Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Israel's "Right to Exist"

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Israel/Palestine Donate to DU
 
norml Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 12:22 AM
Original message
Israel's "Right to Exist"
Israel's "Right to Exist"
by KATHLEEN CHRISTISON Sunday, Jun. 04, 2006 at 4:36 AM


The insistence on Arabic acceptance of Israel's "right to exist" is racist without a similar insistence for Israel to accept Palestine's "right to exist."

"The Palestinians Must Pay a Price for Their Choice"
Surrender vs. the Right to Exist
By KATHLEEN CHRISTISON
Former CIA analyst

Noting that he had been raised with the deep conviction that the Jewish people would never have to relinquish any part of the "land of our forefathers," Ehud Olmert told Congress in his address to a joint session on May 24, "I believed, and to this day still believe, in our people's eternal and historic right to this entire land." He did then concede that dreams alone cannot bring peace and will not preserve Israel as a "secure democratic Jewish state." But what stands out in this little-noted statement of Jewish attachment to the land is its affirmation of a supreme Jewish right to all of Palestine, never mind who else may live there. In the context of any hope for a just and equitable peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinians, this is a deal-breaker par excellence.

In light of this official Israeli view that the Jewish people have "an eternal and historic right to this entire land," one is startled by the hypocrisy of the demand -- enunciated universally by Israel, the U.S., the EU, and most of the rest of the international community -- that the Palestinians must recognize Israel's "right to exist" before anyone will even speak to them, before they can be admitted to civilized company in the world. Does this demand that Palestinians recognize Israel's right to exist mean that they must recognize Israel's "right to the entire land" as defined by Olmert? And if that is the case, how could the Palestinians possibly be assured, even if Israel were magnanimously to grant them a "state" or a "Bantustan" in a part of that "entire land," that Israel would not at some future date take it back, since Jews have "an eternal and historic right" to it? Why should anyone believe that any Israeli concession of land would be permanent?

Olmert's assertion of this all-encompassing Jewish "right" is certainly not a new feature of Israeli and Zionist dogma. The notion has underlain Zionism from the beginning, hidden sometimes behind a leftist veneer of accommodation to the reality of the Palestinian presence in this sacred Jewish land, but never very far beneath the surface. The Zionist belief in Jewish supremacy has never truly been hidden. I ran into this in crude form a few years ago. Shortly after the Palestinian intifada began in 2000, an acquaintance -- no friend, but an irritating bigot who always argues Israel's case openly on the basis that Jewish interests are superior to Palestinian interests -- wrote me an email in which he concluded that, because there is "simply not enough room in Palestine for both Jews and Palestinians," the Palestinians should "go back to Jordan, where they came from" and leave Palestine to the Jews, who own it and so badly need a homeland. (The erroneous notion that Palestinians came from Jordan is a conscience-clearing artifact of the Zionist imagination, designed to "prove" that Palestinians did not originally come from Palestine, are simply interlopers in a Jewish land, and therefore will not be hurt or inconvenienced by "going back" where they came from.) I told him he was factually wrong and completely immoral -- which I'm sure did nothing to burden his conscience, but which did serve, blessedly, to end our correspondence.

The particular argument put forth by this particular man expresses more crude racism than most supporters of Israel would admit to feeling, but in fact his position reflects the official views of the Israeli government and of the U.S. government that supports it. Ultimately, his position, which is of course identical to Olmert's, captures the essence of Zionism and defines what has been the basis of U.S. policy toward Israel and Zionism since well before the state of Israel was established 58 years ago: that is, that Israel's interests as a Jewish state and Israel's "rights" always take precedence, no matter what the interests and rights of the Palestinians, and that Palestinian needs can be accommodated only when these do not interfere with Israel's or when Palestinians give in to Israel's demands. At bottom, this is a policy based on the assumption that there is "simply no room in Palestine for both Jews and Palestinians" and that the only possible solution over the long term is for the Palestinians to disappear in some fashion. As the PLO ambassador to the U.S., Afif Safieh, is fond of saying, Israel wants the Palestinians' geography but not their demography -- the land but not the people.


snip


http://sf.indymedia.org/news/2006/06/1728889.php
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Jim Sagle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 12:23 AM
Response to Original message
1. Exterminationist hogwash.
Edited on Mon Jun-05-06 12:24 AM by Jim Sagle
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Poll_Blind Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 01:10 AM
Response to Reply #1
7. What's an "exterminationist"?
PB
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jim Sagle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 11:05 AM
Response to Reply #7
18. In this case, one who wants to obliterate a whole nation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Behind the Aegis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 12:35 AM
Response to Original message
2. What an ignorant piece...
...however, it is not as hateful as some of her pieces of crap. Basically, this is nothing but a rabid anti-Israeli screed by a woman (im)famous for this filth.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RDU Socialist Donating Member (290 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 12:38 AM
Response to Original message
3. anyone who uses the term Zionism in the venomous manner this author has
Edited on Mon Jun-05-06 12:38 AM by RDU Socialist
is in league with idiots like David Duke, and I give them absolutely no credibility for that very reason. I'm surprised The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion isn't being quoted in this piece.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
norml Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 12:48 AM
Response to Reply #3
4. Since your post is the funniest, I'll respond to it first.
What's not true about what she's saying?

What?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pelsar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 12:52 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. a lot....in fact most of the article..
start with this:

The Zionist belief in Jewish supremacy has never truly been hidden

and then continue with this:

the Palestinians should "go back to Jordan, where they came from

the article itself screams of BS...but it only takes a 5 sec look of someone who has basic knowledge and the players to understand that...and of course an open mind.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
norml Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 01:02 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. "it's called jordan"
Edited on Mon Jun-05-06 01:09 AM by norml
Web Results 1 - 10 of about 272 for "it's called jordan". (0.15 seconds)

The Palestinians Have a State: It's called Jordan.The Palestinians Have a State: It's called Jordan. FrontPageMagazine.com ^ | Tuesday, August 5, 2003 | By Sidney Zion. Posted on 08/05/2003 1:39:35 AM PDT ...
www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/958336/posts - 34k - Cached - Similar pages


The Head Heeb: Touching on a touchy topicIt's called Jordan! Go there and be happy already. Let Israel live in Peace and you will be welcomed with open arms. The West Bank was promised to Israel ...
headheeb.blogmosis.com/archives/015236.html - 21k - Cached - Similar pages


The Best Quotes From Mark Steyn's 'The Face Of The Tiger' - Right ..."In fact, there is a Palestinian state: it's called Jordan, whose population has always been majority Palestinian. It's not as big a state as it used to be, ...
www.rightwingnews.com/quotes/tiger.php - 28k - Cached - Similar pages


Comments on 6623 | MetaFilterYou are factually incorrect, and spouting direct phrases "there already is a Palestine: it's called Jordan" directly from the propaganda handbook, ...
www.metafilter.com/mefi/6623 - 27k - Cached - Similar pages


The Badger Herald - University of Wisconsin-MadisonAnonymous (April 7, 2005 @ 12:03pm):. There IS an independent palestinian state. It's called Jordan. Anonymous (April 7, 2005 @ 1:26pm): ...
badgerherald.com/oped/ 2005/04/07/twostate_option_not.php - 24k - Cached - Similar pages


Political Animal: Comment on Hamas and the WestIt's called Jordan. Isreal did not confine those who fled, ... It's called Jordan. Yes, and prior to 1967 Jordan's border included the West Bank and the ...
www.washingtonmonthly.com/ mt/mt-comments.cgi?entry_id=8220 - 84k - Cached - Similar pages


The Washington MonthlyIt's called Jordan. Yes, and prior to 1967 Jordan's border included the West Bank and ... It's called Jordan." Israel would have the west bank and keep it, ...
www.washingtonmonthly.com/ archives/individual/2006_02/008220.php - 118k - Cached - Similar pages


Breakthrough for peace or war in the Middle East?The Palestinians already have their own state alongside Israel - it's called Jordan. The Palestianians got three-fourths of the land and Israel had to fight ...
www.worldmagblog.com/blog/archives/011104.html - 21k - Cached - Similar pages


Join the Boycott PollThey already have 1 Pal state it's called Jordan. If Palestinians start relocating to their new homes now they should be nicely settled in their new ...
www.internationalvoting.com/cgi/comment.cgi?number=w754 - 25k - Cached - Similar pages


lgf: Right of Return Is Focal PointThere is already a Palestinan state, it's called Jordan. ... It's called Jordan. They are 2nd class citizens not because of Israel, but because of the ...
www.littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=4165 - 113k - Cached - Similar pages


http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&q=%22it%27s+called+jordan%22&btnG=Search
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Behind the Aegis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 01:16 AM
Response to Reply #6
8. Do you have a point?
The quote pelsar gave was based on the author's correspondance with one person, to which she 'implies' is the "popular" opinion in Israel, which it is not. This woman is a hack.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
norml Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 01:52 AM
Response to Reply #8
9. "his position reflects the official views of the Israeli government"
"The particular argument put forth by this particular man expresses more crude racism than most supporters of Israel would admit to feeling, but in fact his position reflects the official views of the Israeli government and of the U.S. government that supports it."

This is true.

Where by the author is it 'implied' that it's a "popular" opinion in Israel?

It might well be popular opinion, considering who's gotten elected.

I'd have to see some polling results to know for sure.

I know it is popular opinion in the right wing media, and in the evil movement that calls itself conservative.

I've heard that drivel so many times that it took not a moment to recall it, and post evidence of it.

That's my point, to provide evidence.

Where's your's?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Behind the Aegis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 02:05 AM
Response to Reply #9
11. here...
"Where by the author is it 'implied' that it's a "popular" opinion in Israel?"

"The particular argument put forth by this particular man expresses more crude racism than most supporters of Israel would admit to feeling, but in fact his position reflects the official views of the Israeli government and of the U.S. government that supports it. Ultimately, his position, which is of course identical to Olmert's, captures the essence of Zionism and defines what has been the basis of U.S. policy toward Israel and Zionism since well before the state of Israel was established 58 years ago..."

To be more accurate, I should have written "supporters of Israel," not just Israelis.

She is an inaccurate, misinformed bigot herself.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eyl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 12:15 PM
Response to Reply #9
21. I see
would you mind citing where the Israeli government (or the US government, for that matter) is claiming that the Palestinians should return to Jordan?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
norml Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 02:02 PM
Response to Reply #21
27. No one's saying it's official policy concerning the Palestinians
that they should "disappear in some fashion".

It's left to their right wing propagandists to make that case.

What's being said in the article is that it's what their official policies amount to.

"that is, that Israel's interests as a Jewish state and Israel's "rights" always take precedence, no matter what the interests and rights of the Palestinians, and that Palestinian needs can be accommodated only when these do not interfere with Israel's or when Palestinians give in to Israel's demands. At bottom, this is a policy based on the assumption that there is "simply no room in Palestine for both Jews and Palestinians" and that the only possible solution over the long term is for the Palestinians to disappear in some fashion. As the PLO ambassador to the U.S., Afif Safieh, is fond of saying, Israel wants the Palestinians' geography but not their demography -- the land but not the people."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kaneko Donating Member (87 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 01:52 AM
Response to Reply #6
10. Ir seems absolutely incredible
that someone at this day and age would quote " the Wise men of Zion" which has been debunked decades ago as a forgery- please let's stay with facts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
papau Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-09-06 08:50 AM
Response to Reply #4
58. ??? - Palestinian State right to exist is challenged by whom?
Edited on Sun Jul-09-06 08:54 AM by papau
The assertion that Jordan is a Palestinian State, while true, does not also imply that Israel or the US opposes a West Bank/Gaza Palestinian state.

"The particular argument put forth by this particular man expresses more crude racism than most supporters of Israel would admit to feeling, but in fact his position reflects the official views of the Israeli government and of the U.S. government that supports it." - not true as to implication.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eauclaireliberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 03:13 AM
Response to Original message
12. Israel does not have a right to exist
...neither does the United States, Great Britian, Canada, Spain, etc. They exist because of concerted efforts to take the land by force and to keep that land in the hands of a few...either by law, treaties, or at gunpoint, whatever works. What gets everyone nuts about Israel is that they want their conquered to accept them and want other nations to protect their interests. I seriously doubt that 150 years ago North and South American Indians would state that annexed countries from Spain and England had a right to exist here. We are in these nations because people have killed and died. That is the human legacy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tocqueville Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 06:56 AM
Response to Reply #12
13. specially when one ceased to exist 1900 years ago
Edited on Mon Jun-05-06 07:00 AM by tocqueville
I never understood the logic of claiming a territory from a tribe that was completely assimilated by the Romans/Greeks and later by the Arabs. Even the language disappeared and had to be reinvented. Today's Palestinians are nothing else than the descendents from the people that originally populated "Israel" + some immigration, but "alas" with a different religion.

When Milosevic claimed total control over Kosovo because the Serbs had won a battle there over the Turks 1400 years ago, the international ccommunity told him "you can't do that" and went to war to prevent it. Milosevic's claim was theoretically as "valid" as the the one from Theodore Herlz. No wonder that the Palestinians are complaining about double standards.

Israel's existence today has a pure religious motive and a very little ethnic one. But it coincides with the West's geopolitical interests. It's very doubtful that if this is viable in the long run. If (when) the West's geopolitical interests change (no oil left in the ME), Israels is going to find itself alone, very alone...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pelsar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 07:10 AM
Response to Reply #13
14. wow... do you know nothing!!
Edited on Mon Jun-05-06 07:47 AM by pelsar
Israel's existence today has a pure religious motive and a very little ethnic one

perhaps you should do some reading on the early zionists...they're motives....Ben Gurions opinion of religion, what brought the concentration camp survivors to israel?....nah...that would ruin a wonderful thesis based on nothing....


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tocqueville Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 08:00 AM
Response to Reply #14
15. even Herzl understood that
"Whereas his first brochure and his first congress address lacked all religious thought, and his famous remark that the return to Zion would be preceded by a return to Judaism seemed at the moment due rather to a sudden inspiration than to deep thought, subsequent events have proved that it was a true prophecy."

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

What I mean is that even if the original intentions were different, it turned out to be like that. Besides, even if there were pure "ethnical/historical" motives to be considered, I find they make little sense. If the theory "our ancestors were in that place first 1000 years ago or more" and thus have the right to that land, were a sufficient motive, conflicts would "legally" explode all over the planet, and specially all over America. Why Israel should be an exception beats me. Religious archetypes related to a common judeo-christian culture in the West seem to give a justification, but there is hardly an historical one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pelsar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 09:43 AM
Response to Reply #15
16. how about reading?
israel is a secular country......the binding element of judisaism is a combo of culture, history and world wide spasms of anti semetism.

what you either dont get, dont want to cant understand is that israel was born out of anti semetism....2,000 years worth. Thats why israel is the exception.

perhaps you have other examples of a single ethnic/cultural group that has be victimized all over the world for the past 2,000 years?...and i mean progroms, race riots, blood libels, world conspiracies, cartoons that have endured 1,000 of years?

the historical justification goes back to jewish history...being kicked out. But you see after 2,000 years of being kicked around, and with the protocols of zion still making the rounds, we really dont care if were"understood or not'.

from my point of view...your head is simply buried in the sand, playing "dumb"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jim Sagle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 11:03 AM
Response to Reply #16
17. I don't think he's playing, pelsar.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
barb162 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 11:32 AM
Response to Reply #17
20. I think you're right
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pelsar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 12:36 PM
Response to Reply #20
22. rather typical....
Edited on Mon Jun-05-06 12:37 PM by pelsar
i've noticed it before...sooner or later they "disappear".....since the belief they have has nothing to "stand on" other than a mere belief, since history nor facts will back them up.

its just one more version of the attempt to make the only country on the globe be declared illegitimate.....and the only one with a jewish majority.....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jim Sagle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 01:17 PM
Response to Reply #22
24. I'm sure that's just a coincidence.
:D
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tocqueville Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 02:26 PM
Response to Reply #22
28. what history, what facts ?
Edited on Mon Jun-05-06 03:22 PM by tocqueville
facts are that a couple of tribes ceased to exist as an independent cultural entity round 100 AD. People converted to new roman-greek culture and were later assimilated in an islamic one. They then continued to live in the same area and are called Palestinians. 1800 years later, a branch of exiled descendents with a mixed ethnical background and some remnants of the old culture, claimed that this particular piece of land belonged to THEM and to nobody else.

With that kind of reasoning the Scandinavians could claim back wholes part of Europe, Natives most of America, Berbers most of North Africa and Serbs most of Kosovo (which they did).

I am sorry but it is YOU who is "standing on" a mere belief. As the the original poster wrote in this thread,
the "right to exist" is only a matter of force. The problem with Israel is that their Palestinians cousins don't have the same version of history than the newcomers. They say "we have been there 2000 years and for some of us even longer". And they have a point. The problem for them is that their lobby in the West was non-existent and the West suffered a collective guilt from the Holocaust. So it wasn't only a matter of letting some Jewish refugees settle on land they had legally bought back, they turned a blind eye when these settlers EXPELLED BY FORCE the original dwellers with some "historical-religious" motivation à la Milosevic. Since then Israel has been in breach of all international resolutions refused to go back at least to 1967 borders.

So who has the MORAL right to "exist" can apply as much to the Jewish entity than to the other. And when you try to look at that from an outside neutral point of view, the Jewish case is very weak. The conflict could probably be settled if Israel ceased to claim a historical right to land and returned occupied territories. But so far they don't.

So please skip the demagogery such as "they don't stand on facts" and "they are anti-semite since they disagree with us", DU is worth a better debate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pelsar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 02:38 PM
Response to Reply #28
29. you skipped two points...
Edited on Mon Jun-05-06 02:38 PM by pelsar
the crucial ones.....

the existence anti semetism through out the world for 2,000+ years as the reason behind zionism (your claim that israel is religious based is simply false)


jewish history links back....and its found within the jewish culture and religion since the romans kicked them out.

if the berbers and serbs etc were hounded since the day they were "kicked out" you might have some moral equivalence but thats not the case so your attempt at showing how foolish the jewish connection to israel is doesn't work.

as i mentioned, and you skipped over: any other social/cultural/religious group have 2,000 years of being kicked out of various countries?...blood libels that exist even today, world wide conspiracies attributed them that exist today,

lets start with that....any other group?

oh yea...and whats your "proof" for zionism being a religious movement and israel being a religious country?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tocqueville Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 03:20 PM
Response to Reply #29
31. see my post below (unique)
Edited on Mon Jun-05-06 03:21 PM by tocqueville
it answers the first point

about the second :

I never said that zionism was a religious movement in the beginning. But the use of religious archetypes to motivate the presence in the region is a fact you cannot deny. Even if Israel is "formally" a secular state (but without a clear separation of church and state having a "status quo" instead), the motives from the new settlers are mostly religious. Ask any settler why they are building colonies on Palestinian soil : answer : it's our historical "holy" right, it's the land of the Bible. It doesn't matter if they call it a kibbutz or not.

At the end of 2003, of Israel's 6.7 million people, 76.7% were Jewish (by religion), 15.8% were Muslim, 2.1% were Christian, 1.6% were Druze and the remaining 3.7% (mainly FSU immigrants) were not classified by religion. <1>

9 percent of Israeli Jews define themselves as Haredim ("ultra-orthodox"); an additional 9% as "religious"; 34% as "traditionalists" (not strictly adhering to Jewish law or halakha); and 48% as "secular". Among the secular, 53% believe in God. <2> However, 78% of Israelis participate in a Passover seder <[3>].

The Orthodox spectrum
The spectrum covered by "Orthodox" in the diaspora exists in Israel, again with some important variations. The Orthodox spectrum in Israel includes a far greater percentage of the Jewish population than in the diaspora, though how much greater is hotly debated. Various ways of measuring this percentage, each with its pros and cons, include the proportion of religiously observant Knesset members (about 25 out of 120), the proportion of Jewish children enrolled in religious schools, and statistical studies on "identity".

What would be called "Orthodox" in the diaspora includes what is commonly called dati ("religious") or haredi ("ultra-Orthodox") in Israel. The former term includes what is called Religious Zionism or the "National Religious" community (and also Modern Orthodox in US terms), as well as what has become known over the past decade or so as haredi-leumi ("ultra-Orthodox nationalist"), which combines a largely haredi lifestyle with a nationalist (i.e. pro-Zionist) ideology.

Haredi applies to a populace that can be roughly divided into three separate groups along both ethnic and ideological lines: (1) "Lithuanian" (i.e. non-hasidic) haredim of Ashkenazic (i.e "Germanic" - European) origin; (2) Hasidic haredim of Ashkenazic (mostly of Eastern European) origin; and (3) Sephardic (including mizrahi) haredim. The third group has the largest political representation in Israel's parliament (the Knesset), and has been the most politically active since the early 1990s, represented by the Shas party.

There is also a growing baal teshuva ("returnees") movement of secular Israelis rejecting their previously secular lifestyles and choosing to become religiously observant with many educational programs and yeshivas for them. An example is Aish HaTorah, which received open encouragement from some sectors within the Israeli establishment. The Israeli government gave Aish HaTorah the real estate rights to its massive new campus opposite the Western Wall because of its proven ability to attract all manner of secular Jews to learn more about Judaism. In many instances after visiting from foreign countries, students decide to make Israel their permanent home by making aliyah. Other notable organizations involved in these efforts are the Chabad and Breslov Hasidic movements who manage to have an ever-growing appeal, the popularity of Rabbi Amnon Yitschak's organiztion and the Arachim organization that offer a variety of frequent free "introduction to Judaism" seminars to secular Jews, the Lev LeAchim organization that sends out senior yeshiva and kollel students to recruit Israeli children for religious elementary schools and Yad LeAchim which runs counter missionary programs.

At the same time, there is also a significant movement in the opposite direction towards a secular lifestyle. There is some debate which trend is stronger at present.

The secular-religious Status Quo
The religious status quo, agreed upon by David Ben-Gurion with the religious parties at the time of the declaration of independence in 1948 is an agreement on the religious Jewish role in government and the judicical system of Israel. Under this agreement, which is still mostly held today:

The Chief Rabbinate has authority over Kashrut, Sabbath, Jewish burial and marital issues (especially divorce), and Jewish status of immigrants
Streets of Haredi neighborhoods are closed to traffic on the Sabbath
There is no public transport on that day, and most businesses are closed
Restaurants who wish to advertise themselves as kosher must be certified by the Chief Rabbinate
Importation of non-kosher foods is prohibited. Despite prohibition, there are a few local pork farms in kibbutzim, catering for establishments selling "White Meat", due to its relatively popular demand among specific population sectors, particularly the Russian immigrants of the 1990s. Despite the Status Quo, the Supreme Court ruled in 2004 that local governments are not allowed to ban the sale of pork, although this had previously been a common by-law.
Nevertheless, some breaches of the status quo have become prevalent, such as several suburban malls remaining open during the Sabbath. Though this is contrary to the law, the Government largely turns a blind eye. The relationship between Judaism and the state has always been a controversial and unstable one.

The Ministry of Education manages the secular (largest) and religious streams of various faiths in parallel, with a limited degree independence and a common core Curriculum.

In recent years, perceived frustration among some members of the secular sector with the Status Quo has strengthened parties such as Shinui, which advocate separation of religion from the state, without much success so far.

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

and don't tell me that Wikipedia is "anti-semitic"....

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pelsar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 03:38 PM
Response to Reply #31
34. WHAT?????
Edited on Mon Jun-05-06 03:39 PM by pelsar
But the use of religious archetypes to motivate the presence in the region is a fact you cannot deny.

of course i can...mainly because only someone who has no knowledge of israel would write such BS
______

the settlers are a loud minority not backed up by the majority of the israelis as the gaza pulled out showed....thats your "proof" of the religious nature of israel?

I do you give you credit...you keep making up new things that i've never heard before....maybe this will sink in: israel is a highly nationalistic militaristic country, the symbols that mean something are found in the flag, memorial day and the IDF.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tocqueville Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 04:23 PM
Response to Reply #34
37. I don't "invent" anything
Zionism has a religious dimension and many Israeli governments existed and exist only because they are backed by an orthodox fringe which is not negligible has you try to make it sound.

If it was only a question to gather certain people in an area where they wouldn't be persecuted and could live up their cultural identity without historical territory claims, Israel could have been created "anywhere". One of the original proposals from the secular Zionists was... Argentina.

Before 1917 some Zionist leaders took seriously proposals for Jewish homelands in places other than Palestine. Herzl's Der Judenstaat argued for a Jewish state in either Palestine, "our ever-memorable historic home", or Argentina, "one of the most fertile countries in the world". In 1903 British cabinet ministers suggested the British Uganda Program, land for a Jewish state in "Uganda" (actually in modern Kenya). Herzl initially rejected the idea, preferring Palestine, but after the April 1903 Kishinev pogrom Herzl introduced a controversial proposal to the Sixth Zionist Congress to investigate the offer as a temporary measure for Russian Jews in danger. Notwithstanding its emergency and temporary nature, the proposal still proved very divisive, and widespread opposition to the plan was fueled by a walkout led by the Russian Jewish delegation to the Congress. Nevertheless, a majority voted to establish a committee for the investigation of the possibility, and it was not dismissed until the 7th Zionist Congress in 1905.

In response to this, the Jewish Territorialist Organization led by Israel Zangwill split off from the main Zionist movement. The territorialists attempted to establish a Jewish homeland wherever possible, but went into decline after 1917 and were dissolved in 1925. From that time Palestine was the sole focus of Zionist aspirations. Few Jews took seriously the establishment by the Soviet Union of a Jewish Autonomous Republic in the Russian Far East.

One of the major motivations for Zionism was the belief that the Jews needed to return to their historic homeland, not just as a refuge from anti-Semitism, but also to govern themselves as an independent nation. Some Zionists, mainly socialist Zionists, believed that the Jews' centuries of being oppressed in anti-Semitic societies had reduced Jews to a meek, vulnerable, despairing existence which invited further anti-Semitism. They argued that Jews should redeem themselves from their history by becoming farmers, workers, and soldiers in a country of their own. These socialist Zionists generally rejected religion as perpetuating a "Diaspora mentality" among the Jewish people.

Jewish reaction to Zionism

Support for the Zionist movement was not initially a mainstream position in the world Jewish community, and it was actively opposed by many Jewish organizations. While traditional Jewish belief held that Eretz Yisrael (the Land of Israel) was given to the ancient Israelites by God, and that therefore the right of the Jews to that land was permanent and inalienable, most Orthodox groups held that the Messiah must appear before Israel could return to Jewish control, and Reform Judaism (prior to the Holocaust) explicitly rejected Zionism. Still, return to the Land of Israel had remained a recurring theme among generations of diaspora Jews, particularly in Passover and Yom Kippur prayers which traditionally concluded with, "Next year in Jerusalem", and the thrice-daily Amidah (Standing prayer). <3>

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

read the whole article BTW

it's obvious that the Jewish reaction to Zionism is ambivalent and that religion plays a big role. Even today.
What's new ? It doesn't mean that it is a theocracy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pelsar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 04:37 PM
Response to Reply #37
39. your single source...is hardly all encompassing
Edited on Mon Jun-05-06 04:40 PM by pelsar
in fact its quite limiting....the religion has always been a part of the identity.....your attempts at making the "religious aspect" and its claim to the land however are not what its about.

but to learn about the complexity means additional sources other than the very very limited on line encyclopedia....Seems to me the encyclopedia was good for reports up to about 6th grade.....after that we were told that we needed additional sources. It was good advice.

and the "orthodox fringe" in the govt...its called politics, giving them power (money) way beyond their numbers...hardly an influence on character of israel (they arent a major player in the settlements)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tocqueville Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 06:45 PM
Response to Reply #39
44. I'd probably could bring up a detailed description
of Wikipedia's statements. It's interesting to note that the Jewish mainstream associations don't dispute this page.

Of course the reality is more complex. But to say that religious archetypes and attitudes have formed Zionism in what it is today and play an important role in Israeli policies is nothing new and revolutionary.

these questions are debated among American Jews :

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=716213&contrassID=2

http://www.trincoll.edu/depts/csrpl/RINVol2No3/Israel's%20Religion%20Wars.htm

google

orthodox Israel haaretz

and you'll find plenty of interesting point of views coming from Israeli themselves

like http://www.irac.org/sub_topics_e.asp?topic=50

I love this one :

Ministry clerks denying foreign converts legal status as immigrants
By Relly Sa'ar, Haaretz Correspondent
Reprinted with permission from Haaretz
Mon., November 22, 2004 Kislev 9, 5765
http://www.haaretz.co.il/hasen/spages/504410.html

The High Court of Justice will rule in a few weeks on whether the state must recognize conversions performed by Reform or Conservative rabbis for the purpose of granting civic standing, such as citizenship or new immigrant status, under the Law of Return. Currently, the only recognized conversions are those performed by the Orthodox rabbinic courts in Israel or abroad. However, Haaretz has learned that even individuals deemed "Jewish enough" for the Orthodox establishment in Israel are not seen that way by clerks at the Interior Ministry. Furthermore, the ministry's policy regarding converts does not follow any logic or written regulations.

The Chief Rabbinate has a list of some 200 conversion courts operating in established Jewish communities in Europe and the United States, and every conversion performed overseas by Orthodox rabbis who have been authorized by Israel's Chief Rabbinate is immediately approved.

Logic would seem to dictate that anyone who wishes to link his fate with that of the Jewish people, adopts a religious lifestyle during the years he must devote to his conversion studies (according to strict standards of Orthodox Judaism), assumes the burden of observing religious duties, immerses himself in the ritual bath, and receives the approval of the three Orthodox rabbis who convert him - would be considered a Jew under the Law of Return in the eyes of Interior Ministry.

An inquiry by Haaretz reveals, however, that this is not the case. Converts recognized by the Orthodox establishment, and those who are even entitled to marry in a religious ceremony in Israel, are being refused local citizenship and immigrant status by the bureaucrats.

http://www.jafi.org.il/education/actual/giur/recognition.html

It's like saying to become an American citizen, you have to convert into an Evangelical fundie on American soil, then we'll see...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Boojatta Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-08-06 09:12 PM
Response to Reply #28
57. Who where?
Edited on Sat Jul-08-06 09:13 PM by Boojatta
facts are that a couple of tribes ceased to exist as an independent cultural entity round 100 AD. People converted to new roman-greek culture and were later assimilated in an islamic one. They then continued to live in the same area and are called Palestinians.

Are there some sources you can cite for these claims? Why do you begin with the year 100 AD? Historical records in the Middle East go back a long way. When was that land first inhabited?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tocqueville Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 02:47 PM
Response to Reply #16
30. the Jewish case is not unique
Edited on Mon Jun-05-06 02:54 PM by tocqueville
History is replete with diaspora-like events. The Migration Period relocations, which included several phases is just one of many. The first phase Migration Period displacement from between AD 300 and 500 included relocation of the Goths (Ostrogoths, Visigoths), Vandals, Franks, various Germanic tribes, Burgundians, Alans, Langobards, Angles, Saxons, Jutes, Suebi, Alamanni) and numerous Slavic tribes. The second phase, between AD 500 and 900, saw Slavic, Turkic and other tribes on the move, re-settling in Eastern Europe and gradually making it predominantly Slavic, and affecting Anatolia and the Caucasus as the first Turkic peoples (Avars, Bulgars, Huns, Khazars, Pechenegs, Varangians) arrived. The last phase of the migrations saw the coming of the Magyars and the Viking expansion out of Scandinavia.

List of notable diasporas

The Acadian Diaspora or Great Expulsion (Grand Dérangement) occurred when the British expelled ~10,000 Acadians (over three-fourths of the Acadian population in Nova Scotia) between 1755 and 1764. The British sent members of the same community to different colonies to impose assimilation.

Afghan people who fled their country throughout the 20th century and the long civil wars
The African diaspora comprises the indigenous peoples of Africa and their descendants, wherever they are in the world beyond the African continent.

Arabs who have migrated out from the Arab World, and now reside in Western Europe, the Americas, Australia and elsewhere. (see Arab diaspora)

Armenians living in their ancient homeland, which had been controlled by the Ottoman Empire for centuries, fled persecution and massacres during several periods of forced emigration, from the 1880s to the 1910s, including the Armenian Genocide of 1915. Many Armenians settled in California, France and Lebanon (see Armenian Diaspora).

Australian Diaspora is a new and somewhat contentious term, probably coined by the Southern Cross Group, to refer to the 860,000 Australians living overseas. The migrations have a variety of causes ranging from war brides and their children to the more recent exodus of young Australians to Europe under working holiday visa programmes.
Basque diaspora, Basques who left the Basque Country, usually to the Americas for economic or political reasons. There are also Basque Catholic missionaries.

Bosnian diaspora as a phenomenon appeared after four years of planned ethnic cleansing in Bosnia. It mainly consists of Bosnian Muslims but also out of Bosnian Croats, Bosnian Serbs, Bosnian-Jewish people, and Bosnian-Roma people. People from Bosnia can be found almost anywhere in the world. Many Bosnians live in USA, mostly in large cities like New York, Washington, D.C., Boston, L.A., and many live in Australia, Canada, Denmark, Germany, Sweden, Norway, Italy, Austria, Croatia, Serbia, and many other places.

Chechens who fled Chechnya during the late 20th century insurrection against the Russian Federation

Chinese diaspora

Colombian diáspora

Cornish diaspora refers to Cornish emigrants and their descendants in countries such as the United States, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa and Mexico. The diaspora was caused by a number of factors, but due mainly to economic reasons and the lack of jobs in the 18th and 19th centuries when many Cornish people or “Cousin Jacks” as they were known migrated to various parts of the world in search of a better life.

Crimean Tatar diaspora, formed after the annexation of the Crimean Khanate by Russia, in 1783.

Tamil diaspora is a term used to denote people of Tamil Nadu and Sri Lankan Tamil origin who have settled in many parts of rest of India, Sri Lanka, Malaysia, Singapore, Reunion, South Africa, Mauritius, Fiji, Guyana, Trinidad and Tobago, French Caribbean islands, Europe, Australia and North America

The Filipino peoples throughout Australia, the United States, Canada and South-East Asia. Overseas workers have their own political party in the Philippine Congress.

The French Canadian diaspora includes hundreds of thousands of people who left Quebec for "greener pastures" in the United States, Ontario and the Prairies, between 1840 and the 1930s.

Calician diaspora, Galicians who left their country for mainly economic reasons to richer areas of Spain or the Americas (especially Argentina and Cuba) and, later, Western Europe (Germany, Switzerland, France, Belgium).

Cuban Diaspora The exodus of over two million Cubans following the Cuban Revolution and the resulting Communist regime. It is the largest diaspora in the history of the Western Hemisphere.

In modern Greek, the word diaspora refers to the large populations of Greek descent living in the United States, Australia and other countries. There is a Department of Diaspora Affairs in the Greek government.(see Greek diaspora).

The Roma (English terms: Gypsy, Gypsies), a traditionally 'dispersed' people in Europe, with origins in South Asia (or perhaps, northern India), are even more 'dispersed' today, following the Holocaust of Nazi Germany. (See Some names for the Roma)

The Heimatvertriebene, the ethnic German refugees and expellees from Eastern Europe and from provinces of the former German Reich during and following World War II, see Oder-Neisse line

The Irish diaspora consists of Irish emigrants and their descendants in countries such as the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Argentina, South Africa and nations of the Caribbean and continental Europe. The diaspora contains over 80 million people and it is the result of mass migration from Ireland, due to past famines and political oppression. The term first came widely into use in Ireland in the 1990s when the then-President of Ireland, Mary Robinson began using it to describe all those of Irish descent.

The Jewish diaspora in its historical use, refers to the period between the Roman invasion and subsequent occupation of Land of Israel beginning 70 CE, to the re-establishment of Israel in 1948. In modern use, the 'Diaspora' refers to Jews living outside of the Jewish state of Israel today. There is a 'Ministry of Diaspora Affairs' in the Israeli government, for example.

Palestinians who fled Palestine during the 1948 Arab-Israeli War (see Palestinian exodus, Palestinian refugees)

"Polonia", the diaspora of the Poles, started with the emigrations after the partitions of Poland, January Uprising and the November Uprising, enlarged by the Nazi policies, and later by the establishment of the Curzon line

The South Asian diaspora includes millions of people in Suriname, South Africa, Trinidad and Tobago, Guyana, Jamaica, Mauritius, Fiji, Singapore, Malaysia and other countries who left British India in the 19th and early 20th century, and millions more who have moved to Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United States, the United Kingdom and the United Arab Emirates in recent decades (see Desi).

The Southeast Asian diaspora includes the refugees from the numerous wars that took place in Southeast Asia, such as World War II and the Vietnam War.

The Boat people who left Vietnam for Hong Kong after the Vietnam war.

The Romanians, who emigrated for the first time in larger figures between 1910 and 1925, and left in mass after the fall of communist regime in Romania in 1989, and comprise the Romanian diaspora, are found today in large numbers in USA, Italy, Spain, Canada.

Various ethnic minorities from areas under Russian and Soviet control following the Russian Revolution, continuing through the mass forced-resettlements under Stalin.

Various groups fled in large numbers from areas under Axis control during World War II, or after the border changes following the war, and formed their own diasporas.

The Somali diaspora that includes ethnic Somalis who live in Ethiopia, Kenya, and Djibouti, as well other parts of Africa. It also includes the one million people who live in Europe, Australia, New Zealand, North America, and the Middle East as refugees from the civil war. It altogether numbers between five and seven million. This is almost the same as the population of Somalia itself.

The South African diaspora mainly consists of white South African emigrants, especially to white Afrikaans speakers who have fled the country for a number of reasons. There is also a growing black middle class in South Africa, many of whom are starting to emigrate as well, furthering the demographic weight of South Africans abroad. South Africans have largely settled in the United Kingdom, Australia, the United States, New Zealand and Canada.

The Ukrainian diaspora, represented by Ukrainians who left their homeland in several waves of emigration, settling mainly in the Americas, but also Australia, and Europe. Also includes the Ukrainians who migrated from Ukraine to other parts of the former Soviet Union (mainly Russian Federation) during Soviet time.

The diaspora of the Tibetan people began in 1959 when the People's Republic of China invaded Tibet.

The Macedonian diaspora was created by Macedonian refugees from Macedonia to the United States of America, Australia, Canada, Germany, Sweden, New Zeland, South African Republic, Argentina, Italy, and many other states. There lived approximately more than 3,000,000 Macedonians.

During the Cold War era, huge populations of refugees continued to form from areas of war, especially from Third World nations; all over Africa, South and Central America, the Middle East, and east Asia.

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

(they forgot the Assyrian diaspora and other various Christian diasporas throughout the islamic world, and the Kurdish question)

even if some of these diasporas are more recent than others, the question remains the same why should the Jewish diaspora have "more" rights than others ? Specially since the event happened so long ago and when the descendents still live in the same area ? My answer is that a combination of events during and after WWII, a need to have a base to secure the oil flow in the region and the fact that the Jewish religion is tied to the Christian one as the archetypal motivation, made possible a reconquer of land by force.

The problem is that the guys that were cultivating their olive trees in the region during 2000 years and survived Arabic, Turkish and Western rule don't see it that way.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pelsar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 03:22 PM
Response to Reply #30
32. thats it?
Edited on Mon Jun-05-06 03:28 PM by pelsar
thats your equivocation to the jewish diaspora is not unique?

which of those groups have 2,000 years of being kicked out of country after country? which of those groups have blood libels that chase after them from country to country.....progroms? which of those groups are the guilty party in 9/11? the depression, WWI, WWII, I could make a list of 1,000 of events that the jews have been found "guilty of causing....in all most all countries of the world....which in your list above even comes close to that.

actually i find this discussion pathetic.....the history of the jews and the anti semetism which have followed them around is incredibly unique....attempts a pretending that its "nothing special" are absurd.

protocols of zion mean anything to you? any of your list above have anything like that?

But i understand the reasoning for it....the whole idea is to remove the base for the jewish identity...and without that there is not "need" for israel the jewish country"

I've seen it in various forms over the years: jews of today have no relationship to the jews of the roman period, or the jews "lost their rights to return...(after 1,000 years one loses the "right of return"), etc. Or in this case: being jewish is no big deal, nothing special about it, as others have also suffered, hence what makes them so "special"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tocqueville Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 03:58 PM
Response to Reply #32
35. So the list means nothing ?
Acadians, Armenians, Assyrians, Tamils fuck them ? never been persecuted in thousands, hundreds of years ?
The Gypsies have a case that reminds vey much of the Jewish. And all the Gnostic Christian enclaves in the Muslim world ? the Copts ? fuck them ? they don't exist... The Jewish persecution though history is a fact but it doesn't differ from other persecutions except on one point : the holocaust which in magnitude was one of the biggest ever (but not the only one).

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

My point was only that persecutions and genocides of other people through history haven't resulted into a return
to a "homeland" by force and motivated it. I can agree that in this case Israel is rather unique. Which can be explained by a combination of events.

what the fuck has 9/11 to do with that story ?

I am very aware that the "Protocol of the Elders of Zion" is a an anti-semitic forgery and I never quoted it. Why then bring it to discussion ? Is it possible AT ALL to have questions about Israels "historical right to exist" from a philosophical, moral and historical point of view without being automatically under suspicion to be an anti-semite ?

The solution to the actual conflict in Palestine would be of course to merge both communities in a single secular nation. Which would be the only real fair solution. But as long there are people from the both sides claiming an historical-religious right to at least part of the land, the chances of success are very few.

And is that definition from Wkipedia wrong ?

"While Zionism is based heavily upon religious tradition linking the Jewish people to the Land of Israel, the modern movement was originally secular, beginning largely as a response to rampant antisemitism in late 19th century Europe. It was the Jewish answer to the Eastern European, mainly Russian Pogroms."

I just stated that religious motives are very important in the identity of Israel, that the historical motive ("we were there first") is a very dubious motive and that the Palestinians could exactly say the same thing.
Which they do by the way. So why should one side be more "right" than the other ?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pelsar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 04:05 PM
Response to Reply #35
36. so yes your list means nothing in this context
Edited on Mon Jun-05-06 04:09 PM by pelsar
the jewish problem is unique.... that is the basis for the returning to israel.....unlike all your other examples of perseuctions and genocides no other "people" have even come close to what the jewish people have gone through and continue to go through today. (hence the example of the protocols)

thats what it comes down to...

and the Wkipedia def is right: zionisn is (was) a secular movement....

who ever said that one side is more "right than the other".....the only ones who do are mainly religious (your religious motives...) ..again your showing your lack of knowledge....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tocqueville Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 04:32 PM
Response to Reply #36
38. so the Jews suffered "more" than the black slaves in 400 years
or the 15 millions Ukrainians exterminated by Stalin ? Or American natives since Columbus ?

Sorry but I fail to understand.

about religious motives read my other post.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jim Sagle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 05:25 PM
Response to Reply #38
40. Who is comparing suffering? Not pelsar. You made that up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tocqueville Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 06:10 PM
Response to Reply #40
42. Do I ?
"the jewish problem is unique.... that is the basis for the returning to israel.....unlike all your other examples of perseuctions and genocides no other "people" have even come close to what the jewish people have gone through and continue to go through today"

or has "have gone through" another meaning ? not even close ? even today ?

Ask the Iraqis, the Chechens, The Kurds, the people of Darfur and why not the Palestinians...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jim Sagle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 06:13 PM
Response to Reply #42
43. To be chased around the world for 2 millenia... that's unique.
If not, give us a counter-example.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tocqueville Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 08:15 PM
Response to Reply #43
45. there is at least a major one : the non-abrahamic religions or people
Christians have persecuted ALL NON CHRISTIANS (and even other branches of Christianity) since they came into power 337 AD

Muslims have persecuted ALL NON MUSLIMS (including Shias) since they came into power 630 AD or short after

these two religions have probably killed and persecuted MORE people together than the Jews alone and eradicated whole civilizations.

Examples of the same can probably be found even in Asia. For example the caste system in Hinduism is a form of permanent persecution.

I don't mean that the Jewish persecution should be minimized but only put in relation to similar patterns througout world history. It is true that the Jews have belonged and belong to the most persecuted groups.
But the claim of UNICITY can be discussed : by what standards ? number of deaths ? length of the period of time ? "atrocity level" ? Other groups could say that they could match or override those standards, at least one of them. What about the groups that have been put to the brink of extinction (thinking of natives and aborigenes)?

I don't think you can "compete in suffering" and take it as a claim for your "inalienable right" to this or that.
That's why the claim of right to land from some Israelis based on the "unicity" and the "historical rights" is perceived as unjust by many.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jim Sagle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 08:47 PM
Response to Reply #45
47. I can't cure faulty perceptions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pelsar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 11:03 PM
Response to Reply #45
48. wrong again....
Edited on Mon Jun-05-06 11:27 PM by pelsar
your part of small group whos constant attempts to claim that "jews arent really jews" gets more and more pathetic as the discussion continues (thats the "bottom line")

you keep on trying to say that though the "jews" have suffered other groups have..and then you show lists of other social or religous or national groups which never have the same characteristics; (I believe this is your "second list')

its a matter of throwing enough mud assuming some will stick.

this time its the "non christians, the extinct groups other natives that have had some sufferin....asking to define suffering, blah blah blah.

try to find a unique cultural group with distinct history, religion, social customs found throughout the world in various communities that also finds similar hatred for that group around the world at different times and has kicked them out of various nations for that identity, killed them for that identity, has had quotas .....for over 2,000 years including today....

you will find but one with all of those characteristics....like the other examples you keep "listing" nothing fits.

old story, new version......thats all your doing

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tocqueville Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-06-06 09:08 AM
Response to Reply #48
50. it doesn't matter how many facts I could pile up...
as long as they don't fit the "official version", they are irrelevant

I just wanted to show that groups have been persecuted to history and some persecutions can in many aspects remind those of the Jews by the amount or the length or both.

it's obviously irrelevant that 17 millions Ukrainians have been killed by Stalin, or that pagans have been persecuted or exterminated since year 300 AD, blacks and Indians been exterminated or put into slavery since 1400 etc...etc...

According to you the Jews have a unique history of suffering which allows them to claim control over a territory they lost 1900 years ago. No other has that right. That's your version. Many others don't see it that way, specially the people that have been living in the same area for the same period of time.

If the facts presented don't fit - or questions are dared being asked, they are "mud".... even if they come from Israeli sources.

There are more Jews living today in the USA than in Israel. They were (are) hardly persecuted and very few of them move to Israel. The same can apply to European Jews after the WWII wave.

If Israel exists today it's because it's the result of a special historical configuration, but not because the MOTIVES are ABSOLUTELY RIGHT AND UNTOUCHABLE. But it is a fact and the "solutions" of "throwing back them into the sea" are as condemnable as the "solutions" of deporting all Palestinians to Jordan. This creates a conflict to which a peaceful solution must be found.

But this solution will not be found as long the constant answer from one part to the other part is crudely put : "we are here by more or less by God's historical right and because we were here first, so fuck you. And besides we suffered a more than any others, so fuck you again". Palestinians don't buy it and that is pretty understandable.

In the 60s/70s people in the West didn't even dare to question the crude statement above. Times have changed, that' all. Deal with it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Behind the Aegis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-06-06 11:41 AM
Response to Reply #50
53. you are wrong on a few things...
...however, this statement; "There are more Jews living today in the USA than in Israel." is wrong. As of May, there are more Jews living in Israel than the US.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pelsar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-06-06 12:14 PM
Response to Reply #50
54. so so so wrong...
Edited on Tue Jun-06-06 12:15 PM by pelsar
we are here by more or less by God's historical right and because we were here first, so fuck you

______

i guess thats your opinion of what we think......to bad its wrong

if you can get that into your head you might have a chance of learning what the conflict is all about....but i have my doubts

but since you brought it up: you say the jews lost the land 1900 years ago and dont have the right to return..ok if it was 50..would they then have the right?....so if 50 is good and 1900 is bad..., perhaps you might enlighten where the line is..which year?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tocqueville Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-06-06 04:26 PM
Response to Reply #54
56. never said that they don't have "the right to return"
but the current situation has been created mostly by force, not negotiation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
barb162 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 11:30 AM
Response to Reply #13
19. You have some really interesting "views" here
some of which are:
"a tribe that was completely assimilated by the Romans/Greeks and kater by the Arabs."
Assimilated? News to me.

Languages change in a major fashion over the course of even a few centuries...witness the differences between Middle English to Modern English.

"Israel's existence today has a pure religious motive..."
Israel has a secular government, is not a theocracy




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tocqueville Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 08:38 PM
Response to Reply #19
46. well what happened after the destuction of the temple ?
the one that stayed became "greek", other moved to other parts of the Roman Empire and melted in.

Some communities survived

"Following the Roman conquest in 63 BCE, parts of Palestine - first a client kingdom of the Roman Empire, after year 6 CE Roman province Iudaea (Roman province), after year 135 province Syria Palaestina - was in nearly constant revolt (see Jewish-Roman Wars). A number of events with far-reaching consequences took place, including religious schisms, such as Christianity branching off of Judaism.
The Great Jewish Revolt in 66-73 resulted in the destruction of the Jewish temple in Jerusalem (70) and the sacking of the entire city by the Roman army led by Titus Flavius and the estimated death toll of 600,000 to 1,300,000 Jews (see Josephus Flavius).

In 135, the crushing of Bar Kokhba's revolt by Hadrian resulted in 580,000 Jews killed (according to Cassius Dio) and the establishment of the pagan polis Aelia Capitolina on the site of the ruins of Jerusalem, in which Jews were forbidden to set foot. Hundreds of thousands were taken as slaves throughout the Empire. The overall province that incorporated Judaea was Syria Palaestina, reintroducing an obscure name given to the region by the Greeks dating as far back as Herodotos (fl. 430BCE). The name, alluding to Biblical enemies of the Jews, was adopted to further mock the conquered nation.

Over several centuries, the Jewish Diaspora grew even further. In addition to the large Jewish community in Babylon, large numbers of Jews settled in Egypt, and in other parts of the Hellenistic world and in the Roman Empire.

The frequent conflict contributed to Jewish emigration, both as refugees, through deportation, and by reducing economic opportunities in the region. It also led to many deaths among the Jewish population - deaths in battles with the Romans and others, deaths due to massacres, and deaths due to the famine and disease that so often accompany armed conflict. However, the Jewish population in the north of Palestine remained large for several centuries.

Meanwhile, Palestine was increasingly Christianized and probably had a Christian majority by the time of Diocletian. Some areas, like Gaza, were well known as pagan holdouts, remained attached to the worship of Daqon and other deities as their ancestors had done for thousands of years. Gaza was probably an Arabic-speaking city by this time: it is referred to as an Arab city by 430 BCE. The Arabic language, meanwhile, was spreading as the majority language throughout the Roman epoch. Southern Palestine had been thoroughly Arabized by the Idumaeans and Nabataeans around the turn of the Era while the regions further north became Arabic in speech by no later than the fourth century.

Byzantine Period
Palestine became part of the Byzantine Empire after the division of the Roman Empire into east and west (a fitful process that was not finalized until 395). Under Byzantine rule, the region became a center of Christianity, while retaining significant Jewish and Samaritan communities (although the Samaritans were greatly reduced following Julianus ben Sabar's revolt.) During a protracted conflict with the Byzantine Empire, the Sassanian Empire under Khosrau II briefly wrested control of the region from the Byzantines. An invasion of Mesopotamia by Byzantine Emperor Heraclius forced the Sassanians to withdraw"

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

then came the Islamic period etc...

so my point is that the Jewish "nation" ceased to exist, but some communities survived both inside and outside Judea. Those communities diversified so much after that, that they even lost a common language. But even if a certain heritage survived thoughout Europe and some parts of the Middle-East and Africa, the "Region Palestine" became as much different as Mexico before and after the Conquistadors, due to a new culture, religion, language and immigration.

Regarding the "religious motives" see my other posts. I still think that the historical religious background plays a very important role, if not a major one in the motivations for Israels existence. Or else it would be very easy to say "they hate us here, let's move to another place". The fact that Israel is formally secular has very little to do with that. Besides there is no separation of church and state, only a "status quo" since Ben Gurion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pelsar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-06-06 12:15 AM
Response to Reply #46
49. and this is what your argument is all about...thank you...
so my point is that the Jewish "nation" ceased to exist,

its about time you got there....

thanks for telling us jews that...we didnt know....nor did the "hitlers of the world"..the quota people, the palestenains (who use the word jew, not israeli)...the leaders of iran, egypt and all the zillons of others over the past 2,000 years who were busy throwing out the "non existant jews, who thought they belonged to a "jewish nation"

hey can i do the same: palestenains really dont exist, since they are not like they were 1,000 years ago...they didnt even know they were palestenian until up to 48 when the world told them that....
____________

this is one of other versions of anti semetism that one comes across:"I'm not anti semetic" the jews really arent any kind of "nation" or whatever they want to call themselves (who gave them that right anyway!)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tocqueville Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-06-06 09:28 AM
Response to Reply #49
51. I put nation into quotes because it doesn't make sense today
in the modern sense of the word nation. Since it was a kingdom over tribes with a more or less common culture (centered through a common religion - that's why the Romans destroyed the Temple), you can say that this culture practically disappeared, except for some communities. A lot of the local dwellers adapted to the occupiers, started to speak Greek or Latin, copied their culture and later became even Christianized and later on Islamized. The mix of these and of Arab immigrants founded what we call Palestinians...

But it is true that some didn't want to accept the situation and left, taking their original culture with them. Some settled and melted in the Roman Empire, some didn't. This is true even for parts of Africa, Spain etc... and later on in the Eastern European countries.

The ones that were persecuted were the ones that kept that original culture, at least partly. But the craddle of that culture had completely changed, even if some communities managed to survive even there...

So you are puting words in my mouth, I never said that the Jews didn't exist. Fact is that they were assimilated or went into a diaspora (with different branches) roughly after 70AD.

Besides it's anti-semitism not semetism.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pelsar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-06-06 10:23 AM
Response to Reply #51
52. i hope you dont mind..
Edited on Tue Jun-06-06 10:24 AM by pelsar
but i think we'll reject your definition of our culture....who are you anyway to define our culture for us?

_______
ou can say that this culture practically disappeared
Some settled and melted in the Roman Empire
kept that original culture, at least partly
craddle of that culture had completely changed,

_____________________

all of the above are attempts at different ways of saying that the jews as distinct culture/society doesnt exist: whatever jews were once, they are no longer that..and have no connection to their past...thats what you've been trying to say all along, in so many different ways all of which fail.

and all of them fail the simple test of historical facts:

facts of jews living together sharing similar values, jews getting kicked out of countries as jews, jews being the subject of quotas as jews traveling to different parts of the world and "meeting up with other jews" identifiying with each other.

your extremly pathetic attempts to delegitimize israel by saying the jews are not a world community and hence have no historical record to the land are no more than the usual.....

i belive its us jews that will define our culture and community and not someone who has so very little understanding of the workings of the jewish culture.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tocqueville Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-06-06 03:50 PM
Response to Reply #52
55. You don't mind facts, If you read what I wrote
Edited on Tue Jun-06-06 03:53 PM by tocqueville
I said that the culture survived locally and through the diaspora and never said that "the Jews are not a world community and hence have no historical record". But it doesn't matter, I could write that Christopher Columbus wasn't Jewish, so you'll disagree with me.

I'll end this discussion with a quote from the famous antisemite site : http://www.zionism-israel.com/index.html

"Zionism did not spring full blown from a void with the creation of the Zionist movement in 1897. Jews had maintained a connection with Palestine, both actual and spiritual. This continued even after the Bar Kochba revolt in 135, when large numbers of Jews were exiled from Roman Palestine, the remains of their ancient national home. The Jewish community in Palestine revived. Under Muslim rule, it is estimated to have numbered as many as 300,000 prior to the Crusades, about 1000 AD. The Crusaders killed most of the Jewish population of Palestine or forced them into exile, so that only about 1,000 families remained after the reconquest of Palestine by Saladin. The Jewish community in Palestine waxed and waned with the vicissitudes of conquest and economic hardship. A trickle of Jews came because of love of Israel, and were sometimes encouraged by invitations by different Turkish rulers to displaced European Jews to settle in Tiberias and Hebron. At different times there were sizeable Jewish communities in Tiberias, Safed, Hebron and Jerusalem, and numbers of Jews living in Nablus and Gaza. A few original Jews remained in the town of Peki'in, families that had lived there continuously since ancient times.

In the Diaspora, religion became the medium for preserving Jewish culture and Jewish ties to their ancient land. Jews prayed several times a day for the rebuilding of the temple, celebrated agricultural feasts and called for rain according to the seasons of ancient Israel, even in the farthest reaches of Russia. The ritual plants of Sukkoth were imported from the Holy Land at great expense. A Holy-Land centered tradition persisted in Diaspora thought and writing. This tradition may be called "proto-nationalist" because there was no nationalism in the modern sense in those times. It was not only religious or confined to hoping for messianic redemption, but consisted of longing for the land of Israel. It is preserved in the poetry of Yehuda Halevi, a Spanish Jewish physician, poet and philosopher, who himself immigrated to "the Holy Land" and died there in 1141."

http://www.zionism-israel.com/zionism_history.htm

this is exactly what I wrote but in shorter terms :

"you can say that this culture practically disappeared
Some settled and melted in the Roman Empire
some kept that original culture, at least partly
the craddle of that culture had completely changed"

but maybe the site above isn't "zionist enough" for you.

In all the discussion threads above you haven't countered with a single fact. Your only "arguments" have been "you don't understand or know, because you are not Jewish" and implied that I am anti-semite, a word you cannot even properly spell.

All this pathetic and don't serve your cause.

End of story.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Phx_Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 01:17 PM
Response to Reply #12
23. Interesting POV
If I were you I would read up on a concept called the "zeitgeist".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Poll_Blind Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 01:46 PM
Response to Reply #23
25. What does the zeitgeist have anything to do with it, in your opinion?
That's a very interesting angle.

PB
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Phx_Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 01:51 PM
Response to Reply #25
26. The poster is evaluating past events
through todays lens. It's a history 101 mistake.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Poll_Blind Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 03:34 PM
Response to Reply #26
33. No, it's not a history 101 mistake, otherwise lynchings, witch burnings..
..., heck the crusades and the unmentionable worse would be relegated to quaint ignorance of the time. Critically analyzing the past and making a judgment based on the current information available is an important part of historical research. What was acceptable at one time does not make it acceptable for all time.

PB
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Phx_Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 05:59 PM
Response to Reply #33
41. I think we are disagreeing about definition
"What was acceptable at one time does not make it acceptable for all time."

I agree with you 100% in fact what was acceptable can only be evaluated by using an eclectic approach to historical analysis.

Let me give you an example of how the "spirit of the times" is used when doing historical analysis. Margaret Sanger, a major figure in the modern birth control/reproductive rights mvmt, was also a supporter of eugenics. With this in mind should historians diminish or obviate her contributions to society? Of course they shouldn't, because we all can understand the context of her opinions better by understanding the influence and widespread acceptance of eugenics during her early/middle years. The eugenics mvmt was not some off-the-wall idea in the 1930s, it was in most university biology textbooks as an accepted genetic theory.

Going back to the original post I responded to, the poster is viewing the actions of early americans, british et al through todays' zeitgeist, which is bound to lead to erroneous conclusions as we see in the post.

Regarding your point about the crusades and shoah, neither time in history were the actions of the perpetrators acceptable by the standards at the time, which is the whole point in understanding the zeitgeist.

The decision to use nukes to end WWII is an example where understanding the context at the time sometimes only makes it more difficult to ultimately evaluate the moral and ethical choices made by our leadership.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun May 05th 2024, 01:43 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Israel/Palestine Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC