish teaching, as they not supposed to have a reconigized state of their own.

Actually, the land was promised to Jews as a homeland, forever and ever, which is now the case, in the end times by God/Allah/Adoni directly to his people. Regardless of how the Hasidim interpret it in the nature of their teaching, they do not speak for God/Adoni/Allah. And, neither do any other human beings on this planet such as Muslims, Jesuits/Catholics, Lutherans, Evangelicals, etc. no matter how much they like to think they do.

Kwame says...

Remember the USS Liberty that was attacked and destroyed by Israel during that 6 day war?

Yes, and this was a ship taken over by CIA operatives who began sending locations of Israeli troop movements to 'agencies' in Egypt, and when asked what they were doing gave a go to hell response to Israelis.

Eric...

Zionists, Nationalists, Racists, colonialists, Apartheid apologists, imperial Warmongers, routinely ignore international laws.

Quite a statement, reminiscent of the Gestapo, the Stazi, and any other Bolshevik/Nazi/socialist propaganda machines trying to use Jews as their scape goat for economic gain, world domination, and unlimited power to create chaos.

Does international law support the abduction of civilians such as in Iraq and Afghanistan for torture and murder/beheadings on worldwide television, or the shooting down of civilian airliners, or the murder of Olympic athletes?

Does international law support the three invasions of Israel by the Arab League? Does it support the 8 years of rocket atacks by Hamas? Does it support the starvation of millions of Somali refugees created by Muslims extremists?

International law is a joke, and so is the UN.

Israel will continue to defend herself, and she will continue to go along doing her thing. If the USA does not want to support Israel..., well that remains to be seen. Should we support terrorism, should we support Islamic extremism, should we support the current government of Iran in their war against their own people?

Hamas/Hezbollah/Al Quaida/ Iran/Syrian connection will continue terrorist activities all over the world and also continue their pity party for the Palestinians they hold hostage. If the Palestinians were free of Hamas, and the radical elements of Fatah, would this situation would change for Israel and Palestine, yes, absolutely. But, at the present, the world is making to much money off of arms, and oil to make the changes needed in this region.

Israel exists and so does Palestine, neither can go away, nor should they. But there are many negative posts here that want to see Israel destroyed. These posts insinuate Jews to be a continuation of Hitler's ideal of us as the cause of the world's problems. These posts stir up hatreds that endanger the Jewish people, exposing them to genocide which is the rhetoric of Iran, Syria, and terrorist leaders in Palestine. We will not, as Jews and Zionists, tolerate to see our children fed into the fires of hatred. Instead, this next time, next time things will be different.

WC Said about the USS Liberty...

"Yes, and this was a ship taken over by CIA operatives who began sending locations of Israeli troop movements to 'agencies' in Egypt, and when asked what they were doing gave a go to hell response to Israelis."

WC were is your proof to back this statement?

go blow a horse

Is that something you do on the regular?

Benji, look it up for yourself, that is what I did. I googled it and found lots of different sites, and I visited many of them until they begain to all sound alike. I found the information on the CIA very interesting. It seems that the CIA overrides the military, just like in the movies. The captain of the Liberty received a call from from a superior giving certain tactical control to the CIA operatives who were on the boat. This was in the testimony I discovered. It is an emotionally charged issue. Yes, Israel did attack the boat, that is fact, but why is very important when taken out of the emotional context.

WC

WC I have looked it up many times and read many articles about the USS Liberty....that attack was an accident, but what you are saying is that the Israeli Military knowingly fired on US Navy ship flying the colors of the United States. Therefore the ball is in your court to justify your claim that it was an "act of war "against the United States of America.

From # 2.24 Yes, and this was a ship taken over by CIA operatives who began sending locations of Israeli troop movements to 'agencies' in Egypt, and when asked what they were doing gave a go to hell response to Israelis."

Ok, in the testimony I read, the CIA was sending Israeli troop locations to Egypt who could have been forwarding them on to the Syrians. The incident happened during the Six Day War between Egypt/Syria/Iraq/Jordan/etc, vs Israel.

In the testimony, the CIA took control of the ship. How could it do this since Naval Commanders are supreme, well, it is an agency directly tied to President Johnson, who was supreme commander and chief of the armed forces. If President Johnson wanted a CIA operative to take control of a navy vessel its his right to order it. Perhaps this is why the waters are so muddy on this issue. Remember, Johnson was elected to the State Senate early in his career on the backs of dead people in a west Texas cemetery.

As I said, the problem here was sending these Israeli troop locations to the enemy (the armies of Egypt, Syria, Jordan, and the rest of the Arab League contingent) while they were engaged in combat. In what way would knowing where, and how many, and what kinds of weapons your enemy have give you advantages in the field. Does Israel have the right to defend itself not just against these nations armed invaders, but against anyone who would send them classified and vital information which could easily result in a lost battle. Any lost battle Israel fights with the Arab League, will result in a disaster of genocidal proportions on Jews.

If we were at war with Canada, and Mexico was sending them vital locations of our troops, numbers and locations of tanks, and ammo stockpiles, what would we do? Would we allow the Mexicans to continue sending Canada this information or would we cut it off? What if we were fighting a Russian invasion which swept quickly through Alaska, and it was the Canadians giving them the information, what would we do?

The Liberty attack was a tragedy, and the reasons for it are very skewed in emotions. People are quick to blame Israel, this is because they are looking for things to support their bias against the country. They are not looking at the situation, the war at the time, nor the vileness of the CIA directed by Richard Helms.

Remember this is the same group that was behind the sales of arms to gorilla groups in El Salvadorians to battle the Sandinista, and since they could not get Congressional approval to fund these weapons, the CIA raised the funds by selling hard drugs on the streets of major American cities.

http://www.danielpipes.org/488/the-liberty-incident-the-1967-israeli-attack-on-the-us-spy

The above link claims the bombing was a mistake, and has testimony information from many of the top government officials. I think its a cover up for their own blunders.

http://books.google.com/books?id=trU7nY-T-4EC&pg=PA267&lpg=PA267&dq=CIA+involvement+in+the+LIberty+incident&source=bl&ots=sCEn0-u1wJ&sig=BP4PH7tyMeZyQ_loK9sJZ8LSAF0&hl=en&ei=LEJmSsmlE4qSNvb7_ZIB&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=10

The above is a book excerpt that explains the CIA sending troop locations to Israeli's enemies during the Six Day War.

The theory WC favors was advanced in the book, The Secret War Against the Jews, by John Loftus and Mark Aarons. The claims made have been denied by survivors:

Loftus and Aarons's book...., is a collection of preposterous and demonstrably false theories and allegations. With regard to the Liberty attack, the only significant detail they get right is that it was deliberate, but they actually make the ludicrous statement that Israel's attack was justified because "the Liberty was gathering electronic information on Israeli troop movements and sending it to British intelligence, which in turn relayed it to the Arabs." Not only does this statement lack any genuine authentication, it also betrays a conspiracy-mindedness that makes all their other concoctions suspicious. Another claim born of this same free- ranging inventiveness is that "U.S. intelligence attempted to curry favor with the Arab oil producers by giving the precise details of Israel's order of battle to the Arabs during the war."

source - http://www.ussliberty.org/ijic.htm

See more at USS Liberty Memorial web site maintained by US survivors.

WC, why would the United States send that information to allies of the Soviet Union, who the US were fighting a proxy war against in South East Asia?

I have no doubt that the USS Liberty was there to monitor/spy on the situation.

I have to laugh...not at you WC, I enjoy your writing... if BS Detector or any of his aliases were reading what you had put forth about the attack on the Liberty, his head would pop.

Ok, ...benji, I am not adverse to changing my opinion on things. I really don't like to say Israel did something a US ship that was not kosher, know what I mean, it hurts. Its like biting the hand that feeds you and in this instance it was our hand.

And, I agree, I probably set myself up. But much of what I read is so much cover up on both sides. And, I did not trust Johnson, who became president after the Kennedy assassination at a time when Kennedy was going to phase out the Viet Nam War, and it continued under Johnson for another decade longer.

There are many untold stories, many half truths, many mysteries about debacles that really bother me. Either the government is afraid of coming out with the truth, or they are busy covering everything up because of inside involvement or advance knowledge. Like the Contra gun running drug dealers, the first attack on the Twin Towers, the cratering of these buildings in the exact manner of demolition on 911, Kennedy, and on and on.

Yikes, it is infuriating! So...

Well WC you maybe right, there is alot of grey areas withthat tragedy. I personally did not trust Macnamera or Johnson....politicians should stay out of war planning and I would not put it past them.

However, I choose to honor the fallen and praise those that served on that ship. That tragedy should be remembered but not as a pawn in debates on the vine.

This would be true from a Native American's viewpoint...have you selected the Native American family you're going to give your home to yet?

Paragon, if you can be truly objective, you might learn something by reading the article I posted just above this comment.

quest now your spamming your propaganda on other boards?

benji, the Liberty episode was well described and documented in the book, "The Secret War against the Jews" by Loftus and Aarons. You're getting a little testy, given that you have given no documented facts yourself and only challenge others to provide them.

J doyle, I don't consider it "spamming"...when I spend several days researching a subject and trying to assemble facts, logic, and feelings into a coherent and planned contention on a subject, I try to get my time's worth out of it by using it wherever I think it applies...I know it's not as easy as rushing through a blog looking for my name and making "one-liners", but I'm out to have a discussion with thoughtful people, so your comments are kinda like water running off my back. One point, however...you really are terrified of examining opposing viewpoints, aren't you?

All while jdoyle walks into Wal-Mart to purchase his Chinese made products.

The US should boycott Israeli products and businesses should divest as was done in South Africa until Israel stops the apartheid and human rights abuses.

Which one's are those jdoyle? Protecting themselves against attacks from Hamas in Palestine or protecting themselves against all of the other Muslim extremist countries that surround them and wish for their destruction? Here's an idea for you. Israel has never attacked anyone first, they have only responded to terrorist attacks in the form of suicide bombings(once bankrolled by Saddam Hussein of all people), rockets being lobbed over their border by Hamas, and various other Muslim-extremist behavior. How's about the MUSLIM'S stop murdering innocent Israelis for a few years without incident and then maybe Israel will consider some of "Palestines" wishes, none of which will include Jerusalem as part of the deal.

Luke Israel has a history of human rights abuses.
They also have a history of land theft and apartheid.

How about Israel stps land theft, murder and apartheid and maybe they can have peace.

How about Israel stps land theft, murder and apartheid and maybe they can have peace

How about if NO ONE HAD ATTACKED THEM IN THE FIRST PLACE, then Israel would not have pushed them back further across the original border to assure a buffer zone against further agression??? Israel has NEVER initiated an attack, they have only RESPONDED to agression against them. If the muslim extremists would leave them alone then they would stop getting their butts kicked and their land taken!!!

Also, Paragon Fury, I'm looking forward to the day when Israel is no longer hand-tied from doing what really needs to be done by the dimwits in Washington. Make no mistake, God will protect his people, it is only a fool who will march on Israel and expect to live!

Luke Israel was founded by Zionist Europeans who murdered and drove off the Palestinians who lived there.

Luke Israel was founded by Zionist Europeans who murdered and drove off the Palestinians who lived there

Um, actually NO jdoyle, Israel was created by God, for the Israelites and Palestine has never even existed!

Here are the facts Luke:

"I started looking in research studies about the exile from the land - a constitutive event in Jewish history, almost like the Holocaust. But to my astonishment I discovered that it has no literature. The reason is that no one exiled the people of the country. The Romans did not exile peoples and they could not have done so even if they had wanted to. They did not have trains and trucks to deport entire populations. That kind of logistics did not exist until the 20th century. From this, in effect, the whole book was born: in the realization that Judaic society was not dispersed and was not exiled."

If the people was not exiled, are you saying that in fact the real descendants of the inhabitants of the Kingdom of Judah are the Palestinians?

"No population remains pure over a period of thousands of years. But the chances that the Palestinians are descendants of the ancient Judaic people are much greater than the chances that you or I are its descendents. The first Zionists, up until the Arab Revolt [1936-9], knew that there had been no exiling, and that the Palestinians were descended from the inhabitants of the land. They knew that farmers don't leave until they are expelled. Even Yitzhak Ben-Zvi, the second president of the State of Israel, wrote in 1929 that, 'the vast majority of the peasant farmers do not have their origins in the Arab conquerors, but rather, before then, in the Jewish farmers who were numerous and a majority in the building of the land.'"

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/966952.html

Israel was created by God,

Prove it.

According to the US Declaration of Independence:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,

Which sort of sounds like the basis for the founding of the United States is God too. If not, the founding fathers stole the land from the King of England, who believed his authority to rule derived from the 'divine right of kings.'

God seems to be an accepted legal standard for this human activity, oddly enough.

If not, the founding fathers stole the land from the King of England,

Actually the land was "stolen" from the Indians. A fact that most educated Americans now recognize.

But then, if you support Israel and Zionism you wouldn't recognize such things.

Jdoyle, why do you continue to only look back 100 years for the existence of Jew in Israel. Go back over the past 2000 years, and you will see that the Jews have had control and lost control many times over.

. Israel has never attacked anyone firs
iraq calls you a liar.

what about yalls breaking of the cease fire on nov 4th
tell me somethign how many isrealis have the rodckets attacks kjilled in over ten years.
how many palistinains children did yall kill in gaza in the month of dec 2008

see a problem with claimign the so called "high road"

how about the arab isreali citizens that fled during the arab/israli war.. are they not allowed to return to theri homes and busineses just cause they fled the fighting.. (READ DID NOT ATTACK ISREAL)

doyle, why do you continue to only look back 100 years for the existence of Jew in Israel.

Because that s the relevant time period.
Go back over the past 2000 years, and you will see that the Jews have had control and lost control many times over.
Jewish co-religionist lived there 2000 years ago. They stayed and are now what are called the Palestinians.
Being Jewish is a religion not an ethnic group

Camilo,

Big lie!!

Really... Like the one you told in #7.

Ryan,

I recommend you hit the ! and then ignore on jdoyle ;)

jdoyle,

Being Jewish is a religion not an ethnic group

Fine then call them their name, the Israelites or Hebrews, but that destroys your argument doesn't it. Because it gives them history in the region, beyond 100 years ago, and history is what helps explain the region.

100% true.

100% BS. Israel is a meltingpot. And Israel is a country that takes in all type of ethnicity's of all types of backgrounds, not one that kills them like Hamas. Your argument holds no water.

Fine then call them their name, the Israelites or Hebrews, but that destroys your argument doesn't it

By changing their name you expect the facts to change?
They are not the same ethnic group as the ancient Hebrews or Israelites; they are just the same religion.

Israel was created by God

If you believe that, then technically everything that exists is created by God.

Make no mistake, God will protect his people

I thought we were all Jesus's children.

jdoyle, you aren't that familiar with history are you?

jdoyle, you aren't that familiar with history are you?

More than you it, appears. I am familiar with real history however.

"100% BS. Israel is a meltingpot. And Israel is a country that takes in all type of ethnicity's of all types of backgrounds, not one that kills them like Hamas. Your argument holds no water."

If true why is Israel called a "Jewish State". Why are the Muslims being systematically forced out of their homes in East Jerusalem...also known as the Muslim Quarter...many or most whose families have lived there since Saladin and many or most also hold Israeli citizenship.

That said I thought it was idiotic for the PLO to put forth East Jerusalem as a capitol. The people and families should be left alone.

If true why is Israel called a "Jewish State". Why are the Muslims being systematically forced out of their homes in East Jerusalem...also known as the Muslim Quarter...many or most whose families have lived there since Saladin and many or most also hold Israeli citizenship.

Are you referring to the people living on Ir David in Silwan? Muslims are not being expelled from the Muslim quarter itself, inside the Old City.

The only thing I can find on the internet with regards to the Muslim Quarter is plans by a Jewish group to build apartments on land bought from Muslims in the Muslim Quarter. The only possible opposition to this is purely racist: that Jews oughtn't be allowed to buy land from Muslims.

The demolitions on Ir David are completely legitimate. The homes are on a near-4000 year old archaeological site! Regardless of who lived on the land, Israel would allow excavations. The site is of immense historical significance -- it could prove (or disprove) the Bible's account of Jewish/Israelite settlement of the area. It is frankly ridiculous to suggest that the archaelogical dig is an attempt to dispossess Palestinians in the area.

"It is frankly ridiculous to suggest that the archaeological dig is an attempt to dispossess Palestinians in the area." I never said that or suggested that INH

Then what did you mean by: "Why are the Muslims being systematically forced out of their homes in East Jerusalem...also known as the Muslim Quarter"

It seems to me that you were rhetorically asking the question to assert that Muslims were being systematically forced out of east Jerusalem, that is, that they are being dispossessed.

So, what did you mean? Did you mean that Israel is actually being completely reasonable towards Israeli Arabs (aka Palestinians with Israeli citizenship)? Because that's the truth of the matter. (And I don't mean to suggest that things are perfect. But things aren't perfect here either. Prejudice exists in both Israel and the US, cf. Henry Louis Gates getting arrested.)

I mucked up on the use of the Muslim Quarter INH oops

Who is Henry Louis Gates?

Henry Louis Gates is an extremely well-known African-American scholar at Harvard, who was just arrested for "disorderly conduct" when the police were called on him when he was breaking into his own home after having lost his keys.

I mucked up on the use of the Muslim Quarter INH oops

Let's be careful next time.

I am usually, typing and TV watching not a good thing.

Thanks for the info on Gates.

TV melts your brain.

;-)

I mucked up on the use of the Muslim Quarter INH oops

no, you didn't benji - I got your point about "melting pot" v. "Jewish State". No matter how completely reasonable Israeli Jews may be the distinction of not being a Jew in a Jewish State will be felt. It is an open prejudice. Otherwise why make it a Jewish State?

Each dispossession of a Palestinian is unique in that it is particular people at a particular location. In the Muslim Quarter there is a yeshiva, Ateret Cohanim, which takes a particular interest in settling Jews in the Muslim Quarter. In April there was news of the take over of Naser Jabers home in the Muslim Quarter. Frequently the homes of Palestinians are cited with building code violations and are demolished.

The tactics of dispossion by home demolition is significant enough that there is a group of Israelis dedicated to preventing it.

It is an open prejudice. Otherwise why make it a Jewish State?

It's no different than Ghana being an Ghanaian state or Thailand being a Thai state. In any state with an inherent ethnic character, those of other ethnic groups will always feel left out.

Even in America, white straight Christians are still the norm, and anyone deviating from that norm is not quite completely accepted as simply American -- they are always hyphenated or qualified: an African-American, a Jewish-American or a gay American.

Faulting Israel for being a Jewish state is hypocritical and inconsistent unless one criticizes all other states for their ethnic or hidden ethnic characters.

jdolye,

What are you going to do when Israel and Palestine make peace, and develop economic relationships? This will happen because these there is no other option than the continuation of war, which Israel will not allow to be fought on her own territory after 30 years of terrorist attacks.

Even in America, white straight Christians are still the norm

I don't see Obama or any other President before him asking to be recognized as a white Christian state

I don't see Obama or any other President before him asking to be recognized as a white Christian state

My point is that explicit or not, every state has an ethnic norm. Obama isn't just the 44th President, but he's the first African-American president. He is hyphenated in a way that only Kennedy was, as the first Catholic-American president.

The quintessential American is a WASP, like it or not. Non-WASPs will never be quintessentially American, but always something-American.

Non-WASPs will never be quintessentially American, but always something-American.

I have to disagree with that. Yes, there are racists. Yes, races other than white are discriminated against. However, nobody has to recognize the US as a white christian nation.

You're Palestinian, right, Squidward? Do you really feel like other people consider you fully American?

I feel like America's distrust of non-white Christians would be even more apparent to you. At least I "pass," and people don't know I'm Jewish unless they ask (and my last name doesn't give it away). I would be surprised if you weren't subject to extra suspicion due to the color of your skin (I assume since you are Palestinian that you look Arab).

At the very least, two guys I know who are Pakistani and Jewish (not sure how) get randomly selected for extra screening at airports every time they go through security. This seems to me to prove my point that non-white people tend to never be considered plain vanilla American, but always whatever-American, enforcing the idea that only white Christians are plain, unhyphenated American.

Anyways, even if America is truly a multicultural, Kumbaya-singing melting pot, I still consider it a double standard to complain only about Israel's perceived ethnocentrism when most of the rest of the world is equally guilty, or far worse (cf. whites not being able to own land in Zimbabwe among many, many examples).

Do you really feel like other people consider you fully American?

In Texas, it's a little bit tough. Although I do like BBQ's, I wanna own a few guns, and I don't mind country soo much.

I would be surprised if you weren't subject to extra suspicion due to the color of your skin (I assume since you are Palestinian that you look Arab).

I look slightly more less suspicious now. I shaved my "Arab Nationalist" mustache. Although, I grew out the mustache because in Austin, everything is weird, and mustaches are considered cool.

Anyways, even if America is truly a multicultural, Kumbaya-singing melting pot, I still consider it a double standard to complain only about Israel's perceived ethnocentrism when most of the rest of the world is equally guilty, or far worse (cf. whites not being able to own land in Zimbabwe among many, many examples).

I understand your point, but I'm not going to pretend that Israel is a multi-cultural Kumbaya-singing melting pot.

My friend is an art teacher in a Queens NY elementary school. She teaches children in English of all religious backgrounds and who have primary languages that encompass 37 different tongues. They all are Americans despite total differences on religion, language, beliefs, cultures, traditions, They are all striving to be Americans. We don't have different rules in our Army or in our schools or about where people can visit or live or build based on religious background. We are all equal and it is illegal to discriminate, Does it happen? Sometimes, but it is illegal, This is a big difference, It is not state sponsored discrimination. We don't have Jewish only housing or Catholic only housing, or Baptist only housing that is subsidized by the state.

I look slightly more less suspicious now. I shaved my "Arab Nationalist" mustache. Although, I grew out the mustache because in Austin, everything is weird, and mustaches are considered cool.

I'm not sure Austin counts as Texas. ;-) (Just like Chapel Hill and Carrboro, near where I am, don't count as real North Carolina.)

I understand your point, but I'm not going to pretend that Israel is a multi-cultural Kumbaya-singing melting pot.

I'm not asking you too. I'm asking everyone to treat Israel like they treat all other non-MCKSMPs. That is, accepting that ethnic minorities will have a somewhat @!$%#ty time of it. There's no reason to single out Israel for @!$%#ty treatment of minorities when minorities are treated @!$%#tily in at least 180-something countries.

First of all, what a hoot reading these posts. Its a lesson in ethics, morals, and culture. Yes, there is some racism in the USA, but if you have lived here as long as I have, you would know that there is less of it now then fifty years ago. And, in the next fifty years there will be even fewer racists running around. That is because of the great equalizer, the mass media which does our thinking for us in sound bites.

I also work in a public school, and I have nothing but a diverse population. About a twenty percent of our population is black, another fifteen is Muslim (we are located about half mile from one of the largest mosques in Harris County), and the rest are Hispanic with a smattering of Anglo/White. All of these kids are special, because they are young and impressionable. It is important to nurture them properly, respect their cultural heritage, and their background. It is important to help them over the prejudices of the parents so they can go out into this society and work with others be them Jews, Muslims, Hispanics, or Asians, etc.

Obama is half black, why do people not remember this? People want him in a box/category, either black or white, either Christian or Muslim, but he cannot cross over, he cannot be both, its one or the other. Does he have to make a choice? Can he just be the president, or does he have to be the Black President, what if he chooses to be the White President? Does his historical background from his Muslim father throw American support to radical Muslims, and is this the end of Israel, will he be the sitting president if Israel gets destroyed by Iranian or NK nukes?

Or will he by guided by his grandmother's Christianity and join an evangelical church and save Israel by dropping nukes on Iran and NK first? We can knock him, we don't have to like him, we don't have to respect him really but he is the president. History will judge him by the policies he makes and keeps, by the way we rebuild this country's economic system, save the poisoning of the planet, and move forward with innovation. He has three and a half years left, and perhaps four more after that. Its a day by day thing.

J Doyle...Can you enumerate these so-called human rights abuses?

...Can you enumerate these so-called human rights abuses?

Murder, land theft and apartheid: where should I start?
How about apartheid?

Jewish self-righteousness is taken for granted among ourselves to such an extent that we fail to see what's right in front of our eyes. It's simply inconceivable that the ultimate victims, the Jews, can carry out evil deeds. Nevertheless, the state of Israel practises its own, quite violent, form of Apartheid with the native Palestinian population.

The US Jewish Establishment's onslaught on former President Jimmy Carter is based on him daring to tell the truth which is known to all: through its army, the government of Israel practises a brutal form of Apartheid in the territory it occupies. Its army has turned every Palestinian village and town into a fenced-in, or blocked-in, detention camp. All this is done in order to keep an eye on the population's movements and to make its life difficult. Israel even imposes a total curfew whenever the settlers, who have illegally usurped the Palestinians' land, celebrate their holidays or conduct their parades.

If that were not enough, the generals commanding the region frequently issue further orders, regulations, instructions and rules (let us not forget: they are the lords of the land). By now they have requisitioned further lands for the purpose of constructing "Jewish only" roads. Wonderful roads, wide roads, well-paved roads, brightly lit at night--all that on stolen land. When a Palestinian drives on such a road, his vehicle is confiscated and he is sent on his way.

On one occasion I witnessed such an encounter between a driver and a soldier who was taking down the details before confiscating the vehicle and sending its owner away. "Why?" I asked the soldier. "It's an order--this is a Jews-only road", he replied. I inquired as to where was the sign indicating this fact and instructing [other] drivers not to use it. His answer was nothing short of amazing. "It is his responsibility to know it, and besides, what do you want us to do, put up a sign here and let some antisemitic reporter or journalist take a photo so he that can show the world that Apartheid exists here?"

http://www.counterpunch.org/aloni01082007.html

J doyle, I am not attacking you, I"m trying to open up your mind. The article I wrote was based on a challenge I received from Erik the Read to look at information and writings on the opposite side of the argument. I did so, and then I researched the subject, got some facts, and drew some conclusions. That doesn't make me an "expert", but it makes me someone who is interested in open inquiry, sharing ideas, and helping people also look at other viewpoints. I'm not sure why you're being defensive.

I thought your article made a lot of sense.

quest I am not into propaganda

I thought your article made a lot of sense.

You would Irene!! LOLOL

kinda thought you might like that doyle:-)

Thanks for your support, Irene.

Friend invitation sent.

Since your a fan of "facts" and not "propaganda, doyle, how about specifiying a few episodes/events that illustrate "Apartheid" and "human rights violations"?

Apartheid:

Jewish self-righteousness is taken for granted among ourselves to such an extent that we fail to see what's right in front of our eyes. It's simply inconceivable that the ultimate victims, the Jews, can carry out evil deeds. Nevertheless, the state of Israel practises its own, quite violent, form of Apartheid with the native Palestinian population.

The US Jewish Establishment's onslaught on former President Jimmy Carter is based on him daring to tell the truth which is known to all: through its army, the government of Israel practises a brutal form of Apartheid in the territory it occupies. Its army has turned every Palestinian village and town into a fenced-in, or blocked-in, detention camp. All this is done in order to keep an eye on the population's movements and to make its life difficult. Israel even imposes a total curfew whenever the settlers, who have illegally usurped the Palestinians' land, celebrate their holidays or conduct their parades.

If that were not enough, the generals commanding the region frequently issue further orders, regulations, instructions and rules (let us not forget: they are the lords of the land). By now they have requisitioned further lands for the purpose of constructing "Jewish only" roads. Wonderful roads, wide roads, well-paved roads, brightly lit at night--all that on stolen land. When a Palestinian drives on such a road, his vehicle is confiscated and he is sent on his way.

On one occasion I witnessed such an encounter between a driver and a soldier who was taking down the details before confiscating the vehicle and sending its owner away. "Why?" I asked the soldier. "It's an order--this is a Jews-only road", he replied. I inquired as to where was the sign indicating this fact and instructing [other] drivers not to use it. His answer was nothing short of amazing. "It is his responsibility to know it, and besides, what do you want us to do, put up a sign here and let some antisemitic reporter or journalist take a photo so he that can show the world that Apartheid exists here?"

http://www.counterpunch.org/aloni01082007.html

It might be useful to read about the Ottoman Millet system, used to administer their Islamic Empire. It is not 'democracy' as we understand it, and it was far from perfect, but it fostered tolerance and a plural society by recognizing the autonomy of other 'nations.'

That was the system in place until the area was transferred to British Mandate administration in 1919, and when violence between the communities began. The Jews were a community in the Ottoman Empire.

The current Arab states of the former Mandate skirt the apartheid label completely don't they? Their governments are also nothing remotely like the Ottoman's tolerant Millet system. Under the Mandate, the plan was to have the local people govern themselves.

The Arabs were given separate states but objected to a setting aside a self governing state for the Ottoman Jewish community, what was their plan for this community then?

Why not use that as a frame of reference rather than an artificial model alien to the area?

Notice how only Jewish cities are referred to as settlements?

Settlements are the movement of a group a of people into land not originally theirs.
Washington was a settlement at one time: nothing can be done to undo the harm done the Native Americans; but just because they got screwed over doesn't mean we should turn a blind eye t the same thing happening to the Palestinians,

Settlements are the movement of a group a of people into land not originally theirs.

There isn't a city in the word that is more originally Jewish than Jerusaleum.

There isn't a city in the word that is more originally Jewish than Jerusaleum.

Being Jewish is a religion not an ethnic group. The Europeans Jews who live in Israel now are not the original inhabitants: see3.7

'ethnic purity' is not part of Judaism.

'ethnic purity' is not part of Judaism

You are right for once. As i said above being Jewish is a religion.
Being a member of a religious group doesn't entitled a person to a home land.
By that theory since I am Catholic I should just be able to got to Rome and give the boot to anyone who is not Catholic and take their home away from them.

jdoyle, don't kid yourself, we Jews are both a religion and an ethnic group. We have similar characteristics in the DNA, and that has been clinically proven. We also have this religion which for some reason has turned the world upside down. We can be found through out history not always in Israel, but always in history.

Being Jewish is a religion not an ethnic group.

There are people who are Jewish by virtue of faith and those who are Jewish by virtue of ethnicity, and there are those who are both of these.

By that theory since I am Catholic

rotflmao!

worldcurmudgeon
So black Jews and blond haired blue eye Jews are the same ethnicity?

alkimija , now you dislike Catholics as much as you dislike Muslims?

jdolye, yes we are. Check the dna. Actually, we are all cut from the same cloth. If you have the same blood type as me I can donate it to you if you need it, this is a biological trait that makes us both the same. If you are black or white it doesn't matter, does it? Jews do share certain biological traits, even diseases such as Tay-Sachs.

Blacks and whites on transplant lists get organs from a variety of ethnic peoples, yet these organs, when matched properly save lives.We have interchangeable parts.

You are no dummy, you debate well, you rage well, and you have information to back up your spiel. You know as well as I do that the Christian church, and its spawned denominations treat Jews as if we are a different species from homosapiens, so I am not going to argue that point, Yes we are Jews are a big fricken family, and there are more of us out there than even we know about. I bet you have a Jew somewhere in your woodpile.

So black Jews and blond haired blue eye Jews are the same ethnicity?

Yes, they certainly can be. There are various tribes of Jews. And they intermarry with other people, you know.

I have the same opinion of Catholics as I do of Muslims. I just don't believe you're a Catholic.

I have the same opinion of Catholics as I do of Muslims.

No doubt; antipathy towards both because you sure seem to hate Muslims

I just don't believe you're a Catholic.

Why is that?
Any rational reason?

Yes, they certainly can be. There are various tribes of Jews. And they intermarry with other people, you know.

So like I said, by your definition since I am Catholic I should be able to move to Rome and kick out any one living there who is not Catholic and steal their home.

jdoyle, I don't hate anyone, regardless of how grating I may find you personally.

Why is that?

I don't recall ever seeing you comment upon a single Catholic-oriented article whereas you seem to be always present in the articles involving Muslims. If you're a Muslim, like it seems obvious that you are, I wonder why you just don't come out and say it.

So like I said, by your definition since I am Catholic I should be able to move to Rome and kick out any one living there who is not Catholic and steal their home.

You are definitely not Catholic, saying something absolutely idiotic like that, lol.

alkimija this what you get for trying to think, I guess.
'Yes I am Catholic: one doesnt need to be a certain religion to want to see its people treated with out bigotry as Isalm is here on Newsvine.

I don't recall ever seeing you comment upon a single Catholic-oriented article

I just did on July 8th. Catholics do not receive all the bigotry here on Newsvine that Islam does expect for the MSNBC trolls which I avoid.

If you're a Muslim, like it seems obvious that you are

,
more of signs of your instability and lack of logic, I am afraid.

jdoyle,

I have given Christians a hard time, historically what came out of the Christian church over the centuries was a religion of Manifest Destiny, that God gave this earth to Christians to conquer, dig up, explore, exploit, squander, and rule. However, this mind set for many millions of Christians has changed and drastically, especially since the Shoah.

Now, the Christian mindset moves in a different direction to be green, make amends for past misdeeds, inject a sense of fairness, call it like they see it, make no excuses, and more.

I see the Muslims on the upside of this theory in place of where the Christians where a millennia or two ago. God/Allah's new conquering heroes are out to make it right by Islam the new Catholicism of the old world. These are the Muslims we kick around here on the vine, its old world vs modern. Even Muslims support an Israel, and I as a Jew support and independent state of Palestine.

Our hope is the educated youth of Islam, Christianity, Judaism, and all of the other world religions who know better, who understand history, and want to make this planet good for everyone on it.

Even Muslims support an Israel, and I as a Jew support and independent state of Palestine.

Muslims being the progessives, who are deeply religious but understand living in a moder world that has a place for everyone. I guess I felt a need to clear that up. Its the difference between Hezbollah's Nassrallah and Fatah's Salam Fayyad. One is into sixteenth century barbarism and politics assassination style, and the other wants to move ahead and achieve Palestinian statehood, and a peace with Israel.

Is this irony?

So like I said, by your definition since I am Catholic I should be able to move to Rome and kick out any one living there who is not Catholic and steal their home.

Because the funny thing is, way back once upon a time, the Romans invaded Jerusalem, kicked out the Jews and renamed the real estate Palestine.

but that was before the Christian era, which is a whole other chapter involving the Holy Land.

Because the funny thing is, way back once upon a time, the Romans invaded Jerusalem, kicked out the Jews and renamed the real estate Palestine

.

As I have shown a few times, not all the Jews left; they convert to Islam later and are now called Palestinians.

This is ridicoulous. this hammering jdoyle about what religion he says he is. Are you implying that all Muslims think alike or all Catholics think alike? That is the definition of racism.

If I said you "can't be Jewish because you think like a Muslim" all possible $hit would hit the fan. Please stop this. I was also a Catholic for most of my life (I am not now, I am not Muslim or Jewish either and will not discuss my personal religion) but I am pretty old and was Catholic and my kids were raised Catholic and we were very involved in the Catholic Church forever.

So must I also be Muslim because I defend the Palestinians rights against the abuses of Israeli policy? Must I be Muslim too because I support a boycott, sanctions and divestiture from Israel? That makes about as much sense as saying I must be black because I supported the same against White Apartheid South Africa?

many groups who are not Muslim do not support Israeli actions.

.

Even as a former Catholic I find it offensive to be told what a Catholic would or would not say about Rome or any thing else for that matter. My wife and I , when we were Catholics, there was a group "Catholics for Choice". I don't know how jdoyle feels on that we probably disagree, but I don't have any way of knowing by what religion he says he is by his feelings about any one subjects. Religious people do not have monothink. I know Jews who classify themselves as Jews who eat shrimp and bacon and cheeseburgers.

There is a group of Catholics called Womanchurch. That had as its motto: "ordain women or stop dressing like them". So that may be offensive to many Catholics, but they had many Catholics who agreed with them.

The main founders and supporters of BSD of Israel in Canada are Jewish women. Are they not Jewish.Can one identify what they are by their words? I think not.

This is ridicoulous. this hammering jdoyle about what religion he says he is.

As a Catholic, jdoyle would know that Catholicism is a choice, and that nobody is born Catholic. It's not an ethnicity. You have to be baptized and confirmed. Vatican City is not the homeland of any ethnic group (of course) but is the spiritual home of all peoples that are Roman Catholic.

So his ridiculous little tale of booting anyone out of "Rome" that isn't Catholic becomes immediately apparent as the comment of someone who has only the most superficial knowledge (and certainly misunderstanding) of Catholicism.

As a former Catholic (and I'm one myself), you should understand what I'm saying. I have no doubts about what you're telling me as the truth. I have no reason to disbelieve you. However, jdoyle has been consistently inconsistent and had betrayed enough of a lack of knowledge about his so-called faith to make believe he is being less than truthful.

My wife and I , when we were Catholics, belonged to a group "Catholics for Choice".

And that's a large part of why you're now a former Catholic, like me, lol.

Are you implying that all Muslims think alike or all Catholics think alike?

Uh, no.

That is the definition of racism.

Uh, no actually, even if I believed that (and I don't), it would be close to the very opposite. Seriously.

See assuming again.

There is a specific VERY PERSONAL reason having nothing to do with any of that why we are former Catholics. It is personal not doctrinal. We could possibly rejoin the church at some point. Our reasons are our own, not "group".

Catholics do not have monothink.

That doesn't mean though that they can't be tribal. You can join Catholicism or not , but if you were born Catholic it is very much like being born Jewish, or Buddhist or Muslim. You are a member of the "tribe" even if you try and opt out.

If you are in the hospital and the priest or sister knows you were ever Catholic? You get the visit, You move into a new town, and they know you were ever Catholic? You get the visit. If you went to Catholic School, were baptized as a baby, did confirmation in high school? You are considered Catholic by Catholic the same way Jews eating a BLT are still considered to be Jews by Israel.(and their mothers, fathers , aunts and uncles)

Many Catholics do see the Vatican as "theirs", the resent the gold plates and the Pope's "party shoes" and fancy brocade cloaks. Some don't. Some see it as ok. Many Catholics such as "Catholic Workers" are about as far left as you can go without falling off. Others Such as Catholic Evangelicals well they are off the chart the other way. BUT they are all still Catholics.

Even Recovering Catholics obviously are defining themselves as actually Catholics who have "left". But they can't just stop--they "recover"

And yes implying that anyone group because of their religion all think a certain way is if not racism per se, it is certainly prejudice. I say racism because you seem to say that being Jewish is both a religion and ethnicity, and others say lost tribes , (race of people) so. I take it back , I say it is prejudiced to say that. Below is an example. Many many many Catholics from all over the world have totally different attitudes about. You said,

So his ridiculous little tale of booting anyone out of "Rome" that isn't Catholic becomes immediately apparent as the comment of someone who has only the most superficial knowledge (and certainly misunderstanding) of Catholicism.

I have actually said the same thing before.

Since you used to be a Catholic, I don't know if you were born one or converted, I am sure you know people who were born Catholic, who have since become Buddhists, or Hindu or Sikhs and follow gurus who when asked, still say, Oh I am a recovering Catholic--and now I ractice Buddhism--but still go to midnight Mass on Christmas, or light a candle or whatever--or not--in any case they are still defined by their tribalism. And it isn't as easy as you say above that you just get baptized or confirmed. I think as a former Catholic you must be aware of this total diverstity too.

Catholics do not have monothink.

Ah, but they're supposed to. The Church is the sole arbiter of what is right and what is wrong. You may have belonged to the group "Catholics for choice" but it was certainly not officially sanctioned and officially I'm sure it was (is) officially "frowned upon."

You can join Catholicism or not , but if you were born Catholic it is very much like being born Jewish, or Buddhist or Muslim.

Wrong. There is no such thing as an ethnic Catholic. There is such a thing as an ethnic Jew.

If you are in the hospital and the priest or sister knows you were ever Catholic? You get the visit, You move into a new town, and they know you were ever Catholic? You get the visit.

Really? Gee, why did they ignore me then when I was in the hospital, even though every member of my family knows that I was Catholic and even though they're still Catholic? hmmm

And yes implying that anyone group because of their religion all think a certain way is if not racism per se, it is certainly prejudice.

I didn't write any such thing: that was your mistaken assumption.

Since you used to be a Catholic, I don't know if you were born one or converted

Baptised and confirmed, then left.

they are still defined by their tribalism

I think you're confusing "tribalism" with "tradition."

tell it to the Irish and the Brits

Only because some people say so. In actuality there is only one race--human with almost zip for differences.

No << i am not confusing anything.

You are definitely not Catholic, saying something absolutely idiotic like that, lol.

This is exactly what you said. No Catholic would say that? I just told you I have said the exact same thing, and since I just left the church very recently, I can tell you that I have heard many other people who still are practicing Catholics say the same thing too.

As for all Catholics being supposed to think the same thing? Duh, that is the same for Judaism and Islam. But in practice it doesn't happen or you wouldn't have all the internecine conflict.

As for your not getting visited. Maybe they know you if you live in a small town and know your attitude about Catholicism? Or maybe if you live in a city nobody knew. If you live somewhere and they find out that you once were Catholic, and don't know of your disdain? they will come. Next time you go in? Email me. I will tell them that you are a lapsed Catholic and they will come.

The Irish and the British are different ethnic groups, dude.

This is exactly what you said. No Catholic would say that?

No, a Catholic wouldn't say that.

I just told you I have said the exact same thing, and since I just left the church very recently

And that's why you're not a Catholic. You didn't agree with the church, and you left.

I can tell you that I have heard many other people who still are practicing Catholics say the same thing too.

And I can tell you that I've never heard anyone else that is Catholic say the same thing, period.

As for all Catholics being supposed to think the same thing?

Not on all subjects, of course. But on certain matters, the church dictates what is or isn't the truth. Deviating from the church stance in such matters is defiance not only of the church, but - according to the RC church of course - defiance of God.

It is not the same for Judaism and Islam because they don't have a primary authority for their faiths as does Roman Catholicism.

Race, ethnicity, culture, tribalism, religion and traditions are social constructs. It's plain nonsense to pretend there are fixed defining features that apply across the board to divide people neatly into separate categories.

That is the what I recall whenever I hear "Never Again".

That first paragraph is great. It also has no relation to what I was actually saying, which is that there are concrete beliefs applicable to and identifiable of Roman Catholics and Catholicism.

Oh horse hockey alkimija, even the frickin priest told me that most Catholics don't believe in all the beliefs, and that "there was a higher law" and that people should just "pray about it and go to mass". So If you never heard any questioning Catholics you must live in a bunker and put cotton in your ears and make that "naaaaa, naaaa, aaa" sound whenever you talk to Catholics. Catholics have abortions, Catholics get divorced, Catholics cheat on their spouses, Catholics marry non Catholics who won't agree to raise the kids Catholic, Catholics are basically just like every other people.

Try moving to Israel and telling them that you aren't Catholic. Tell them you are Jewish. See if they believe you or if they want you to pass some really convoluted Jewishness test to prove that you are Jewish. I guarantee it will include specific, concrete beliefs.

Then again, some person whose mother was Jewish can move there right after eating a BLT and live in on land where some Palestinian was pushed out of their house and it was bulldozed. So you can't have it both ways.

Catholics all agree do they?
I guess it is news to these Catholics

http://www.catholicsforchoice.org/
http://www.romancatholicwomenpriests.org/
http://www.answerbag.com/q_view/302012
http://liberalslikechrist.org/Catholic/Vaticanpalace.html

The example of Ireland was that the Irish were discriminated against by the Brits because they were Catholic--you just refuted your own argument.

As for Judaism, they , as we are so often reminded , have the, excuse the THE Covenant. The big one, the chosen people, straight from gods lips to their ears. Please. It is all just as Melony said. "social construct"

And it is really too bad that people keep killing other people it.

As a Catholic, jdoyle would know that Catholicism is a choice, and that nobody is born Catholic. It's not an ethnicity

No one is forced to stay Jewish; which is about as much an ethnicity as being Catholic. ie its not.

Wrong. There is no such thing as an ethnic Catholic. There is such a thing as an ethnic Jew.

No there is not.

However, jdoyle has been consistently inconsistent and had betrayed enough of a lack of knowledge about his so-called faith to make believe he is being less than truthful.

You are so full of crap. LOL You know nothing about me ; all you know is that you dont like the fact I respect Islam which you clearly hate.
Want me to send you the parish bulletin every week?

Please. It is all just as Melony said. "social construct"

And it is really too bad that people keep killing other people it.

The idea of socially constructed reality is a post modern philosophical belief system.

How do we know what we know?

Take for example, Adam and Eve eating the forbidden fruit from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil.

Is it just a dated cosmology myth? or relevant allegory for epistemology?

Knowledge of good and evil are moral discriminations, is that a social construct?

Yes --good and evil, are social constructs created by civilizations that come and go. Morality is a product of those social constructs.

Most people do not accept it would be moral say to agree to kill your son, or anyone else because God said so in 20th century. A story such as this to prove any point would be considered irresponsible. Ask any serial killer who thought God was speaking to him or her.

so essentially then, you're positing that religion is not valid in the 20th century? Or just the validity of particular religions?

So it's passe for Jews to identify as a religion? (and apparently from the example, by extension, Christians) Nor are they entitled to be an ethnic group and nationalism is just an outmoded obstacle to a one-world utopia and world peace?

So, in what way are the arguments against the legitimacy of the state of Israel any different than those made by the birthers against Obama? Are objections to Zionism just a 'legal issue' to determine whether illegal immigrants are improperly in control of a country? Are they just looking for a valid deed?

Irene:
people obviously don't need , or want my opinion or permission to follow whatever god or religion or philosophy they want.

I am just saying that the "good and evil" morality that come out of them are in my opinion social constructs that are relative.

The Jewish scripture is a perfect example of this idea. The idea of Midrash, a Jewish construct, takes one body of written work and finds ways to make the meanings to conform to changing social and political context.

Midrash can take things as simple as the direction of a "bet" is facing and derive meaning from this and create a new meaning for a passage of text that fits into a new era. But most religions do this. Even ones without written record. Philosophies also seem to evolve when put into actual practice as opposed to someones idea of how things should be.

Is it passe you ask ? I guess that depends if you are a person who believes it to be true or not. It remains to be seen whether ethnicity will be an obstacle to world peace. I guess that depends on whether the model is peaceful sharing of the worlds resources or a "get it and growl" Balkanization.

The idea of Balkanization doesn't appeal much to me, but others may choose that, For the US I prefer the melting pot to the salad bowl.

The Birthers? to me they are totally irrelevant. I wouldn't know how to compare them to anything.
As for Adam and Eve, I think plenty of indigenous peoples worldwide have proven that they can make their own social contructs that include their own ideas of right and wrong, without the influence of middle eastern religion of any stripe

I am not sure what your question is about Zionism and immigration are referring to.

I am not sure what your question is about Zionism and immigration are referring to.

The birthers seem to be arguing that Obama is an illegal immigrant, The anti-Zionists seem to be arguing that Israelis are illegal immigrants.

Both are making arguments that are essentially existential challenges to identity and to legitimate national authority.

Both generate a lot of conspiracy theory type narrative on the internet- although not usually at the same time.

for the other questions, I am not arguing for the superiority of the bible, I don't know about that.

But, social construction of reality wise- since the bible and the abrahamic religions- with all their impact on law and culture and history-- and visa versa-- are indigenous to the middle east, it's not exactly a foreign, irrelevant influence.

millerb -

Oh horse hockey

Sure, that's what you say, but the church officially says something completely different (and you know that).

Try moving to Israel and telling them that you aren't Catholic. Tell them you are Jewish. See if they believe you or if they want you to pass some really convoluted Jewishness test to prove that you are Jewish. I guarantee it will include specific, concrete beliefs.

So... are you saying that I should ask jdoyle to "pass some really convoluted" Catholicness test to prove he's Catholic? I'm honestly not that interested, lol. I just don't believe him because of his consistent inconsistencies and honestly I'm not interested in further exploring the subject (it's rather off-topic).

Or are you saying that only Jews would ask someone to prove their religious background? What are you really saying there? It's not quite clear.

As for your links, I'm sure you're aware that those who defy the RC church risk excommunication. So whereas individual Catholics may personally have all sorts of differences of personal beliefs, they know what the official church position is on that matter, which was my point (which also seemed to have gone *whoosh* right over your head).

jdoyle -

No one is forced to stay Jewish

Religiously? - no. But if you're born an ethnic Jew, then you can no longer give up your ethnic ancestry than a tree could stop being a tree. And if you don't think that Jews are an ethnicity, then maybe you should take a look on the Internet sometime. There's a lot of information out there. It seems to contradict you on a fairly regular basis.

As for your snide little remarks that I "hate" Islam, I'd like you to (for once!) provide proof of that remark and point out one - JUST ONE - comment that I made at any time that is hateful toward Islam and/or Muslims, EVER.

Of course, you'll have a hard time providing that proof, because I've never made any such comments and all your shrill accusations are merely unfounded and pathetic personal attacks.

But if you're born an ethnic Jew

There is no such thing.

As for your snide little remarks that I "hate" Islam, I'd like you to (for once!) provide proof of that remark and point out one - JUST ONE - comment that I made at any time that is hateful toward Islam and/or Muslims, EVER.

I go by your comments; just about any time Islam is mentioned by you it is in a negative connotation.

I just don't believe him because of his consistent inconsistencie

Examples?

and honestly I'm not interested in further exploring the subject (it's rather off-topic).

Which means you have no proof, just more of your irrational feelings.

Oh horse hockey and birthers

Those are two new ones to me....Coming from the "State of Hockey", Minnesota...never seen a horse play hockey, bet someone could make some bucks on that.

Just trying to simmer down the conversation a bit.

Now then Jewish and Judaism. You can be a Jew but not be observant of Judaism, its a matriarchal thing...if your mothers Jewish than by birth you are considered Jewish. If however, you are a blond, blue- eyed Aryan type and convert to the religion of Judaism you are also considered Jewish. If an ethnic Jew (born of a Jewish mother), converts to Catholicism or any other religion, they are still considered Jewish but of the faith that they have chosen.

Not if they were born Irish, Polish or Italian Catholic they are not considered that. Who is doing the considering is the key here.

You are only talking about it from a Jewish point of view that the rest of the world doesn't necessarily share. Ever heard the terms relapsed Catholic or Recovering Catholic--note they still use Catholic as the origin.

what is the purpose of the world involving itself in identifying Jews?

what is the purpose of the world involving itself in identifying Jews?

Just making the point being Jewish is a religion not a race entitled to other's lands.

what you are saying though, is that Jews aren't entitled self determination.

History is chock full of the world identifying Jews and making laws declaring they aren't entitled to own land or even set foot on it.

According to this article just last April, it is a death penalty offense to sell land to Jews:

Warning the Palestinians against engaging in "suspicious real estate deeds," the religious leader said that according to Islamic teachings it was a "grave sin" to sell houses and lands to Jews.......

......Scores of Palestinians have been murdered over the past three decades for allegedly selling their property to Jews or for acting as intermediaries in real estate deeds involving Jews.

How were the participants religious affiliations identified in the sales?

Is it possible that land sales are marketed as 'stealing' to protect the lives of the seller?

Irene:

what is the purpose of the world involving itself in identifying Jews

?

How the heck did you get that our of what I said? I obviously meant that all people can identify with a religion as more or less than just their religion, but that still doesn't give them any rights to steal land or claim to be a real democracy if religious law is part of the basis of becoming a new citizen.

Dam slapped by my own friends...I will take that as a complement. For the record I am German, Dutch and English; born Luthern and could care less who is Jewish or not.

Anyway here is where I got that from when I was debating it a month ago.

Judaism does not seek out converts, and actively discourages converts (because a person does not need to be a Jew to be righteous in G-d's eyes), but conversion to Judaism is possible.

A Jew is any person whose mother was a Jew or any person who has gone through the formal process of conversion to Judaism.

It is important to note that being a Jew has nothing to do with what you believe or what you do. A person born to non-Jewish parents who has not undergone the formal process of conversion but who believes everything that Orthodox Jews believe and observes every law and custom of Judaism is still a non-Jew, even in the eyes of the most liberal movements of Judaism, and a person born to a Jewish mother who is an atheist and never practices the Jewish religion is still a Jew, even in the eyes of the ultra-Orthodox. In this sense, Judaism is more like a nationality than like other religions, and being Jewish is like a citizenship. See What Is Judaism?

This has been established since the earliest days of Judaism. In the Torah, you will see many references to "the strangers who dwell among you" or "righteous proselytes" or "righteous strangers." These are various classifications of non-Jews who lived among Jews, adopting some or all of the beliefs and practices of Judaism without going through the formal process of conversion and becoming Jews. Once a person has converted to Judaism, he is not referred to by any special term; he is as much a Jew as anyone born Jewish.

This gives me a great idea though, everyone can convert to Judaism and gain Israeli citizenship and vote for peace...except the Israeli government put up some road blocks to prevent that.

Benji : If you mean me? Sorry , but I didn't mean that I thought you were Jewish, just that the "laws" that define who is Jewish in Israel are based on Jewish Religious law. Nobody else really cares if Jews believe religion is transferred by the mothers lineage, or by some test that the Orthodox Rabbis create criteria for. We are all really just humans and are citizens of countries not religions.

Actually to be honest I thought that you were Hindu/Sikh--well, I did start to wonder when you said Minnesota, but I have tons of Northern Indian Sikh friends and the are all name-ji.

as for horse hockey, no, not in actuality, but donkey basketball gives me hope.

As for your "great idea"--thought of that too, but the criteria are pretty strict. And I don't think I want to support the idea of a religious democracy, Seems like an oxymoron if the religion is used at all as a test, requirement, or really as anything more than decoration. Even that I am not thrilled about, but decorative is better than operative.

so the purpose of the world involving itself in identifying Jews is to make sure they don't:

steal land or claim to be a real democracy if religious law is part of the basis of becoming a new citizen.

but,

all people can identify with a religion as more or less than just their religion

So, based on the tyranny of majority rule, identifying and persecuting Jewish people for their religion in a country was ok, but Jews themselves have no right to identify themselves as Jewish people?

Interestingly, people overthrowing tyranny was the justification in the Declaration of Independence for the founding of the United States.

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation........

...... But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

whoa Irene:
put away the Twister Game.

you're the one saying Israel isn't a democracy.

Millerb, I was making a joke about being slapped, Sikh...well I could say my last name is Sing...but its not. I did have several Sikh friends in college, very interesting bunch.

As for playing Jew or not Jew. If someone born Jewish does not want to recognise themselves as being Jewish, fine by me. I kind of doubt someone these days would try and hide their ethnic background if they were born Jewish. Those who convert to Judaism ...by excepting that faith, I think they would consider themselves to be Jewish...their family might have other opinions on that.

So it is a matter of who is deciding if one is a Jew. But anyone who wants to be a Jew and fully convert to Judaism...even if they are Black, Hispanic, or Chinese, can consider themselves to be a Jew.

Irene he used Religious Democracy, it currently is not, but there are religious parties making up the Kennesit(sp) and they are growing.

One can argue that the US has this same thing but it is desguised by being called right wing repulican(as an example), but I too am a Rebublican but have little in common with the religious right. That is the difference, Israel has an Ultra Orthodox party and others that are truly religious in nature. So a fair argument can be made that Israel is partly a Religous Democracy...BiBi would have not been able to claim victory without them.

I like donkey basketball ...it is better than the timber wolves any day

J doyle, you need to read my article, "Is International Law relevant"...it gives a good synopsis of why this is not entirely "other people's land". And, if you live in the US, you are violating your very point...you are either living on Indian land or land belonging to the Mexican government. I notice there is no long line at reservations and at Mexican embassies of Americans dying to expunge their guilt by giving back their title to their own individual property.

religious parties making up the Kennesit(sp) and they are growing.

not growing,more or less the same size for years,actually lost some seats in the last elections.

BiBi would have not been able to claim victory without them.

he could if Kadima would have joined him,Israel is a free-democracy and a secular Nation.

J doyle, you need to read my article, "Is International Law relevant"...

Why would I read anti Islamic garbage?

And, if you live in the US, you are violating your very point...you are either living on Indian land

True but that happened so long ago there is no way to sort out proper ownership. Israel steals land to this day and that is what has to stop.

True but that happened so long ago there is no way to sort out proper ownership.

Time heals all wounds, my ass.

You're engaging in some barely-veiled juvenile and neocon-like American exceptionalism, excusing America's sins while condemning another country's exact same (alleged) sins.

Israel is stealing land right now from the Palestinians; how is that OK?.

Israel is stealing land right now from the Palestinians; how is that OK?.

a.) "The Palestinians" as a unit own nothing. They have no state and no right to anything as a group. Jordan has given up its claim to the West Bank.

b.) Israel is taking land, currently, from individual Palestinians. This is quite suboptimal. However, in many cases, such a seizure could be justified as eminent domain. Unless you oppose eminent domain, I don't think you can consistently oppose Israeli seizure of Palestinian land for roads, the wall, etc.

c.) Much of the land that is being "stolen" was owned by Jews before 1948. The rightful owners of that land, or their heirs, are Israelis. This land cannot be said to have been stolen from the Palestinians, since the land was owned by Jews, not Palestinians.

HI IDF ...I know that Israel is a secular democracy. I will take your word for the religious parties sizes and number seats held. That said the day might come (and this is speculative) where Israel being a "free" democracy might be controlled by the religious parties. What I base this on is that Reformed Jews and Secular Jews usually have the proverbial 2 kids and a dog. Orthodox Jews prefer to have larger families, secondary to "be fruitful and Multiply" gaining more more of a voting base.

I am not trying to blast Israel on this subject

a.) "The Palestinians" as a unit own nothing. They have no state and no right to anything as a group.

Because Zionists came from Europe and conquered them.

b.) Israel is taking land, currently, from individual Palestinians.

Its stealing land: use thew correct term.

c.) Much of the land that is being "stolen" was owned by Jews before 1948.

Most of the Israelis or their parents and grandparents were in Europe before 1948, The Palestinians were the ones living on that land. INH please try to keep up with the facts.

Right now, some people say that the US government is stealing land from Americans with zoning laws, eminent domain and environmental land use!

How is that OK, jdoyle?

And it really does look like Mexico might have something to be annoyed about. In the aftermath of the Mexican American War, May 26, 1848 (coincidence?):

Mexico lost more than 500,000 square miles (about 1,300,000 km²) of land, 55% of its national territory. This figure rises to over two thirds of its territory if Texas is included.

So is that OK?

Most of the Israelis or their parents and grandparents were in Europe before 1948,

Are you against immigration in general jdoyle? Or only to Israel?

is that OK?

Irene and Benji:

I guess historically lots of things have been ugly. One would think that this would help people learn from their mistakes and right now? Israel has religious requirements for complete citizenship and is an apartheid state, which by definition can never be a true democracy.

Because Zionists came from Europe and conquered them.

Or, more accurately, because the Jordanians came in 1948 and conquered what was supposed to be a Palestinian state.

Most of the Israelis or their parents and grandparents were in Europe before 1948, The Palestinians were the ones living on that land. INH please try to keep up with the facts.

Are you dumb or just too obstinate to do any research?

There were many Jews living in what it is now the West Bank before 1948. For instance, the Gush Etzion settlement bloc is built on land owned by Jews since the 1920s. Or, the Jewish quarter of Jerusalem itself was rid of its 2,000 Jews.

Clearly, jdoyle, you don't know anything about the actual conflict if you deny that there were Jews living in Israel before 1948 or that those Jews came not only from Europe but from throughout the Middle East as well. Please, do some research before telling lies everywhere.

Clearly, jdoyle, you don't know anything about the actual conflict if you deny that there were Jews living in Israel before 1948

I didnt say none: I said most came from Europe .
Now spin and lie some more. I have made my case on these boards any number of times, but the dishonest refuse to admit the truth: The Palestinians are native to Palestine now called Israel.

Israel has religious requirements for complete citizenship and is an apartheid state, which by definition can never be a true democracy.

A true democracy is simply majority rule, which leads to tyranny of the masses. Life is so unfair.

all countries have citizenship requirements and the apartheid state thing is just plain linguistics.

where are you getting yours?

I didnt say none: I said most came from Europe .

You said that most came from Europe and that the Palestinians, that is, the non-Jews, were the ones living on the land. It doesn't take a professor of linguistics/semantics (which, incidentally, I study) to tell that your implication was that Jews did not own any of the land.

If you acknowledge that there were Jews living in what is now Israel and owning land there, then your response to my statement of that above was completely irrelevant.

So, tell me again: How is land owned by Jews for almost 100 years "stolen" from the Palestinians?

millerb,

The overthrowing tyranny, freedom, justice and liberty- for all-- white, male, land owners who sold human being in slavery and stole land from the natives-- is Basic American history-- we work towards a more perfect union. It's not like we started out perfect.

Democracy is a form of government in which the right to govern is vested in the citizens of a country or a state and exercised through a majority rule.

The United States was founded as a representative republic with various checks and balances, to hopefully avoid the pitfalls of democracy. Below an assortment of famous quotes from the framers of the Constitution of the United States:

"Democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts and murders itself. There was never a democracy that 'did not commit suicide." Samuel Adams

"It has been observed that a pure democracy if it were practicable would be the most perfect government. Experience has proved that no position is more false than this. The ancient democracies in which the people themselves deliberated never possessed one good feature of government. Their very character was tyranny; their figure deformity." Alexander Hamilton

"We are a Republican Government. Real liberty is never found in despotism or in the extremes of Democracy." Alexander Hamilton

"Democracy is the most vile form of government... democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention: have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property: and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths." James Madison

How is land owned by Jews for almost 100 years "stolen" from the Palestinians?

So do thePalestinians have any moral right to live on the land that they have been cultivating and living on all their lives? Or should they sacrifice their land for the sake of Herzl's dream?

So do thePalestinians have any moral right to live on the land that they have been cultivating and living on all their lives? Or should they sacrifice their land for the sake of Herzl's dream?

It's a tough question. But let's just examine it from a perspective of treating both Jews and Arabs equally.

But first, I'm confused. Which land are you referring to?

Are you referring to land in the W. Bank owned by Jews since 1920 but cultivated by Palestinians? Are you referring to land in the W. Bank owned/used for a lifetime by Palestinians but "stolen" by Israelis? Or are you referring to land inside Israel proper formerly owned by Palestinians from which they left/were expelled (not getting into it.) in 1948/9?)

I'm happy to try to answer the question, but answer my clarification first.

Are you referring to land in the W. Bank owned/used for a lifetime by Palestinians but "stolen" by Israelis?

I guess this one.

And not just in the West Bank....what about the land that Palestinians lost in 1948 that they owned?

So numbers 2 and 3.

I'll get to it in the morning, I'm gonna go to sleep. But I will get back to you.

(Geez, Rob Ballew is getting rich off this thread.)

A lot of pretty cool discussion I must say. Newsvine get smarter here.

J doyle...your comment indicates that you are unaware of the contents of the article...I start it off by analyzing all of the allegations against Israel and acknowledging how each action contitutes a violation of International Law; I do the same for China and the United States; only at the end do I mention actions of Hamas..how can the truth be "anti-Islamic?

your comment indicates that you are unaware of the contents of the article.

What makes you an expert on anything?Your opinion that you are?

@quest: jdoyle has been on my ignore list for years. You can probably guess why.

@Squidward: In the abstract, it would be nice to say that Palestinians (individually, not as a group) have a right to the land that they own/ed pre-1948/pre-1967. However, we cannot practically do this. Why?

Because, as I'm sure you'll agree, equity and fairness are quite important. If we recognized a universal practical right to land in Israel proper or in the W. Bank settlement blocs for Palestinians who were in some way dispossessed (not getting into it.), then we'd likewise have to recognize a similar right for Jews displaced (or killed) from Europe in the Holocaust (note: Although reparations were paid, they were on the area of $3,000/victim, nowhere near the total value of property lost, let alone lives) or for Jews displaced from Muslim countries in the late 1940s and 1950s.

Such a plan would be completely infeasible. First, because we'd be essentially rewinding time to 1947 or so. The sheer number of people being forced to move around because someone else had a "moral right" to the land they had lived on (and thought they had clear title to) for near 60 years would be ridiculous. Second, the Mizrahi Jews certainly don't want to be plopped down in the middle of Baghdad or Cairo; that'd be near suicidal.

To "restore" the Palestinians' "moral rights" to their property without doing similarly for the Israelis would not only be inequitable, but absurdly repetitive, setting the Jews to wander the globe homeless once more.

So, the only solution is to simply declare today's possessors of land to be, in most cases, the legitimate owners. Evacuate the Israeli outposts that aren't adjacent to Israel, and draw the adjacent ones into Israel. Let the Israeli Arabs in the Triangle and elsewhere near the border choose to join Palestine or to stay in Israel. Call it a day.

@quest: jdoyle has been on my ignore list for years. You can probably guess why.

That's a little bit of a lie since you responded to me in 4.58 through 4.68 LOL

Most certainly!

Netanyahu is not a radical?

Netanyahu is not a radical?

Only if you define "radical" as protecting your homeland and her people!

Only if you define "radical" as protecting your homeland and her people!

That's similar to what Hamas and Hezbollah say when Israel calls them "radical terrorists".

Netanyahu is not a radical?

I know, I said radicals he is appeasing, not civilized leaders he's pestering ;) You know radicals like Ahmadinejad, Hamas, Fatah, etc.

Anyone who can bulldoze a family's house, take their land, and then declare them "unwilling to compromise" because they want their land back - that's a radical.

That's similar to what Hamas and Hezbollah say when Israel calls them "radical terrorists".

Um...yeah...but Hamas and Hezbollah are terrorist organizations that lob bombs and send people strapped with explosives into Israel to blow up their innocent citzens! EVER SO SLIGHT difference, woudn't you say?

Only if you define "radical" as protecting your homeland and her people!

That's similar to what Hamas and Hezbollah say when Israel calls them "radical terrorists".

Kwame,

Really because Hamas the terrorist group, has admitted their terrorist acts. So for them to say they are not radicals, is news to me.

In addition, if they really took care of their people they wouldn't be using them as shields and they wouldn't be telling them to blow themselves up. If that's not radical, I don't know what is.

Anyone who can bulldoze a family's house, take their land, and then declare them "unwilling to compromise" because they want their land back - that's a radical.

But what if that family who were kicked off the land only lived there for a few years, after having kicked the Jews off that land in 1948?

This is the situation that's taken place with a lot of "Palestine," where Jews bought the land before 1948 and were expelled by the Jordanians in 1948. Any "solution" which seeks to expel Jews from the land that they or their ancestors owned is unjust.

Further, it is absurdly hypocritical to kick one group of people (i.e. the Israelis) out in order to remedy the kicking-out of another group, particularly if the first group happened to have been kicked out of Germany, Poland, Morocco, Egypt, Iraq or Yemen, variously. No solution which involves kicking out Israelis from the West Bank would be fair unless it allows them the property they left behind -- and this solution would be stupid, because it would obviously not work to drop a bunch of Israelis into Iraq or Egypt.

Really because Hamas the terrorist group, has admitted their terrorist acts.

Why link propaganda when the actual charter of Hamas is available?

Why link propaganda when the actual charter of Hamas is available?

Why indeed? Hamas' actual charter includes the hateful passages referenced in the mideastweb article, for instance the references to the hateful forgery The Protocols of the Elders of Zion and the claim that Islam will destroy Israel. Hamas' charter proves the point that Hamas is incapable of making peace.

Straight from the horse's mouth.

cryptoanarchist,

Why link propaganda when the actual charter of Hamas is available?

lol! Propaganda? But how can it be propaganda when it basically states what your link states? Wait, I got it, it's the source. OK then from the link you provided.

Here are the objectives of Hamas:

These are the motives. As to the objectives: discarding the evil, crushing it and defeating it, so that truth may prevail, homelands revert [to their owners], calls for prayer be heard from their mosques, announcing the reinstitution of the Muslim state. Thus, people and things will revert to their true place.

Just in case you are confused it's the same thing the other article stated. Hamas goals are to take over Israel and make it an Islamic state by whatever means they need to. They refer to Israel as evil, and state they will crush and defeat Israel.

Funny they say nothing about peace or about the two state, guess that's all BS that they try to get people like yourself to believe. Seems like they achieved that goal with you.

Its propaganda because it wasn't written by the source and it calls itself a "Hamas charter" when its not.

You realize you are on the freakin Internet, right? Anyone can say anything about anyone else and claim to have authority. Just because you link something doesn't make it at all true or bonifide.

When possible in the future, please try to check what you are linking so that its not some made up bs when the actual information is available. Thats all I ask. I realize its diffcult to check source validity, but in a case like this, its rather obvious that you linked propaganda rather than a bonifide source and if you spent 10 second on Google you could have verified that yourself.

cryptoanarchist,

Seems you have some selective reading problems. You want to cry propaganda, as if what I linked were lies, when the link you provided says the SAME damn thing! You are too funny man. Get back to me when you have something better to say.

The difference is that your "Hamas Charter" is prepended by an "Introduction" written by a web master in 2009. The actual charter doesn't start until around page 7.

While the actual charter is also anti-zionist, it doesn't talk openly of terrorism like the bogus "Introduction" does.

Like I said, just link the actual source documents and check your sources, please. There's no reason to be linking some bs written by a webmaster in 2009, when the actual charter is available.

And now that the Palestinians know that Prez Hussein is on their side they'll probably step up their attacks on Isreal thinking that he'll applaud their efforts.

Who's President Hussein??

Irene:

well then that proves my point that Israel is not one

http://www.indypendent.org/2007/12/09/israeli-democracy-arabs-need-not-apply/

http://www.counterpunch.org/cook01252003.html

http://www.greenleft.org.au/2002/494/28193

http://www.counterpunch.org/gordon02032004.html

all countries have citizenship requirements and the apartheid state thing is just plain linguistics.

If religion is the factor it is apartheid

inh
here is how the Zionists got the land:

yehida massacre
khisas massacre
qazaza

massacre
al-sheikh village massacre
deir yassin massacre
naser al-din massacre
beit daras massacre
the dahmash mosque massacre
dawayma massacre
sharafat massacre
kibya massacre
kafr qasem massacre
al-sammou' massacre
the sabra and shatila massacre
oyon qara massacre
al-aqsa mosque massacre
the ibrahimi mosque massacre
the jabalia massacre
eretz checkpoint massacre

http://www.iol.ie/~afifi/BICNews/Harbinger/harbinger18.htm

If apartheid is your analogy, where is your Mandela?

doyle, without spending time to refute your list line-by-line, the Sabra and Shantila massacres were carried out in Lebanon by Christain militiamen and involved no transfer or seizure of Palestinian land. If this is representative of the quality of the "facts" you rely on, you might as well pack up, because if you can't even bother to check them, no one will bother to listen to them.

I think the list goes from 1947-1994, yet somehow completely overlooks the Arab invasion of Israel in the War of Independence, the flight of virtually ALL the Jews from the surrounding countries of the middle east, the 1956 Sinai War, the Six Day war in 1967, the 1973 Yom Yippur War..........

And of course, doesn't even address suicide bombers or the issue of whether more Palestinians were killed by Palestinians in internal violence than by Israelis.

How so very "white" of him to give away what wasn't his!

Kwame, are you race-baiting? WTF? No use for you on here! Get lost!

#6.1 marked as inflammatory!

Maybe Obama missed when Fatah stated that their goal is NOT peace but to conquer Israel.

There are so many things wrong with that link I don't know what to begin.

1. First of all, she's hardly a Palestinian leader. She's not a President, she's not a Prime Minister. In fact, who the hell is she? Is she influential?

2. By Palestine, could it be possible she means West Bank and Gaza? As in a Palestinian nation?

3. The source is PMW. Seriously?? Do I have to even address the source?

Thanks for the propaganda Iluvmyblog

1. First of all, she's hardly a Palestinian leader. She's not a President, she's not a Prime Minister. In fact, who the hell is she? Is she influential?

Did you read the article in the link? It tells you who she is, but since you are too lazt her name is Kifah Radaydeh, and she is a Fatah official.

2. By Palestine, could it be possible she means West Bank and Gaza? As in a Palestinian nation?

No.

3. The source is PMW. Seriously?? Do I have to even address the source?

The PMW seeded the video but the video was recorded the Palestinian Authority TV. Read the article next time won't you.

Thanks for the propaganda Iluvmyblog

It's not propaganda. Though I know you do like it when it comes from Hamas, I'll be sure to link that for you next time ;)

No.

Unless you have proof that she specifically meant Israel and the West Bank and Gaza, I don't have to believe your side of the story.

It's not propaganda.

PMW is a known propaganda machine. Yes, it was recorded on PA tv. Funny, how PMW only put out part of the interview. Hmmm...maybe they have an agenda??

Unless you have proof that she specifically meant Israel and the West Bank and Gaza, I don't have to believe your side of the story.

You don't believe anything that doesn't support your side of the story, so what else is new...

PMW is a known propaganda machine. Yes, it was recorded on PA tv. Funny, how PMW only put out part of the interview. Hmmm...maybe they have an agenda??

They have an agenda because they don't support Hamas...?

They have an agenda because they don't support Hamas...?

Nope they have an agenda because, like in this particular case, they clipped certain parts of the interview. If that Fatah official was really anti-peace, why not show the whole interview? Maybe because it will give some context? Their agenda is to make all Palestinians look like intolerant violent people. That's how they make a living and many people love them for it so they can pass on the propaganda.

Certainly you wouldn't call PMW a fair and balanced source, would you??

If you want to believe in their propaganda, you are definitely free to do so. I'm not going to fall for it.

Squidward,

You can pretend all day that you don't know what Fatah's goals are or what Hamas goals. There aren't enough soundbites in the world to change what they really are. People see their actions and motives which tell a lot about them.

So go ahead and play the propaganda excuse all you want, you know and I know they supported terrorism against Israel and we know they do not seek peace with Israel. That's the point and that's the fact.

There's a difference between supporting (or having supported) terrorism against Israel and not wanting to seek peace with Israel.

Saying that Fatah doesn't want peace with Israel is preposterous. I don't care what this woman said, if she said it out of context or not. It is true Fatah did - and is still doing - a lot of pretty bad things. But they've clearly stated over and over again that they wanted peace.

People see their actions and motives which tell a lot about them.

And when's the last time Fatah organized a terrorist activity?...you linked propaganda and I commented on it being propaganda..if you don't like it, stop posting propaganda.

crazypenguin,

You may not care what she said, but I do, as she is speaking for Fatah and is a Fatah official. And Fatah is supposed be more moderate than Hamas.

Also, she is not the only one to say such a thing. A Fatah commander, Muhammad Dahlan, has stated...

In the interview, Dahlan was asked about reports that Fatah was demanding that Hamas recognize Israel's right to exist as a precondition for the establishment of a Palestinian "unity government." He called the reports "misleading" and said Hamas was "putting words in our mouths."

Dahlan added: "They say that Fatah has asked them to recognize Israel's right to exist and this is a big deception. For the one thousandth time, I want to reaffirm that we are not asking Hamas to recognize Israel's right to exist. Rather, we are asking Hamas not to do so because Fatah never recognized Israel's right to exist."

He explained that it was the PLO, and not Fatah, which recognized Israel's right to exist when the Oslo Accords were signed in 1993.

link

So saying Fatah doesn't want peace isn't really preposterous. You know what though, I may start believing that they really want peace when they start punishing terrorists, assist in stopping border attacks, and rocket launches.

Squidward this comment is also addressed to you.

Can either of you two, provide any sources of how Fatah has changed since their days of terrorism? I'd like to compare the new Fatah with the old Fatah.

Can either of you two, provide any sources of how Fatah has changed since their days of terrorism?

The answer is within the question itself. It no longer conducts any terrorist activities at all.

Can you currently tell me what is Dahlan's current political position?

And what about this poll:
http://www.maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=212540

Two thirds of Palestinians support a peace settlement with Israel, 77%, and 70% would agree to disarm all factions and leave security in the hands of the Palestinian Authority security services

Squidward,

That is not an efficient answer. I asked you to provide some resources supporting your claim that Fatah has changed. Since you can not provide this, then my views are still the same. I have yet to see Fatah punish terrorists, or assist in stopping border attacks, or the rocket attacks. As far as I am concerned they still have internal anarchy and hold the same ideologies.

The answer is within the question itself

Philosopher and cartoon character, you never cease to amaze me Squidward =}

iluvmyblog,
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1081029.html

and can you address these two points

Can you currently tell me what is Dahlan's current political position?

And what about this poll:
http://www.maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=212540

Two thirds of Palestinians support a peace settlement with Israel, 77%, and 70% would agree to disarm all factions and leave security in the hands of the Palestinian Authority security services

Philosopher and cartoon character, you never cease to amaze me Squidward =}

Thanks, Davoh

You're the man squid

You have a point. But you need to also flip it 180 degrees. So, you see a lot of Jewish people selling their land to Palestinians? You and everyone else know pure free market mechanisms can't be allowed to rule this case. The Palestinian territories need protection because it's people have been crammed into ghettos, refugee camps and even exile for 50+ years, their homes bought up, occupied and bulldozed.

Jerusalem is not a settlement, though, Netanyahu is right. Jerusalem is a hot potato - it should be an international city and not part of a Palestinian or Israeli state. It's the only way to satisfy the Palestinians and the Israelis.

Don't forget the Christians in your plans. Its our most sacred city, too!

I live in the West Bank.

Mar7aba bro or Madam....I got a lot of family in Gaza.

And they keep on taking in people from all over the world, whether they be refugees from Darfur , exiled Jews from the Middle East and Europe, or Palestinians from Gaza.

Really people from Gaza? Last I heard, unless you're about to die from cancer, a Gazan isn't allowed across the border to Israel, let alone get a citizenship. As far as a melting pot goes, Israel is nowhere near as diverse as the US, but racism is definitely alive and kicking in both countries, as it is in all countries. But let's not pretend racism in Israel doesn't exist.

The occupation continues. Palestein continues to suffer. Israel continues to encourage the suffering. We are the occupying race and we set the rules.

Israel, back the f@ck off.

cryptoanarchist > I said Israelis and Palestinians not Jews and Muslims :)

and Squidward: ahlen!

crazypenguin,

exile to Darfur refugees? Really?

Yes, I said they took in Darfur refugees, and granted them citizenship even when they come from an enemy state. You think that Sudan would do the same for Israeli Jews? I think not.

exile to Palestinians from Gaza?

Not exiled Palestinians, just Palestinians from Gaza.

Some 250,000 Palestinians currently reside in Jerusalem. Only 12,000 of them have sought to obtain an Israeli citizenship since 1967, an average of about 300 new citizens a year.

link

What, is this news to you?

As a Palestinian I have no way of going to Israel - and I'm lucky, I live in the West Bank.

Really???? You have no way but those Palestinians did... hm interesting.

Is it because you don't want to go to Israel and become an Israeli because other Palestinians will view it as treason?

As accepting Israeli citizenship was viewed by many within the community as tantamount to treason, most Palestinians opted to remain permanent residents and enjoy the benefits of living under Israeli sovereignty – full welfare rights, municipal voting rights and unrestricted movement - without putting their loyalty to the Palestinian Authority into question. The average Palestinian family in East Jerusalem currently receives a $770 monthly stipend from Israel.

link

That's interesting....good enough to live there but not willing to become a citizen because other Palestinians will see it as treason.

And how exactly is it getting any better "by the day" in the West Bank, pray tell?

When did I say that? I wouldn't, Hamas is still around. How can it get any better?

Now you say that you are Palestinian. Do you approve of Hamas action against Israel? Do you think only Arabs citizens in Jerusalem should be able to build and not Jewish citizens?

Nothing of what you say is news to me. You're just amalgamating situations which are totally different and this shows how little you know of the situation.

The Palestinians living in Jerusalem have never lived in the West Bank or Gaza. They are Jerusalem residents, who don't have a Palestinian or Israeli passport - they only have a Jerusalem ID. A person holding a Palestinian passport is not allowed to legally be in Israel.

I don't think taking an Israeli passport is treason for these people - in fact, I think it's quite stupid of them to refuse the passport. But I can also understand their situation - they don't want to live in Palestine proper because the living conditions there are awful but they don't feel comfortable taking an Israeli passport because they consider this as giving up their fight.

This is not my situation - I hold a Palestinian passport. Don't mix everything up. I'm legally Palestinian - and legally forbidden from going to Israel. The Arab residents of Jerusalem aren't legally Palestinian.

I'm also not comfortable with your questions. Why do you suppose I should approve of Hamas acting against Israel? I don't. I'm very saddened that what could have been an acceptable fight against occupation turned into religious-driven terrorism. I believe Arab citizens as well as Jewish citizens should be able to build and live in Jerusalem - and in the rest of the country.

I'm sorry, you're right, you didn't say anything about the West Bank, IDfeb did. My bad.

As for the Darfur refugees :

and you're right Sudan wouldn't do the same for Israeli Jews... but did I ever say Israel was all bad? In fact I believe Israel could be a role model - to a certain extent - for Palestinian society.

Don't jump to conclusions because I said I was Palestinian and because I said negative things about Israel.

Darfur: I wanted to post a link to a Haaretz article but I can't do it.

I'll just quote:

Last month the bill, with its Orwell-worthy name, sailed through its first Knesset plenum reading by an astounding 59-1 vote. The legislation ran to 24 pages of microbial font print - verbose enough to persuade overwhelmed legislators to vote for it rather than read it.

Many of the 59 ].

But the moral red line that borders fascism is crossed later on, in a short clause marked "Assistance to Infiltration."

"The punishment of one who aids the person who commits a crime according to this law, in order to ease his infiltration or his illegal stay in Israel, will be as the punishment designated for the principal commission of the crime."

In other words, if doctors or nurses abide by their professional oaths and administer medical treatment to a refugee lacking permits to stay in Israel, their prison sentence could be the same as that of the refugee - five, seven, even 20 years.

that's a snip from: Will Israel grant asylum to fascism? - Haaretz

Thank you :) How do you link to another article?

Nothing of what you say is news to me.

Sorry, but then why did you act like it was...?

The Palestinians living in Jerusalem have never lived in the West Bank or Gaza. They are Jerusalem residents, who don't have a Palestinian or Israeli passport - they only have a Jerusalem ID. A person holding a Palestinian passport is not allowed to legally be in Israel.

Are you sure about that?

Palestinian Demography

105,000 PALESTINIANS received Israeli ID cards via marriage (since Oslo 1993) and are doubly-counted (by the PA as well).

210,000 JERUSALEM ARABS, who benefit from Israel’s social security, are doubly-counted (as Israeli Arabs by Israel and as West Bankers by the PA).

link

I don't think taking an Israeli passport is treason for these people - in fact, I think it's quite stupid of them to refuse the passport.

I agree.

This is not my situation - I hold a Palestinian passport. Don't mix everything up. I'm legally Palestinian - and legally forbidden from going to Israel. The Arab residents of Jerusalem aren't legally Palestinian.

Sorry to hear about your situation, but I don't understand. How are some Palestinians able to travel into Israel and be granted citizenship but you are not? What's the difference?

I'm also not comfortable with your questions. Why do you suppose I should approve of Hamas acting against Israel? I don't.

Don't get offended or take it personal. I just want to know if you agree or not because many do and it makes a difference to me if you do. And I am glad that you don't.

I'm sorry, you're right, you didn't say anything about the West Bank, IDfeb did. My bad.

Not a problem ;)

and you're right Sudan wouldn't do the same for Israeli Jews...

Mm hm. I know.

but did I ever say Israel was all bad?

Well when you stated that I should go to Israel; I took it as you were saying Israel is a bad place. I guess I was wrong my assumption, since you think they are actually a role model.

Don't jump to conclusions because I said I was Palestinian and because I said negative things about Israel.

It's not really because you are Palestinian, it's more so of what you said and the way I took it. Although to be honest I did wonder if there would be bias since you are because of the whole Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Can you blame me?

After you are with Newsvine for a time (like 30 to 60 days) they give you extra tools in the comment box. I hope you stick around.

Arab residents of Jerusalem do not hold a Palestinian passport. They couldn't hold one, I say it again, it is illegal for a person holding a palestinian passport to go out of the West Bank or Gaza and into Israel. The only way to do so is to get a permit that the Israelis give you for special occasions.

I did not know there were as much Palestinians who received Israeli IDs via marriage. Interesting. But the point here is not whether it is possible or not to get an ID (and an ID is not a passport mind you) via marriage but getting it for living in the country. Not all holders of the Jerusalem resident ID ("Jerusalem Arabs") benefit from Israel's social security.

Three situations, then: Arab Israeli (an Arab who has the Israeli nationality), Jerusalem Arab (resident of Jerusalem who is allowed to move freely in Israel but has no passport whether Israeli or Palestinian) and Palestinians proper who hold a Palestinian passport and ID card and who aren't legally or officially allowed into Israel.

Obviously it's quite complicated and not as clear cut as that but these are the main categories. I stand by what I said and what I live everyday - there is no way for me as a Palestinian to go to Israel ... unless, maybe, I get married to an Israeli or forfeit my Palestinian nationality (and even then it's not a given).

Many Palestinians do not condone Hamas or what Hamas does. Really. Talk to some, you'll be surprised.

When I said you should go to Israel (or was it Palestine? Can't honestly remember what I said) I meant you should see what is going on there - and having an antagonistic attitude to things is always a bad idea. Palestinians aren't all radical Islamists who want to blow Israel up. Very few of them are. Sure, we bear a grudge towards Israel, and sometimes it expresses itself very violently, but can anyone honestly blame us? I don't think one can. We could do better - civil protest, boycotts, etc. to fight the occupation. But when you've lived your whole life in a small town regularly raided by the Israelis and when you feel the world has no idea what is going on you're desperate to be heard and feel that things like civil protest don't work.

Meloney > Thanks!

crazypenguin,

The situations are rather complicated, but my point is and has been that Israel is not only made up of Jewish people, but much more. Israel is being portrayed as just a Jewish state and its not. And it's done so to make Israel and Israelis come off as racist.

there is no way for me as a Palestinian to go to Israel ... unless, maybe, I get married to an Israeli or forfeit my Palestinian nationality (and even then it's not a given).

I'm assuming that's just how the citizenship deal works. People have to go through a process before granted citizenship. That's how it is in the US too.

Anyway, I don't think all Palestinians are radical, that would be crazy. I know there are many civil non-radical Palestinians, as well many radical ones. My protest is against the radical people, not the civil, and sadly I know the good people do get caught up with the bad.

Also, I think civil protests and non-violent acts would make all the difference. I really don't see how rockets being launched into Israeli communities or suicide bombers will be seen as progressive or a non-terrorist act. Everyone needs to understand that Israel is here to stay, and if there is any way to have peace they need to get rid the radicals who attempt to conquer all of Israel and figure out a realistic solution because both sides have suffered enough.

No this is not how it works. I'm not saying there's a procedure to get a nationality, this is normal. I'm saying I just can't go to Israel. It's different.It means Israel is restricting my right to move from one place to another because I have a Palestinian ID.

Israel is a Jewish State, that is the whole point of its existence. Yes there are minorities (Arab Muslims, Arab Christians, Armenians, etc.) but this does not change the fact that Israel is a Jewish country created for Jews. This is no melting pot.

I agree with the rest of what you said.

crazypenguin,

Yes, Israel was created for Jewish people. Why...because these people faced persecution from all over the world. They had no place to go. They were exiled from everywhere, exiled from their homelands which was why Israel was created.

Today yes there are minorities but to say it's not a melting pot, I just don't know how you can. But you have your notions and I have mine. For the most part I think everyone knows there needs to be a practical solution to resolve the conflict and hopefully it comes sooner than later.

For the most part I think everyone knows there needs to be a practical solution to resolve the conflict and hopefully it comes sooner than later.

Such a solution would best be arrived at by negotiations between the interested parties, or open warfare.

Long term peace in the ME requires much more than just Israeli-Palestinian treaties. What about freedom, democracy, equal rights, rule of law and open media in all countries of the ME?

What about freedom, democracy, equal rights, rule of law and open media in all countries of the ME?

Including Israel, OSA?

Oopps I did it again: maybe that should have read WKB, not OSA.

I really need to work on my typing!

these people should just get along.. fighting over baseless things...

I know, right. I've been telling them that for 2000 years, good luck

You must be very old.

Ohh sonny, these old bones have seen better days

He does know stuff. That is why he got elected, he knows stuff. And, he is going to use it. Kind of like Schwarzenegger, he knows stuff too.

He does know stuff. That is why he got elected, he knows stuff.

yes many agree with his plans for the getting of the Palestinians.

Seamus,

I am wondering after the two thousand years, two thousand mind you, not just sixty-one, that Jews were tortured by Catholics, Lutherans, Protestants:

pushed in ghettos originally by Catholics and later Lutherans,

tattooed with numbers by Nazis (a more distorted form of Christianity and the French Revolution),

had patches sown on their clothes to stand out at the demands of the Pope of Catholics,

suffered limited movement from their homes again by Christian religious leaders at the point of vicious beatings and murder,

villages raided and families sliced to death by the sword of Greek Orthodox Christian Cossack terrorists on horseback,

murdered without provocation by frenzied mobs incited by Jesuit Catholics,

children stolen out of the arms of their mothers and given over to Catholic orphanages,

ritually murdered for a hundred years by the French during Easter in Cathedrals,

expulsion from every European (and most Arab ones) country after having everything stolen from them,

suffered laws against the repair or rebuilding of synagogues that when the synagogue fell from rot the land was confiscated by the Catholic Church,

being herded together in synagogues and burned to the ground during the crusades and in Nazi Germany as well as Poland and other EU countries,

Jewish children murdered in front of their parents then the parents murdered,

and you are concerned about Israeli Arabs?

Not one, no, not one Catholic, Protestant, or Lutheran went on record to assist Jews in any way during these times. This hatred of Jews, these accusations of deicide, these notions that some how Jesus Christ, the savior of all mankind, was murdered by Jews, continues in so many forms it shows that man has not progressed other than fancy technology, faster cars, and lots more beer choices.

Why, the whole 'Jesus murdered by Jew's thing is a myth concocted by the church for power, money, and domination over the populace, and taught for two thousand years. These centuries of repeated lies has created this debilitating mindset in many millions of people. This is regardless now of who spouts the usual diatribes, whether that person claims to be religious, agnostic, or atheist. This kind of person promotes this same hatred not just on Newsvine seeds but in many other media sources.

When the Pope can decide - over God - who gets into heaven and who goes to hell, this has a powerful effect on people who are not intelligent enough, or fearless enough to question the Christian or Muslims authority that dominated their lives from the cradle to the grave. The Catholic Church was the great evil on earth, and the Muslims are quickly becoming the next as Catholicism with all its rituals, its laws, its control over many millions dissipates into the mist.

If the Israeli Arabs are suffering that much, they can cross the border and live in the West Bank, or Gaza, but they don't, and why don't they, because even in Israel they have more freedom of movement, education, and opportunities than they would ever have in Palestine, Syria, Iran, or any Islamic nation on the face of this earth. Much more than any Jews would have in an Arab or Islamic country, no doubt about it. In fact, in Yemen, Jews were killed two months ago for just being Jewish. How may more Jews are murdered in the closed media states of Syria, and Iran without any one knowing about it?

Oh, I forgot to mention, that in 1919 when the British screwed up the Balfour document and limited Jewish immigration to Israel is when the first two Arab massacres of Jews began this movement toward a creation of Israel. Then, the Brits, in all of the pompous glory and sanctimonious bull@!$%#, stopped Jewish immigration to Israel at the point of a gun mind you, at the time of Hitlers push to murder Jews outright in 1941. These English gentlemen (LOL) also refusal to allow Jews a safe harbor in England. The USA joined in as well and allowed no immigration of Jews, which showed Roosevelt's antisemitic side very broadly.

So, what do you say to that, Seamus?

wait, I don't get it. Jews were murdered and persecuted and tortured for the past 2000 years therefore the Israeli Arabs can go to hell?

This is so dumb.

Oh, also, you should remember that Zionist settlers in Palestine from 1933 onward sometimes refused German Jewish refugees and even sent them back to Nazi Germany. Were the Zionists antisemitic?I can't really see the point of your argument.

However I do agree on one thing: Israeli Arabs have far more rights in Israel than Jews do in some Arab countries. But this just goes to show that Israel should be true to its founding values and give them full equal rights - and truly reach out to the Palestinians.

cracypenguin, those Jews in 1919 and 1920, were victims of two Arab massacres. In addition, those Jews you said were sent back, that was done by the British. Look up the Peel White Paper which severly restricted Jewish immigration. Yes, the Brits forced boats of Jews back to Europe, they denied Jews the right to come to 'Palestine' knowing that Germany was going to murder them.

If Zionists refused to settle Jews I would like a reference. In fact, when the German Jews settled in 'Palestine' they became very involved in business, and began selling German made equipment, and machinery to the Arab and Jewish farmers in the area. The British stopped the immigration of German Jews, then refused to allow them to sell German made materials which competed with their own shoddy equipment.

It was, and is, all about the DEAL. Look up the Peel Commission, and the White Paper, you can get this and other information in the British National Archives. And, whether you agree or not, I think you will find it interesting. Its nothing to join, and you can search archives and get access to certain materials.

My source is Tom Segev's Elvis in Jerusalem. To be honest I don't have any other sources for that fact I just took his word for it. At some point he mentions how some German Jews were deemed unsuitable for life in Palestine and were sent back by the Zionists to Germany.

I know about the White Paper - but thanks for the BNA tip, it's very interesting.

Again, how is Isriel holding the West Bank, Gaza, and Golan Heights any different from Saddam moving into Kuwait?

Something to do with the fact that Iraq attacked Kuwait in 1991, but Syria and Jordan (et al.) attacked Israel in 1967.

That is, Iraq went to war for conquest. Israel went to war not to get pushed into the sea by Arab armies.

Israel went to war not to get pushed into the sea by Arab armies.

Projection. Israelis pushed Palestinians into the sea.

In terms of 1967, I specifically remember Israel firing the first shots.

Projection. Israelis pushed Palestinians into the sea.

Yeah. The Israelis won. That's why they didn't get pushed into the sea.

And I have better things to do than go to your propaganda websites.

In terms of 1967, I specifically remember Israel firing the first shots.

True, but I think you selected those words purposefully. Let's not get into whether the Egyptian blockade of the Straits of Tiran was sufficient casus belli to attack Egypt preemptively.

But if you'll recall what I wrote, Israel did not fire the first shots against Syria or Jordan. Both of those countries attacked Israel first, Israel not being eager to start a war on multiple fronts. And the Golan and the West Bank were conquered from Syria and Jordan, respectively, and with regards to these states, Israel did not fire the first shot.

. Let's not get into whether the Egyptian blockade of the Straits of Tiran was sufficient casus belli to attack Egypt preemptively.

Good because I'm sure as you predicted, we probably would just reach to a final point of disagreement on that.

what you apparently have forgotten, Squidward,is the closing off of Israel's only sea access to the south by the Egyptians and the massing of troops by all of the surrounding Arab countries. Don't fault Israel for not lying down and taking it.

didn't hear of any drownings, Meloney. They got pushed into Gaza, where they currently reside.

what you apparently have forgotten, Squidward,is the closing off of Israel's only sea access to the south by the Egyptians and the massing of troops by all of the surrounding Arab countries. Don't fault Israel for not lying down and taking it.

If you'd read my comment, you'd know that we're not getting into that, although I obviously agree with you. We've had that discussion here before and no one's a-budgin'. It's pointless to waste time arguing it again.
In reality, international law is flaky and inconsistent. What's considered legitimate casus belli in one circumstance is illegitimate in another, depending on which side of which war is more popular. (Sort of like middle school.)
Ain't no point getting into it.

Insert Name, sorry, but I posted before I had a chance to read your post; I was responding to Squidward independently at the time.; however, in any case, the closure of the strait was just the proximate provocation; israeli intelligence on the ground, in part from having Mossad agents placed high in the Egyptian high command, indicated that the Arabs were mobilizing for a huge attack. This is important, because people can always dither about the closure being sufficient cause, but knowing of an imminent attack is another kettle of fish entirely.

israeli intelligence on the ground, in part from having Mossad agents placed high in the Egyptian high command, indicated that the Arabs were mobilizing for a huge attack.

I think the whole Egypt-just-kicked-the-UN-peacekeepers-out-of-the-Sinai thing may have played a role in that too. ;-)

possibly, but they knew ahead of time thanks to a Mossad agent who became close friends with several members of the Egyptian high command; he dined with them, traveled with them, rode horses with them, etc.

IV your unsourced post is as meaningless as the rest of your posts.

It came from your source.....LOL LOL LOL

Read or have somebody read it to you the talkback section

Have a nice day

In other words, Shlomo Sand is full of it.

This is from my source?

IV where is this in my link?

This scholar, working outside his field, seems to be relying on inferior sources. For example, the notion that "there is no etymological connection between the German Jewish language of the Middle Ages and Yiddish" is counterfactual as anyone who knows old Yiddish texts or the history of Yiddish literature can testify.
That a team of prominent geneticists have proven that 60% of Sephardic Jews who are Cohens and 55% of Ashkenazi Cohens all share 46 chromosemes and can be traced back to a common ancesestor 3,200 years ago. In other words,

Your source even mispelled a bunch of words; great source there iV LOL

I think doyle's main function in this discussion is comic relief.

Thanks, ralphie, I appreciate the positive comments. We, as a planet, cannot afford continued hate filled governments bent on Genocide. I don't have a personal grudge against the Catholic Church as it is today, and I think in its own sluggish way, it is trying to change its ways. But the worst has been done.

I agree with you, I do not have the facts on Islamic genocides on Jews, but I know they have happened. Lots of people want Israel to be destroyed, but this is a pipedream, these five million people are not going away, but they are in danger everyday of being attacked and severely wounded. Just because they are surrounded by 130 million Arabs (last week I was told in a post it was one billion Arabs) they are not all hostile.

If you go by some of these comments here and on other sites and the general shape of the world, we are heading into a horrible period and I think that maybe we deserve it.

Lets hope this doesn't happen.

these five million people are not going away

7,411,000 and growing mate...

PLO executive committee member Zahir Muhsein admitted in a March 31, 1977 interview with a Dutch newspaper Trouw.

"The Palestinian people do not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct 'Palestinian people' to oppose Zionism. "

Most of the PLO would disagree with him, including the PLO charter. Palestinians would agree with him. Historians would disagree with him.

We must unleash the wrath of G-D against the enemies of Israel and those collaborating with the enemy.

If that's the case, why don't you stay at home and let God do all the work. Since, you know, he's going to unleash his wrath against "enemies of Israel"

jay's post is spammy - copying and pasting - around the net. Here's a sampling:

http://worldblog.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2009/06/04/1953708.aspx

http://www.forward.com/articles/110382/

http://calitreview.com/153 (that one is from October 2008 - stale already ; )

Thanks Meloney. I shoulda known.

thanks Meloney:
I was getting worried too. Thought maybe I needed to call the paramedics.