Zionism

[I.S.L.A.M617]

Is there any way I can convince you that forceful expulsion means forcefully expelling people off the land?

I agree that forceful expulsion is forcefully expelling people from a land. That much is obvious lol. It doesn't mean those people were innocent. I don't see why you're getting so hung up on the semantics of it... Do you just not want to associate Jews with "negative" words like "force"? I'm sorry to tell you, acts of war are the same no matter who's doing them...

 

[Flankerl]

You assume to represent all Jewish teachings hold that teaching on Satan?

Well he's right.

The idea that an angel may be some kind of evil-god is completely foreign to Judaism.

 

[tumbleweed41]

How many Arabs have been forcefully expelled in the last 10 years? Got a statistic on that?

27,000 Palestinian homes destroyed since 1967, 269 Jewish only settlements and outposts built on land formerly occupied by displaced Palestinians.

For example, on Sept. 5, 2011, a Palestinian named Abu Wajih arrived at his land to find that the Israeli government had ordered the confiscation of 1.5 acres of his land and had begun leveling it. Since then he has lost 60 olive trees, 18 almond trees and 8 hawthorn trees.

 

[tumbleweed41]

They haven't. Conquered territory taken in a defensive war is not stolen.

4th Geneva Convention Article 49

Individual or mass forcible transfers, as well as deportations of protected persons from occupied territory to the territory of the Occupying Power or to that of any other country, occupied or not, are prohibited, regardless of their motive.
Nevertheless, the Occupying Power may undertake total or partial evacuation of a given area if the security of the population or imperative military reasons so demand. Such evacuations may not involve the displacement of protected persons outside the bounds of the occupied territory except when for material reasons it is impossible to avoid such displacement. Persons thus evacuated shall be transferred back to their homes as soon as hostilities in the area in question have ceased.
The Occupying Power undertaking such transfers or evacuations shall ensure, to the greatest practicable extent, that proper accommodation is provided to receive the protected persons, that the removals are effected in satisfactory conditions of hygiene, health, safety and nutrition, and that members of the same family are not separated.
The Protecting Power shall be informed of any transfers and evacuations as soon as they have taken place.
The Occupying Power shall not detain protected persons in an area particularly exposed to the dangers of war unless the security of the population or imperative military reasons so demand.
The Occupying Power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies.



Inconvenient, but there it is.

 

[tumbleweed41]

Part of the problem here is that your objectives are at odds with one another. You say that you are not calling for the destruction of Israel, yet you are also expecting Israel to open its borders to mass importation of Arab populace and invite said populace to essentially overrun the institutions of power by flooding the electorate.

Israel is the Jewish State. It is there to be a homeland and safe space for Jews to exist, in their ancestral place. Allowing mass immigration of Arabs and disproportionate electoral power to non-Jews is a sure way to have Israel's Jewish character disappear in short order.

There is one small place (like, around the size of the US State of Delaware-- tiny) in the world that Jews wish to be a Jewish homeland. No one is saying non-Jews cannot live or be citizens there. But it must remain a Jewish place. If non-Jews object to living in a Jewish society under Jewish rule, why can they not choose to reside in any of the other parts of the 99.99999% of the planet that are not under Jewish rule and never will be?

Correct, Jews do not owe Arabs anything, any resident of a specific country sees all residents from another country as "OTHER" that is common sense, why does Israel need to feed and support citizens of another country? Israel did its part, it took Jews who were citizens of Arab countries (650,000 of them) Is that not enough? now Arabs with all their money can take on the obligation to feed and support their Arab brothers.

Just because Arabs are also human beings why should I let them in to my country? on what basis? If an Arab person wants to live in Israel (Jewish state) he is welcomed to do so but he is welcomed in to a Jewish state, not Muslim state. Jews are not losers, you cannot tell us to be human beings and open borders to people who want to see all of us dead. This is not righteousness this is a suicidal stupidity and that is something that is more relevant to the Arab world rather then Jewish world.

You seem to be comfortably hiding your negative attitude towards Israel with the so called human rights and human being ideas and that is not real honest on your part. I personally do not care what your attitude towards Israel is but it would be much appreciated if you would be honest about (that is what human beings should do) it and say it openly so that we can have an open discussion, otherwise we can go back and forth with no end.

In reply to both of you,
First, I find it disturbing that there are still people in the world that believe ethnicity and/or religion should be the foundation of a country or government.
And I apply this to every ethnocentric and theocratic government.
Second, the attitude seems to be that if the Palestinians dont like it, they can leave, or do no need to come here. As if the land was an empty wasteland, unpopulated until 1946 when the Jews repopulated a land empty for thousands of years.

And to Juhurka, in your accusation that I am being dishonest in my attitude towards Israel, you ask for an admission of my true feelings. I have been honest throughout this thread, and if you have an accusation to make, make it clearly.

 

[thau]

Well he's right.

The idea that an angel may be some kind of evil-god is completely foreign to Judaism.

Yes, I believe I have to concede yours and islam617’s charge. By and large, Jewish teaching apparently does not regard Satan as G-d’s adversary but as an angel sent to tempt us to disobey G-d. (the Talmud notwithstanding) That markedly does differ from Catholic teaching on Satan.

But do note: Nowhere is Satan or the devil ever referred to as an “evil-god” or any kind of deity above that of a fallen angel. Which does not mean that Satan still is not capable of exacting supernatural powers here on earth at times. He surely does.

 

[I.S.L.A.M617]

Yes, I believe I have to concede yours and islam617’s charge. By and large, Jewish teaching apparently does not regard Satan as G-d’s adversary but as an angel sent to tempt us to disobey G-d. (the Talmud notwithstanding) That markedly does differ from Catholic teaching on Satan.

But do note: Nowhere is Satan or the devil ever referred to as an “evil-god” or any kind of deity above that of a fallen angel. Which does not mean that Satan still is not capable of exacting supernatural powers here on earth at times. He surely does.

What's the point in God having a weaker adversary? Couldn't he just kill him? The whole concept is absolutely ludicrous...

 

[1robin]

What's the point in God having a weaker adversary? Couldn't he just kill him? The whole concept is absolutely ludicrous...

Things exist because they exist not because they have a point. Liberalism exists and it has no point (other than the destruction of the greatest nation in human history at least).

 

[I.S.L.A.M617]

Things exist because they exist not because they have a point. Liberalism exists and it has no point (other than the destruction of the greatest nation in human history at least).

Shocker...

 

[Levite]

In reply to both of you,
First, I find it disturbing that there are still people in the world that believe ethnicity and/or religion should be the foundation of a country or government.

With all due respect, this is the attitude one can be privileged to hold when one's ethnicity or religious group is not in any real risk. It's a little akin to American conservatives saying that no aid need be given in law or programming to minorities, because now we're all color blind and there is no more racism. It sounds great if you're white and well to do; it rings a little hollow if you're poor and black.

Second, the attitude seems to be that if the Palestinians dont like it, they can leave, or do no need to come here. As if the land was an empty wasteland, unpopulated until 1946 when the Jews repopulated a land empty for thousands of years.

No, there were certainly Arabs living there, and in greater numbers than Jews, for most of the past 1500 years or so. But we never relinquished our claim and right to the land, and many of the Arabs living there in 1948 were given the option of Israeli citizenship, which they rejected. They made their choices. It's unfortunate that they may regret those choices, and perhaps they even deserve some form of compensation for their trouble. But not a carte blanche for Arab "return" to Israel. And since much of the West Bank and areas around Jerusalem at that time were being held by Jordan, why don't they "return" there?

 

[moodys]

And since much of the West Bank and areas around Jerusalem at that time were being held by Jordan, why don't they "return" there?

Because they lived in what is now Israel.

 

[tumbleweed41]

I think you may notice that I have never called for a "return" or compensation. What I have called for is a change in Israels discriminatory practices concerning Palestinians/Arabs and an end to the forcible relocation (eviction) of Palestinians and illegal Jewish only settlements.

As for the risk of ones ethnicity, this reminds me of the attitude of the modern White supremacist who does not "hate other races", but only calls for the purity of the "white race".
I agree that racism exists, and will continue to exist as long as one human looks upon another as 'other' and separate. Calling for purity in ones ethnicity or race will always result a viewing of the 'other' as lesser. And calling for purity of religion in a nation has the same results.

 

[Shermana]

I think you may notice that I have never called for a "return" or compensation. What I have called for is a change in Israels discriminatory practices concerning Palestinians/Arabs and an end to the forcible relocation (eviction) of Palestinians and illegal Jewish only settlements.

As for the risk of ones ethnicity, this reminds me of the attitude of the modern White supremacist who does not "hate other races", but only calls for the purity of the "white race".
I agree that racism exists, and will continue to exist as long as one human looks upon another as 'other' and separate. Calling for purity in ones ethnicity or race will always result a viewing of the 'other' as lesser. And calling for purity of religion in a nation has the same results.

Then you probably wouldn't like the whole concept of the PLO and the PA who believe the territory is "Arab Land".

You should also consider directing some of this indignation towards Germany (who still has right of return laws for Germans) and Japan (Where you must be Japanese to live there unless under corporate white collar contract work).

It disturbs me that people put rosy ideology ahead of the facts on the ground.

 

[1robin]

Because they lived in what is now Israel.

It became Israel because Jordan occupied the neutral area and used it to attack Israel and so have many others in the past. Israel took it to stop the attacks.

 

[Shermana]

Yes, I believe I have to concede yours and islam617’s charge. By and large, Jewish teaching apparently does not regard Satan as G-d’s adversary but as an angel sent to tempt us to disobey G-d. (the Talmud notwithstanding) That markedly does differ from Catholic teaching on Satan.

But do note: Nowhere is Satan or the devil ever referred to as an “evil-god” or any kind of deity above that of a fallen angel. Which does not mean that Satan still is not capable of exacting supernatural powers here on earth at times. He surely does.

Well, for the record on this tangent, this idea was not at all foreign to Judaism during Josephus's time, where the idea was pretty much standard. The idea of "Fallen Angels" only became Foreign to "Judaism" many centuries after the Second Temple period. The idea of an arch-king of evil angels is basically found in the DSS. What can be said is that this idea is foreign to post-Pharisaical and post-Essene "Judaism" which is a much different concept than ancient-era Judaism.

 

[tumbleweed41]

Then you probably wouldn't like the whole concept of the PLO and the PA who believe the territory is "Arab Land".

You should also consider directing some of this indignation towards Germany (who still has right of return laws for Germans) and Japan (Where you must be Japanese to live there unless under corporate white collar contract work).

It disturbs me that people put rosy ideology ahead of the facts on the ground.

It disturbs me that in a thread about Zionism, you complain that I did not mention other countries and organizations that also have unjust practices and laws.
No, I do not support the PLO. And I have mentioned the atrocities and inhumane policies of Hamas and the Palestinian Authority.

But that does not excuse Israel. (Remember, the nation this thread concerns)

 

[Shermana]

It disturbs me that in a thread about Zionism, you complain that I did not mention other countries and organizations that also have unjust practices and laws.
No, I do not support the PLO. And I have mentioned the atrocities and inhumane policies of Hamas and the Palestinian Authority.

But that does not excuse Israel. (Remember, the nation this thread concerns)

No no no, the main organization I am referring to is the PA, and the PLO. Germany and Japan are just add ons to the concept. You don't have to support the PLO or the PA to understand the issue at stake.

You see, Israel is dealing with people who consider the land "Arab land". Israel is dealing with people historically supported by the Ba'athists. The Jews already share the land with 1.2 million Arabs who have mostly equal rights, with some minor inconveniences like having to have the wedding in Cyprus in the rare, rare event they decide to marry a Jew.

With that said, I really don't see the problem of considering a country to be based on ethnic ties, since that's pretty much the universal standard. Why should anyone try to impose their Kumbaya post-modern liberal values upon it? if the Jews want it to be an Ethnic-based boundary, why not? Because it's offensive to non Jews?

 

[tumbleweed41]

The Jews already share the land with 1.2 million Arabs who have mostly equal rights, with some minor inconveniences....

Like forced relocation, uncompensated and unjustified land seizure and illegal settlements.

With that said, I really don't see the problem of considering a country to be based on ethnic ties, since that's pretty much the universal standard. Why should anyone try to impose their Kumbaya post-modern liberal values upon it? if the Jews want it to be an Ethnic-based boundary, why not? Because it's offensive to non Jews?

Because they are not the only residents of the land.

 

[Shermana]

Like forced relocation, uncompensated and unjustified land seizure and illegal settlements.

This has happened to Israeli citizen Arabs? Do show where.

Because they are not the only residents of the land.

Yes, and the other residents who haven't taken citizenship are hostile Separatists. Name a single other country on Earth that would tolerate Hostile separatists who refuse to adopt citizenship and instead align themselves under an opposing government within the land.

 

[I.S.L.A.M617]

Yes, and the other residents who haven't taken citizenship are hostile Separatists. Name a single other country on Earth that would tolerate Hostile separatists who refuse to adopt citizenship and instead align themselves under an opposing government within the land.

Canada (Quebec is a semi-autonomous state of separatists)
Spain (Navarre, Catalonia)
Italy (Vatican City)
Liberia (there's a different "president" everywhere you go in that country)
Sri Lanka (the Tamil Tigers)
Myanmar

This is just off the top of my head. If I actually did digging I could probably find a lot more.