Zionism

[1robin]

I am not sure if you are incredibly naive or incredibly vicious.
However, we are instructed by G-d to give everyone the benefit of the doubt so, I will extend that courtesy towards you for now.

The video you posted is vicious propaganda and incredibly hateful indoctrination against Jews and Israel. It has nothing to do with Zionism per se.
You claim to agree with the viewpoint:
"The only reason the Jews were given Israel was because they were oppressed by the Nazis. I find it hypocritical that they would turn around and do essentially the same thing to the Palestinians."
This is an historically invalid and quite dishonest point of view.
For you to agree to it indicates that you have zero interest in history or facts.
I would suggest you read some history on the origins of the State of Israel and your comparison of slaughtering millions of Jews with the treatment of the Arabs called Palestinians.

"Zionism claims that Israel belongs to the Jews by right of birth, but the majority of displaced Jews in Israel are of European descent and just happen to follow the Jewish religion. They have no more of a "blood" claim to Israel than I do."
This is even a decent dictionary or propaganda definition of Zionism.
Again, this would indicate that you don't really understand the things to which you object.
I would suggest you educate yourself outside of those who simply hate Jews and/or Israel.
There is no profit in your observations nor in your video.

The Jews have every right there is to Israel.
1. UN mandate.
2. Right of conquest.
3. Continual occupation by their people.
4. Acquisition for the ruling authority (Britain).
5. The enormous gain the region and the world has gained by having Israel make the place prosper instead of languish in ignorance and dysfunction as the Palestinians had done. Even without oil Israel leads the entire middle east in many categories of productivity and civilized advancement at the same time they are forced to spend more of personal defense per person that any nation on earth. It has the free press, the only full citizenship granted to all faiths, and tolerates the open practice of al faiths. It is the only place in the God forsaken region that functions correctly and yet those that ruin everything they touch even want it without having any claim to it.

IOW by every method we use to determine who owns a nation the Jews have the greatest claim by far. BTW even Eastern European Jews have a vastly greater claim to Israel than you. Their ancestors have lived there continuously for thousands of years. Even if some were forcibly removed that does not render your claims equal to theirs. If your house taken away and you relocated I would suspect you would think your grandchildren had a better claim to the house that those that simply moved into the vacancy and wrecked it.

 

[Moishe3rd]

The Jews have every right there is to Israel.
1. UN mandate.
2. Right of conquest.
3. Continual occupation by their people.
4. Acquisition for the ruling authority (Britain).
5. The enormous gain the region and the world has gained by having Israel make the place prosper instead of languish in ignorance and dysfunction as the Palestinians had done. Even without oil Israel leads the entire middle east in many categories of productivity and civilized advancement at the same time they are forced to spend more of personal defense per person that any nation on earth. It has the free press, the only full citizenship granted to all faiths, and tolerates the open practice of al faiths. It is the only place in the God forsaken region that functions correctly and yet those that ruin everything they touch even want it without having any claim to it.

IOW by every method we use to determine who owns a nation the Jews have the greatest claim by far. BTW even Eastern European Jews have a vastly greater claim to Israel than you. Their ancestors have lived there continuously for thousands of years. Even if some were forcibly removed that does not render your claims equal to theirs. If your house taken away and you relocated I would suspect you would think your grandchildren had a better claim to the house that those that simply moved into the vacancy and wrecked it.

I would suggest that a better analogy might be that "if your house were taken away" and your only choice was to accede to conquerors who ruled by some kind of framework, however flawed, of Just Law - Or, to allow yourself and your children to be put in concentration camps for the rest of your life by people who would just as soon see you dead and buried - I would suspect that you would choose the former...
Well, NO. They don't choose the former, do they?
Riddle me that Palestinian Man? (generic humor here; not directed at any poster)

 

[1robin]

I would suggest that a better analogy might be that "if your house were taken away" and your only choice was to accede to conquerors who ruled by some kind of framework, however flawed, of Just Law - Or, to allow yourself and your children to be put in concentration camps for the rest of your life by people who would just as soon see you dead and buried - I would suspect that you would choose the former...
Well, NO. They don't choose the former, do they?
Riddle me that Palestinian Man? (generic humor here; not directed at any poster)

I see no humor or coherence here. I have no idea what it was you are trying so hard to say nor where the "Palestinian man" remark comes from. Take a breath and type slower. What are you talking about? BTW my post was only 10% analogy, why did not garble the rest as well?

 

[Moishe3rd]

I see no humor or coherence here. I have no idea what it was you are trying so hard to say nor where the "Palestinian man" remark comes from. Take a breath and type slower. What are you talking about? BTW my post was only 10% analogy, why did not garble the rest as well?

Oy. Sigh...
"Riddle me this, Batman" is from a 1960's television show where the character, Batman, was posed contradictory conundrums by a character called "The Riddler," regarding the Riddler's criminal plans and activities. Batman then figured out the answer to those riddles...
It's called a "twisted cliche" when used as I did, substituting "Palestinian Man."
(Ya know, it's just not funny when you have to explain...)

And, I happen to agree with your post. I have no interest in "garbling it."
I simply do not believe that claiming continuous residence by Jews in the Land of Israel for several thousand years, validates the State of Israel's ownership of the land in the State of Israel today.
Every single inch of land that is "owned" by any country or tribe on this planet is owned by right of conquest and governance.
Continuous residence of a people has never determined who "owns" what land or who governs what land.

I was suggesting that the Arabs called Palestinians are far better off under the aegis of the Israeli government than they are, or would be, under the rule of other Arabs because - historically and factually, this is true.
The Israeli government treats its Arab citizens and its resident Arab non-citizens with far more justice than ANY other Arab or Muslim country on planet Earth.

Is this a tad bit clearer or, am I still "garblling" your post?

 

[Avi1001]

Oy. Sigh...
"Riddle me this, Batman" is from a 1960's television show where the character, Batman, was posed contradictory conundrums by a character called "The Riddler," regarding the Riddler's criminal plans and activities. Batman then figured out the answer to those riddles...
It's called a "twisted cliche" when used as I did, substituting "Palestinian Man."
(Ya know, it's just not funny when you have to explain...)

And, I happen to agree with your post. I have no interest in "garbling it."
I simply do not believe that claiming continuous residence by Jews in the Land of Israel for several thousand years, validates the State of Israel's ownership of the land in the State of Israel today.
Every single inch of land that is "owned" by any country or tribe on this planet is owned by right of conquest and governance.
Continuous residence of a people has never determined who "owns" what land or who governs what land.

I was suggesting that the Arabs called Palestinians are far better off under the aegis of the Israeli government than they are, or would be, under the rule of other Arabs because - historically and factually, this is true.
The Israeli government treats its Arab citizens and its resident Arab non-citizens with far more justice than ANY other Arab or Muslim country on planet Earth.

Is this a tad bit clearer or, am I still "garblling" your post?

Hey Moish, good post on Zionism. Haven't seen you in a long time, how goes it ? Maybe you should start a new OP with a more positive prospective on Zionism ?

 

[ametist]

Governments, military, borders..apparently this is a political issue. I dont understand what it is doing in religious debate forum. Is politics using religions or what?

 

[Moishe3rd]

Governments, military, borders..apparently this is a political issue. I dont understand what it is doing in religious debate forum. Is politics using religions or what?

Zionism is also a political issue.
And, it's the title of this thread.

I would humbly suggest that "anti-Zionists" are ALL using their own twisted version of what "They" define as Zionism to indirectly attack or denigrate Jews and/or Israelis.
And, as the majority of the planet associates Zionism; Israel; and Jews with Judaism, these politics appear to be related to Judaism, which most people consider a religion.

 

[Moishe3rd]

Hey Moish, good post on Zionism. Haven't seen you in a long time, how goes it ? Maybe you should start a new OP with a more positive prospective on Zionism ?

Maybe.
I don't post much as most arguments tend to bore me.
If I do a "positive" piece on Zionism, I would just be feeding those who want to make up their own definitions and their own ridiculous histories...
But, maybe...

 

[1robin]

Oy. Sigh...
"Riddle me this, Batman" is from a 1960's television show where the character, Batman, was posed contradictory conundrums by a character called "The Riddler," regarding the Riddler's criminal plans and activities. Batman then figured out the answer to those riddles...
It's called a "twisted cliche" when used as I did, substituting "Palestinian Man."
(Ya know, it's just not funny when you have to explain...)

And, I happen to agree with your post. I have no interest in "garbling it."
I simply do not believe that claiming continuous residence by Jews in the Land of Israel for several thousand years, validates the State of Israel's ownership of the land in the State of Israel today.
Every single inch of land that is "owned" by any country or tribe on this planet is owned by right of conquest and governance.
Continuous residence of a people has never determined who "owns" what land or who governs what land.

I was suggesting that the Arabs called Palestinians are far better off under the aegis of the Israeli government than they are, or would be, under the rule of other Arabs because - historically and factually, this is true.
The Israeli government treats its Arab citizens and its resident Arab non-citizens with far more justice than ANY other Arab or Muslim country on planet Earth.

Is this a tad bit clearer or, am I still "garblling" your post?

Since you said you agreed with me you can easily see I had no motivation for falsely claiming you garbled anything. You have a very unusual way of writing that is confusing to a rigorous minimalist. We should go back to the days where writing material was very rare. People had to systematically learn to be as clear and efficient with words as possible, and little effort was spent "riddling out" anything. Anyway I did understand you to say we agree so I will leave it there.

 

[ametist]

Zionism is also a political issue.
And, it's the title of this thread.

I would humbly suggest that "anti-Zionists" are ALL using their own twisted version of what "They" define as Zionism to indirectly attack or denigrate Jews and/or Israelis.
And, as the majority of the planet associates Zionism; Israel; and Jews with Judaism, these politics appear to be related to Judaism, which most people consider a religion.

So it is only jews who can understand the spiritual meaning of judaism and it is crime to have an. understanding of it out of any politics whatsoever?

 

[Moishe3rd]

So it is only jews who can understand the spiritual meaning of judaism and it is crime to have an. understanding of it out of any politics whatsoever?

I don't know.
I was answering your question.

 

[ametist]

I didnt much had a question as much I had a remorse that spirituality and actual purpose of religion which is knowing god turns into hard core politics.

 

[2ndpillar]

For or Against?

I am opposed to Zionism for 2 reasons:

1)The only reason the Jews were given Israel was because they were oppressed by the Nazis. I find it hypocritical that they would turn around and do essentially the same thing to the Palestinians.

2)Zionism claims that Israel belongs to the Jews by right of birth, but the majority of displaced Jews in Israel are of European descent and just happen to follow the Jewish religion. They have no more of a "blood" claim to Israel than I do.

Dear ISLAM,
You can't have it both ways. It is the Palestinians who thought to destroy the Jews, and in the execution of that plan, in 1967, were exiled themselves. As for today, the chant is to wipe Israel off the face of the earth. Like in 1967, what will happen is already spoken of in Ze 14, the nations will be gathered against Jerusalem, and the "Lord" will go out to fight against those nations...and plague with which the Lord will strike those people is of the same description as that plague that struck Hiroshima in the 2nd world war. Ze 14:12"...their flesh will rot while they stand on their feet, and their eyes will rot in the sockets, and their tongue will rot in the mouth". The Law is that "As you do unto others, shall be done unto you".

 

[1robin]

Dear ISLAM,
You can't have it both ways. It is the Palestinians who thought to destroy the Jews, and in the execution of that plan, in 1967, were exiled themselves. As for today, the chant is to wipe Israel off the face of the earth. Like in 1967, what will happen is already spoken of in Ze 14, the nations will be gathered against Jerusalem, and the "Lord" will go out to fight against those nations...and plague with which the Lord will strike those people is of the same description as that plague that struck Hiroshima in the 2nd world war. Ze 14:12"...their flesh will rot while they stand on their feet, and their eyes will rot in the sockets, and their tongue will rot in the mouth". The Law is that "As you do unto others, shall be done unto you".

Every single nation mentioned in the bible Christ will war against when he returns is currently Islamic.

Note: The Biblical mention of Ethiopia is not modern day Christian Ethiopia it is modern day Islamic Sudan. Solomon's Ethiopia.

Who side will be standing after the dusk of Armageddon clears is not provable however it is clear we will not be on the same side.

 

[FunctionalAtheist]

If one understands anything of pre-history, history, or human nature, it should be obvious that there is not a square inch of the Earth controlled by someone who has a 'right' to it. Britian, Uganda, China, Australia, Hondurous, etc. etc. all lands have been taken, lost, and taken again. The jews killed all the inhabitants to take the land. Before that it was controlled by babylonians, egyptians, assyrians, etc., etc. and since then it has been controlled by greeks, romans, mongols, moors, and turks.

Someone says the britan, the rightful authority...LMAO what a joke! They stole the land from turkish athority only 30 years before the mandates.

Israel has the right by conquest? Might as well admit that arab's have the right to keep fighting to take control again.

I think displacing the palastinians and mandating the land to Isreal was a cold, heartless, political and economic ploy that only a monster could somehow see as a moral imperative.

I also think the same applies to the treatment of the jews by the nazis, and what happened to native americans.

No one has a birth right to own or controll land. Everyone has a right to struggle and fight for land. If there were a god we wouldn't have these issues because everyone would be in their place. But on this earth you have what you hold, and if you can't hold it you have no right to it.

 

[Nakosis]

No one has a birth right to own or controll land. Everyone has a right to struggle and fight for land. If there were a god we wouldn't have these issues because everyone would be in their place. But on this earth you have what you hold, and if you can't hold it you have no right to it.

I don't believe there was ever a human who had the authority to speak for God.

That doesn't mean I don't believe a number of people in our history or founders of a particular religion weren't verify spiritual people and perhaps held some greater insight to the nature of human beings.

Prophets spoke for themselves, perhaps with the best intentions to rely their spiritual insight about God. Just a bugger in the past to get people to listen to you except by claiming Gods authority.

So yes I think the reality is people hold land by might. They just justify their actions sometimes by claiming to have God's authority. No one else need accept that, but it doesn't stop them from claiming it.

 

[1robin]

If one understands anything of pre-history, history, or human nature, it should be obvious that there is not a square inch of the Earth controlled by someone who has a 'right' to it. Britian, Uganda, China, Australia, Hondurous, etc. etc. all lands have been taken, lost, and taken again. The jews killed all the inhabitants to take the land. Before that it was controlled by babylonians, egyptians, assyrians, etc., etc. and since then it has been controlled by greeks, romans, mongols, moors, and turks.

Someone says the britan, the rightful authority...LMAO what a joke! They stole the land from turkish athority only 30 years before the mandates.

Israel has the right by conquest? Might as well admit that arab's have the right to keep fighting to take control again.

I think displacing the palastinians and mandating the land to Isreal was a cold, heartless, political and economic ploy that only a monster could somehow see as a moral imperative.

I also think the same applies to the treatment of the jews by the nazis, and what happened to native americans.

No one has a birth right to own or controll land. Everyone has a right to struggle and fight for land. If there were a god we wouldn't have these issues because everyone would be in their place. But on this earth you have what you hold, and if you can't hold it you have no right to it.

1. I did not say Israel only has a right by conquest. I said Israel has every right normally used to recognize national existence. This includes conquest, and UN mandate, international recognition, continuous occupation, etc.... They have the best claim in all categories.

2. The Turks had no rights. They stole it from the Crusaders, the Crusaders stole it from the Muslims, the Muslims stole it from Jews. The British controlled it by as much a legitimate right as any other and they legally gave it back to Jewish people.

3. The Arab's loose all their conquests. They have no justifications for attempting them anyway. Israel has legitimacy it defending the homes they have had for 3000 years, Iran has no right to declare they have no rights to exist. There are no absolute certainties here but Jewish claims have vastly more justification than any other.

4. I have no idea how given back a homeland to the people taken from it by force and even giving half of it to the squatters that had occupied the vacancy (by the way this was agreed to Jews but not by the squatters) is the actions of a monster. however people on you side routinely claim hero's are monsters' and vice versa.

5. As far as native Americans go I am one. One of the few tribes that actually any claims to anything (Cherokee) and I thank God Europeans made the nation grow from abject ignorance into a force that has defended the world from tyranny. As far as most "Indians" go they came out of Canada a few centuries before whites arrived and killed off tribe after tribe of their brothers without bothering to offer money, education, economic stability, medical care, or even coexistence. They considered peace a weakness and practiced war like a sacred duty. They were worse than street gangs and had no right to anything. This includes all the classic horse cultures. Your views are inconsistent with well known history.

6. If we all have the right to fight for land then why did you condemn only one sides actions in many cases. If that is true then you will not object when someone fights you for your land or removes you by force and others take it.

In summary Israel has by far the greatest claims to the land in every category. God it seems, agrees.

 

[1robin]

I don't believe there was ever a human who had the authority to speak for God.

That doesn't mean I don't believe a number of people in our history or founders of a particular religion weren't verify spiritual people and perhaps held some greater insight to the nature of human beings.

Prophets spoke for themselves, perhaps with the best intentions to rely their spiritual insight about God. Just a bugger in the past to get people to listen to you except by claiming Gods authority.

So yes I think the reality is people hold land by might. They just justify their actions sometimes by claiming to have God's authority. No one else need accept that, but it doesn't stop them from claiming it.

Now you may certainly believe this but the weight of evidence is against you. Over 2000 prophecies accurate in exact detail indicate what you believe is not true for example.

 

[FunctionalAtheist]

1. I did not say Israel only has a right by conquest. I said Israel has every right normally used to recognize national existence. This includes conquest, and UN mandate, international recognition, continuous occupation, etc.... They have the best claim in all categories.

2. The Turks had no rights. They stole it from the Crusaders, the Crusaders stole it from the Muslims, the Muslims stole it from Jews. The British controlled it by as much a legitimate right as any other and they legally gave it back to Jewish people.

3. The Arab's loose all their conquests. They have no justifications for attempting them anyway. Israel has legitimacy it defending the homes they have had for 3000 years, Iran has no right to declare they have no rights to exist. There are no absolute certainties here but Jewish claims have vastly more justification than any other.

4. I have no idea how given back a homeland to the people taken from it by force and even giving half of it to the squatters that had occupied the vacancy (by the way this was agreed to Jews but not by the squatters) is the actions of a monster. however people on you side routinely claim hero's are monsters' and vice versa.

5. As far as native Americans go I am one. One of the few tribes that actually any claims to anything (Cherokee) and I thank God Europeans made the nation grow from abject ignorance into a force that has defended the world from tyranny. As far as most "Indians" go they came out of Canada a few centuries before whites arrived and killed off tribe after tribe of their brothers without bothering to offer money, education, economic stability, medical care, or even coexistence. They considered peace a weakness and practiced war like a sacred duty. They were worse than street gangs and had no right to anything. This includes all the classic horse cultures. Your views are inconsistent with well known history.

6. If we all have the right to fight for land then why did you condemn only one sides actions in many cases. If that is true then you will not object when someone fights you for your land or removes you by force and others take it.

In summary Israel has by far the greatest claims to the land in every category. God it seems, agrees.

Your views are insainly inconsistent. You talk about how arab's, turks, british had no authority, yet you previously listed being given the land by the righful authority (briton) as one of the reasons israel has a right to the land. You say no one has right to speak for god, then you say god agrees with you (what arrogance). You say I condemn a side for taking land and then you say I should not object when someone fights me for my land.

I recommend you type up a DRAFT response, read through it a few times. Maybe even read it outloud.

I would also like to point out that nowhere did I say isreal should give up what they have.

Mostly I'm absolutly amazed how little you know of native americans. Most certainly did not come from Canada. In fact they filled the continents of both North and South America all the way from Alaska to Patagonia and southern Chilie. And to say that they were worse than street gangs somehow makes me feel you really have very little to offer in the way of thoughtful discourse. Yes they were savage, they practiced war, and they offered nothing in return. So more or less you are saying they were just like the europeans, or asians, or africans, or jews, or arabs, or anybody else.

To say that jews have been defending that land in the middle east for 3,000 years is an ignorant statement that leaves out 1850 years were there were practically no jews anywhere near isreal.

 

[1robin]

Your views are insainly inconsistent.

Was that an echo or a fifth grade I know you are but what am I comment?

You talk about how arab's, turks, british had no authority, yet you previously listed being given the land by the righful authority (briton) as one of the reasons israel has a right to the land. You say no one has right to speak for god, then you say god agrees with you (what arrogance). You say I condemn a side for taking land and then you say I should not object when someone fights me for my land.

I think you have me confused with someone else. I think I said the exact opposite and "you" at least admitted several of these were true, (not me).

I recommend you type up a DRAFT response, read through it a few times. Maybe even read it outloud.

Are you talking to 1robin?

I would also like to point out that nowhere did I say isreal should give up what they have.

I did not say you did. Though you did say Arabs had the the right to try and take it by force. I am not sure your even talking to me. I will await confirmation.