• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

ZIONIST Grip on American Films

Status
Not open for further replies.

.lava

Veteran Member
No,we normally have just History,for example the great fire of London in 1666 which started in a shop in Pudding lane does'nt need a commitee,its just History,it may vary in its telling from Book to Book but the essential facts are the same.
Sayeed Qutb and Hassan Al Banna were both propagators of the Zionist conspiracy,how do i know this?,well they both wrote books so its from the Horses mouth and which can be seen in the Hamas Charter :

"The Islamic Resistance Movement is one of the wings of Muslim Brotherhood in Palestine. Muslim Brotherhood Movement is a universal organization which constitutes the largest Islamic movement in modern times. It is characterised by its deep understanding, accurate comprehension and its complete embrace of all Islamic concepts of all aspects of life, culture, creed, politics, economics, education, society, justice and judgement, the spreading of Islam, education, art, information, science of the occult and conversion to Islam."
Charter of Hamas

I would say here though that it should say Islamist and not Islamic but again from the Horses mouth so to speak,so no commitee needed for History.
I would guess though that the curriculum in secondary education is far more condensed and perhaps some things are omitted of less importance but on higher education like Uni people tend to specialise so no commitee.

yes, if great fire of London was removed from your history books, maybe a hundred years later not even one person would know about it. there is always "a bunch of men" who decide for masses, specially in education and specially history. only a bunch of people decide what public should know and what version of story they should believe as facts. of course, your history teacher has nothing to do with it. teachers can only teach what they learned.

i don't know about this brotherhood. last year i've heard there is one in Africa but i can't say i know or understand it


.
 

England my lionheart

Rockerjahili Rebel
Premium Member
yes, if great fire of London was removed from your history books, maybe a hundred years later not even one person would know about it. there is always "a bunch of men" who decide for masses, specially in education and specially history. only a bunch of people decide what public should know and what version of story they should believe as facts. of course, your history teacher has nothing to do with it. teachers can only teach what they learned.

i don't know about this brotherhood. last year i've heard there is one in Africa but i can't say i know or understand it


.

They are currently doing well in the Sudan,but you can check this out on their Website.
 

Aquitaine

Well-Known Member
Interesting and relevant question, especially with the increasing use of the label 'zionists' and of course the OP.
people who claim Zionism may be secular, religious, leftists, or righties. because there is no one monolithic Zionism with a world agenda. the roots of Zionism were secular, it was a largely secular movement. and yes while it does maintain since the 19th century the historic link of Jews to the land of Israel, the movement came as a response to the racism in Europe and it aimed at finding a solution to the problem which reached its climax with National Socialist Movement, and the tragic events of WWII. the Zionist Jews of Europe were supporters of European liberalism and were part of the middle class in Europe. later more trends within the Zionist movement emerged.
in modern Israel, parties both from the right and the left claim Zionism. so while you often hear about Zionism and its expansionist agenda, you can also find Israeli parties which are against the settlements claiming Zionism.
for example take a look at the principals of the Israeli left-wing social democratic party Meretz:

New Movement-Meretz - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

the label 'zionists' ignores the diversity of political opinions within this umbrella, while to many people under this umbrella upholding Zionism mainly means the right for a Jewish homeland. whether they are atheists, traditional, liberal or conservative. it is no wonder that figures such as the Iranian president Ahmadinejad and the chiefs of international terror organizations love to throw that label and claim that there is a Zionist conspiracy for world domination (another word for 'Jewish conspiracy') while at the same time using other labels for years, such as referring to the US, as 'The Great Satan' and Israel as 'The Little Satan'.


Thanks for the clarification, Caladan. I guess it's kinda like with religions: there's no "true" Christianity or Islam etc. Same with Zionism I guess, but most of the time I hear that word it comes across as a hostile insult, like "those Zionist Jews" or whatever, or "he is actually a Zionist!" etc.

I guess we all need to clarify what we mean in regards to our stance on "Zionism". From my perspective, I though Zionism basically meant the right for Israel to exist, so in that sense I am a Zionist, but given how that word has so many meanings guess I should just say I support the right for all territories to exist peacefully - otherwise it'll end up in a labelling game :)
 

Aquitaine

Well-Known Member
Hmm, so there is a limit on how far "back" we can go then?

Look, I've heard things like that been said before about this God-given homeland for the Jews etc, as apparently being a belief of "Zionism" etc, all I'm doing is pointing out things I've heard be described as "Zionism".

Nothing more.
 

Gabethewiking

Active Member
Look, I've heard things like that been said before about this God-given homeland for the Jews etc, as apparently being a belief of "Zionism" etc, all I'm doing is pointing out things I've heard be described as "Zionism".

Nothing more.

Fine fine, just a bit curious that it goes back to a specific point and no further...

The ones that can only truly tell us is, of course, the Jews themselves, and we have a rather vocal one here, so it would be nice if he told us what a Jew is, but perhaps it is like "kind", you cant actually desribe it, you just know.
 

Ba'al

Active Member
I guess we all need to clarify what we mean in regards to our stance on "Zionism". From my perspective, I though Zionism basically meant the right for Israel to exist, so in that sense I am a Zionist, but given how that word has so many meanings guess I should just say I support the right for all territories to exist peacefully - otherwise it'll end up in a labelling game :)

Zionism is not the belief of Israel to exist. The term is biblical and refers to God giving the Israelites the Promised Land, which is ofcourse where Israel is now. So a Zionist is a Jew that believes the land of Israel is theirs because God gave it to them, no matter what the political or geographical circumstances are at the time. There are actually Jews who are against Zionism.
 

Caladan

Agnostic Pantheist
Zionism is not the belief of Israel to exist. The term is biblical and refers to God giving the Israelites the Promised Land, which is ofcourse where Israel is now. So a Zionist is a Jew that believes the land of Israel is theirs because God gave it to them, no matter what the political or geographical circumstances are at the time. There are actually Jews who are against Zionism.
Ignorant drivel. even wiki can make you infinitely more informed. Zionism is a movement which was created by secular Jews in Europe as a response to increasing racism, and as a tool to find a solution to the difficulties of life in Europe as a minority.
those Jews you speak about are against Zionism BECAUSE they view it as a secular movement which is at odds with their religious values.
 

Ba'al

Active Member
Ignorant drivel. even wiki can make you infinitely more informed. Zionism is a movement which was created by secular Jews in Europe as a response to increasing racism, and as a tool to find a solution to the difficulties of life in Europe as a minority.
those Jews you speak about are against Zionism BECAUSE they view it as a secular movement which is at odds with their religious values.

Fine let's look at what Wiki says:
Zionism (Hebrew: ציונות‎, Tsiyonut) is the international nationalist[1] political movement that originally supported the reestablishment of a homeland for the Jewish people in the Land of Israel (Hebrew: Eretz Yisra'el), the historical homeland of the Jews. Since the establishment of the State of Israel, the Zionist movement continues primarily to support it. Zionism is based on historical ties and religious traditions linking the Jewish people to the Land of Israel.[2]

And BTW, since you are staff, does that give you the right for rude name calling? :no:
 

Caladan

Agnostic Pantheist
Fine let's look at what Wiki says:
Zionism (Hebrew: ציונות‎, Tsiyonut) is the international nationalist[1] political movement that originally supported the reestablishment of a homeland for the Jewish people in the Land of Israel (Hebrew: Eretz Yisra'el), the historical homeland of the Jews. Since the establishment of the State of Israel, the Zionist movement continues primarily to support it. Zionism is based on historical ties and religious traditions linking the Jewish people to the Land of Israel.[2]
Do you always stop reading after the first lines?
of course Zionism's 'ethos' is about the link Jews have to the land of Israel.
here is what wikipedia resumes saying:
the modern Zionist movement, beginning in the late 19th century, was mainly founded by secular Jews, largely as a response by Ashkenazi Jews to antisemitism and the emancipation across Europe, especially in Russia.
...
Haredi Orthodox organizations do not belong to the Zionist movement; they view Zionism as secular, reject nationalism as a doctrine and consider Judaism to be first and foremost a religion.

And BTW, since you are staff, does that give you the right for rude name calling? :no:
Get over it. and do your research next time.
 

Ba'al

Active Member
Do you always stop reading after the first lines?
of course Zionism's 'ethos' is about the link Jews have to the land of Israel.
here is what wikipedia resumes saying:
the modern Zionist movement, beginning in the late 19th century, was mainly founded by secular Jews, largely as a response by Ashkenazi Jews to antisemitism and the emancipation across Europe, especially in Russia.
...
Haredi Orthodox organizations do not belong to the Zionist movement; they view Zionism as secular, reject nationalism as a doctrine and consider Judaism to be first and foremost a religion.

Yeah so? We could also paste the entire wiki definition if we really want to get picky.
 

Aquitaine

Well-Known Member
At least you realize that you are being selective to make a [misinformed] case.

Hey Caladan, I'd imagine you're more informed on this so I wanna ask what do you think it was that made Europe "reject" the Jews, if you know what I mean. Why did everyone hate the Jews? :shrug:
 

IF_u_knew

Curious
I guess we all need to clarify what we mean in regards to our stance on "Zionism". From my perspective, I though Zionism basically meant the right for Israel to exist, so in that sense I am a Zionist, but given how that word has so many meanings guess I should just say I support the right for all territories to exist peacefully - otherwise it'll end up in a labelling game :)

I think this is the best thing that has been said in the whole of this thread. Quite true. It always reminds me of the story about the Tower of Babel .. discussions such as this one here, that is. Everyone can be using the same term and to each in their own mind it could have a completely different meaning than the next person's idea of the word. Then, confusion sets in (and sometimes the tempers flare). Thus, VERY good advice for all of us. :yes:
 

Caladan

Agnostic Pantheist
Hey Caladan, I'd imagine you're more informed on this so I wanna ask what do you think it was that made Europe "reject" the Jews, if you know what I mean. Why did everyone hate the Jews? :shrug:
During preiods such as the middle ages, the persecution of Jews involved a lot of religious sentiments and passions. Jews as Christ-Killers, Jews were accused of various calamities, such as the black death, for which many Jews lost their lives, blood labels were popular in which Jews are presented as drinkers of the blood of Christian children in their holidays, and for making traditional Jewish food in holidays such as passover. the fact that Jews were limited in professions pushed Jews to pursue money-landing and accounting, professions that were deemed to be negative and were avoided in Christian tradition, this only increased animosity towards Jews.
In religious themes, Jews were portrayed as diabolic, again as Christ-Killers, and as having occult powers.
the concept of Jews being collectively responsible for the death of Christ was a strong instrument in the persecution of Jews.
in the 19th and 20th century like the concept of 'Zionism vs' Jews' today many in the Catholic clergy wrote pieces against Jewish control of banking and Jewish power in general, and at the same time reminding critics that they are not criticizing Jews for being Jews but for their control and power... sounds familiar?
during the rise of nationalism in Europe and the movement of sentiments and passions from being focused on religious elements to nationalist elements, antisemitism gained a new nature, xenophobia was rampant and Jews were now being labeled and discriminated against on racial terms, and while Jews were a scapegoat on religious basis before, now Jews became the scapegoat for national troubles.
a famous case is that of the Jewish French military Captain Dreyfus, who was charged at the end of the 19th century for spying for Germany. he was convicted and deported. only after the trial it was proven that he was not guilty. during his trial many French were up in arms about him and against Jews in general as his case was turned into a highlight, violence against Jews broke out.
in Germany the Aryan myth vs the preceived Jewish liberalism gained momentum, and Jews were accused of economical calamities and as alien to the Aryan civilization. despite the fact that 150,000 Jews served in the German armed forces during the first world war with thousands of them being decorated with medals of honor, many blamed the Jews (and the socialists) for Germany's defeat. the Nazi Party made it clear that Jews can never be part of the Volk, and with the economic woes and humiliating terms of losing the war, many groups were formed that let out these frustrations through public violence, later these men became instrumental in the genocide against Jews.
 
Last edited:

Gabethewiking

Active Member
During preiods such as the middle ages, the persecution of Jews involved a lot of religious sentiments and passions. Jews as Christ-Killers, Jews were accused of various calamities, such as the black death, for which many Jews lost their lives, blood labels were popular in which Jews are presented as drinkers of the blood of Christian children in their holidays, and for making traditional Jewish food in holidays such as passover. the fact that Jews were limited in professions pushed Jews to pursue money-landing and accounting, professions that were deemed to be negative and were avoided in Christian tradition, this only increased animosity towards Jews.
Well, drinking childrens blood does not sound good, I wonder if there has been enough study to really exclude that this happened, blood sacrifices and similar things are very common in religious traditions, lets not just pass over such a remark to quickly now. :eek:

In religious themes, Jews were portrayed as diabolic, again as Christ-Killers, and as having occult powers. the concept of Jews being collectively responsible for the death of Christ was a strong instrument in the persecution of Jews.
Well, Jews are responsible for the death of the fictional character "Jesus", this is a fact, read the New Testament.

The Old Testament (Torah) was written for Jews by Jews and to promote the Jewish people, whiles the New Testament (NT) was written by people who where also Jews, but seem to have wanted to distance themselves from traditional Judaism. The character "Jesus" was a jew himself and according to the New Testament followed by the new religion 'Christianity', the (old) Jews where responsible for his execution.

Plain fact, nothing weird. This is like accusing Mel Gibson for being anti-semitic for following the Biblical story, silly.

in the 19th and 20th century like the concept of 'Zionism vs' Jews' today many in the Catholic clergy wrote pieces against Jewish control of banking and Jewish power in general, and at the same time reminding critics that they are not criticizing Jews for being Jews but for their control and power... sounds familiar?
Sounds like the average Right wing fanatics we have today, should we call it typical semantics among people who show aggressive and hateful behaviour? Or just Human behaviour?

during the rise of nationalism in Europe and the movement of sentiments and passions from being focused on religious elements to nationalist elements, antisemitism gained a new nature, xenophobia was rampant and Jews were now being labeled and discriminated against on racial terms, and while Jews were a scapegoat on religious basis before, now Jews became the scapegoat for national troubles.
Somewhat over exaggerated, but fine.

a famous case is that of the Jewish French military Captain Dreyfus, who was charged at the end of the 19th century for spying for Germany. he was convicted and deported. only after the trial it was proven that he was not guilty. during his trial many French were up in arms about him and against Jews in general as his case was turned into a highlight, violence against Jews broke out.
I do not have enough un-biased information about the Dreyfus case to comment on this, but how would one example show the real deal in any case, kind of saying that George W Bush to be the example of American people, not very fair nor proper.

in Germany the Aryan myth vs the preceived Jewish liberalism gained momentum, and Jews were accused of economical calamities and as alien to the Aryan civilization. despite the fact that 150,000 Jews served in the German armed forces during the first world war with thousands of them being decorated with medals of honor, many blamed the Jews (and the socialists) for Germany's defeat.
I never heard that Jews was blamed for the loss in World War I, is this unbiased information you are contributing?

The Jews have a long history in Germany and have since 1930 been one of the most populated nations of Jews, so obviously you would have the most amount of problems relating to Jews, please do not forget this. I do find your comment on the Socialist to be a good one, many forget the anti-Socialism/Communism in Germany as well as somehow confuse pre-WWII Germany with being Socialist/Communist because of poor or no education on the subject.

the Nazi Party made it clear that Jews can never be part of the Volk, and with the economic woes and humiliating terms of losing the war, many groups were formed that let out these frustrations through public violence, later these men became instrumental in the genocide against Jews.
Now it is also worth noting that what was done to Germany and the German people was wrong and this is what finally caused the Second World War. Germany got the complete blame for the First World War and punished thus, most people, especially in the U.S, have absolutely no clue about this and do not realize that the winning side set it up so this would eventually happen because of our anger towards Germany, if we acted properly this may never have happened.

Jews where only one of many people blamed, Blacks, Homosexuals, Gypsies but as the largest group and Hitler personal hatred against Jews made them a specific target but do not think this is somehow a unique event, if the same historic events and setup would happen in the U.S, We would have executed and murdered the Jews, just as would have happen in France of or Britain, this was not a specific 'German' case, this was because the majority of Jews where in Germany, so lets not pretend we are better.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top