link (http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/spages/449338.html)


The Catholic Church condemned anti-Zionism as a cover for anti-Semitism by means of a joint statement issued by a forum of Catholic-Jewish intellectuals this week.

The announcement was made at a gathering of religious, academic and other leading Jewish and Catholic figures in Buenos Aires.

"We oppose anti-Semitism in any way and form, including anti-Zionism that has become of late a manifestation of anti-Semitism," the statement said.


so now, joining Martin Luther King jr. (http://christianactionforisrael.org/antiholo/ml_king.html), the Catholic Church adds its voice to sanity.

i heard many dismiss the MLK jr. letter as a hoax, but i haven't seen proof of that... just ridiculous claims by anti-Semites and anti-Zionists

anyway, how about that?

This is the first time that anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism have been equated by the Catholic Church.
...
Ilan Steinberg, director of the World Jewish Congress, one of the forum's organizers, described the joint statement as "an historic moment."
[it is]
...
"In the past, Zionism was equated with racism, and this statement turns anti-Zionism statements to a form of racism," a Jewish leader said in New York.

The statement joins a prior European Union announcement and UN declaration of war against anti-Semitism as part of a global front fighting the scourge.


so, i wonder how brave the western world will be against al-Qaeda and pseudo-'palestinian' terror, and stick to this...

btw...
Zionizm = Jews going back home to their land

Ah yes the Roman Catholic Church has finally bowed down to the pressure from Zionist organizations. Unfortunately for Zionists the situation is stable; Zionism is not and cannot be equated with Judaism. I will take this laughable quote from the article as an example:

"In the past, Zionism was equated with racism, and this statement turns anti-Zionism statements to a form of racism," a Jewish leader said in New York.

Against what race may I ask? Oh yes there is no race to be spoken of why of course. The Catholic Church should really not be the place to be looking for substantiation for ones cause. The “intelligentsia” of the Catholic Church obviously didn’t read the works of Zionism itself now did they? Considering that Zionism needs Anti-Semitism to exist, and Zionist intellectuals make no bones about it. Really I should say what a propaganda coup for the Zionists, trying to extend the “guilt clause” on the millions of non pseudo-Jews. Quite frankly the biggest Anti-Semites are the self-hating Jews themselves, otherwise known as Zionists.

If as you rashly contend, anti-zionism = antijudeosemitism, then zionism would equate to being Jewish, which would mean that all Jews want a "homeland" as established in the Israeli state.

Both premises are completely false. So is your backhanded substantiation of this lie.

Fraud Fit For a King (http://bellaciao.org/en/article.php3?id_article=1504)

Vatican-PLO Agreement (http://www.cephasministry.com/vatican_plo.html)

Rabbi Jonathan Sacks (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/2218571.stm)

Other Rabbis (http://www.jewsnotzionists.org/rabbismain.htm)

From JewsNotZionists (http://www.jewsnotzionists.org/)
JUDAISM VS. ZIONISM
The Jewish nation is basically different from all other nations <loshen kodesh> as it does not depend for its existence on geographical boundaries, on secular sovereignty or on an army or air force. The Jewish people are ordained to live in peace with the nations of the world and it therefore has no part in the political and military quarrels of the Zionist state with its neighbors. Zionism a complete falsification of Judaism and the Zionist state cannot represent the Jewish people.

The Jewish nation exists only because of the eternal bond between G'd and the Jewish people, confirmed at Mount Sinai for all future generations. The laws of the Torah are not subject to any party or parliamentary vote but the <loshen kodesh> (commandments) of the written and oral Torah laws are obligatory for every Jew and for the entire Jewish community.

It is important for every Jew and non-Jew to know this fundamental difference between Zionism and Judaism, between the Zionist state and the true Jewish nation. Since its inception, Zionism has been condemned by the foremost Torah authorities as a gross aberration, as misleading and as a danger to Judaism and the Jewish people. Rabbi Amram Blau zt"l, the great and well-known Jewish leader and spokesman in Jerusalem, proclaimed shortly before his death that the recognition and acceptance by the United Nations of the Zionist State as representing the Jewish people was a grave injustice and mistake that this action should be rectified.

In due course the Zionist mirage will disappear, as did so many false Messianic movements before, but the Jewish people will live -- patiently waiting the arrival of the true Moshiach -- an enduring testimony to Divine rule, upholding the banner of high moral and ethical standards, a symbol of peace and brotherhood.

Why of course we cannot forget that Herzl did not want Israel to be Jewish in the first place, as we all know Jewish is religious and nothing else, if it were something more then I should be just as Jewish as some other people. But it is not, and Herzl did not want a state of religious Judaism, no he wanted a secular “Jewish” state, which unto itself is a contradiction.

"Herzl was an assimilated Viennese Jew, a journalist and a playwright," says Avi Shlaim, author of The Iron Wall: Israel and the Arab World. "He was completely secular and he had no particular attachment to the Jewish religion. As he conceived it, the idea of a Jewish state was a secular idea."

As said in this quote:
Zionism is not a part of the Jewish religion, but rather is parasitic upon it. Most Zionists are Jews, but not all Jews are Zionists. To condemn Zionism as immoral (racist, vicious and depraved) is not to condemn Judaism.
We aren’t ignorant people; the modern state of Israel today stands as a diametric opposite of Judaism. Only and illiterate would not be able to see the Anti-Semitic undertones of Zionism. The recent use of the Catholic Church is indicative of a fundamental shift in the use of the term Anti-Semitism:
As many observers have written recently, an anti-Semite used to mean someone who hated Jews because they were Jews.Now, the term anti-Semite is used by Jews to tar and feather anyone who disagrees with Jewish policies, influences, and effects. Complain about Israelis burying alive Palestinian residents of Jenin and Jews say you're an anti-Semite. Wonder about the preponderance of Jewish influence on the American government and you're an anti-Semite.
John Kaminski: Heads They Win, Tails We Lose
The Church is not stupid, this twisted, and revisionist use of the term has indeed become something that means what is said above. The Church is basically saying, hey we aren’t “Anti-Semitic”, its not because the Church doesn’t know about the history and philosophical tenants of Zionism, no rather the Church understands that ignorance breeds compliance, and the ignorance of Zionism by the masses leads to that.

Here's something I never really understood.

What reputable and convincing evidence is there that the current location of Israel is the "rightful homeland" of the Jews? The Bible or other religious texts don't count among "reputable and convincing evidence". Besides those, I haven't yet seen or heard any.

Someone explain. I need to be enlightened as to the reason why the Jews so deserve this land. I remember the US and the Soviets just banding together to steal a hunk of land from the Arabs to set up this "Israel" and then attaching the US to it as a gigantic satellite nation of the Jews.

So ... explain.

this is a post I made in the pal thread for another member who still can't grasp the basic concepts of semites/semitism antropology Vs theology and hence I think it is relevant to this thread too

--------------------------------------------------------------------------


spidergoat:

1If you go by the older history, then the Arabs are occupiers of Jewish land, since Jewish history in Israel is older.

NO. absolutley and totally and utterly wrong .

2If we acknowledge that the cultural (religious) differences between Arabs and Jews

OK, I really need to address some major gaps in your knowledge goat.

Firstly there is one major conceptual problem you're having in distinguishing anthropology and religion/theology

I'm going to take this slow, and I want you to fully grasp this:

anthropology is a completely different and separate concept to theology + spiritual belief

1)anthropology concerns analysis of peoples on the basis of biology/history and geographic distribution

2)theology and spiritual beliefs concern themslves with metaphysical ideology and philosophies.

you cannot and must not mix anthropological + theological concepts together, the two are not comparable, this must be grasped.

AThe term "Arab" is a loose generic (I avoid the term as much as possible myself) anthropological term defining peoples. A more accurate anthropological deffinition would be semetical peoples or semites

BThe term jew refers to a person who follows the ideology of judaism ie believes in judaism that is a spititual/metaphysical belief pattern.

as mentioned above the 2 concepts are completely different + non comparable.

to clarify further for you:

Examples of people of the SAME anthropological class but different religious beliefs:

example: 1: an Iraqi jew + iraqi muslim
example: 2: palestinian jew + palestinian muslim
example: 3: syrian christian + syrian muslim

above are all examples of Arab/semetical peoples but different religious beliefs.

Examples of people of differentanthropological classes but SAME religious beliefs:

example 1: slavic jew + iraqi jew.
example 2: chinese muslim + pakistani muslim
example 3: ethiopian jew + palestinian jew

a german jew is not a semite
a slavic jew is not a semite
an iraqi christian is a semite
a palestinian muslim is a semite.
an iraqi jew is a semite
a palestinian jew is a semite.


judaism is a spiritual belief NOT an anthropological classification this is pure fallacy propegated by decades of zionism + is absorbed by the masses who do not have a solid grounding on anthropology and theology especially judaism

regarding your first quote right at the begining, I will have to start a separate thread (I've been meaning to for ages anyway) since there are many facets to the argument that I need to clarify.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------

The term semites is an anthropological term and NOT a theological term, and it's woth noting that if moses had never been born, ie: judaism not exsist, there would still be semitical peoples

The term Semites is applied to a group of peoples closely related in language, whose habitat is Asia and partly Africa. The expression is derived from the Biblical table of nations (Genesis 10), in which most of these peoples are recorded as descendants of Noah's son Sem.

In historic times all Western Asia (see below), with the exception of the peninsula of Asia Minor, was Semitic. From the philological point of view the Semitic peoples are divided into four chief Babylonian-Assyrian Semites (East Semites), Chanaanitic Semites, (West Semites), Aramaic Semites (North Semites), and Arabian Semites (South Semites). The last-named group is divided into North and South Arabians, of which last the Abyssinians are a branch. The first three groups are usually termed North Semites, in contrast to the Arabian group, or South Semites. But the classification of the Babylonian with the Aramaic and Chanaanitic Semites is not permissible from the philological point of view

TERRITORY

The great mountain-chains which begin at the Syro-Cilician boundary, and then curving towards the south-west extend to the Persian Gulf, separate on the north and east the territory of the Semites from that of the other peoples of Western Asia. It includes the Syro-Arabian plain with the civilized countries extending to the east and west and the Arabian Peninsula which joins it on the south. The lowlands to the east are formed by the Euphrates and the Tigris, and include the homes of two very ancient civilizations, in the north the rather undulating Mesopotamia, in the south the low Babylonian plain; the land extending to the west from the lower Euphrates is called Chaldea. These are the territories of the East Semitic tribes and states. On the west lies Northern Syria, then the Lebanon Mountains with the intervening Coelo-Syria, the oasis of Damascus, the seat of an ancient culture, the Hauran, and in the the midst of the desert the oasis of Palmyra (Tadmor). These territories were at a later period occupied principally by Aramaic tribes. The territory on the coast extending westwards from Lebanon, and Palestine, which joins it on the south, are the principal seats of the Chanaanitic Semites. The mountainous country to the east of Arabia and the Sinaitic peninsula extending to the west of Arabia, belong to Arabia proper, the territory of the South Semites.


http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/13706a.htm

Don't you understand, outlandish, that religion creates ethnic groups? Religion, particularly Judaism, encourages a population to remain genetically (relatively) isolated, forming a distinct ethnic group. Genetic studies have found that Jewish men who dispersed from Israel around 70 AD, traveled to many countries, and took local women as wives. This, along with the inevitable interbreeding that took place from time to time created many populations that do not look "semetic". You cannot separate anthropology from theology. Technically there is no one Jewish race, but it is true that Jews are discriminated against in racist ways, particularly those Ashkenazic Jews who are identifiable due to their physical characteristics.

Zionism does not "depend" on anti-semitism, it is a reaction to 2000 years of anti-jewish hatred and violence.

I’ll that “racial” business to Outlandish.

Zionism does not "depend" on anti-semitism, it is a reaction to 2000 years of anti-jewish hatred and violence.

Care to re-read what you wrote? Seems like the initial statement, was only supported by the latter statement? See Zionism exists because of A-S, and Zionism has actively pursued A-S, and has supported it. For instance:

“It is essential that the sufferings of Jews. . . become worse. . . this will assist in realization of our plans. . .I have an excellent idea. . . I shall induce anti-semites to liquidate Jewish wealth. . . The anti-semites will assist us thereby in that they will strengthen the persecution and oppression of Jews. The anti-semites shall be our best friends”. (From his Diary, Part I, pp. 16)

And boy is Israel a propaganda tool or what! Modern A-S is not geared against Jews, it geared against Isael.

Here's something I never really understood.

What reputable and convincing evidence is there that the current location of Israel is the "rightful homeland" of the Jews? The Bible or other religious texts don't count among "reputable and convincing evidence". Besides those, I haven't yet seen or heard any.

Someone explain. I need to be enlightened as to the reason why the Jews so deserve this land. I remember the US and the Soviets just banding together to steal a hunk of land from the Arabs to set up this "Israel" and then attaching the US to it as a gigantic satellite nation of the Jews.

So ... explain.

My question has not been answered. Is this a sign that I'm right or that I'm spouting bullshit straight from the ass? :D

My question has not been answered. Is this a sign that I'm right or that I'm spouting bullshit straight from the ass? :D

I've always wondered that myself, it seems kinda arbitrary to me but I'm not up on the history of that area.

Here's a "Biblical map", showing the general areas once ruled by Jews:
http://www.antiwar.com/cole/palestine2.jpg
If we could play such a map backward and forward in time with the members of the original Tribes of Israel plotted, we would likely see them continually blending in and out of other "colors", just as any human tribes have done over time. Zionism attempts to take one snapshot of peak Israelite influence, and use that as a basis for a modern state.

For Americans, Manifest Destiny is familiar in our own history, and we can relate. Zionism has become widespread in many influencial evangelical American Christian sects. Here is Christian Broadcasting Network's (US Evangelical) explanation (http://www.cbn.com/CBNnews/news/020426e.asp) of the manifest destiny of both Biblical and present Israel. The Bush Administration, for example, is much influenced (http://www.villagevoice.com/issues/0420/perlstein.php) by this ideology. Here's More Christian Zionism background (http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_isra.htm)

But scarcely addressed in Zionist and Christian-Zionist political movements are the Palestinian "lost tribes", or descendants of Biblical Jews who remained in the region, but did not remain religiously Jewish. Any heredity-based restoration of land rights, rewinding exclusively to Biblical Israelite days (but ignoring all other nations/empires/faiths that have held influence since) would have to include most Palestinians as the rightful heirs: Clearly Arab and Jewish lineages did not part forever with Abraham's sons, even if Abraham was the forebear of of all Arabs and Jews. Instead, Sephardic Jews and Palestinians are genetically and hereditarily conjoined. Being "up on" what has been transpiring in the Levant ethnically and genetically for the past 3 thousand or so years includes the realization that ancient Israel is as thoroughly and inextricably blended into the human melting pot as are any other ancient kingdoms you wish to compare, in spite of persistence of ethnic seperatism and exceptionalism among zionists and others. Attempts to restructure things in accordance with historically distant political structures is so unwise and illogical as to require fanatical religious appeals to sell well.

link (http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/spages/449338.html)

well to you all arabs/muslims/non muslims/ no catholic and every one is anti semite. You have a disease, and there is no cure for it. I feel sorry for you my friend. I hope that some would help u some day. :(

Mod note: now that just wrong!, how would you know if he has crabs?

Mod note: now that just wrong!, how would you know if he has crabs?

Makes me wonder what the hell the original post was. :bugeye:


Thanks, hypewader. So basically the idea that Israel "deserves" that land is drawn out of someone's ass. Good thing you clarified. :D

How do you give back land and be sure you're fair? I can't help but put this in a North American context (simply because it's the place I was born/live in).

Technically the aboriginal americans own everything here because there were basically no other occupants. So, is the whole thing theirs or are only the specific places they lived theirs? if that's the case, do you chose their highest point of population or lowest in chosing what is fair? Do you include the paths between settlements in the deal? How do you even show that the people claiming the land are even part of the culture that lost the land in the first place? On top of all that, there's the argument that land is owned by those that presently occupy it (the "possession is 9/10 of the law" theory)

Suddenly I understand why this issue is so complex.

buffy says:How do you give back land and be sure you're fair? I can't help but put this in a North American context.

hmmm
simple
you say:
here is your land i took from you by force.
will you forgive me for having killed your people
cause i cant bring them back and give them
with the land?
sounds fair to me!!!
then will tell you what is fair? cause when you
took it you told them.

Philosopher Philocrazy.

they killed ours
we killed theirs
dead.
who owns what
whats fair?

buffys philosopher.

buffy philosopher said:
Suddenly I understand why this issue is so complex. buffy

buffy philosopher also said:
they killed ours
we killed theirs
dead.
who owns what
whats fair?

buffys philosopher.

------------------------------------------------------
your philosophy all of a sudden got very simple!!!!!!
thanks to
the greatest philosopher of all time
Philocrazy

that's it?

I was hoping for a rap.

Though the ultra Religious Jews are anti Zionists, (and most Orthodox Jews do NOT serve in Israeli army) this still does not stop Arab Muslim "palestinian" Thugs from targeting their babies in Jerusalem.
Nor does it stop them from hate & death-threats campaign against all Jews all over the Goliath ArabMuslimLand..

AntiZionism is just a cover for Islamo militant Nazis or for "regular'' Nazis.

AntiZionism is just a cover for Islamo militant Nazis or for "regular'' Nazis.

Too bad none of here are Islamic, or Nazi’s simply cognitive members of society who understand simple concepts. I know simplicity scares many Zionists but it’s not a hard concept, Jews have no reason for being the Levant other then as a huge refugee camp and in that process expelled 750,000 Arabs from their homes, and established a state that ran counter to the idea of self-determination. Although most of us here accept the existence of Israel as a state, that doesn’t mean we accept her obviously “Lebensraum” actions against the Arabs.

Don't you understand, outlandish, that religion creates ethnic groups? Religion, particularly Judaism, encourages a population to remain genetically (relatively) isolated, forming a distinct ethnic group. Genetic studies have found that Jewish men who dispersed from Israel around 70 AD, traveled to many countries, and took local women as wives. This, along with the inevitable interbreeding that took place from time to time created many populations that do not look "semetic". You cannot separate anthropology from theology. Technically there is no one Jewish race, but it is true that Jews are discriminated against in racist ways, particularly those Ashkenazic Jews who are identifiable due to their physical characteristics.

Zionism does not "depend" on anti-semitism, it is a reaction to 2000 years of anti-jewish hatred and violence.

great words from our resident anthropology + zionism expert :rolleyes:

that religion creates ethnic groups?

you still dont read my posts do you? otherwise you still wouldn't be coming out with this slop.
I even took the liberty of posting the same info in this thread...go back and read my 1st post in this thread

religion is a metaphysical concept based on belief
religion does not create new anthropological groups.
what when an nigerian non muslim converts to islam his DNA suddenly changes + he changes to a different race???!!

particularly Judaism, encourages a population to remain genetically (relatively) isolated, forming a distinct ethnic group


rubbish

Genetic studies have found that Jewish men who dispersed from Israel around 70 AD, traveled to many countries, and took local women as wives. This, along with the inevitable interbreeding that took place from time to time created many populations that do not look "semetic".

LMAO!!!
yeh that's right goatboy, the hebrew israelites were miraculously teleported 2000 years and ended up in eastern europe!!!!

the original "jews" were of canaanite/phonecian/assyrian origin, all the peoples of that land (ie palestine/jordan/syria/iraq etc) were of the same classification, but not all had convertyed to judaism, but anthropologically they were the same

the ancient HI didnt migrate to non semetic countires, they dispersed to surrounding semetic lands and converted over centuries to xtianity + islam

when will you get this through your thick skull. Those jews didnt go anywhere, they just changed faith.....a hard pill for you aetheist zionist meatheads to swallow.

goatboy

Zionism does not "depend" on anti-semitism, it is a reaction to 2000 years of anti-jewish hatred and violence

really Mr I'm-an-expert-on-zionism??

1) AS was conceived implemented + propegated by zionists to further the cause of zionism.

2) AS has nothing to do with the anti jewish hatred that has always exsisted.

here, don't take my word for it, here's what your buddy Herzl said:



-Modern Anti-Semitism is not to be confounded with the religious persecution of the Jews of former times.

you still dont read my posts do you? otherwise you still wouldn't be coming out with this slop.
I even took the liberty of posting the same info in this thread...go back and read my 1st post in this thread
I have read your pseudo-science, and I reject your basic premise, namely that racial continuity (purity) is an essential part of Zionism. While I think a degree of racial continuity was in fact retained, (the proof is the recognizable semetic features of some European Jews), race is only of vital importance to YOU. The Jewish people are whoever they consider themselves to be, like the Republicans. There are many Zionists in Israel who claim Israel should be theirs just by virtue of being Jewish, no matter what the situation in Palestine is. I disagree. I say Jews are entitled to create a country out of self-defense, having already been motivated by Zionism, WWII, British and international encouragement (including not being able to emigrate to the US in large numbers), to gather in one spot, where they found their very existence threatened by Arabs unwilling to adapt to the emerging political realities of the post WWII world.

religion is a metaphysical concept based on belief
religion does not create new anthropological groups.
what when an nigerian non muslim converts to islam his DNA suddenly changes + he changes to a different race???!!
On an individual level, belief is separate from physical origins, that is true, but on a larger scale, beliefs can form a cultural barrier which acts in similar ways to geographic isolation. There are some scientists who even think there is no such thing as race.


when will you get this through your thick skull. Those jews didnt go anywhere, they just changed faith.....a hard pill for you aetheist zionist meatheads to swallow.
I accept that some of them didn't go anywhere at all, but some did. Their legacy was not one of race, but religion. Religion is the unifiying factor. There will always be some exceptions, people on the fringes, who are less easily classified, like me.

when will you get this through your thick skull. Those jews didnt go anywhere, they just changed faith.....a hard pill for you aetheist zionist meatheads to swallow.
That is false. (http://www.cohen-levi.org/jewish_genes_and_genealogy/jewish_genes_-_dna_evidence.htm)

I know you will be quick to respond to the race/DNA issue, because this is one way propagandists discredit Zionism.

I didn’t write this so I will quote it:

First of all the historical compare you make (Jewish-Palestinian) is one between a religion and a nationality . You understand this cannot hold logical ground for historical relevance , yes your religion indeed has a larger history than Palestinian nationality . A logical compare would be religion , however the Palestinian nationality holds more than one religion , including the one the compare is made with .

Perhaps then you should compare it to the Israeli nationality , and we will see that this one only exists for 55 years . But ofcourse the point you wish to make is that there is a relation between Jewish heritige and Hebrews , the peoples of the ancient nationality of the land , and there is . However it is not a racial one as you wish to claim .

Jews are a multiracial peoples and none of your arguments show that they are monoracial even in the slightest bit . The tribe of Hebrews does no longer exist , their cultural heritage is of all races . In other words , the only relation you have with the Hebrew Israelites is your immitation of their supposed cultural-religious social construction and philosophy . And such is then still regarded as not necesarily active , a mere potential thought is what is supposedly being shared with those ancient peoples . A bond by blood is illusionary , a reminder of the supposed Aryan race . The philosophy of Blut und Boden that enflourished this nationalism is one that has no logical base . There is no blood and the soil is that of another peoples . This error is to blaim on secular Europe’s tearing apart of one identity into seperate categories of which race is one .

In any ways the basic undertone necesarry for a scientific approach toward the philosophy of Blut und Boden relies within a racial essence , and such cannot be founded amongst Conahim nor .

Todays scientfic opportunities are however of use in a various ways of rehetorical game-play in order to bring out this racist essence of Zionism . One of its promoters is Rabbi Yaakov Kleiman who has written the infamous article The Conahim-DNA Connection as he claims an unbroken bond in his attempt to do away with mixing relevance :

The Cohen line is patrilineal passed from father to son without interruption for 3.300 years

Even if an line without interruption would exist , such completely neglects the mixing on the maternal side and the mixed result that becomes the carryer of Konahim .

You say your grandfather is Kohen this only proves that he 33 centuries X 4 generations = 1/132 Hebrew Israelite based on this minimal calculation . Many Arabs from the region would infact have quite a chance to be more of an Hebrew Israelite by blood then you or your Konahim grandfather .

The Jewish genetic researches on Kohen supposes that there is a gene(s) that survives through all the Kohens (fathers) . Having one similar gene with a Hebrew Israelite doesnt make you one . Dr. David Goldstein however would disagree :

For more than 90 percent of the Cohens to share the same genetic markers after such a period of time is a testament to the devotion of the wives of the Cohens over the years. Even a low rate of infidelity would have dramatically lowered the percentage

Their claim goes beyond a mere share amongst a world of differences and an assumed inexistance infidelic intermixing , their attempt is to prove a racial relevance which results in the following , explained by Yaakov Kleinman :

Wider genetic studies of diverse present day Jewish communities show a remarkable genetic cohesiveness. Jews from Iran, Iraq, Yemen, North Africa and European Ashkenazim all cluster together with other Semitic groups, with their origin in the Middle East. A common geographical original can be seen for all mainstream Jewish groups studied.

No such proof exists , other than a selection based on commonnes instead of commonnes discovered after the selection . To claim a Yemeni clusters together with a Ukrainian or such other compares merely because of his religious affiliation and a selected commonness through DNA is beyond all ridicule .

Anthropologically this is a failure , biologically it is like reversed bingo . Nowhere is shown a motivation for selection of the genetic marker in common (after all human DNA as it is a specie has an amazing percentage of commonnes in its generality , thus not to hard to find common markers with anybody .

They might as well try to defend the religious connection they invision through scientifical manipulation , or is that what they are doing already ?

But ofcourse their drive of motivation shows , other insisters of racial entities have attacked the prescious illusion of a Hebrew ancestry for their Ashkenazim heritage through the Khazaric theory presented by our symbol for Western-Jewish psychological disorders Arthur Koessler . And so Yaakov Kleiman feels attacked and reacts ruthlessly using his discovered pseudo-science of racial genetics :

This genetic research has clearly refuted the libel that the Ashkenazi Jews are not related to the ancient Hebrews, but are descendants of the Kuzar tribe -- a pre-10th century Turko-Asian empire which reportedly converted en masse to Judaism. Researchers compared the DNA signature of the Ashkenazi Jews against those of Turkish-derived people, and found no correspondence.

Yes correct indeed very few Turkic relevance if you take a Jew from Holland or Croatia or Sint Petersburg but take a Jew from a Turkic nation and you will find nothing but Turkic . Again both racial-purity theories forget the fact that in thousands of years mixture accurs at such levels that locally new tribes of racial traits are created . Heritage does not mean an authoritair blood-relation , it means preserved culture through selection .

These theories fall just as Aryanism and other racial claimers like Ra Un Nefer Amen or The Assembly of Yahweh . Identity-crisis can be a bitch but assuming ancient racial ancestry is just sad .

And if it hasnt been put in clear perspective already , Aryanism and its Swastika are in the exact same way philosophies and psychologies of racial identification with an Ancient history .

Indeed, this study of the Cohen line is complete Bull Shit, why? Because it neglects the fact that there was huge amounts of intermarriage, and it neglects the trueness of race. Now if we are going to use race as the precursor to allow Jews to move back to Israel, then surely I and many more Christian Jews should be able to migrate back? Why didn’t they test the DNA of converted Christians? Does that DNA automatically become invalidated when I convert? Again this all goes back to the fallacy that is the “Jewish race”, because as mentioned Arabs have the most Hebrew blood, much more then any other Jew. If we are to going to go by this racial nonsense, then am I a Christian Jew? Is a Palestinian a Muslim Jew? You are again lying to yourself to try quite desperately to get this claim. The Jewish race is a myth.

Although the anti-semitism thing is abused, Ariel Sharon has said to criticise the policy of the Israeli government is anti-semitic.

Trueness of race is the myth, race is an attempt to place clear borders around the continuous spectrum of human characteristics. Any designation of race is a generality. Even ignoring the lack of any real evidence in this article, and the poor english, it is contradictory. At one point they say the connection is only "cultural-religious social construction and philosophy" (which is quite enough for me), and then they say "this only proves that he 33 centuries X 4 generations = 1/132 Hebrew Israelite based on this minimal calculation". So the genetic connection is minimal, so what, that is exactly what one would expect to find. Jews are multiracial, but the existence of Jews in Europe and elsewhere is to a large extent due to the exile of Jews from Israel, and the subsequent establishment of Jewish communities. The genetic connection, however slight, only proves the historical reality of exile.

Again this all goes back to the fallacy that is the “Jewish race”, because as mentioned Arabs have the most Hebrew blood, much more then any other Jew.
This is a strawman argument, arabs are more genetically similar to the ancient hebrews than European Jews, but that is totally irrelevant. I already accept that Arabs have a historical connection to Palestine. The fact we are trying to prove here is that in general modern Jews had at some point in their history, fathers who were those exiled by the Romans from ancient Israel, as opposed to being entirely composed of foriegn converts to Judaism.

Trueness of race is the myth, race is an attempt to place clear borders around the continuous spectrum of human characteristics.

So why bring it up? It wasn’t me who brought up the supposed connection to Cohen. Obviously you don’t even practice your own rhetoric.

Jews are multiracial, but the existence of Jews in Europe and elsewhere is to a large extent due to the exile of Jews from Israel, and the subsequent establishment of Jewish communities. The genetic connection, however slight, only proves the historical reality of exile.

But the problem stems that although some Jews in Europe may have this “connection”, there are millions more that don’t. The Kharazia connection has not been disproved by any measure of the imagination. Also then if we are to define the Jew as a race, then like I said there are countless Christian Jews who must have the same blood tie, why are they exempt? Because being Jewish is being religious, that is the tie you have with the Hebrews. I am pretty sure I have some Hebrew blood too, thus can I migrate? If and atheist Jew can do it, why can’t a Christian Jew?


This is a strawman argument, arabs are more genetically similar to the ancient hebrews than European Jews, but that is totally irrelevant.

Oh no it’s not, because it proves that they have an even greater claim to that land then any European Jew. You are trying to have your cake and eat it too spider, you want it to go both ways. I am sure that most Jews in Europe have other racial ties to Turks, Slavs, Latins, Anglos, Saxons, etc. I just don’t buy this Cohen nonsense.

The fact we are trying to prove here is that in general modern Jews had at some point in their history, fathers who were those exiled by the Romans from ancient Israel, as opposed to being entirely composed of foriegn converts to Judaism.

You are telling me that all Jews in Europe were tested? Secondly, as I said Christians must also be involved in that, as well as Muslims, and Atheists. If you have a connection to that land through pseudo-science, so do I. You are among many pseudo-Jews Spider, live with your lies.

So why bring it up? It wasn’t me who brought up the supposed connection to Cohen. Obviously you don’t even practice your own rhetoric.
I bring it up because someone claimed that there is no connection between ancient and modern Jews, except religion. Even if race never has clear borders, we can speak of general trends. Those who are Jewish by religion only, like converts, still identify with those who do. The point isn't that we can define who is entitled to Israel in a legalistic way, but, that cultural identification is a major force in the world today. You seem to be saying, there should be no Zionism. But there is, and they disagree with you, and there will be no reconcilliation between these points of view. Instead, we should concentrate on the real problem, how can Israel and the Palestinians come to terms?

Also then if we are to define the Jew as a race, then like I said there are countless Christian Jews who must have the same blood tie, why are they exempt?
I'm not sure what you mean by "Christian Jews". The blood tie applies to all Jews as a generality, due to the fact that among them, there are those who actually have some genetic connection. For those with Jewish genetic traits, but Christian (or other) religion, these facts are irrelevent, since they are not asking for any consideration with respect to the land of Israel.

If and atheist Jew can do it, why can’t a Christian Jew?
It's not so sure that an atheist Jew can immigrate to Israel, besides, this only has to do with modern Israeli laws, not Zionism.

Oh no it’s not, because it proves that they have an even greater claim to that land then any European Jew. You are trying to have your cake and eat it too spider, you want it to go both ways. I am sure that most Jews in Europe have other racial ties to Turks, Slavs, Latins, Anglos, Saxons, etc. I just don’t buy this Cohen nonsense.
This crises will not be solved by determining who has greater "claims", at this point, such considerations are merely academic. Israelis have raised an entire generation there, and those people consider the place to be their home, no legalistic arguments will change this.

Consider the implications of your racial argument about the land. That means that Arabs are native to the entire middle east, not just Palestine, since there is no separate Palestinian "anthropological" group, (to borrow your terminology). Therefore, any part of Jordan, Syria, or Iraq. etc... is the Palestinian's native home. Even the name Palestinian is misleading, since many of those who self-identify (like Jews self-identify) as Palestinians actually came from different parts of the middle east. The only reason they don't move into their historically native lands is the political attitudes of those states, who have an interest in fighting Israel. So, Palestinians have no recognized right to move to Jordan, any more than they have the right to move to Israel.

If you have a connection to that land through pseudo-science, so do I. You are among many pseudo-Jews Spider, live with your lies.
Cultural identification is a personal choice, we are talking about generalities, not individual cases. In general, most Israeli jews accept the basics of Judaism, but prefer a secular government.

Palestinians should feel lucky that modern Jews have changed considerably from ancient ones. After a religious war, Jews were obligated to destroy the enemy completely- everyone, (except for virgin women), everything (down to the buildings), and every living thing, including livestock.

The point isn't that we can define who is entitled to Israel in a legalistic way, but, that cultural identification is a major force in the world today.

Yet you still have no accepted the basic premise of the Jewish culture, which is religion. Again I ask you are you circumcised? If so, then please stop uttering because you aren’t making any sense.

You seem to be saying, there should be no Zionism.

Zionism can exist all it wants, I really don’t care. What I am doing is questioning the overtly illogical, anti-Semitic, and fallacious concepts behind it. If you enjoy partaking in an ideology that demeans Jewry, with some members of this sciforums community (who happen to be Zionist) calling Hassidic Jews “monkeys”, you have issues.

Instead, we should concentrate on the real problem, how can Israel and the Palestinians come to terms?

I’ve offered my solution, but Zionists will not hear of it.

I'm not sure what you mean by "Christian Jews".

I’m not sure what you mean by “Atheist Jews”, of which you are part of. See how stupid it sounds when the tables are turned?

For those with Jewish genetic traits, but Christian (or other) religion, these facts are irrelevent, since they are not asking for any consideration with respect to the land of Israel.

Nonsense, complete illogical nonsense. Again you are trying to have it both ways, a race transcends all religious, and cultural differences. If you are going to claim you have a right to Israel through some insignificant blood tie to the people who inhabited that region, then so should all people who have that same blood tie. You aren’t making any sense.

It's not so sure that an atheist Jew can immigrate to Israel, besides, this only has to do with modern Israeli laws, not Zionism.

Israeli laws are based on Zionism, modern Israel= Zionism. If an atheist Jew cannot immigrate to Israel, then what you think your Jewish?

This crises will not be solved by determining who has greater "claims", at this point, such considerations are merely academic. Israelis have raised an entire generation there, and those people consider the place to be their home, no legalistic arguments will change this.

We aren’t talking about the realities on the ground here spider, don’t try to change the subject. We are talking about the validity of Zionism, and your own so called “Jewishness”.

That means that Arabs are native to the entire middle east, not just Palestine, since there is no separate Palestinian "anthropological" group, (to borrow your terminology).

I never said there was…and I never used that argument. I am in full accordance that being Iraqi, Syrian, Palestinian are really just machinations of Imperialism. The goal of the inhabitants of the region is to create the Ummah, or a Pan-Arabist state.

Therefore, any part of Jordan, Syria, or Iraq. etc... is the Palestinian's native home.

Yes, and as is Palestine. The difference though is that they owned the land before the making of the state of Israel. Palestine is just as Arabic as Yemen; they all belong to the Arab people. Just because you think that Jews should a little tiny part of the Arabic land mass is ok, it’s not. Israel has cut the Arabic world in half.

The only reason they don't move into their historically native lands is the political attitudes of those states, who have an interest in fighting Israel. So, Palestinians have no recognized right to move to Jordan, any more than they have the right to move to Israel.

1825 the population of Palestine was 325,000 persons, well before the first Zionist immigrant. Arabs have always lived on that land. It’s more theirs then yours, Zionism is lucky that Israel even exists today.
Cultural identification is a personal choice, we are talking about generalities, not individual cases. In general, most Israeli jews accept the basics of Judaism, but prefer a secular government.

Granted, but it is a misnomer to call it a Jewish state.

Palestinians should feel lucky that modern Jews have changed considerably from ancient ones. After a religious war, Jews were obligated to destroy the enemy completely- everyone, (except for virgin women), everything (down to the buildings), and every living thing, including livestock.

This is bound to happen eventually anyways…

I never said there was…and I never used that argument. I am in full accordance that being Iraqi, Syrian, Palestinian are really just machinations of Imperialism. The goal of the inhabitants of the region is to create the Ummah, or a Pan-Arabist state.
If existing borders are constructions of imperialism, who's to say where they actually end? What is now Jordan could be considered Palestine, too, so if they go there, they are still in their homeland. Why don't they? In the past, Arab imperialism expanded its territory through violence, why are these lands accepted now, and any modern change considered wrong? Shouldn't the Arabs return all the land they stole to the ancestors of the original inhabitants?

Yes, and as is Palestine. The difference though is that they owned the land before the making of the state of Israel. Palestine is just as Arabic as Yemen; they all belong to the Arab people. Just because you think that Jews should a little tiny part of the Arabic land mass is ok, it’s not. Israel has cut the Arabic world in half.
And before the Arabs moved in to Palestine, who's land was it?
1825 the population of Palestine was 325,000 persons, well before the first Zionist immigrant. Arabs have always lived on that land. It’s more theirs then yours, Zionism is lucky that Israel even exists today.
Always? Some arabs lived there and perhaps have ancestors that lived there, but how do you determine that those Arabs, the Palestinians, lived there? It could be that the parents of those 325,000 Palestinians actually came from Pakistan or Iraq in recent times, in which case they were just as much immigrants as the Jews. Can they prove their ancestors came from Palestine, as you would have the Jews prove? Before the first "Zionist" immigrant there were Jews living in Palestine. In fact, some have always lived there. The truth is that the Arabs got ownership of that land by the same means that the Jews have it now, they considered it theirs, took it, defended it, and used it. This is the pattern all around the world, including the Arab world (remember Spain?). In fact, by your reasoning, Jews have every right to Arabia as well, since it was made purely Islamic only through the ethnic cleansing of Jews from the land.

spidergoat

My where’s the rest?

If existing borders are constructions of imperialism, who's to say where they actually end? What is now Jordan could be considered Palestine, too, so if they go there, they are still in their homeland. Why don't they?

Because part of that homeland would be Palestine as well, why don’t all Jordanians move into Palestine? That line of argumentation is seriously lacking any coherency.

In the past, Arab imperialism expanded its territory through violence, why are these lands accepted now, and any modern change considered wrong?

Yes because the people’s of these lands consider themselves Arabic, and mostly Muslims.

Shouldn't the Arabs return all the land they stole to the ancestors of the original inhabitants?

Those original inhabitants have been Arab-ized, and Islam-ized.

And before the Arabs moved in to Palestine, who's land was it?

Arabs is a modern term for a people who have always lived there. I know what you are trying to do, and it’s not going to work. In order for your argument to work, Palestine at some point must have been totally uninhabited, that’s nonsense. Arabs are descendents of many different peoples, Hebrews, Canaanites, Egyptians, Phoenicians, Greeks, Romans, and Arabs. They reflect the history of the region in their blood you don’t.

Some arabs lived there and perhaps have ancestors that lived there, but how do you determine that those Arabs, the Palestinians, lived there?

The Palestinian is a modern construct, just like Israeli nationalism. How do you determine what is Israeli? That is the real question, which you have not been able to answer.

It could be that the parents of those 325,000 Palestinians actually came from Pakistan or Iraq in recent times, in which case they were just as much immigrants as the Jews.

Pakistan…right…anyways in order for this argument to work Palestine at some point must have been totally uninhabited, that’s nonsense..

In fact, by your reasoning, Jews have every right to Arabia as well, since it was made purely Islamic only through the ethnic cleansing of Jews from the land.

Excuse me? That’s why there were 25,000 Jews in Palestine in the 1800’s prior to the invasion of European Jewry? Stop the lies, they aren’t working here child.

Arabs is a modern term for a people who have always lived there. I know what you are trying to do, and it’s not going to work. In order for your argument to work, Palestine at some point must have been totally uninhabited, that’s nonsense. Arabs are descendents of many different peoples, Hebrews, Canaanites, Egyptians, Phoenicians, Greeks, Romans, and Arabs. They reflect the history of the region in their blood you don’t.
Palestine, at some point MUST have been uninhabited, as was most of the known world. Even Africa, where we are said to have evolved, was uninhabited by humans at some point. As you say, the Arabs came from all over but now they are seen as a distinct ethnic group, how did that happen? Perhaps because they share a similar ideology; in general- muslims married muslims. The Jews also shared a similar ideology with each other, forming a distinct ethnic group.

This forming of ethnic groups is incidental, since it wasn't deliberate, but came about as a result of some isolating factor. Therefore, it is the original isolating factor that is of primary relevence, not the visual traits that became common to the group (blood). The isolating factor of Arabs was geography. The original factor that created as separate group known as the Jews was religion, which still continues today. As a result of this situation, you can find people that are ethnically Jewish, but not of the Jewish religion (almost unknown in the past), and you can find people of the Jewish religion, who are not ethnically Jewish. Zionism applies mostly to those of the Jewish religion, since it is a religious idealism (one that I do not share). I accept that Israel is the original home of the Jews, but not that they should definitely move there. The "blood", or racial characteristics only serve to illustrate the sequence of migrations that occurred after the Jews left Palestine. The relative strength of the racial characteristics that were preserved from ancient times is less important, only serving to demonstrate the continuity of the religion, and the religion's connection to it's birthplace. Muslims should recognize the importance of place to religion (Mecca).

That being said, there will be some, due in some part to higher education, that still consider themselves a part of the Jewish tribe even if they have other ideas about religion.


Shouldn't the Arabs return all the land they stole to the ancestors of the original inhabitants?

Those original inhabitants have been Arab-ized, and Islam-ized.
I suspect they were massacre-ized. Nothing against the muslims, this was a common tactic at the time, it prevented a cycle of violence among those with a culture of revenge and honor.

As to my own Jewishness, let me ask you this, are the babies born of Jewish parents also Jewish? As children, they don't understand the religion, and the boys aren't circumcised right away.

How do you determine what is Israeli? That is the real question, which you have not been able to answer. A citizen of Israel is an Israeli.

Zionism can exist all it wants, I really don’t care. What I am doing is questioning the overtly illogical, anti-Semitic, and fallacious concepts behind it. If you enjoy partaking in an ideology that demeans Jewry, with some members of this sciforums community (who happen to be Zionist) calling Hassidic Jews “monkeys”, you have issues.
I don't see how Zionism was that illogical, given the situation of Jews at the time. It certainly was not anti-semitic (anti Jewish), although they were less diplomatic about the Arab problem than they should have been.

The Hassidic Jews are just as crazy and fanatical as Islamic and Christian fundies. This is the danger of taking idealisms too seriously. That is why I support a more liberal and non-literal approach to religion.

If you are going to claim you have a right to Israel through some insignificant blood tie to the people who inhabited that region, then so should all people who have that same blood tie. You aren’t making any sense.
The racial tie, however insignificant, along with the religious continuity, proves a connection. I don't think it gives Jews the right to claim pre-Israel Palestine as their own, only that it gives credibility to the idea of moving there, pending local political concerns. The local political climate was favorable to the idea of Jews moving to Palestine at the time. After that, it was not Zionism per se, but the idea of self-rule that applied, as well as self-defense.

We should not discount the significance of anti-Jewish feelings due only to Islamic religious arrogance, not land issues.

Palestine, at some point MUST have been uninhabited, as was most of the known world.

Yes that is true, but the only relevant part of habitation was during the period btwn the Roman destruction of Israel, and expelling of Hebrews, and the establishment of Israel. If there was a period in which the entire region was empty then we may a discussion. But as we all know that’s nonsense, the land was constantly occupied.

As you say, the Arabs came from all over but now they are seen as a distinct ethnic group, how did that happen?

Well it’s not because of what you insinuated, the Arab came into relevance through much intermixing with the local population until they became the dominate race. Yes there must have been some Arabic immigration, but there are Jewish, Christian Arabs as well so no it’s not the concept of religion that makes you Arabic, largely it’s a common language, predominantly being Arabic, and a shared culture.

The original factor that created as separate group known as the Jews was religion, which still continues today. As a result of this situation, you can find people that are ethnically Jewish, but not of the Jewish religion

But you are being very exclusively, as I said one can be Arabic and yet still are Christian or Jewish one doesn’t need to be Muslim. It is you who is putting an extra something in there to make you Jewish. There are a lot of ethnic Jews who aren’t Jewish, who are Christian yet you denied these same people the right to claim that land. Yet you being an Atheist Jew are somehow exceptional or different? No, it’s still not logical.

Zionism applies mostly to those of the Jewish religion, since it is a religious idealism (one that I do not share).

Zionism does no such thing, it shuns the religion. Zionism has created you the goyim Jew. Who believes that they are a “people”, connected more then by mere faith, for instance from Herzl himself:

Those Jews who were advanced intellectually and materially entirely lost the feeling of belonging to their race.

The most damning conviction to support my stance comes from Herzl himself:

The theories of a divine institution, or of superior power, or of a contract, and the patriarchal and patrimonial theories do not accord with modern views.

Zionism= Atheism= goy.

The relative strength of the racial characteristics that were preserved from ancient times is less important, only serving to demonstrate the continuity of the religion, and the religion's connection to it's birthplace. Muslims should recognize the importance of place to religion (Mecca).

Even you know are espousing the virtues of religion, yet are atheist? You have just told me right now what I wanted to hear, your claim is based on religion. That religion bars you from going and thus you who pretend they are Jews are paying for their disobedience.

That being said, there will be some, due in some part to higher education, that still consider themselves a part of the Jewish tribe even if they have other ideas about religion.

Rabbi’s are some of the smartest individuals on Earth, I am Catholic does that make me an idiot too?

I suspect they were massacre-ized. Nothing against the muslims, this was a common tactic at the time, it prevented a cycle of violence among those with a culture of revenge and honor.

Surely there were massacres, but that is a constant in the era of imperialism. To this day there are people who are being subjugated by Arabs that is true, I support the independence of the Kurds, and the plight of Bantu Christians in Sudan. But Palestine is wholly not even close to being in the same league.

As to my own Jewishness, let me ask you this, are the babies born of Jewish parents also Jewish?

Racially no, there is no unique Jewish gene, that Cohen thing is so irrelevant most Europeans should have it. So the answer is no, if you maintain your parents traditions then yes you are a Jew. The question I have for you is, can one be Jewish if they don’t practice their faith?

As children, they don't understand the religion, and the boys aren't circumcised right away.

Aren’t boys circumcised prior to the child being 1 years old? Children understand some concepts of religion.

A citizen of Israel is an Israeli.

That’s not an answer, what makes and Israeli and Israeli.

I don't see how Zionism was that illogical, given the situation of Jews at the time. It certainly was not anti-semitic (anti Jewish), although they were less diplomatic about the Arab problem than they should have been.

It certainly was Anit-Semitic, read:

Great exertions will hardly be necessary to spur on the movement. Anti-Semites provide the requisite impetus. They need only do what they did before, and then they will create a desire to emigrate where it did not previously exist, and strengthen it where it existed before. Jews who now remain in Anti-Semitic countries do so chiefly because even those among them who are most ignorant of history know that numerous changes of residence in bygone centuries never brought them any permanent good.

Here Herzl explains the notion of Anti-Semitism again:

 -. The movement towards the organization of the State I am proposing would, of course, harm Jewish Frenchmen no more than it would harm the "assimilated" of other countries. It would, on the contrary, be distinctly to their advantage. For they would no longer be disturbed in their "chromatic function," as Darwin puts it, but would be able to assimilate in peace, because the present Anti- Semitism would have been stopped for ever. They would certainly be credited with being assimilated to the very depths of their souls, if they stayed where they were after the new Jewish State, with its superior institutions, had become a reality. The "assimilated" would profit even more than Christian citizens by the departure of faithful Jews; for they would be rid of the disquieting, incalculable, and unavoidable rivalry of a Jewish proletariat, driven by poverty and political pressure from place to place, from land to land.


That was uber A-S, “rid the Jews they cause problems” concept he just employed. We aren’t stupid, and I suggest you read your own Karl Marx, he is rather interesting.

The Hassidic Jews are just as crazy and fanatical as Islamic and Christian fundies.

If I said that I would be labeled a A-S… so I assume you support the assertion that they are monkey’s?

The racial tie, however insignificant, along with the religious continuity, proves a connection.

First we assume that such tie is true for all Jews, which is highly questionable.

The local political climate was favorable to the idea of Jews moving to Palestine at the time. After that, it was not Zionism per se, but the idea of self-rule that applied, as well as self-defense.

Moving to Palestine wasn’t nessecarily the problem, the problem was the Zionist goal of a state.

We should not discount the significance of anti-Jewish feelings due only to Islamic religious arrogance, not land issues.

Anti-Zionist feelings, stop abusing a word that you don’t even understand the basic concept behind. Islam has very little do with this, we are dealing with nationalism. Arabs have every right to be pissed off, it wasn’t them who gave you shit in Europe, yet they suffer for the sins of Europeans? Pathetic, truly, pathetic.

Your quotes do not suggest that Zionism is anti-Jewish, only that the attitudes of anti-semites might be exploited to advance Zionism.

If I said that I would be labeled a A-S… so I assume you support the assertion that they are monkey’s?
Yes, we are ALL monkeys.

The question I have for you is, can one be Jewish if they don’t practice their faith? Yes. Individual traits can vary widely, what is more important are general trends.

I'm sorry if the spectrum of Jewishness does not fit in with your black & white view of the world, just like ethnicity, there are no clear cut lines, language and a shared culture are also a factor. Everyone's individual experience is different, and one's views about religion can change over time. I'm aware of the seeming contradiction that Judaism is what created Jews, yet Israel was founded largely by atheistic socialists, who came out of that same tradition. In light of this reality, that Jews are Jews due to a variety of factors, the only definition that really counts is self-definition. Anti-semitics do not stop to ask about your personal religious views before discriminating against you.


Moving to Palestine wasn’t nessecarily the problem, the problem was the Zionist goal of a state. Why? What is the big difference between a Jewish "homeland", and an actual state? I know, an army. The Arabs could tolerate Jews around as long as they remained powerless. The problem wasn't a state, but the displacement of native Palestinians, which was at least partially voluntary, and the empowerment of Jews, which they hoped to subjugate in the Islamic tradition. You only have to look at the history of Christians in Saudi Arabia to see what could have happened.

Arabs have every right to be pissed off, it wasn’t them who gave you shit in Europe, yet they suffer for the sins of Europeans? Pathetic, truly, pathetic.Islam has everything to do with this, Islam is what inspires suicide bombings, Arab nationalism, and, if not outright hatred, then contempt of non-muslims. Islam divides the world into believers, and non-believers, the non-believers deserving of no sympathy whatsoever, only the sword. There some clause about non-believers with whom they have a treaty, but this was only out of necessity. Jews have every right to be pissed off at Arabs, since they sided with the Nazis, and did nothing to fight facism, since Islam and facism are very similar. Yes, they did suffer from the sins of Europeans, as did everyone in the world. Arab religious-imperialism also caused much suffering in the world, and this violence is the only reason their territory is so large.

Your quotes do not suggest that Zionism is anti-Jewish, only that the attitudes of anti-semites might be exploited to advance Zionism.

That’s not anti-Semitic? Are you telling me in all seriousness that endorsing anti-Semitic actions is not A-S? Then I guess we can give up on Hitler can’t we?

Yes, we are ALL monkeys.

That was a truly pathetic, so can I call Jews monkey’s? Of course not…ridiculous. Please avoid that cop-out option it’s not very becoming of you.

I'm aware of the seeming contradiction that Judaism is what created Jews, yet Israel was founded largely by atheistic socialists, who came out of that same tradition. In light of this reality, that Jews are Jews due to a variety of factors, the only definition that really counts is self-definition. Anti-semitics do not stop to ask about your personal religious views before discriminating against you.

You people are so very traumatized, you Spider define yourself by those who hate you not those who are like you. Look at the last sentence of your argument, you justify your lie by those who you consider Anti-Semites, you allow the irrationality of A-S to define youself. You believe because A-S’s discriminate against you (because you believe independent of your religion) that it must be because you are magically distinguished. A-S’s discriminate against Jews because you are close knit, here in Toronto we have a Ghetto Bathurst Street. If a Jew was walking down the street I wouldn’t know he was a Jew, unless he was wearing something to indicate he was a Jew. Consider that if being Jewish is independent of religion, then why was assimilation a viable option? If being Jewish like you assert is something (which you have yet to define) other then religion then assimilation was not an option.

Islam has everything to do with this, Islam is what inspires suicide bombings, Arab nationalism, and, if not outright hatred, then contempt of non-muslims.

Islam is an integral aspect yes, but it is not the only aspect. This is a common Zionist tactic, to demonize the entire Islamic world, and Islam’s practitioners so their actions can be justified. I know how a Zionists mind works, “we are the victims” syndrome, and everyone who doesn’t agree with your position is a A-S, even Jews! Yes there are extremist Islamic elements, but there are extremist Jewish, Christian, and even Atheist elements as well. There are many Christians who live in Egypt, Syria, and even in Palestine. Christian holidays are even celebrated in these nations. Your view on the Islamic world is skewed and bias.

Jews have every right to be pissed off at Arabs, since they sided with the Nazis, and did nothing to fight facism, since Islam and facism are very similar.

And Zionist’s are to be absolved from their sins in their co-option with the Nazi’s? Using your logic, Henry Ford’s plants should be part of Israel too…get a new argument. Secondly why not create Israel in Bavaria? Was it not the Germans who did the work? You are merely doing to the Arabs what you should be doing to the Germans, transference.

Arab religious-imperialism also caused much suffering in the world, and this violence is the only reason their territory is so large.

Whatever their reasons may have been, it is irrelevant in the modern context. You may have had a viable argument back in the 700’s.

That’s not anti-Semitic? Are you telling me in all seriousness that endorsing anti-Semitic actions is not A-S? Then I guess we can give up on Hitler can’t we?
The situation has many parallels with Liberia (http://personal.denison.edu/~waite/liberia/history/acs.htm).
The American Colonization Society was established in 1816 by Robert Finley as an attempt to satisfy two groups in America. Ironically, these groups were on opposite ends of the spectrum involving slavery in the early 1800's. One group consisted of philanthropists, clergy and abolitionist who wanted to free African slaves and their descendants and provide them with the opportunity to return to Africa. The other group was the slave owners who feared free people of color and wanted to expel them from America.

The situation has many parallels with Liberia.

Like Liberia, Israeli's live worse there then they would in their original homes.

I have read your pseudo-science, and I reject your basic premise, namely that racial continuity (purity) is an essential part of Zionism. While I think a degree of racial continuity was in fact retained, (the proof is the recognizable semetic features of some European Jews), race is only of vital importance to YOU. The Jewish people are whoever they consider themselves to be, like the Republicans.

i was just wondering, if i converted to Judaism then would i be allowed in Israel?

I think you can enter Israeli even if your not a Jew.

I think you can enter Israeli even if your not a Jew.

I think he means to become a citizen…

I think you can enter Israeli even if your not a Jew.

I think he means to become a citizen…
Neither can you become a citizen in comfortable relaxed UK/US/Australia etc. "just like that"... but whining/picking on the suffering little country Israel, struggling with the few milions they already have, is rather racist.But of course you wouldn't mention the large number of non Jewish refugees they took in, such as the Vietnamese and Muslim Bosnians.

Neither can you become a citizen in comfortable relaxed UK/US/Australia etc. "just like that"...

Obviously not, but those states don’t engage in fascist immigration policies. I mean think about this, considering that South Africa back in the 70’s and 80’s was apartheid the international community would condemn South Africa even more if her immigration policies were “for whites only” and I bet it was. Why is there a Israeli double standard? Israel is apartheid.

but whining/picking on the suffering little country Israel, struggling with the few milions they already have, is rather racist.

Against a non-existent race, sadly that’s impossible.

But of course you wouldn't mention the large number of non Jewish refugees they took in, such as the Vietnamese and Muslim Bosnians.

That’s great, but that’s not the point your appeal to emotion is fruitless.

Neither can you become a citizen in comfortable relaxed UK/US/Australia etc. "just like that"...

Obviously not, but those states don’t engage in fascist immigration policies.
Do you call attempting to rescue Jews -- that [most of them] suffer persecution around the world, -- as "fascism"?

appeal to emotions...
Just the facts, the facts of COLD cruelty Vs. Israel.
non existing race...
1) They, the Jews, are both, a race AND a religion.
2) Call it bigotry, if the wording "disturbs" you.

Do you call attempting to rescue Jews -- that [most of them] suffer persecution around the world, -- as "fascism"?

I call like I see it, Zionism demands that Anti-Semitism be raised to bring the Jews of the world screaming and crying into Zionist Israel. Have you read Herzl? If not I suggest you do because he outlines the goal of Zionist immigration to Israel:

Great exertions will hardly be necessary to spur on the movement.ti-Semites provide the requisite impetus. They need only do what they did before, and then they will create a desire to emigrate where it did not previously exist, and strengthen it where it existed before. Jews who now remain in Anti-Semitic countries do so chiefly because even those among them who are most ignorant of history know that numerous changes of residence in bygone centuries never brought them any permanent good.

Sick logic, and a sick ideology imo.

Just the facts, the facts of COLD cruelty Vs. Israel.

Your goal was not to give me facts, it was to sway my emotions, and it failed.

1) They, the Jews, are both, a race AND a religion.

Tell yourself that nonsense…

2) Call it bigotry, if the wording "disturbs" you.

The only bigotry here is your overtly racist Arab vibe.

Do you call attempting to rescue Jews -- that [most of them] suffer persecution around the world, -- as "fascism"?

I call like I see it, Zionism demands that Anti-Semitism be raised to bring the Jews of the world screaming and crying into Zionist Israel. Have you read Herzl? If not I suggest you do because he outlines the goal of Zionist immigration to Israel:



Sick logic, and a sick ideology imo.

Just the facts, the facts of COLD cruelty Vs. Israel.

Your goal was not to give me facts, it was to sway my emotions, and it failed.

Wrong again, just the CRUEL Persecution on Israel -- facts and I did made already the point because you HAD to switch it around towards "appealing- emotions" - twice.

Every country controls immigration, I'm sure the policies of Arab countries are quite strict as well. Israel was established as a refuge for Jewish people, and unrestricted immigration would invite undesirable political consequences. Priority is given to Jewish people of any race, and to the relatives of Jewish people. If you happen to be Jewish by race only, and not religion, and have no relatives in Israel, you would have a hard time immigrating there. Judaism is strongly associated with a race, but is not exclusively a race. Yes, Israel's policies discriminate against non-Jews with no connection to Israel, but it was never intended to be a "melting-pot", like the US was. The Arab Palestinians are generally excluded from immigration due to obvious security concerns.




Sick logic, and a sick ideology imo. As far as Zionism, Undecided, you have yet to demonstrate why this quote by Herzl is sick. He is saying that prejudice against Jews will make Zionism more popular, a prejudice that no one needs to encourage. He is saying that history has proved that anti-semitism in some places will not magically disappear, and appeasement has led to disaster.

Wrong again, just the CRUEL Persecution on Israel -- facts and I did made already the point because you HAD to switch it around towards "appealing- emotions" - twice.

That sentence made no sense, control your drewel and make arguments not screaming matches please. The facts are that Zionists want the persecution of Jews so Israel can get more immigrants and bolster the case of Israel’s existence as a refugee camp.

Every country controls immigration, I'm sure the policies of Arab countries are quite strict as well.

I wouldn’t be surprised, but we aren’t talking about Arabs are we. WE are talking about Israel, what is with Zionists do they have a compulsions to compare themselves to Arabs constantly isn’t Israel supposedly closer to Western nations then Arabs. Comparing Israel and an Arab state seem illogical, and a false dichotomy. If Israel loves to scream that they are representative of Western values, then let’s compare Israel to her western allies.

Priority is given to Jewish people of any race, and to the relatives of Jewish people. If you happen to be Jewish by race only, and not religion, and have no relatives in Israel, you would have a hard time immigrating there.

Get over this racial Bull Shit because if it racial I’m a Jew, being Jewish is a cultural-religious expression not a racial one. If being Jewish was racial then the Palestinians would be Jewish as well. So please stop making this so darn easy.

A banner nearby proclaims: "Blacks are Jews, too," and the crowd, holding up pictures of their relatives, chants "Mama," "Papa," "Sister," "Grandma."

So are Christians, Muslims, Chinese, Malaysian, Russians, Germans, French, Arabs, etc. if we are to use your illogical logic. Stop the B.S.

Yes, Israel's policies discriminate against non-Jews with no connection to Israel, but it was never intended to be a "melting-pot", like the US was.

So it is Apartheid, keeping different peoples apart.

The Arab Palestinians are generally excluded from immigration due to obvious security concerns.

Also because they constitute a threat to Israel’s “Jewish” majority population, alas racism, and apartheid.

As far as Zionism, Undecided, you have yet to demonstrate why this quote by Herzl is sick.

If Hitler had said “We will use the Zionists to incite hatred against the Jews” that would not be sick? He is endorsing that very bad things happen to Jewry internationally, Zionism has created Anti-Semitism.

“It is essential that the sufferings of Jews. . . become worse. . . this will assist in realization of our plans. . .I have an excellent idea. . . I shall induce anti-semites to liquidate Jewish wealth. . . The anti-semites will assist us thereby in that they will strengthen the persecution and oppression of Jews. The anti-semites shall be our best friends”. (From his Diary, Part I, pp. 16)

If you want to believe in an ideology that actively wants you to be harmed in Oregon by A-S, if you enjoy being a puppet to a sicko ideology that demands that you suffer for it’s own good then you are indoctrinated so badly not to see the obviously disturbed mentality of Zionism.

He is saying that history has proved that anti-semitism in some places will not magically disappear, and appeasement has led to disaster.

He is saying let’s make it worse; boy did it get bad… yet you have no problems with inciting hatred of Jews on purpose by the same people that supposedly are supposed to help them? Zionism creates an artificial environment of hatred so immigration can happen.

If being Jewish was racial then the Palestinians would be Jewish as well.Um, no, you misunderstand the meaning of Semitic. It only refers to Semitic languages, not anthropological groups. I think there is a distinctive ethnic group within the larger group we call Jews, one that descended from the original Hebrews, but, of course, there are others as well, of different backrounds. They all share a common Jewish identity.

However Herzl also felt race was unimportant:
However, [Zangwill's] point of view is a racial one--which I cannot accept if I so much as look at him and at myself. All I am saying is: we are an historical entity, a nation made up of diverse anthropological elements. This also suffices for the Jewish state. No nation has uniformity of race.

Herzl (http://www.mideastweb.org/thejewishstate.htm) did not create the desire to return to Zion, which had been an intrinsic part of Jewish culture for 2000 years, nor did he invent either practical or 'political' Zionism. Practical Zionism, the settling of the land for purposes of rebuilding a Jews community in Palestine, had been practiced by the Bilu and other groups before Herzl. Political Zionism, the attempt to secure a "charter" for a Jewish state from Turkey, Egypt or another country, had been around for hundreds of years. It was the program of the false Messiah Shabetai Tzvi in the seventeenth century. In 1839, Sir Moses Montefiore had petitioned the Khedive of Egypt for a Jewish homeland in Palestine. Herzl's contribution was to establish a unified Zionist movement that made a public statement of its political ambitions and settlement program.
Zionism did not create or advocate anti-semitism, that is putting the cart before the horse. The quotation in question (if accurate, which I doubt, what is left out?), was not part of any sort of Zionist "plan", but is merely a collection of Herzl's musings and dreams and half baked ideas, most of which never became part of Zionist doctrine.
The diaries (http://iupjournals.org/jss/jss5-3.html) themselves are a mixed bag, especially in the earlier parts, which are composed mainly of collections of paper scraps on which Herzl jotted down, in a disjointed and disorganized way, ideas that came across his mind and that he thought he might use later; these are accompanied by drafts of plans of action or speeches he intended to make. Later in the diaries appear almost daily accounts of meetings and audiences he had with politicians, statesmen, and bankers, reports on meetings of committees and various Jewish activities, and drafts of letters to numerous personalities as well as biting comments about some of his interlocutors and collaborators, some of whom were important historical figures, some less so. Some of the entries run to dozens of pages, others are half-formed, staccato sentences; some were written in great haste, others in relative leisure; some contain almost verbatim accounts of meetings and talks, others just note headings for a later, fuller report that, in many cases, Herzl was never able to compose. Such a variety does not always make for easy reading or systematic assessment.

The sick distortion is in thinking that Herzl actively wanted anyone to be harmed, much less Jews.

Um, no, you misunderstand the meaning of Semitic. It only refers to Semitic languages, not anthropological groups.

Did I ever assert that it did? I know Semitic is a language grouping, I know Indo-European is a language grouping as well. But then you must agree that Anti-Semitism cannot be racist by definition.

I think there is a distinctive ethnic group within the larger group we call Jews, one that descended from the original Hebrews, but, of course, there are others as well, of different backrounds. They all share a common Jewish identity.

Again, can I immigrate to Israel if I am racially Jewish as you assert? To be racial in today’s world means you have to be distinct. I was shocked at many Jews there were in Hollywood, I knew there were many but because so many changed their names to sound gentile, and no one would have guessed they were a Jew. If I can’t tell you’re a Jew, then there is no Jewish race in the modern context. I can tell if your Black, Chinese, but a Jew no dice.

However Herzl also felt race was unimportant:

Bull Shit:
Those Jews who were advanced intellectually and materially entirely lost the feeling of belonging to their race.
Read the damn document, and stop appealing to an authority to make your fallacious arguments.

Zionism did not create or advocate anti-semitism, that is putting the cart before the horse.

A-S did not exist prior to the advent of Zionism, the term A-S was only invented in the 1890’s in conjuction with Zionism itself. Herzl even said that A-S is to be confused with what transpired to Jewry before the advent of Zionism:

Modern Anti-Semitism is not to be confounded with the religious persecution of the Jews of former times.

No, because he re-invented what is means to be Jewish, to be part of a race of people. That in reality don’t exist.

The sick distortion is in thinking that Herzl actively wanted anyone to be harmed, much less Jews.

It’s not sick it’s a fact, Zionism espouses hatred of the Jew:

We shall give up using those miserable stunted jargons, those Ghetto languages which we still employ, for these were the stealthy tongues of prisoners. Our national teachers will give due attention to this matter; and the language which proves itself to be of greatest utility for general intercourse will be adopted without compulsion as our national tongue. Our community of races peculiar and unique, for we are bound together only by the faith of our fathers.
I don’t know what more Anti-Jewish then calling the languages of Yiddish, and Ladino ghetto tongues and those of prisoners. He wanted a new Jewish race to give up on what was the Jew, to reform what it means to be Jewish. You have fallen into the trap you confused little child.

Why is it that those HYPOCRITES that use the anti-zionists mask [always end up that in fact] they're hating all Jews?
Even Mahathir "moderate" Islamo[Nazi] Leader, spoke against the Jews as a whole.

To whom do you think you are talking to?

But then you must agree that Anti-Semitism cannot be racist by definition.
It can because it does not mean discriminating on the basis of a language group. That is what the name implies, but in common usage, it refers only to Jews.
Again, can I immigrate to Israel if I am racially Jewish as you assert?I did not assert that. If you are only racially Jewish, I don't think you qualify under Israel's right of return, but then again, if you are related to Jews, it would be more likely your family or relatives were already there. They have to weigh your interest in the welfare of Israel.

Read the damn document, and stop appealing to an authority to make your fallacious arguments.
I doubt you read the document, since your quotes are exactly the edited ones favored by anti-Zionist websites. Herzl did not think that race is what contributes to Jewish identity, or is the factor that lends credibility to Zionism.

A-S did not exist prior to the advent of Zionism, the term A-S was only invented in the 1890’s in conjuction with Zionism itself. Herzl even said that A-S is to be confused with what transpired to Jewry before the advent of Zionism:
Yes, he wants to make the point that modern A-S stems from different reasons than religious differences, like in the past. It has to do more with the social and economic roles, resistance to assimilation. etc...

It’s not sick it’s a fact, Zionism espouses hatred of the Jew:
That is beyond rediculous, your quote does not support that idea in the least. What he hated was the situation of non-unity, both of language, and nationality, and the powerlessness that was the result.

Since the return to Zion has an integral part of Judaism for 2000 years, anti-Zionism is anti-semitism. However, we have to acknowledge that modern anti-Zionism does not usually refer to the ancient "return to Zion", (wherever that might be) but rather, objection to Israel and it's policies.

It can because it does not mean discriminating on the basis of a language group. That is what the name implies, but in common usage, it refers only to Jews.

So now the meaning of the word changes to fit the revisionist Zionist definition. Semitism even by your own admission is based on a linguistic grouping in the Middle East, and has no affiliation with races of the region. Anti-Semitism by her very definition which you so graciously reminded us means Anti-linguism not racism. Stop raping the English language further…

I did not assert that. If you are only racially Jewish, I don't think you qualify under Israel's right of return, but then again, if you are related to Jews, it would be more likely your family or relatives were already there.

Of course there is no Jewish race to be spoken of but lets assume just for fun shall we. If my relatives are all Christian why would they be in Israel, considering they are “racially” Jewish? I asked my local rabbi about a year ago “Is being Jewish racial?”, he said with certainty in his voice” No.”

I doubt you read the document, since your quotes are exactly the edited ones favored by anti-Zionist websites.

I read Der Judeenstaat, I had to for my philosophy paper, those are direct quotes from the book go read it if you don’t believe me.

Herzl did not think that race is what contributes to Jewish identity, or is the factor that lends credibility to Zionism.

You haven’t read Herzl so how do you know?

From Chapter one of Der Judeenstaat

Jew-baiting has merely stripped off our weaklings; the strong among us were invariably true to their race when persecution broke out against them.
-------------------------------------------------------------
Those Jews who were advanced intellectually and materially entirely lost the feeling of belonging to their race.

To him race was necessary for the Zionist program to work, because that excuses the immigration in direct violation of G-d’s laws. As said by a psychologist who studied the thought processes of Zionism:

. The secular Zionists redefined what it meant to be Jewish. As Ben Hecht, himself a secular Zionist, says in his book Perfidy: "They (the secular Zionists) were out to change the Jews from the people of the Torah to the people of Zion, a nation." This puts into a nutshell the secular Zionist ideology. Their idea may never have gotten off the ground, however, if it hadn't been for reinforcement from other quarters.
A nation requires more then a religion it requires a common racial tie. So why do you make up excuses when prominent Zionists make no bones about it?
Yes, he wants to make the point that modern A-S stems from different reasons than religious differences, like in the past. It has to do more with the social and economic roles, resistance to assimilation. etc...

But Anti-Semitism is essentially a new phenomenon based on the presumption of a “Jewish race”. That is the point, it has redefined Jewry and how Jews look at themselves.

That is beyond rediculous, your quote does not support that idea in the least. What he hated was the situation of non-unity, both of language, and nationality, and the powerlessness that was the result.

Ridiculous I assume is what you meant? Well no it is disgusting because he has just stated that he Jewry of Europe are disgusting with their disgusting languages, that doesn’t fit into his enlightened view of what Jewry was to be in the new era. You are an example of Jewry in the new a era, a man among men. Hassidic Jewry of Eastern Europe was aggressive and very defensive when it came to outside influence. To him the notion of the “Jew” was not acceptable in a “Jewish” state.

The Jihadi Arab Muslims that planned the masssacre on Haifa Restaurant 'Maxim', were ALSO venomously against the idea of Arabs & Israelis living together.
After all that's what Israel is all about, Peace & Security, Harmony & Safety.
And 75% of "palestinian" Arab Muslims still support Genocide bombing targeting babies [their poll], so is there official TV With saturated Hate sermons against Jews [and often against Christians] http://www.pmw.org.il What a huge difference between the two.

Anti-Semitism by her very definition which you so graciously reminded us means Anti-linguism not racism. Stop raping the English language further…
No, anti-semitism does not refer to the outdated concept of semitism as a race which includes Arabs and Jews together, even if the root word is the same. Anti-semitism means anti-Jewish. Semitic refers to a language group. I didn't invent or redefine these terms. I know it's not logical, but these are the definitions from www.dictionary.com

an·ti-Sem·i·tism (nt-sm-tzm, nt-)
n.
Hostility toward or prejudice against Jews or Judaism.
Discrimination against Jews.
and
Se·mit·ic ( P ) Pronunciation Key (s-mtk)
adj.
Of or relating to the Semites or their languages or cultures.
Of, relating to, or constituting a subgroup of the Afro-Asiatic language group that includes Arabic, Hebrew, Amharic, and Aramaic.

n.
The Semitic languages.
Any one of the Semitic languages.
So, who's raping the language? I'm using the dictionary definitions.


If my relatives are all Christian why would they be in Israel, considering they are “racially” Jewish? It's possible, there are many besides Jews in Israel.

I asked my local rabbi about a year ago “Is being Jewish racial?”, he said with certainty in his voice” No.” He's right, but that doesn't contradict anything I said. Being Jewish isn't racial, but a Jewish race exists within the larger, multicultural body of Judaism. We don't define ourselves by race, but by shared culture, ideology, and religion.

A nation requires more then a religion it requires a common racial tie. So why do you make up excuses when prominent Zionists make no bones about it? No, it only required a shared ideology, like "democracy".

I read Der Judeenstaat, I had to for my philosophy paper, those are direct quotes from the book go read it if you don’t believe me.
The quote about languages is, but the other (heavily edited and out of context) quote from the diaries is not. It is the diaries which I doubt you read- "The Jewish State" is available on the web. If you did read Herzl's diaries, at least provide the entire quote.


To him the notion of the “Jew” was not acceptable in a “Jewish” state.
Jesus, what the hell are you talking about? This is contrary to the entire tone of "The Jewish State", besides being inherently contradictory.

The Jewish state had to be secular, because Judaism does concern itself with running a nation. Besides, Jewish culture was heavily influenced by the greeks, who invented democracy.

I know it's not logical,

So you understand the inherent idiocy of the term, and you understand the illogical nature of the concept yet you still think its use is valid? You don’t think that’s a bit schizoid?

So, who's raping the language? I'm using the dictionary definitions.

A dictionary yes the layman’s excuse of intelligentsia, let’s get a brain shall we for a moment and stop appealing to an authority to prove a point. We must remember that the dictionary only reports what the term means; it doesn’t give the term its meaning.

It's possible, there are many besides Jews in Israel.

Well there are hardly any Jews in Israel as it is anyways:

Jewish 80.1%, Muslim 14.6% (mostly Sunni Muslim), Christian 2.1%, other 3.2% (1996 est.)

Considering that most of those “Jews” are actually atheist. Also I don’t see much Christian immigration to Israel much of those 2.1% Christians are most likely Arabic.

We don't define ourselves by race, but by shared culture, ideology, and religion.

Religion exactly, what is culture without an originating cause? Nothing, the cause of Judaism is by definition G-d, and Jews are defined by their belief in G-d, not the golden calf that is Zionism. If you think that Zionism defines what it means to be Jewish, then you have fulfilled the Zionist dream of abandoning the Torah, and the worst sin that can committed against G-d I hope you know is betrayal.

No, it only required a shared ideology, like "democracy".

LOL! Ok that’s a fallacious argument and one that cannot be proven by any measure of history. Nation states can exist independent of democracy. The ideology of Zionism demands that Jews change from their old selves into a new enlightened Jew so they can be en par with the gentile states. You want to be us…

The quote about languages is, but the other (heavily edited and out of context) quote from the diaries is not. It is the diaries which I doubt you read- "The Jewish State" is available on the web. If you did read Herzl's diaries, at least provide the entire quote.

I am going to read Herzl’s diaries, I have been trying to search for it on the net, but to no avail. But as it stands I see no reason not to believe that quotation it fits in perfectly with the ideology of self-hatred.

Jesus, what the hell are you talking about?

Please don’t use my lords name in vain, its not within your rights.

This is contrary to the entire tone of "The Jewish State", besides being inherently contradictory.

Welcome to Zionism my friend, no one said it made sense, and now you know how I feel.

The Jewish state had to be secular, because Judaism does concern itself with running a nation. Besides, Jewish culture was heavily influenced by the greeks, who invented democracy.

Jewish state doesn’t have to be secular; a secular Zionist state was a result of the rejection of the old Jewish ways of life. Herzl was an atheist and did not want Judaism to define what it meant to be a new “Jew”. God was right; those who call themselves Jews are nothing more then part of the “Synagogue of Satan” because you defied G-d in his face, and rejected him. I am not an overly religious person, but the stark similarities with what is said in the bible and the state of Zionism, and Israel are eerie. I can’t change your mind, but I hope for your own sake you take time to actually think about what is being said.

So you understand the inherent idiocy of the term, and you understand the illogical nature of the concept yet you still think its use is valid? You don’t think that’s a bit schizoid?
The terms are not idiotic, just illogical, due to the inaccuracy of their origins. Words don't have to have a logical origin for the concepts they represent to make sense. God, I feel like I'm talking to a 4 year old here.

A dictionary yes the layman’s excuse of intelligentsia
Perhaps, but we have to agree on the meaning of the terms before intellegent discussion is possible.

We must remember that the dictionary only reports what the term means; it doesn’t give the term its meaning.
Terms often get their meanings in inaccurate, convoluted ways that are beyond my control, sorry.

The ideology of Zionism demands that Jews change from their old selves into a new enlightened Jew so they can be en par with the gentile states. You want to be us…Maybe herzl's Zionism envisions a change in old habits, but if they wanted to be you, they would have just assimilated into the US.

But as it stands I see no reason not to believe that quotation it fits in perfectly with the ideology of self-hatred. Did Jesus hate himself when he encouraged a new understanding of God and the OT? No, he didn't hate Jews, and he didn't hate himself. The characterization of Zionism as self-hatred is exactly the kind of offensive bullshit offered up by the jewsagainstzionism fundamentalist morons.

This is contrary to the entire tone of "The Jewish State", besides being inherently contradictory.

Welcome to Zionism my friend, no one said it made sense, and now you know how I feel.
You're the only one not making sense here.


God was right; those who call themselves Jews are nothing more then part of the “Synagogue of Satan” because you defied G-d in his face, and rejected him. I am not an overly religious person, but the stark similarities with what is said in the bible and the state of Zionism, and Israel are eerie. I can’t change your mind, but I hope for your own sake you take time to actually think about what is being said. Jesus never said he was God, but a son of God, as are we all. But his teaching never got out, it was intercepted and usurped by the same ones that rejected his message, they are identical in their rigid, literal interpretations of scripture. The Palestinians are the ones "calling themselves Jews" by virtue of thinking they are the only rightful inhabitants of Judea.

The terms are not idiotic, just illogical, due to the inaccuracy of their origins.

Right and I’m the four year old here? Explain how something can be illogical yet not idiotic? All I hear from you Spider is excuses, not explanations.

Perhaps, but we have to agree on the meaning of the terms before intellegent discussion is possible.

The meaning of the term makes no sense, even to your own criteria so I guess we have just invalidated the term Anti-Semitism. If you wanted to be taken as a intelligent member of society then at least try to keep your arguments as coherent as possible please.

Terms often get their meanings in inaccurate, convoluted ways that are beyond my control, sorry.

Doesn’t mean we have to use them, for instance let’s take the term Mohammadan, it was used to describe Muslims as well. Although it is incorrect because it denotes that Muslims believe in Mohammed, like Christians believe in Christ. Which is false, yet that is a term in the dictionary as well, albeit insulting:

Mo•ham•med•an (m -)
adj.
1. Of or relating to Muhammad.
2. Offensive. Of or relating to Islam; Muslim.
3. n. Offensive A Muslim.


So then using your logic, it is ok to a Muslim Mohammedan because the dictionary says so.

Maybe herzl's Zionism envisions a change in old habits, but if they wanted to be you, they would have just assimilated into the US.

He wanted a change in all things Jewish, he wanted a new atheist, racist, Jew that can exist independent of the Torah. He wanted to be like gentiles, because we can define ourselves without a ideology, or a religion. Jews cannot, that’s the problem and Herzl wanted to change that.

Did Jesus hate himself when he encouraged a new understanding of God and the OT?

No he was not a Christian Jesus was a Jew who set out to reform the religion, Jews did not adhere. Thus Paul created a new religion called Christianity. Jesus did not hate or alienate his Jewishness, he believed in the OT. Unlike some members of sci who truly reject what they really are.

The characterization of Zionism as self-hatred is exactly the kind of offensive bullshit offered up by the jewsagainstzionism fundamentalist morons.

They aren’t “morons”; you are getting emotional because what they say is true. Merely insulting someone shows weakness in your arguments not theirs. I have to see you disprove anything.

You're the only one not making sense here.

Right, who here sounds like a Schizoid? Surely its not me…

The Palestinians are the ones "calling themselves Jews" by virtue of thinking they are the only rightful inhabitants of Judea.

LOL! Ok that makes no sense, they don’t call themselves Jews you do. Comprende, they call themselves what hey are, Muslims, Christians and Jews. You call yourself a Jew even though you reject G-d, you reject the basis of your culture, and you reject what you are to try to make yourself into a new people. So go ahead call yourself a “Jew” I know it isn’t going to be who will suffering for that sin…