Zionists answer back......

Discussion in 'World Events' started by outlandish, Aug 8, 2003.

  1. and2000x Guest

    Alright, I see my errors.

    I'm talking about Jews as a religious group, not as a race or culture. Futhermore, an athiest raised by a Jew may still use Jewish dual thinking and morality even if they are not Jewish by religion, much like many liberals espouse 'morality' even in anti-religious stances. I guess I am trying to say Jewish by philosophy, for example:

    "The Jewish Phenomenon : Seven Keys to the Enduring Wealth of a People by Steven Silbiger

    With a sprinkling of Jewish humor, Silbiger shows convincingly how these principles have helped the Jews historically and how they continue to ensure Jewish success today. More important, Silbiger makes clear that these seven "secrets" are not secret at all and are equally at the disposal of Jews and non-Jews alike. The amazing success of the Jews simply proves that they work."


    Chauvanism and nepotism is a particular trait of the Jewish philosophy would you not say?

    This does NOT apply to all Jews. For example, there are many Jews living out in eastern countries who have a very different perspective and practicing of the Torah that western Jews would consider mad.
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  3. Ghassan Kanafani Mujahid Registered Senior Member

    Alright, I see my errors.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    This does NOT apply to all Jews. For example, there are many Jews living out in eastern countries who have a very different perspective and practicing of the Torah that western Jews would consider mad.

    Indeed and that was what I was aiming at , however those differences do not end nor start with Torah . It deals with culture , socio-economical situation , history , etc .

    As for the link , interesting book . However I dont think it reflects Jewry , other than Amerikan Jewry .

    I saw the chapters and one ought to be added IMO . The tribal circulation of money , a system that ensures the community to provide certain facilitations (like money for college) if a person within the community shows that he is a worthy investment that leads to the other chapter of taking care so they can take care for you (thats not Jewish btw thats rather a common standard issue regarding children worldwide depending on economical situation of the nation , but surely USA Jewry has managed to deal with the issue in exceptional ways) .

    In any ways this tribal arrangement of financing ofcourse in several circle goes beyond education , ofcours it deals with the business sector just as easy and when a structure is created that specific known peoples are in relevant and beneficial positions this system of wealth and prosperity and overal succes within such society is maintaned .
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  5. guthrie paradox generator Registered Senior Member

    There is a small problem here in that I havnt studied jews a great deal. I have better things to do with my time.
    However, on reading the views of the people who have read it, that are posted on amazon, it seems to me that firstly, you are ascribing something a bit too specifically, and secondly that that still doesnt directly adress my main points.
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  7. Alagar Registered Senior Member

    I'm replying only to say that I've read the posts to this point and I 'm not ignoring anyone or something. Since I'm too busy lately with my studies and was a little distrupted by a friend of mine getting hurt in the attack several days ago, I have very little time to actuallly sit down and reply. I will come back to reply in the following days, though.
  8. Alagar Registered Senior Member

    Actully, In the mandate form you see a clear path in british eyes to not let any jewish settlement disturb any rights of arabs in the regions. The so famous Balfur statement saw zionism in bright eyes only "without any act that might hurt other nations rights in the region" (my translation from hebrew)
    Though those right weren't defined fully in the mandate, jewish immigration was very minimized and bound, though for many jews it ment death in Europe.

    So we can claim that Jews could be sought as enemies, but their intentions were not to drive anyone out at that time, and some brought capital with them, so palestinian arab could actully benefit from their arrival if they got along.

    The 3-year period of 1917-1920 might prove you wrong. The famous "The police is with us!" call during the massacre in Hebron might implicate that pro-judaism wasn't a part of the army or colonial managment, but only a part of more federal groups. Churchil, later prime-minister, was a first council to the land, and his main idea (as seen in the mandat protocol) was to allow jews to immigrate only as long as they don't pose a threat and can be founded by jews living in the area.

    Zionists held no threat over palestinian arabs at that time. Those circumstances (in which unacceptable actions can develop themselves) were not created.

    Sharon doesn't hold DIRECT responsibility for Sabra and Shatila, but INDIRECT. The diffrence is beetwen someone who can legally be charged for that, than for someone who could stop the massacre from happening, and that is a big diffrence.
    There is no expansionist policies in Israel, taking out "new Heirut" (which is not in the knesset) and Ra'am (which is similar to ba'ath parties). The border, along the likud, is supposed to be nagotiated somewhere beetwen the military borders of today and the green line, assuming territory sweeping will take place. Nothing out of the current borders, anyway.

  9. Ghassan Kanafani Mujahid Registered Senior Member


    We can see from documented Survey of Palestine the legal Jewish migration into Palestine :

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    The mere fact that no violence was used with this is because little resistance would be offered , the only reason violence was used later is because resistance evolved , I am aware of this .

    However these numbers show a demographic threat for the peoples of Palestine , and Zionist intention was to declare a state . Ofcourse when one would have ability to take land and declare a state without a fight that would be preferred , the resistance is indeed the motive for attack .

    Their intentions were not to drive anyone out by force , but rather through other means it cannot be denied their intentions relied on a Jewish state that is what Zionism is all about . The existanc eof that state was a threat to the existance of other peoples there , the wars and resistance merely created opportunity to engage in battles some already expected and thought inevitable .

    In 1923 Jabotinsky surely understood the situation perfectly , and I reckon that many intelligent zionists did so

    They look upon Palestine with the same instinctive love and true fervor that any Aztec looked upon his Mexico or any Sioux looked upon his prairie. To think that the Arabs will voluntarily consent to the realization of Zionism in return for the cultural and economic benefits we can bestow on them is infantile. This childish fantasy of our “Arabo-philes� comes from some kind of contempt for the Arab people, of some kind of unfounded view of this race as a rabble ready to be bribed in order to sell out their homeland for a railroad network.

    This view is absolutely groundless. Individual Arabs may perhaps be bought off but this hardly means that all the Arabs in Eretz Israel are willing to sell a patriotism that not even Papuans will trade. Every indigenous people will resist alien settlers as long as they see any hope of ridding themselves of the danger of foreign settlement.

    Iron Wall

    Yet the intentions were clear , the creation of a Zionist state . His considerations of posing a thread are either misjudged or simply differently understood . A thread to the Arabs such migration did form , the creation of a state likewise .

    A 3 year period doesnt reflect the entire mandate , and most importantly the relevance does not lie in a compare toward importance of Brittish interests , but that of Arabs . To split the land was an issue that could not be accepted . Zionism because of its hostile nature could never , even if accepted , remain equally powerfull toward its neighbourhood in order to not pose a threat . Zionism drives on superiority , ideological superiority , economical superiority , political and military superiority . Such a state can never live in peace with its neighbours , other than forced .

    So yes they were created . Demographic explosion is considered threatning . When this comes with economical etc superiority the threat is increased . Those circumstances were created when first zionist (intentions for a state) set foot on Palestine .

    To the point of having an impression of Arik's moral values over political gain this example suiths perfectly . It shows the objections Arik has to such policies .

    This border of Israel that Likud plays around with is as temporary as the Hudna offered by Hamas , and you ought to know this . What is Israels record time period for maintaining a stable border ? Every 'defensive' war has been used as an excuse to expand either for actual settlement or for bargain , oftenly both . Golan is still occupied do we forget that ? It has been 3 years since Lebanon are we forgetting that ? WB & gaza today , yes ?

    There is absolutely no 'word' that Likud can give (which btw they dont) that ensures Israeli stability within these borders . The ideology is there , the history is there , the possibility and motivation are there and the current military situation is perfectly fit . I dont see how their word would do away all of this .

    And how exactly did Likud change somuch ? On what grounds are you having faith in their actions to be different from their historical ground and ideology ? And dont forget the ultra's pushing .

    You see zionist as centrist so left or right would not be 'more' zionist , I see zionist as as a movement that has an outsetting that can be increased , this increasement increases the fullness of the ideology . I understand you have problems seeing this because you consider yourself a zionist , while you have socialist tendencies . I see zionism as nationalism , a nationalist increase is paralel to a zionist increase .

    What war-crimes against palestinians or Arab states did I neglect ? I condemn the Arab regimes for their interest in Palestine beyond Palestinians and I condemn Palestinians attacking their own brothers because of their religion .

    We should be very aware that not all Palestinians attacked 'any' Jews nor did all Palestinians attack 'only' Zionists .

    I also remember the driving force behind their immigration . It is explained in this section Apartheid of my thread I think you find of interest of reading .

    Israel knew it could not colonize in peace , as mentioned previously . A state is an objective that deals with authority over peoples , and a nationalist (Jewish) state is an objective that deals with ethnical discrimination . Non-agression means attempt to trick in this case , the trick didnt work perfectly leading to necesity of agression .

    And no it is indeed not the driving force of middle east misery , the driving force of middle east misery is sources-exploitation , corruption and religious conservatism .

    Israel is merely the driving source of the misery inflicted upon the peoples it occupies and has chased away .

    And that is exactly the point with the Arab-Palestinian difference , a mere denial/destruction of this cause does not make one cause for both . Both the Arab regimes as the peoples of Palestine have different interests in the land of Palestine .

    I would even say that israel is the best thing that could ever happen to the Arab regimes , as without Israel the peoples of Arabia would have more space for misery they could potentially identify to their corrupt regimes . But ofcourse fascism would rule as always and little would be achieved , the chances would have been better though .

    What was the PA supposed to be doing ?

    Promisses have been broken on both sides , the basis for this would be the demand of military demolition .

    Look it is very simple , for your demands to be met is necesarry a state a government and national defence forces . Without such you cannot demand this . Because when you do what you demand is weaking of the Palestinian resistance . The resistance is against you , you cannot expect that your demand is met without alternative for resistance .

    Tanks for belts and then we'll talk .

    You quote me but dont respond ? ......

    To be more specific of what i mean regard the previously mentioned thread , the last part .

    Yes put fault as the original problem remains the right for the existance of the zionist state .

    Again I ask by whom were they driven to Israel ? I will never deny that there are not Arabs who hate jews and want them away , or Arab leaders that would potentially profit somehow and commit such actions , however this is simple Zionist policy . Again I refer you to my thread .

    * When Arab nationalism would come in a factor it would be rather to fight than to run away .

    * I cannot see a role for Arab propaganda incitement for a peoples to leave everything behind based on 'trust' they will return . A relevant motivator for a person to come to such actions would be the fear of its existance (massacres) and simple direct armed threat (expulsion) by the peoples who would take their possesions and land .

    Such measures are not satisfactory , their intent is gaining legitimacy not behaving moral . If that would be the case Israel would not be a state it is in its roots , a racist state . Your entire argument is based on legitimacy of Israeli existance . IMO if Israel was a social state without ethnic idenitity you would have very good points , at least within national perspective . This however is not the case , Israeli intentions toward some peoples is merely for self-interest and that does not include Palestinian interest .

    * Israel created it because Israel created the refugeeproblem through ethnic cleansing . This is a fact . That is where the claim lies .

    * Arab regimes are responsible for making it worse (not in terms of war against israel but in terms of care for the refugees)

    That is the relation that the 2 have with this refugeeproblem . And to be honest I have a much greater problem with the Arab regimes than I have with israel , because form an enemy you cannot expect any difference , but from your brother you ought to . They didnt get it .

    To put it in different words , your desire would be the exact same zionist state without violence but in peacefull measures . However the violence is BECAUSE of this existence of the state , and from there it developped onward .

    You offer nothing but co-existance under zionism , an Israel as today but without all the violence . That is a dream and a reasonable person can see the illusion and unreasonableness in this . Hey I would want an independant Arab Brussels in peace , is that reasonable of me to ask ? There is no taking anothers property in peace , such would be called bribery and eventually as it explodes the same result emerges , and so it did . You cannot expect differently we are not hippies .

    * Arab information-acces in its attempts is much more manipulative than Israeli . Israeli information-acces in its result is alot more manipulatory than Arab .

    * Respect of civil rights cannot be considered legiitim when applied AFTER all citizens are displaced .

    How are public interests better maintained ?

    * Lebanon is an anarchy as Israel is fascismo .
    * Dont do it to make me happy do it for the sake of objectivity .

    Was there talk of a stake ? Already 'forward' ought to be considered marginal in complete historical perspective , however if this forward does not even include a souvereign state the value is lacking completely in the meaning of progression .

    I am aware your peoples base policy on momentary results . Another great point for never-lasting peace . Its all so meaningless a genocide would happen just as easy afterwards .

    Look if you are a slave and you revolt you may escape you may get shot . But if you obey your chances to survive longer increase . Your advise is to obey . Such is not to be accepted .

    The only reason there is no violent solution is because no violence leads to actual destruction/damage but mere a symbolical statement of retalliation and justice . Violence has not been a solution because the political think-thank consists of baboons with personal interests .

    I agree this is going nowhere , I dont agree surrender is the alternative .

    An economic solution does not equal some necesity-fuinding to get something moving . I am speaking of complete retribution of damage being done in financial terms and a management that can keep such effords within positivity of Palestinian economy .

    And this not being done by others , but by Israel . That is how justice would create opportunities and that is what never will happen . Israel wouldnt even admit the damage to have been done in order to deny its retribution .

    I havent witnessed one before

    That is true , but the intellectual progression we are speaking of would bring in little benefit for the masses . The masses need daily nurture etc and such is not being improved somuch by making matters more complex .

    Complexity is not always intelligent , surely it is not intelligent by defintion . Oftenly it is simply udnesirable
  10. Repo Man Valued Senior Member


    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Thought I'd share a laugh.

Share This Page