Catholic Church: anti-Zionism = anti-Semitism

link

so now, joining Martin Luther King jr., 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?

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

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

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:

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.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

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

Vatican-PLO Agreement

Rabbi Jonathan Sacks

Other Rabbis

From JewsNotZionists

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

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.

As said in this quote:

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:

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:

1

NO. absolutley and totally and utterly wrong .

2

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.

 

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

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

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:

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

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 of the manifest destiny of both Biblical and present Israel. The Bush Administration, for example, is much influenced by this ideology. Here's More Christian Zionism background

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.

 

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.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

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.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

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.