This is the sort of thing Palestinians should be doing more of.
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
I'm not sure to what degree you are or aren't sarcastic, but this is actually kinda cool (even if it's also kinda sad).
Posted by Clive Candy (Member # 11977) on :
I'm not being sarcastic. I found this at a film blog and just wanted to share it. By my comment, I meant they should protest like this rather than suicide bombing. If the Palestinians simply protest like this more it makes it harder for the land hungry nefarious Zionists to portray the Palestinians as the bad guys.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
"The "Avatar" protest comes a day after the Israeli government began rerouting the enclosure to eat up less of the Palestinian village."
Which figures. Every time they get something, it simply whets their appetite for more.
Posted by Clive Candy (Member # 11977) on :
Well yes, if you've return to me just a teeny bit of something you stole from me, it's only natural for me to expect you to go the whole way and give back the rest.
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
This is going to be a fun thread.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
GET YOUR POPCORN HERE
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
Since we didn't steal anything, your comment is a non sequitur. Besides which, if someone stole something from me, I wouldn't demonstrate against them after they'd shown a sign of good faith by giving some of it back. But since these people don't even know what good faith means, I guess that would be too much to expect.
And since the goal of these people has never been to have a Palestinian state (and there's never been one, so I'm not sure who you're saying had something stolen from them), but only to prevent the existence of a Jewish one, their thuggish attempts to intimidate us into surrendering (which is, after all, what terrorism is all about) will never work.
Posted by MightyCow (Member # 9253) on :
Odin says that land actually belongs to Denmark. You can all expect to see angry Vikings any day now!
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
Don't taunt Lisa guys. You can disagree with something somebody says without needing to bait them into making more remarks for you to pick apart.
And as somebody who lives in a country where, not only were we unarguably not the original inhabitants, we did a much poorer job of working with the folks who we found here; I don't feel like I have a lot of moral high-ground for telling others, "Yur doin eet rong!"
Posted by Stephan (Member # 7549) on :
Nothing annoys me more then White Americans complaining about Israel.
Posted by Dan_Frank (Member # 8488) on :
quote:Originally posted by BlackBlade: And as somebody who lives in a country where, not only were we unarguably not the original inhabitants, we did a much poorer job of working with the folks who we found here; I don't feel like I have a lot of moral high-ground for telling others, "Yur doin eet rong!"
I disagree with your assertion that American Colonial history should invalidate us from criticizing others. Whether or not our own past is sordid has no actual bearing on whether or not a criticism we level has merit.
That being said, the vast majority of criticisms against Israel have no merit. Particularly criticisms coming from those hellbent on Israel's destruction no matter the cost. So, I basically agree with Lisa, and I agree with BB insofar as people shouldn't taunt her. I just disagreed with his reason (or, one of them, anyway).
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dan_Frank: I disagree with your assertion that American Colonial history should invalidate us from criticizing others. Whether or not our own past is sordid has no actual bearing on whether or not a criticism we level has merit.
Good. In general, cowering behind Tu Quoque is such a common technique for people of all kinds, in spite of its meritlessness.
Posted by AvidReader (Member # 6007) on :
quote:Originally posted by Lisa: Since we didn't steal anything, your comment is a non sequitur.
I suppose one could argue that the British stole Palestine from the Ottoman Empire, that the Turks stole it from Egypt, and so on, but spoils of war were historically considered up for grabs.
Wiki credits the birth of an Arab Palestinian identity with the protests against the British in 1937 - 56 years after the Jews had begun emigrating back en mass. In fact, the Arabs mostly seemed to be mad about the Jews having more money and better education than them. Not sure if that was a result of British influence on the region or other factors.
At the end of 1947, the UN offered to split the region up into three pieces, a Jewish state, an Arab state, and the city of Jerusalem under international control. The Arabs said no, started a fight, and lost.
Did the Turks have the moral authority to allow the Jews to emmigrate to Palestine in the first place? That's a question I could have some fun debating. Isreal stole Palestine rhetoric? That's just boring.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
quote:Originally posted by Stephan: Nothing annoys me more then White Americans complaining about Israel.
Why? A person's race has a bearing on their right to express opinions on political issues?
Funny how anti-white racism is so very acceptable in otherwise modern times. You feel free and justified in saying that Whites, by virtue of their race alone, should not be valued for their opinions on something. Good job.
Posted by Alcon (Member # 6645) on :
quote:Originally posted by Stephan: Nothing annoys me more then White Americans complaining about Israel.
How about a White American Jew?
Israel's not winning itself any friends the way it acts on the global stage. It takes two to tango and as long as Israel keeps answering violence with violence the cycle will continue. It needs to get a hold of itself and be the grown up in its neighborhood.
Granted that's harder said than done when suicide bombers are blowing themselves up on your streets on a daily basis. But that's the only way to stop it.
Posted by Stephan (Member # 7549) on :
quote:Originally posted by Orincoro:
quote:Originally posted by Stephan: Nothing annoys me more then White Americans complaining about Israel.
Why? A person's race has a bearing on their right to express opinions on political issues?
Funny how anti-white racism is so very acceptable in otherwise modern times. You feel free and justified in saying that Whites, by virtue of their race alone, should not be valued for their opinions on something. Good job.
Just again comparing it to our own theft of the Americas. More sarcasm then anything else. I'm white myself, and American, and Jewish.
Others put what I was getting at in a much better way.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
You were getting at something? The blame game over deeds done by past generations is not something worth getting at. We learn from the past, we shouldn't use it as a bludgeon on the present.
Posted by Stephan (Member # 7549) on :
quote:Originally posted by Alcon:
quote:Originally posted by Stephan: Nothing annoys me more then White Americans complaining about Israel.
How about a White American Jew?
Israel's not winning itself any friends the way it acts on the global stage. It takes two to tango and as long as Israel keeps answering violence with violence the cycle will continue. It needs to get a hold of itself and be the grown up in its neighborhood.
Granted that's harder said than done when suicide bombers are blowing themselves up on your streets on a daily basis. But that's the only way to stop it.
I honestly believe its the Palestinians who need to take the high road. If they took some lessons from Gandhi they could turn the entire world against Israel. But as long as they have sworn violence and refuse to accept compromise, it will continue.
Posted by Stephan (Member # 7549) on :
quote:Originally posted by Orincoro: You were getting at something? The blame game over deeds done by past generations is not something worth getting at. We learn from the past, we shouldn't use it as a bludgeon on the present.
Fine by me. As long as the people who complain about Israel, complain about it today, and not about past "theft".
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
Israel is an evolving situation, the US is not, in the same sense. Issues of ownership and primacy are still relevant.
Posted by Stephan (Member # 7549) on :
quote:Originally posted by Orincoro: Israel is an evolving situation, the US is not, in the same sense. Issues of ownership and primacy are still relevant.
So if Israel survives another 100 hundred years, then the Palestineans will be in the wrong?
Posted by Alcon (Member # 6645) on :
quote: quote:Originally posted by Alcon:
quote:Originally posted by Stephan: Nothing annoys me more then White Americans complaining about Israel.
How about a White American Jew?
Israel's not winning itself any friends the way it acts on the global stage. It takes two to tango and as long as Israel keeps answering violence with violence the cycle will continue. It needs to get a hold of itself and be the grown up in its neighborhood.
Granted that's harder said than done when suicide bombers are blowing themselves up on your streets on a daily basis. But that's the only way to stop it.
I honestly believe its the Palestinians who need to take the high road. If they took some lessons from Gandhi they could turn the entire world against Israel. But as long as they have sworn violence and refuse to accept compromise, it will continue.
Either side could say the others have to take the high road. But Israel's sitting in the first world - well educated, aware of history and with wealth to back them up. The Palestinians meanwhile are in the third world. Poor, desperate and not - on the whole - terribly well educated. In that case, it is the responsibility of those who are better off and ought to know better to take the high road.
Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
quote:Originally posted by Stephan:
quote:Originally posted by Orincoro: Israel is an evolving situation, the US is not, in the same sense. Issues of ownership and primacy are still relevant.
So if Israel survives another 100 hundred years, then the Palestineans will be in the wrong?
Or they could be wrong right now......
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by Alcon: Either side could say the others have to take the high road. But Israel's sitting in the first world - well educated, aware of history and with wealth to back them up. The Palestinians meanwhile are in the third world. Poor, desperate and not - on the whole - terribly well educated. In that case, it is the responsibility of those who are better off and ought to know better to take the high road.
So, they should do their best to defend their own citizens while harming the other side's civilians as little as possible?
Good. They do that already.
If by "high road", you mean "don't protect their own citizens", then I say that is a despicable notion. Not to mention completely immoral.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dan_Frank:
quote:Originally posted by BlackBlade: And as somebody who lives in a country where, not only were we unarguably not the original inhabitants, we did a much poorer job of working with the folks who we found here; I don't feel like I have a lot of moral high-ground for telling others, "Yur doin eet rong!"
I disagree with your assertion that American Colonial history should invalidate us from criticizing others. Whether or not our own past is sordid has no actual bearing on whether or not a criticism we level has merit.
That being said, the vast majority of criticisms against Israel have no merit. Particularly criticisms coming from those hellbent on Israel's destruction no matter the cost. So, I basically agree with Lisa, and I agree with BB insofar as people shouldn't taunt her. I just disagreed with his reason (or, one of them, anyway).
I said, "I don't feel I have alot of moral high ground" to you that may have implied that Americans cannot sound off on this subject, but what I meant was that we did not do a very good job, and I am not certain I even know what a "good job" is in either scenario.
Posted by Alcon (Member # 6645) on :
quote:Originally posted by rivka:
quote:Originally posted by Alcon: Either side could say the others have to take the high road. But Israel's sitting in the first world - well educated, aware of history and with wealth to back them up. The Palestinians meanwhile are in the third world. Poor, desperate and not - on the whole - terribly well educated. In that case, it is the responsibility of those who are better off and ought to know better to take the high road.
So, they should do their best to defend their own citizens while harming the other side's civilians as little as possible?
Good. They do that already.
If by "high road", you mean "don't protect their own citizens", then I say that is a despicable notion. Not to mention completely immoral.
Come on Rivka, you know darn well it's much grayer than that. They regularly respond to attacks against their citizens with violence against innocents. Sure they say they're hitting the locations of terrorist cells and groups. But those locations are smack dab in the middle of cities and villages. And Israel hits them with rockets and bombs. They lash back when they're attacked far more indiscriminately than one who's doing as you say would or should.
If they were really doing as you say, they wouldn't lash back like that. They would make a more targeted effort to bring those responsible for the attacks to justice with out resorting to very non-specific rocket and bomb attacks. Those attacks frequently kill more Palestinian civilians than the suicide bombers kill Israelis.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
Almost every attempt to target more specifically has resulted in unacceptable losses of Israeli soldiers. Or missing the target completely. Or both.
And they still preferentially use targeted methods whenever possible.
Posted by Armoth (Member # 4752) on :
It's extremely difficult.
We're now at an age where we're struggling with whether or not to treat terrorist activities as acts of war or as criminal actions.
For terrorism perpetrated against the U.S. there is a much stronger argument to treat the perpetrators as criminals. But what about a people that democratically elected a terrorist group into government?
Hamas hides amongst its people, but its people are, to an extent, Hamas. Hamas isn't a criminal gang that you can root out and strike against - Israel isn't being lazy. It is in their best interest to strike as surgically as possible. It's just hard...
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
quote:Originally posted by Stephan:
quote:Originally posted by Orincoro: Israel is an evolving situation, the US is not, in the same sense. Issues of ownership and primacy are still relevant.
So if Israel survives another 100 hundred years, then the Palestinians will be in the wrong?
Not a fair question, really. One would hope that in 100 years, the conflict will have been equitably resolved, and there will be no need of the assignment of blame. As for the Americas, the assignment of blame for previous wrongs has expired. All the people involved in the theft, along with their children and great grandchildren, are dead, along with everyone they stole the land from. We have to live in present circumstances, regardless of our desires. We can only learn from the mistakes made, and try not to repeat them- that includes working towards a more equitable situation in Israel.
If the situation should remain exactly the same there as it is today in 100 years, the people of that time will be responsible for improving their own circumstances, but they will not be morally responsible for creating those circumstances. As it happens, there are a fair number of people alive today, Palestinian and Israeli, who are not morally blameless for the nature of the present situation, even if the genesis of that situation in most cases preceded any of their births. In America, most people (though not all) are rather powerless individually to improve upon the situation of the Native American tribes, even though the nature of the crimes committed against them in the past makes the situation in Israel/Palestine look like a minor neighborhood dispute. Still, Palestinians and Israelis today are still empowered (if not individually, then as larger groups) to resolve their conflict more amenably than either side seems inclined.
From what I've seen and read, I think Israel is working *very* hard in a difficult situation, and in many respects has acted commendably. I think though, that ultimately its security will nevertheless depend on rather large compromises they are understandably unwilling to make. As for the Palestinians, it's a much harder question- it's a question so hard in fact, that several Palestinian authors have treated it in books with empty pages. I'm disturbed by that fatalism, but I think I can understand it.
It seems to me, as an outsider to the situation, that emotion and blame have so twisted the views of all involved, that they are locked in a spiral of antagonism which they may never choose to stop, or from which they may never be able to escape. I find it heartbreaking, when I choose to think about it at all.
[ February 14, 2010, 03:00 PM: Message edited by: Orincoro ]
Posted by Stephan (Member # 7549) on :
quote:Originally posted by Orincoro: [QUOTE]Not a fair question, really. One would hope that in 100 years, the conflict will have been equitably resolved, and there will be no need of the assignment of blame. As for the Americas, the assignment of blame for previous wrongs has expired. All the people involved in the theft, along with their children and great grandchildren, are dead, along with everyone they stole the land from. We have to live in present circumstances, regardless of our desires. We can only learn from the mistakes made, and try not to repeat them- that includes working towards a more equitable situation in Israel.
If the situation should remain exactly the same there as it is today in 100 years, the people of that time will be responsible for improving their own circumstances, but they will not be morally responsible for creating those circumstances. As it happens, there are a fair number of people alive today, Palestinian and Israeli, who are not morally blameless for the nature of the present situation, even if the genesis of that situation in most cases preceded any of their births. In America, most people (though not all) are rather powerless individually to improve upon the situation of the Native American tribes, even though the nature of the crimes committed against them in the past makes the situation in Israel/Palestine look like a minor neighborhood dispute. Still, Palestinians and Israelis today are still empowered (if not individually, then as larger groups) to resolve their conflict more amenably than either side seems inclined.
From what I've seen and read, I think Israel is working *very* hard in a difficult situation, and in many respects has acted commendably. I think though, that ultimately its security will nevertheless depend on rather large compromises they are understandably unwilling to make. As for the Palestinians, it's a much harder question- it's a question so hard in fact, that several Palestinian authors have treated it in books with empty pages. I'm disturbed by that fatalism, but I think I can understand it.
It seems to me, as an outsider to the situation, that emotion and blame have so twisted the views of all involved, that they are locked in a spiral of antagonism which they may never choose to stop, or from which they may never be able to escape. I find it heartbreaking, when I choose to think about it at all.
Now that my friend, makes perfect sense to me.
Posted by Teshi (Member # 5024) on :
Wait-- who are the Native Americans in this analogy? The Israelis or the Palestinians?
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
quote:Originally posted by Teshi: Wait-- who are the Native Americans in this analogy? The Israelis or the Palestinians?
It's not really important who has the, "I was here first argument." The Jews are not going anywhere, the Palestinians are not going anywhere.
What is more important is two groups of people attempting to coexists inside the same space. There are three options that I can see.
1: One side subjects the other, and confines the losers to tiny plots where they cannot expand. The losers may or may not simply leave.
2: They continue with this stalemate, and both sides continue to seethe with resentment that the other side won't see things their way.
3: They figure out a compromise where neither side gets everything they'd want, but they both get everything they need.
I suppose there is the unthinkable 4th option.
4: One side kills the other until it has become extinct.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
They have a Palestinian state. And that's on our land, too. It's currently called Jordan.
Now... I don't see any reason to engage in war to try and take Jordan back. But it should be on the record that we do contest the fact that the Jordanian government makes it illegal (on pain of death) for Jews to own land in what is, after all, an integral part of the Land of Israel.
But taking the high road and saying "Fine, you hold onto that part of our land until you decide you'd rather we have it," it's still an integral part of the area called Palestine. And the population is mostly Palestinian. If they want national expression, they should cross the Jordan river and take up residence there.
BlackBlade, there will never be a compromise that works, for the simple reason that the very existence of a Palestinian nationality is a tool for the destruction of any Jewish sovereign presence in the Middle East. They don't want a state; they just don't want us to have one. They honestly view compromise as a tactic in an ongoing war, and not as a way to resolve the conflict.
And you left out:
5: We throw them out
Posted by LargeTuna (Member # 10512) on :
quote:Originally posted by Alcon:
It takes two to tango and as long as Israel keeps answering violence with violence the cycle will continue. It needs to get a hold of itself and be the grown up in its neighborhood.
If Israel stops answering violence with violence it won't exhist anymore.
Posted by scholarette (Member # 11540) on :
Wow- I actually agree with Clive. The world would be better off if the Palestinians did protest by dressing up as Na'vi rather than blowing people up.
Posted by MightyCow (Member # 9253) on :
That's the solution!
The Palestinians dress like Navi to protset, but at the same time the Israelies dress like Navi to protest, because they both insist it's their land the other is taking.
In the confusion, they all go home with the wrong families, and it turns into a Very Special Eposode of Wife Swap. They have beautiful Jew-Arab babies and learn to live in peace.
Posted by Clive Candy (Member # 11977) on :
quote:Originally posted by scholarette: Wow- I actually agree with Clive. The world would be better off if the Palestinians did protest by dressing up as Na'vi rather than blowing people up.
They are justified however to resist violently, just like the Native Americans were.
Posted by Clive Candy (Member # 11977) on :
quote:Originally posted by Lisa: They have a Palestinian state. And that's on our land, too. It's currently called Jordan.
Pernicious lies.
quote:Now... I don't see any reason to engage in war to try and take Jordan back. But it should be on the record that we do contest the fact that the Jordanian government makes it illegal (on pain of death) for Jews to own land in what is, after all, an integral part of the Land of Israel.
Perhaps it's because they suspect that you would use private ownership to gulp up the land and annexed it to Israel. After all, don't you *all the time* say that the current disputed land is all the more yours because Jews paid for it in the 20s or earlier? Why would the people of Jordan make the same mistake?
quote: But taking the high road and saying "Fine, you hold onto that part of our land until you decide you'd rather we have it," it's still an integral part of the area called Palestine. And the population is mostly Palestinian. If they want national expression, they should cross the Jordan river and take up residence there.
Much like the Native Americans were forced to move across this or that river if they wanted their own land or to remain with their own people.
quote: BlackBlade, there will never be a compromise that works, for the simple reason that the very existence of a Palestinian nationality is a tool for the destruction of any Jewish sovereign presence in the Middle East. They don't want a state; they just don't want us to have one. They honestly view compromise as a tactic in an ongoing war, and not as a way to resolve the conflict.
Also: Israeli Jews reaaaaalllly want the West Bank and request conditions that are impossible for Palestinians to accept (Recognize our right to have dispossessed you! etc).
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by MightyCow: They have beautiful Jew-Arab babies and learn to live in peace.
Arab is both a noun and an adjective. Jew is only a noun. The adjective is Jewish. Using Jew as an adjective is considered derogatory. You probably weren't aware of that.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by Clive Candy:
quote:Originally posted by scholarette: Wow- I actually agree with Clive. The world would be better off if the Palestinians did protest by dressing up as Na'vi rather than blowing people up.
They are justified however to resist violently, just like the Native Americans were.
Since they are the aggressors and occupiers, no, they aren't. We didn't take their land. There's never been a Palestinian state that somehow got conquered by Israel. The Arabs conquered it from the Byzantines. The Turks conquered it from the Arabs. The Allied Powers conquered it from the Turks.
The Jews, who had been kicked out against our will by the Romans (who became the Byzantines), started coming back during Turkish times. It wasn't until quite a while after that, as has already been pointed out here, that the small population of Arabs decided that they had a national identity. Their "national identity" was formed as a direct reaction to Zionism. They had no interest in a nation, but once they saw we intended to restore ours, they decided to play spoilers and say, "No, wait! We're a nation too!"
And violent criminal types from all over the Arab world jumped on the bandwagon. That's how you had the Egyptian Yasir Arafat running the PLO for decades and pretending that he was a "Palestinian". That's how you have Edward Said, who was born in Jerusalem, but who emmigrated to Egypt long before Israel declared statehood, claiming to be a "refugee".
The returning Jews found a land that had gone to crap. There was very little agriculture, and they'd turned our beautiful land into a near copy of Arabia. We came back and started fixing things. In the process, we increased the wealth of the local Arabs. We created jobs, which further raised their standard of living. So their cousins in backwards places like Transjordan and Syria decided to come and suck at the Zionist teat.
The British tried everything they could in the 30s and 40s to prevent Jews from returning to our land, while opening the doors fully to any Arab who wanted to come in and declare himself a "Palestinian native". They hoped we'd give up because of the demographics.
When the British handed 79% of the land the League of Nations had entrusted them with as the Palestinian Mandate, for the declared purpose of creating a Jewish homeland, we didn't stage violent demonstrations. We left the homes we'd built on the east side of the Jordan river, and started rebuilding them on the west side.
When the UN decided that we could have about half of the remaining 21%, split into three separate non-contiguous pieces, and not including Jerusalem, instead of throwing a hissy fit and demanding that they give us all of it, we said, "Well, it isn't ideal, but yes, we accept it." The Arabs, of course, who were being offered 10% more of the total (bringing them up to 89% of Palestine), did throw a hissy fit. And their brethren invaded, and did their level best to prevent us from having even 11% of our homeland to ourselves.
We're the natives. And we were charitable enough to accept the squatters. But the squatters don't want that. They want to kill us and take over.
A better analogy would be if the US was made up of 60% Indians and 40% Europeans, and both Canada and Mexico were inhabited solely by Europeans who wanted to throw the Indians out. We're the Indians in this scenario.
Posted by Clive Candy (Member # 11977) on :
quote:Originally posted by Lisa:
quote:Originally posted by Clive Candy:
quote:Originally posted by scholarette: Wow- I actually agree with Clive. The world would be better off if the Palestinians did protest by dressing up as Na'vi rather than blowing people up.
They are justified however to resist violently, just like the Native Americans were.
Since they are the aggressors and occupiers
Projection.
quote: We didn't take their land.
But you did.
“If I were an Arab leader, I would never sign an agreement with Israel. It is normal; we have taken their country. It is true God promised it to us, but how could that interest them? Our God is not theirs. There has been Anti - Semitism, the Nazis, Hitler, Auschwitz, but was that their fault ? They see but one thing: we have come and we have stolen their country. Why would they accept that?”"
--David Ben-Gurion
quote: There's never been a Palestinian state that somehow got conquered by Israel
There needn't have been a "state." Palestinians lived there. You stole their land. God, the first prime minister of Israel says so. Do you know more about Israel's founding than the first prime minister of Israel?
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
So I better set my computer to keep a record of this thread becaaauuuuse
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
Because this is the sort of thing that ought to be preserved for posterity?
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
I just try to keep a notion in my head of which threads have cleared betting odds for vanishing or getting locked aaaand
Posted by 0Megabyte (Member # 8624) on :
Honestly, at this point neither side is going to get what they want, I think.
Israel isn't going to get what it desires. Certainly not the hardliners like Lisa. (Jordon? Really? Good luck with that.)
And the Palestinians aren't going to get the Israelis to go move away to some other state/die horribly, either.
More seriously, the non-ridiculous desires are problematic as well. I used to be pretty well read on the situation... but it's been long enough that my memory is fuzzy and I don't feel comfortable commenting on the specifics, but it doesn't look like a lot has changed.
I do quite wonder how things will work themselves out.
It honestly seems to me that as long as anything about the past is brought up at all, things will not advance. The only way seems to be to clean the slate for both sides, forget past grievances, and work with what both sides have available to them.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by Clive Candy:
quote: We didn't take their land.
But you did.
“If I were an Arab leader, I would never sign an agreement with Israel. It is normal; we have taken their country. It is true God promised it to us, but how could that interest them? Our God is not theirs. There has been Anti - Semitism, the Nazis, Hitler, Auschwitz, but was that their fault ? They see but one thing: we have come and we have stolen their country. Why would they accept that?”"
--David Ben-Gurion
You need to work on your reading comprehension. He's saying that this is how the Arabs see it. Not that it's true.
But, you know, as long as we're doing the whole quote thing:
"There is no such country! Palestine is a term the Zionists invented! There is no Palestine in the Bible. Our country was for centuries, part of Syria."
--Auni Bey Abdul-Hadi, a local Arab leader testifying before the Peel Commission (1937)
"Those organizations which seek to differentiate between Palestinians and Jordanians are traitors who help Zionism in its aim of splitting the Arab camp."
--King Hussein of Jordan (1965)
"Jordan is Palestine. They have never been ruled as two separate states except during the British Mandate. Before 1918 the two banks of the Jordan River were a single state. When they returned to being a single state after 1948, it was a matter of building on the earlier unity. Their families are one, as are their welfare, affiliation, and culture."
--Jordanian Prime Minister Zayd ar-Rifa'i (1975)
"Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct Palestinian people to oppose Zionism."
--Zahir Muhsein, member of the PLO executive committee (1977)
"Palestine, Jordan and Syria constituted one family until the British and French occupation in 1918, which drove the wedge of boundaries among us. We do not differentiate between our people, whether they live in Jordan, Syria, or Palestine."
--Anwar al-Khatib, former Jordanian mayor of East Jerusalem (1986)
"We must distinguish the strategies and long-term goals from the political-phased goals which we are compelled to accept due to international pressures."
"The ultimate goal is the liberation of all of historical Palestine."
"Oslo has to be viewed as a Trojan Horse."
--Faisal Husseini (2001)
Oh, the list goes on.
quote:Originally posted by Clive Candy:
quote: There's never been a Palestinian state that somehow got conquered by Israel
There needn't have been a "state." Palestinians lived there.
Sure. Anyone who lived there was a Palestinian. There were Jewish Palestinians, Arab Palestinians... and in 1948, the Jewish Palestinians chose to call the pitiful scraps of land we were offered "Israel", casting off the name that Hadrian had given to our land centuries earlier. Up until 1948, the Jewish Palestinians had an English language newspaper called "The Palestine Post" (now the Jerusalem Post).
quote:Originally posted by Clive Candy: You stole their land. God, the first prime minister of Israel says so. Do you know more about Israel's founding than the first prime minister of Israel?
You have some serious reading comprehension problems. Ben Gurion didn't say we stole it; he said that's how the Arabs look at it.
Posted by Stephan (Member # 7549) on :
When I took part in Birthright Israel, it was truly an eye opening experience. When I signed up for a free 10 day trip, I was expecting 10 days filled with propaganda.
What I received was the complete opposite.
First and foremost, for the first time in my life I felt truly safe in my surroundings. Israel has a small town feel even in the biggest cities. I had never experienced a place where it felt like everyone was watching out for each other. My in-laws (constant worriers) were glued to the tv the entire time terrified that some terrorist was going to blow up next to me. But frankly I felt safer in Jerusalem and Tel Aviv then I feel in the small rural town they live in.
The Israeli soldiers and tour guides themselves expressed their own concerns about "the wall" (really mostly just a fence). I was amazed when they told me stories of Palestineans seperated from the land they have always worked on. The Israelis really are not trying to hide anything.
For being the only country in the region without oil to rely on, they have truly turned it into a metaphorical land of "milk and honey". They deserve the land. They have paid for it. No one forced Arabs to sell them land a century ago. They understood the concept of money and personal property far better than the American Indians did. Lisa'a quotes paint a perfect picture of the reality. The people behind the Palestineans terrorism are not motivated by a homeland, but by the destruction of the Jewish people. Even EGYPT started building its own fence on their border.
I just cannot fathom how a people that make up far less than 1% of the total population of the planet can be such a threat to Clive and people who share his hatred.
Posted by Alcon (Member # 6645) on :
[edit] In response to this:
quote:They have a Palestinian state. And that's on our land, too. It's currently called Jordan
[/edit]
Lisa - we moved out. We left. We bailed. Folks came in, they conquered us, they conquered us again, we got our butts kicked and it made more sense for us to scatter. That was thousands of years ago. Since then other people moved in. And they've been living there for thousands of years themselves. Before we lived there other folks were living there that we conquered.
No one owns land. People simply possess it. Israel is no more Jewish land than Massachusetts is Algonquian.
The difference between Israel and Massachusetts is that we reconquered it and resettled it with the help of Britain after World War II. The other difference is that this took place less than 70 years ago. It's still in living memory. So people who had been living in that land, who's families had been living on that land for thousands of years, still remember being conquered and kicked off it.
Who are you to say that land is not theirs? They've been working it and using it while our people were off wandering the globe. Just because we got abused by the rest of the world and decided it was time to go back doesn't mean we can just say "sorry, we want this back now".
What happens when the people we conquered show up out of history and suddenly declare "hey, we were here before you were, it's our land. Get out."
We just gonna say "oh, you're right, you were here first, we'll leave"?
Yeah. Right.
[ February 16, 2010, 10:54 AM: Message edited by: Alcon ]
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by Alcon: [edit] In response to this:
quote:They have a Palestinian state. And that's on our land, too. It's currently called Jordan
[/edit]
Lisa - we moved out. We left. We bailed. Folks came in, they conquered us, they conquered us again, we got our butts kicked and it made more sense for us to scatter.
That's historically untrue. We didn't move out; we were forced out. And while we may not have had public demonstrations and thrown rocks and molotov cocktails to make the point, we reiterated our hope and intent to return home every single day of every single year, over and over and over again.
You look at the Jews today, and you see a lot of secularized Jews who've drifted away from what we've been for millenia. Fine. But you need to realize that this is a fairly recent development. For 15 centuries, the entire Jewish nation proclaimed our intent to return incessantly. For the two centuries after that, a lot of Jews who had grown comfortable in their Exile decided that they liked it better that way. But don't read that attitude back into our history. That's an anachronism.
quote:Originally posted by Alcon: That was thousands of years ago. Since then other people moved in. And they've been living there for thousands of years themselves. Before we lived there other folks were living there that we conquered.
Actually, there are very few Arabs who can claim to have lived there since the Arabian conquest. There are as many Jews who can make the same claim. And please, stop with the friggin' Canaanites. We still exist. We never dropped our claim. They don't and did.
quote:Originally posted by Alcon: No one owns land. People simply possess it. Israel is no more Jewish land than Massachusetts is Algonquian.
In your opinion. I think the Somalian would claim that "Palestine" is Arab land.
quote:Originally posted by Alcon: The difference between Israel and Massachusetts is that we reconquered it and resettled it with the help of Britain after World War II.
Actually, we started resettling it while the Turks were ruling. The Brits did their level best to stop us. Read up on Mandatory history. They tried to prevent us from entering, and we had to sneak in. They armed the Arabs and killed Jews for possession of weapons.
quote:Originally posted by Alcon: The other difference is that this took place less than 70 years ago. It's still in living memory. So people who had been living in that land, who's families had been living on that land for thousands of years, still remember being conquered and kicked off it.
They didn't have families living there for thousands of years. First of all, the Arab conquest was only about 1300 years ago, so "thousands" is false on the face of it. Second of all, the vast majority of so-called "Palestinians" arrived with their families after the start of the Zionist enterprise.
quote:Originally posted by Alcon: Who are you to say that land is not theirs?
One of the actual owners. Thanks for asking.
quote:Originally posted by Alcon: They've been working it and using it while our people were off wandering the globe.
Under duress. And "working it"? "Ruining it" would be more accurate.
quote:Originally posted by Alcon: Just because we got abused by the rest of the world and decided it was time to go back doesn't mean we can just say "sorry, we want this back now".
We didn't leave willingly, and while you seem to be under the impression that we adjusted to Exile and became nice and comfortable the way so many US Jews are today, there's no historical validity to that whatsoever.
quote:Originally posted by Alcon: What happens when the people we conquered show up out of history and suddenly declare "hey, we were here before you were, it's our land. Get out."
Why don't you send me a card when that happens.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
PS: Alcon, I don't think I realized you're Jewish. But I can understand how being raised by "a pair of former hippie academics" would give you the impression that Jews never actually felt more than a vague tie to the land we were thrown out of. I think that if you read up on it, you'll find that you're misinformed.
Posted by MightyCow (Member # 9253) on :
I wonder what would happen if I showed up at the land my ancestors 1500 years removed used to own and tried to claim it.
Who knows what actually happened all that time back, and what's the statute of limitations on land ownership?
I'm just saying that I don't think the legal claim is very strong, and the moral claim is much stronger to the view of the people who want the land than to anyone else.
I feel "bad" for both parties, in the sense that I think it's one of the modern examples of the absolute worst of what organized religion does to people, and I think it's terrible what people on both sides are doing to their families and to their enemies families over a tiny plot of land, two disagreeing books, and generations of hatred.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by MightyCow: I wonder what would happen if I showed up at the land my ancestors 1500 years removed used to own and tried to claim it.
Did you leave on purpose? Have you spent the past 1500 years proclaiming every single day that you want and intend to return?
If not, then maybe you could skip the spurious poor analogies.
Posted by The White Whale (Member # 6594) on :
Lisa, how many Jewish people have moved on? What percentage of the Jewish population do you represent?
Posted by Dobbie (Member # 3881) on :
The intention to return to Israel is part of the prayers that every religious Jew recites every day.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote:Have you spent the past 1500 years proclaiming every single day that you want and intend to return?
I'm curious, Lisa: why do you think this matters?
Posted by Ace of Spades (Member # 2256) on :
Not to change the subject or anything...
TODDLER’S RULES 1.- If I want it, it's mine 2- If it's in my hand, it's mine 3- If I can take it away from you, it's mine 4- If I had it a while ago, it's mine 5- If it's mine, it must never appear to be yours in any way 6- If we are building something together, all the pieces are mine 7- If it just looks like mine, it's mine 8- If I think it's mine, it's mine 9- If I give it to you and change my mind later, it's mine 10- Once it's mine it will never belong to anyone else, no matter what Posted by Alcon (Member # 6645) on :
quote:PS: Alcon, I don't think I realized you're Jewish. But I can understand how being raised by "a pair of former hippie academics" would give you the impression that Jews never actually felt more than a vague tie to the land we were thrown out of. I think that if you read up on it, you'll find that you're misinformed.
I never said that we don't feel more than a vague tie to the land. Or that we didn't intend to return. I said we left. It doesn't matter that we were forced out at pain of death. We left.
Once you leave. It isn't yours any more. Same as you show disdain for the idea of Canaanites showing up again and reclaiming the land from us, the Arabs feel we are out of our minds to show up and try to reclaim the land from them. It doesn't matter about the circumstances of our leaving - the bottom line is, we left.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson:
quote:Have you spent the past 1500 years proclaiming every single day that you want and intend to return?
I'm curious, Lisa: why do you think this matters?
There's a difference between someone who abandons a house, moves to another place, and then a generation later, his kids come and demand that the people who've moved in leave and someone who is forced, kicking and screaming, out of his house, imprisoned elsewhere, and finally manages to get home, only to find squatters having taken up residence.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by Ass of Spades: Not to change the subject or anything...
TODDLER’S RULES 1.- If I want it, it's mine 2- If it's in my hand, it's mine 3- If I can take it away from you, it's mine 4- If I had it a while ago, it's mine 5- If it's mine, it must never appear to be yours in any way 6- If we are building something together, all the pieces are mine 7- If it just looks like mine, it's mine 8- If I think it's mine, it's mine 9- If I give it to you and change my mind later, it's mine 10- Once it's mine it will never belong to anyone else, no matter what
If it's mine and a bully takes it away, and I protest, I get to take it back, given the chance.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by Alcon: I never said that we don't feel more than a vague tie to the land. Or that we didn't intend to return. I said we left. It doesn't matter that we were forced out at pain of death. We left.
Really? It doesn't matter? So if I were to come to your house, and physically throw you out of it, take up residence, prevent you from getting back in by threatening to shoot you if you tried, I would gain title to the house?
Hot damn! I think I just found the solution to the housing crisis. Violence!
quote:Originally posted by Alcon: Once you leave. It isn't yours any more.
Wanna give me your address, and we can put that to the test?
quote:Originally posted by Alcon: Same as you show disdain for the idea of Canaanites showing up again and reclaiming the land from us, the Arabs feel we are out of our minds to show up and try to reclaim the land from them.
Not true. They don't like it, but they understand it. To a certain extent, they even respect it. It's when we don't maintain that position that they realize they can destroy us.
Here's a story related by journalist Aharon Barnea that shows the reality that you refuse to see:
quote:Salah Tamari, a former Palestinian terrorist, told Israeli journalist Aharon Barnea of the complete transformation he underwent in an Israeli prison. While in prison, he had completely despaired of any hope that the Palestinians would one day realize any of their territorial dreams, and so he was ready to renounce the struggle.
Then, one Passover, he witnessed his Jewish warder eating a pita sandwich.
Tamari was shocked, and asked his jailer how he could so unashamedly eat bread on Passover.
The Jew replied: "I feel no obligation to events that took place over 2,000 years ago. I have no connection to that."
That entire night Tamari could not sleep. He thought to himself: "A nation whose members have no connection to their past, and are capable of so openly transgressing their most important laws --- that nation has cut off all its roots to the Land."
He concluded that the Palestinians could, in fact, achieve all their goals. From that moment, he determined "to fight for everything -- not a percentage, not such crumbs as the Israelis might throw us -- but for everything. Because opposing us is a nation that has no connection to its roots, which are no longer of interest to it."
Tamari goes on to relate how he shared this insight with "tens of thousands of his colleagues, and all were convinced."
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote:If it's mine and a bully takes it away, and I protest, I get to take it back, given the chance.
Again, I'm curious why the "and I protest" bit makes any difference to you.
Posted by The White Whale (Member # 6594) on :
quote:Originally posted by Lisa:
quote:Originally posted by Alcon: I never said that we don't feel more than a vague tie to the land. Or that we didn't intend to return. I said we left. It doesn't matter that we were forced out at pain of death. We left.
Really? It doesn't matter? So if I were to come to your house, and physically throw you out of it, take up residence, prevent you from getting back in by threatening to shoot you if you tried, I would gain title to the house?
Let me rephrase my earlier question: how many Jewish people think of this place as their actual home and want to return? As in, would leave wherever they are living now and move?
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson:
quote:If it's mine and a bully takes it away, and I protest, I get to take it back, given the chance.
Again, I'm curious why the "and I protest" bit makes any difference to you.
Adopted on 30 August 1961 by a Conference of Plenipotentiaries which met in 1959 and reconvened in 1961 in pursuance of General Assembly resolution 896 (IX) of 4 December 1954 Entry into force: 13 December 1975, in accordance with article 18
....
Article 7
....
4. A naturalized person may lose his nationality on account of residence abroad for a period, not less than seven consecutive years, specified by the law of the Contracting State concerned if he fails to declare to the appropriate authority his intention to retain his nationality.
The Romans knew we wanted to go home. That's why Hadrian renamed it Palestine. The Turks knew. The Brits knew. I'm not sure what other "appropriate authority" you'd like us to have informed (God comes to mind, but I guess that doesn't work for you), but even international law makes a distinction based on declaration of intent to return.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote:A naturalized person may lose his nationality on account of residence abroad for a period, not less than seven consecutive years, specified by the law of the Contracting State concerned if he fails to declare to the appropriate authority his intention to retain his nationality.
But you aren't covered by that law, you realize; nor is God the appropriate authority. Most Jews have never actually lived in Israel, and certainly not in Gaza. Are you applying here to some sort of higher law, in which God holds a case open as long as someone keeps sending it back for review? If so, why?
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by The White Whale:
quote:Originally posted by Lisa:
quote:Originally posted by Alcon: I never said that we don't feel more than a vague tie to the land. Or that we didn't intend to return. I said we left. It doesn't matter that we were forced out at pain of death. We left.
Really? It doesn't matter? So if I were to come to your house, and physically throw you out of it, take up residence, prevent you from getting back in by threatening to shoot you if you tried, I would gain title to the house?
Let me rephrase my earlier question: how many Jewish people think of this place as their actual home and want to return? As in, would leave wherever they are living now and move?
Many people are afraid to move back, because of the threat of Arab violence.
Posted by The White Whale (Member # 6594) on :
You're still not answering my question. You answered a different question.
If everything worked out the way you wanted, and Jewish people everywhere could move back, how many actually would?
I know many Jews, and I'm fairly certain most of them are quite happy where they are.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson:
quote:A naturalized person may lose his nationality on account of residence abroad for a period, not less than seven consecutive years, specified by the law of the Contracting State concerned if he fails to declare to the appropriate authority his intention to retain his nationality.
But you aren't covered by that law, you realize; nor is God the appropriate authority. Most Jews have never actually lived in Israel, and certainly not in Gaza. Are you applying here to some sort of higher law, in which God holds a case open as long as someone keeps sending it back for review? If so, why?
Someone willingly choosing not to return home is not the same as someone forceably prevented from returning home. I don't know how much more clear I can make it to you.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by The White Whale: You're still not answering my question. You answered a different question.
If everything worked out the way you wanted, and Jewish people everywhere could move back, how many actually would?
I know many Jews, and I'm fairly certain most of them are quite happy where they are.
So you don't have a problem with those who have chosen to return home, right?
Posted by Alcon (Member # 6645) on :
I'm getting too tired to continue making sense.
What I'm trying to communicate, Lisa, is that the Jewish people getting kicked out of Israel is history in the same way the Native Americans being practically wiped off the face North America is history. It happened, it cannot be changed and no one living today had anything to do with it.
The Jewish people returning to the land of Israel and kicking out the Arabs who were living there happened in living memory. It happened recently. There are those who remain alive who were at the other end of that gun. It isn't history yet. Though it cannot be undone - and I've never said that it should be undone - we have to make more allowances for it in the emotions of those who were kicked out.
That is why we must take the high road. Because in living memory - we were the aggressors. Even if it is land that we feel we have a bond to. When we took it, it was not ours anymore than North American is the property of the Native Americans.
[ February 16, 2010, 04:44 PM: Message edited by: Alcon ]
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote:Someone willingly choosing not to return home is not the same as someone forceably prevented from returning home.
But the people who are wanting to return "home" have never lived there. Posted by The White Whale (Member # 6594) on :
quote:Originally posted by Lisa:
quote:Originally posted by The White Whale: You're still not answering my question. You answered a different question.
If everything worked out the way you wanted, and Jewish people everywhere could move back, how many actually would?
I know many Jews, and I'm fairly certain most of them are quite happy where they are.
So you don't have a problem with those who have chosen to return home, right?
I'm just trying to get a feel for the scale of the problem. I just want to understand how many others believe the same thing. Of all the Jews not in their homeland, how many are as fervently forceful as you about their 'home'? 10%? 1%? 50%?
I personally don't care what you (Lisa) believe. I'd rather get a feel for the diversity within the Jewish population. Scale analysis, if you will.
Posted by Destineer (Member # 821) on :
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson:
quote:Someone willingly choosing not to return home is not the same as someone forceably prevented from returning home.
But the people who are wanting to return "home" have never lived there.
Why Tom, how dare you view Jewish people as autonomous individuals rather than a single homogeneous tribe.
Posted by Armoth (Member # 4752) on :
Just chiming in to agree with Lisa.
I've articulated my position a number of times before, but I'll do it again, in brief.
I am definitely a Jew who identifies with my people's yearning for Israel for 2000 years. To be a bit more nuanced, that yearning, for me, continues - (the yearning for Israel continues in Orthodox liturgy) - because that yearning isn't so much for a plot of land as it the relationship with God that comes along with it. God has a relationship with His people, Israel, and as a part of that relationship, He gave them the land of Israel for them to be a nation.
I believe that we lost the land and our relationship with God - the goal of Judaism for the last 2000 years has been to mend that relationship.
So that is how I am tied to the land. To be honest though, it isn't this religious theology that ties me to the land. The reason I don't feel compelled to up and move to Israel is because I think the Jewish people are still in a status of exile, even though they are physically in the land of Israel. That's because we haven't exactly mended our relationship with Him. And, at least personally, the land is only secondary to the relationship.
What compels me, and I think, what compels secular Jews, is a sense of history. We're pretty sold on the idea that we need a homeland. I studied Jewish history and it's pretty much a history of where we were kicked out of. Kicked out of Israel, spread among the Middle East, Spread to Muslim controlled Spain, kicked out, Spread to Western Europe, kicked out, Eastern Europe, massacred, spread back to Western Europe, Holocaust, persecuted in Middle East...
Even today, Jews are emigrating en masse from Russia and France.
I studied Modern Middle Eastern History. I understand the Arab and Muslim points of view. I get that the British and French made a mess of things. But I don't think you can expect a nation of survivors not to jump at the chance to return to their homeland. You can't mess with that psyche. My grandparents are all holocaust survivors - two were previously married, lost their first wives and children. They thought all was lost. And suddenly they survive and are able to do what all persecuted Jews for 2000 years yearned to do? To return to Israel? Even without the heavily messianic themes involved, the need for a homeland was too essential worry about what right the British or the UN had to give us land.
Do I think it's reasonable for a people dispossessed to return 2000 years later and claim their land? No. However, I don't think it's reasonable for the world to expect Israel to do anything but struggle to survive - especially in light of our circumstances. We aren't exactly in a position to be "reasonable."
We are trying to do the next best thing, we are trying to be compassionate, and we are trying to do our best. We aren't settling, zionistic, imperialist conquerors - we're a nation that is struggling to survive. And we feel sorely misunderstood.
That is our mindset.
(at least acc to me...)
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
Feeling bad about it makes it okay to do it?
Every justification I've heard for Isreal comes across as so incredibly racist - "It is okay for my people to do it, but wrong for other people to do it to us."
Posted by Armoth (Member # 4752) on :
That wasn't the justification. I don't see how you got that.
The justification for a homeland is survival. The justification for kicking people out of that homeland? We didn't do that. The British and the UN did. The nations of the world (excluding the Middle East) did. They handed it to us. We're not talking 80 years after the holocaust, we're talking RIGHT after the holocaust. You expect a bunch of survivors to be all...hey, doesn't someone else live there?
1) Jews had already settled there, they had purchased land and settled. 2) After the fall of the Ottoman Empire, things were up in the air - self-determination, immigration, all that stuff, made it feasible for the establishment of a Jewish homeland. 3) It happened. The Jews got their homeland.
Now what? What exactly are you suggesting to Jews that will ever work? Telling them it isn't ok to take someone else's land? It didn't exactly go down that way. Telling them that they don't deserve to be there? Disagree. Telling them that they don't need a homeland? Blink a few times, swallow incredulity, and disagree.
In today's climate - what reasonable suggesting do you have?
Posted by LargeTuna (Member # 10512) on :
I haven't been to Israel yet. I've lived with Israelis who were either just finished their military service, or were half way through and taking a break in America. After spending so much time with people who feel so passionately about their homeland some of it has rubbed off on me and I do see it as a second home. I don't plan on moving there, but I will visit eventually, and hopefully more than once.
Just putting some input on how I view Israel emotionally.
Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
quote:Now what? What exactly are you suggesting to Jews that will ever work? Telling them it isn't ok to take someone else's land? It didn't exactly go down that way. Telling them that they don't deserve to be there? Disagree. Telling them that they don't need a homeland? Blink a few times, swallow incredulity, and disagree.
Abandon your bronze-age cosmology and assimilate.
I would love to see all governments except the Israeli and Palestinian ones get out of the business of trying to create peace in the ME. Let them fight it out, and the best genocidal tribe win, just as in the Old Testament. No aid to Israel, no aid to Egypt, no aid to Jordan. Conceivably the resulting war "would not end until it was fought with knives", but what of it? There is nothing in the area that we want; even the oil is largely on the Gulf side, not the Med side. Neither the US nor the European countries have any real national interests in Israel other than prestige and posturing for domestic consumption; this is not worth spending money and time on.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by Armoth: I believe that we lost the land and our relationship with God - the goal of Judaism for the last 2000 years has been to mend that relationship.
"Lost" it?
quote:Originally posted by Armoth: The reason I don't feel compelled to up and move to Israel is because I think the Jewish people are still in a status of exile, even though they are physically in the land of Israel. That's because we haven't exactly mended our relationship with Him. And, at least personally, the land is only secondary to the relationship.
And perhaps the relationship can't be fully repaired without us returning to the land. After all, Yechezkel says explicitly that our being in exile is a chillul Hashem.
quote:Originally posted by Armoth: Do I think it's reasonable for a people dispossessed to return 2000 years later and claim their land? No. However, I don't think it's reasonable for the world to expect Israel to do anything but struggle to survive - especially in light of our circumstances. We aren't exactly in a position to be "reasonable."
Wow. If I believed the way you do, I'd be marching with the Arabs.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by katharina: Feeling bad about it makes it okay to do it?
Every justification I've heard for Isreal comes across as so incredibly racist - "It is okay for my people to do it, but wrong for other people to do it to us."
I'd think you'd be okay with "God said so."
But I agree with your criticism of what Armoth posted. Sheesh... it amounted to, "Yeah, we suck, but feel sorry for us."
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by King of Men:
quote:Now what? What exactly are you suggesting to Jews that will ever work? Telling them it isn't ok to take someone else's land? It didn't exactly go down that way. Telling them that they don't deserve to be there? Disagree. Telling them that they don't need a homeland? Blink a few times, swallow incredulity, and disagree.
Abandon your bronze-age cosmology and assimilate.
I would love to see all governments except the Israeli and Palestinian ones get out of the business of trying to create peace in the ME. Let them fight it out, and the best genocidal tribe win, just as in the Old Testament. No aid to Israel, no aid to Egypt, no aid to Jordan.
Let's start a petition drive. I'll be the first one to sign.
And yeah, some people will assimilate. Look at Alcon, for example. But a thousand years from now, we'll still be here.
Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
As a point of interest, if you weren't here in a thousand years, would that be evidence against your god?
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
Absolutely. I mean, not me personally, but the Jews.
Mind you, it wouldn't prove that no God exists, but it would certainly prove that ours doesn't. And that's the only one I'm interested in.
Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
Ok, now what if you personally had survived but you were the only Jew left, or there were, say, less than a thousand of you? Using the word in its religious sense, that is, as opposed to "persons descended in the maternal line from a particular set of ancestors". So I'm not looking at the genetics, but at the existence of a Jewish religious community maintaining the Torah's supposed continuity.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
Fewer than a thousand, I could deal with. Fewer than 10 adult religious men? It'll never happen. Oh, and at least one of the men would have to be a descendant of Aaron and at least one would have to be descended from David. The rest could all be descendants of converts or converts themselves.
Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
Ok, your prediction is noted. Does the number ten, perchance, come from some particular ritual which requires that many observers to run?
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote:If I believed the way you do, I'd be marching with the Arabs.
Why? What about your rationale for marching against the Arabs becomes less compelling when you look at it from Armoth's POV? Do the facts suddenly become obvious for some reason if you abandon some of your worldview?
Posted by Armoth (Member # 4752) on :
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson:
quote:If I believed the way you do, I'd be marching with the Arabs.
Why? What about your rationale for marching against the Arabs becomes less compelling when you look at it from Armoth's POV? Do the facts suddenly become obvious for some reason if you abandon some of your worldview?
Do the facts suddenly become obvious?
You know that Lisa is going to defend herself, such that this line will only remain as an attack against me. I'm not sure you intended to do that. If you did - super. I'll deal. My intention was to bring understanding, sensitivity, and maybe even compassion. But I prefer that my words not be fashioned into the spear for which you attack Lisa.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by King of Men: Does the number ten, perchance, come from some particular ritual which requires that many observers to run?
Quite a few.
Posted by Dobbie (Member # 3881) on :
quote:My intention was to bring understanding, sensitivity, and maybe even compassion. But I prefer that my words not be fashioned into the spear for which you attack Lisa.
Armoth, it's got nothing to do with the fact that they're your words. Frankly, any attempts to promote understanding, sensitivity, and compassion are all going to be perceived as attacks on Lisa.
Posted by MightyCow (Member # 9253) on :
Let's say that 500 years ago, some long-dead relative of mine was forced off his land in Scotland. They really wanted it back, as did their decendents.
Can I today, take a flight to Scotland and expect to kick the current owners off the land by laying claim to it as an owner 10 generations removed?
Nobody would accept that claim. What makes it any different?
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by King of Men: Ok, your prediction is noted. Does the number ten, perchance, come from some particular ritual which requires that many observers to run?
Yep.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson:
quote:If I believed the way you do, I'd be marching with the Arabs.
Why? What about your rationale for marching against the Arabs becomes less compelling when you look at it from Armoth's POV? Do the facts suddenly become obvious for some reason if you abandon some of your worldview?
No. Armoth misstated the facts. Or rather, he repeated some of the anti-Israel spin that's been put on some facts by others. Not that he's anti-Israel; but he's apparently unwilling to challenge what "everybody knows".
Posted by Clive Candy (Member # 11977) on :
quote:Originally posted by Lisa:
quote:Originally posted by Clive Candy:
quote: We didn't take their land.
But you did.
“If I were an Arab leader, I would never sign an agreement with Israel. It is normal; we have taken their country. It is true God promised it to us, but how could that interest them? Our God is not theirs. There has been Anti - Semitism, the Nazis, Hitler, Auschwitz, but was that their fault ? They see but one thing: we have come and we have stolen their country. Why would they accept that?”"
--David Ben-Gurion
You need to work on your reading comprehension. He's saying that this is how the Arabs see it. Not that it's true.
He's justifying the Arab reaction. You really have no shame.
quote:But, you know, as long as we're doing the whole quote thing:
"There is no such country! Palestine is a term the Zionists invented! There is no Palestine in the Bible. Our country was for centuries, part of Syria."
--Auni Bey Abdul-Hadi, a local Arab leader testifying before the Peel Commission (1937)
"Those organizations which seek to differentiate between Palestinians and Jordanians are traitors who help Zionism in its aim of splitting the Arab camp."
--King Hussein of Jordan (1965)
"Jordan is Palestine. They have never been ruled as two separate states except during the British Mandate. Before 1918 the two banks of the Jordan River were a single state. When they returned to being a single state after 1948, it was a matter of building on the earlier unity. Their families are one, as are their welfare, affiliation, and culture."
--Jordanian Prime Minister Zayd ar-Rifa'i (1975)
"Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct Palestinian people to oppose Zionism."
--Zahir Muhsein, member of the PLO executive committee (1977)
"Palestine, Jordan and Syria constituted one family until the British and French occupation in 1918, which drove the wedge of boundaries among us. We do not differentiate between our people, whether they live in Jordan, Syria, or Palestine."
--Anwar al-Khatib, former Jordanian mayor of East Jerusalem (1986)
"We must distinguish the strategies and long-term goals from the political-phased goals which we are compelled to accept due to international pressures."
"The ultimate goal is the liberation of all of historical Palestine."
"Oslo has to be viewed as a Trojan Horse."
--Faisal Husseini (2001)
Oh, the list goes on.
I'm sure it does, but then again I'm sure that even the Nazis made statements justifying to themselves their evil actions.
quote: You have some serious reading comprehension problems. Ben Gurion didn't say we stole it; he said that's how the Arabs look at it.
No. Shame.
thief to victim: nah see, I didn't steal your stuff. That's just how you're happening to look at it.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by Clive Candy: I'm sure it does, but then again I'm sure that even the Nazis made statements justifying to themselves their evil actions.
Pig. In any case, those were quotes from Arabs, on the relatively rare occasions that they were caught telling the truth.
quote:Originally posted by Clive Candy:
quote: You have some serious reading comprehension problems. Ben Gurion didn't say we stole it; he said that's how the Arabs look at it.
No. Shame.
thief to victim: nah see, I didn't steal your stuff. That's just how you're happening to look at it.
No, see, we have a quality that the Arabs lack entirely. It's called empathy. We can actually look at a situation from someone else's point of view, even if we disagree with that point of view, and even if the other person is an enemy.
Posted by The White Whale (Member # 6594) on :
quote:No, see, we have a quality that the Arabs lack entirely. It's called empathy.
Now that's just plain racist.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote:We can actually look at a situation from someone else's point of view, even if we disagree with that point of view...
I thought you'd just got done excoriating Armoth for demonstrating that ability.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
Lisa is clearly ragingly racist. As is every justification for Isreal I've heard so far.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
How about this one?
quote:Under the influence of the new evangelicalism, which treats the Book of Revelation very seriously, there is a wide belief that the state of Israel represents the in-gathering of Jews necessary for the end of the world. Hence her recent statement: "I believe that the Jewish settlements should be allowed to be expanded upon, because that population of Israel is going to grow. More and more Jewish people will be flocking to Israel in the days and weeks and months ahead. And I don't think that the Obama administration has any right to tell Israel that the Jewish settlements cannot expand."
quote:We can actually look at a situation from someone else's point of view, even if we disagree with that point of view...
I thought you'd just got done excoriating Armoth for demonstrating that ability.
No. I excoriated him for going much further than empathy. Ben Gurion, in that quote, pointed out that he can see the Arab POV. So can I. Better than most of the bleeding hearts on this forum, incidentally. Armoth didn't do that. He basically said that the Arab POV is basically correct. But poor, poor us, what can we do? We have to be evil imperialist occupiers. We can't really be blamed for that. Wah!!!
Feh.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by katharina: Lisa is clearly ragingly racist. As is every justification for Isreal I've heard so far.
You're clearly an idiot. Not ragingly, though. Just insipidly.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
You could only wish. Sadly, that you are a despicable racist is clear with every word you say on this topic.
Posted by Armoth (Member # 4752) on :
Kat, you implied that I was a racist. Why?
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote:Armoth didn't do that. He basically said that the Arab POV is basically correct. But poor, poor us, what can we do? We have to be evil imperialist occupiers. We can't really be blamed for that.
Rather, I think Armoth is observing that the Jews can choose between being evil, imperialist occupiers and not existing as a people, and whether or not they can be blamed for choosing to exist is irrelevant.
Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
If so, that's a false dichotomy; the Jews existed for 2000 years without a homeland. They are existing just fine in the US today.
Posted by Alcon (Member # 6645) on :
quote:If so, that's a false dichotomy; the Jews existed for 2000 years without a homeland. They are existing just fine in the US today.
While I agree with this, KOM, I do think that Jewish people are not completely crazy to feel slightly insecure in the States. Just look at the Christian religious right...
If they ever got in power - really in power - how long do you think it would take them to turn on the other religions that co-inhabit this country?
Not that I think that'll ever happen. But I can understand the fear. And the comfort that comes from knowing there's a place you can run to should it happen where you'll always be accepted.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
But of course recent history has proven rather unkind to large populations of Jews who did not have the political and military support of an independent state behind them. Surely then, the reasoning behind the formation of such a state is relatively clear, whether you agree such action is justified or not. Now, it's a perfect valid ethical and moral question as to where that state ought to have been established- but can you think of many places that this would have been possible?
Surely, the present location was less than ideal for manifold practical reasons, but there was a certain logic to that choice as well, completely aside from the religious implications. The establishment of a pro-western, pro-democratic state in the middle east was desirable to Europe and America, and so they supported its establishment and armament for more than just moral reasons. It's interesting that the US would not likely have given up land for nor supported a Jewish state on its own borders, but fully supported its establishment in a more politically unstable position- and I think it was more complicated than a simple "NIMBY" attitude.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
quote:Originally posted by Alcon:
If they ever got in power - really in power - how long do you think it would take them to turn on the other religions that co-inhabit this country?
Not that I think that'll ever happen. But I can understand the fear. And the comfort that comes from knowing there's a place you can run to should it happen where you'll always be accepted.
How lovely for you. Where is everyone else supposed to "run to"?
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
Jews in America who don't realize that they're only guests are delusional. Jews felt that way in Spain before 1492. Jews felt that way in Germany before 1938. Every time things go fairly well for us for a while, we forget history.
The only place in the world that is actually ours is the land of Israel.
[ February 17, 2010, 02:20 PM: Message edited by: Lisa ]
Posted by The White Whale (Member # 6594) on :
You're just spouting now, Lisa. It's unseemly.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
I don't think she's just "spouting," actually. I think she's speaking from the heart. I don't think she's right, but I don't begrudge her right to be passionately wrong.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
I disagree [edit: with TWW, not Tom]. That's one of the only posts of hers in this thread that I entirely and without reservation agree with.
[ February 17, 2010, 02:51 PM: Message edited by: rivka ]
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
Arguably, if you're Middle Eastern or Chinese in America, you probably should keep an eye on your exit strategies as well. So in that sense, I have to sympathize.
Posted by Blayne Bradley (Member # 8565) on :
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots:
quote:Originally posted by Alcon:
If they ever got in power - really in power - how long do you think it would take them to turn on the other religions that co-inhabit this country?
Not that I think that'll ever happen. But I can understand the fear. And the comfort that comes from knowing there's a place you can run to should it happen where you'll always be accepted.
How lovely for you. Where is everyone else supposed to "run to"?
Canada.
Posted by Alcon (Member # 6645) on :
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots:
quote:Originally posted by Alcon:
If they ever got in power - really in power - how long do you think it would take them to turn on the other religions that co-inhabit this country?
Not that I think that'll ever happen. But I can understand the fear. And the comfort that comes from knowing there's a place you can run to should it happen where you'll always be accepted.
How lovely for you. Where is everyone else supposed to "run to"?
Personally I'm in the camp of "lets just try not to let it get that far".
Posted by Armoth (Member # 4752) on :
quote:Originally posted by rivka: I disagree [edit: with TWW, not Tom]. That's one of the only posts of hers in this thread that I entirely and without reservation agree with.
Ditto. My posts above were to help you understand this sentiment. Most Jews I know have this in the back of their minds, always.
It's not like we're waiting for it to happen in America, it's just that we know that it's definitely a possibility, and the existence of Israel makes us feel infinitely more comfortable.
That is the reason why Jews are leaving France in hordes.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
I wonder why we atheists have never demanded a homeland of our own? We get killed in droves by religious crusades, too. Perhaps because we aren't linked by genetic destiny...?
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: I wonder why we atheists have never demanded a homeland of our own?
Y'all already have a couple.
Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
quote:Originally posted by Alcon:
quote:If so, that's a false dichotomy; the Jews existed for 2000 years without a homeland. They are existing just fine in the US today.
While I agree with this, KOM, I do think that Jewish people are not completely crazy to feel slightly insecure in the States. Just look at the Christian religious right...
If they ever got in power - really in power - how long do you think it would take them to turn on the other religions that co-inhabit this country?
By that standard, atheists should be invading somewhere with a conveniently low military potential and making it their homeland. Are you seriously claiming that every religious group needs a nation-state (religion-state?) so its adherents will have somewhere safe to retreat to?
On behalf of atheists everywhere, I call dibs on California. The present population will just have to move out.
Posted by Armoth (Member # 4752) on :
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: I wonder why we atheists have never demanded a homeland of our own? We get killed in droves by religious crusades, too. Perhaps because we aren't linked by genetic destiny...?
::shrug:: Ever since Napoleon created the secular space, Jews have been trying to assimilate for two centuries now...
The nazis did major research into a person's ethnic background and persecuted Jews who thought they were successful in their assimilation. I think that's why secular Jews see Israel as a haven - not at all for religious purposes, but purely because even if we wanted to assimilate, our safety isn't rooted simply in our perspective, but in the perspective of the rest of the world.
Posted by Armoth (Member # 4752) on :
quote:Originally posted by King of Men:
quote:Originally posted by Alcon:
quote:If so, that's a false dichotomy; the Jews existed for 2000 years without a homeland. They are existing just fine in the US today.
While I agree with this, KOM, I do think that Jewish people are not completely crazy to feel slightly insecure in the States. Just look at the Christian religious right...
If they ever got in power - really in power - how long do you think it would take them to turn on the other religions that co-inhabit this country?
By that standard, atheists should be invading somewhere with a conveniently low military potential and making it their homeland. Are you seriously claiming that every religious group needs a nation-state (religion-state?) so its adherents will have somewhere safe to retreat to?
On behalf of atheists everywhere, I call dibs on California. The present population will just have to move out.
No. No. No. No. No. There was a reason I wrote and there was a reason I wrote the way I wrote.
The argument isn't every segment has a home state, we want one to. The argument was nuanced in history, in a religious persecution, ethnic persecution, two thousand years of trends and turbulence, a situation that was born out of the holocaust, Western guilt, UN resolutions and British mandates. That's how we got to where we are.
I recognize that your world is so simple, if only everyone would start from scratch, renounce religion, false perceptions of ethnicity, race, gender, etc. And it would be. But it's insanely unrealistic. So you can whine in misery about how everyone is not as enlightened as you are, you can try your best to spread your worldview, or you can come up with a more practical and realistic response.
Posted by natural_mystic (Member # 11760) on :
I fully understand the desire for a Jewish homeland. What I don't understand is why the creation and/or expansion of settlements has not been halted.
Posted by Armoth (Member # 4752) on :
I mean, it depends.
You'll find a lot less Israelis in support of settlement or expansion.
A lot of the settlers are religious Zionists who are much more in Lisa's camp. They believe that the world can be expected to recognize a 2000 year-old claim, and they believe that God gave them the land.
(I believe the same, I just don't believe we, the Jews, are in a position to ask the world and the people who live there to respect a 2K y/o claim, at this point)
A lot of the settlements were taken for security reasons. ALL were taken after wars not initiated by Israel. Those are the settlements I support.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
I'm sad that katharina has perceived racism in every single argumnet in support of Israel. I have always appreciated Lisa's comments regarding Israel as it is a point of view that is so rare here in the United States.
As far as feeling like a guest, I'm inclined to agree with her. It was only about 150 years ago that Mormons had to leave what was then the US and eek out a place to live in a hellish environment. Even then, an army was sent to chase them out which was only narrowly placated by bad weather, our refusal to take one life, and them realizing we were willing to burn everything to the ground and move to somewhere else.
Since then my people have never experienced main stream acceptance. I remember how excited folks in my church were in the late 90's and 00's when suddenly interest in Mormonism seem to balloon. Time, Newsweek, 60 minutes, all seem to be paying an inordinate amount of attention to us. Salt Lake City was hosting the 2000 Winter Olympic games, Mitt Romney salvaged a debacle and turned it into a triumph, he became governor of Massachussetts, the bluest of the blue states, and then he ran for president and it seemed like he had a fantastic shot at the presidency.
I didn't completely support Romney's candidacy, we disagreed on many things, but even I wanted to believe he could get the nomination and put a serious candidacy online. Then Mike Huckabee came along and I realized not much had changed. The people in Utah are as conservative as any place I've ever seen, so conservative they were going to vote for the Republican candidate even after Romney was walked out on by the Christian right.
I'm glad Utah doesn't have a fantastic geography, loads of resources, or convenience for business, as I am fairly certain were that the case, we'd be leaving again. I can sympathize with the Jews feeling like guests, and needing a place like Israel to exist. I confess, if the day comes where Mormons are no longer welcome here, I might find myself on a plane headed for somewhere like Israel.
Posted by The White Whale (Member # 6594) on :
I guess I just don't see Jews as guests. I would be sad if every Jewish person I knew left. I'd be sad to lose the diversity around me.
And I can understand ( a little ) this yearning for a homeland. But I can see much more clearly the high level of animosity and perpetual hatred that exists due to these disputes. We all share this land, and all have ancestors that, at some point in our past, pushed some other people out, or killed them, or used them. I don't want to white-wash these atrocities, but I think it's pointless to hold these grudges. It just leaves us mired in our own problems.
Posted by Alcon (Member # 6645) on :
quote:Originally posted by rivka:
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: I wonder why we atheists have never demanded a homeland of our own?
Y'all already have a couple.
We do? Where?
Posted by Alcon (Member # 6645) on :
quote:Originally posted by King of Men:
quote:Originally posted by Alcon:
quote:If so, that's a false dichotomy; the Jews existed for 2000 years without a homeland. They are existing just fine in the US today.
While I agree with this, KOM, I do think that Jewish people are not completely crazy to feel slightly insecure in the States. Just look at the Christian religious right...
If they ever got in power - really in power - how long do you think it would take them to turn on the other religions that co-inhabit this country?
By that standard, atheists should be invading somewhere with a conveniently low military potential and making it their homeland. Are you seriously claiming that every religious group needs a nation-state (religion-state?) so its adherents will have somewhere safe to retreat to?
On behalf of atheists everywhere, I call dibs on California. The present population will just have to move out.
I never said they were right to take the space, I just said I understand the comfort it gives. And frankly, I would love, Love, LOVE to have an "atheist" homeland somewhere (one that was a representative Democracy). I might even move there. But I would never advocate for forcibly taking a space to create one.
Posted by The White Whale (Member # 6594) on :
I would not advocate for an atheist homeland. Why would we need to create an identification based on a plot of land? What purpose would that serve?
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
Strategically it doesn't make much sense either, in a pinch it makes sense to have escape routes, but long-term you want to be able to get out in the world and assimilate others. Restricting yourself not only constrains the ability to assimilate others but opens yourself up to a sneak attack when you're not alert.
Posted by scifibum (Member # 7625) on :
BlackBlade, I hope this doesn't bother you, but your post sympathizing with Lisa's argument about how Jews are "only guests" in the U.S. made me less sympathetic, instead of more.
My ancestors are all Mormons for at least 2 generations and include people who were part of the initial migration to Utah. And I have zero concern that my Mormon ancestry is going to threaten my ability to live in the U.S. in the future. (Based on the assumption that the Mormons as a bloc won't be declaring war on the U.S., which I think is a pretty safe one.)
If the trend over the last few decades wasn't so clear - unprecedented popular enthusiasm for cultural diversity - I might feel differently.
I don't think assuming that Jews will at some point be unwelcome/unsafe in the U.S. makes much sense, based on the way the U.S. looks now.
"Since then my people have never experienced main stream acceptance."
Yes, they have. They hold national offices, run public corporations, and as you noted, get lots of positive press. They can live and work where they want. Sure, if all the Protestant denominations recognized them as real Christians, that'd be a degree of "acceptance" beyond present reality, but I don't think you can say LDS folks aren't accepted by the mainstream just because of that margin.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
Armoth, Jews have certainly been persecuted. They are not the only people who have been persecuted. Why should they get the "comfort" of a special, back-up country?
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
quote:Originally posted by scifibum: ... If the trend over the last few decades wasn't so clear - unprecedented popular enthusiasm for cultural diversity - I might feel differently.
I don't think assuming that Jews will at some point be unwelcome/unsafe in the U.S. makes much sense, based on the way the U.S. looks now.
Jews and Mormons maybe.
But for Muslims/Middle Easterners, it only took one 9/11 to get to racial profiling, indefinite detention without charge, and extraordinary rendition. Imagine a couple more 9/11 scale incidents and I think that the United States would get very unwelcome/unsafe very quickly. The route for Chinese Americans is a bit more fanciful but not entirely unrealistic either.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
scifibum: Far be it from me to get upset because you have a response that is as real to you as mine is to me.
Your ancestors were Mormon, but correct me if I'm wrong you do not identify by the faith anymore. It's not the same thing.
Do you disagree that Romney's Mormonism was not a real problem when it came to his electability? Further, the general populace's knowledge of Mormonism is a bit on the ridiculous side. I could accept a very basic understanding, but most mistakenly believe we don't believe in Jesus.
One phrase that stood out for me during the whole Prop 8 episode was, "I have no tolerance for intolerance."
I may have sounded more fatalistic than I was going for in my last post, and I feel a little churlish for comparing the plight of Mormonism with Judaism. I don't live in fear that any day now I might wake up and be asked to leave the country. But the religious right think we are apostates living in sin, and the liberal left think we are hopelessly old fashioned and somewhat crazy.
The Jews lived in Europe for hundreds of years at a time before things got bad again, and often it got bad rapidly. I don't think the US is immune from that sort of development, and God knows I love my country like crazy.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
quote:Originally posted by Lisa: we have a quality that the Arabs lack entirely. It's called empathy. We can actually look at a situation from someone else's point of view, even if we disagree with that point of view, and even if the other person is an enemy.
Aaaaaand Lisa's off the deep end again. This forum works in bizarrely cyclical ways!
Posted by Ace of Spades (Member # 2256) on :
quote:Originally posted by Lisa: ...and even if the other person is an enemy.
Are you suggesting that there is another person who isn't an enemy?
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by natural_mystic: I fully understand the desire for a Jewish homeland. What I don't understand is why the creation and/or expansion of settlements has not been halted.
If I have an empty lot between my house and a neighbor, why on earth shouldn't I be able to build an extension or another house there? They aren't allowing us to so much as put up a shed in the backyard.
What you call "settlements" are towns and cities. Why should they be strangled by being prohibited from building new apartment complexes or houses?
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by scifibum: I don't think assuming that Jews will at some point be unwelcome/unsafe in the U.S. makes much sense, based on the way the U.S. looks now.
And there are plenty of Jews who would agree with you. It's a case of "those who refuse to learn from history are doomed to repeat it." Everyone seems to think that their world and culture is unique. I bet there were nice Spaniards who said the same thing you're saying back in 1450. And Germans who said the same thing you're saying back in 1925. Hell, there were Jews in the Spanish court and in the Weimar government. And believe it or not, when Hitler was elected, he got a not insignificant number of Jewish votes.
The Jews in Germany wanted nothing more to be the best Germans in the world. They were "Germans of Mosaic persuasion". When they'd hear about anti-semitism, they would say, "Oh, they don't mean us. They mean those dirty Ausyidden (eastern Jews) who insist on being different.
And then when things went bad, most of their good friends turned on them like rabid dogs. Okay, maybe many of them did so because they didn't want to get painted as Jew-lovers, but the motivation doesn't really matter.
See, if you'd said, "I would fight to prevent that from happening," I would have been happy. But when you say that it isn't realistic to think that it'll happen, it just saddens me that one more person won't be doing anything about it.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by Ass of Spades:
quote:Originally posted by Lisa: ...and even if the other person is an enemy.
Are you suggesting that there is another person who isn't an enemy?
It certainly isn't you.
Posted by just_me (Member # 3302) on :
Hey Lisa - you may think you're being clever but you're not.
Do you wanna fix that quote or should I press this cute little whistle button..???
(Yes, Ace of Spades was being a jerk, but it seems to me that you're the one that stepped over the line. If you disagree and prefer to let PJ sort it out that's fine with me)
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
happy birthday pj
Posted by scifibum (Member # 7625) on :
quote:See, if you'd said, "I would fight to prevent that from happening," I would have been happy. But when you say that it isn't realistic to think that it'll happen, it just saddens me that one more person won't be doing anything about it.
I thought about this, actually. And I think I would (fight it). But it's a bit hard for me to make a convincing promise about something I don't think will happen, so I didn't. To me, it'd feel glib and insincere. Sorry if that saddens you.
Posted by Foust (Member # 3043) on :
Wow, I thought evangelical Christians and Mormons* had the strongest persecution complexes around. Lisa's fears of future pogroms make even less sense to me; multiculturalism isn't some vague idea floating around the west, providing the indignant PC police with ammunition, it is all but built into consumerist capitalism, liberal democracy and enlightenment ideals.
There is no analogy between the Spain of centuries ago, mid-century Germany, and the west today, especially North America.
It would take a series of apocalyptic events to undue the political work of the Enlightenment, especially in the last decades. Exactly what could cause such a cataclysmic shift is a complete unknown. Worrying about complete unknowns is truly, deeply paranoid. You have a right to your paranoia, of course, I don't begrudge it of Christians, but a lot of Palestinians are getting screwed because of it.
*I don't separate Mormons from Christians to suggest Mormons are non-Christian, but because evangelical and Mormon persecution complexes seem to work in very different ways.
Posted by Dan_Frank (Member # 8488) on :
quote:Originally posted by Foust: ... multiculturalism isn't some vague idea floating around the west, providing the indignant PC police with ammunition, it is all but built into consumerist capitalism, liberal democracy and enlightenment ideals.
...
It would take a series of apocalyptic events to undue the political work of the Enlightenment, especially in the last decades. Exactly what could cause such a cataclysmic shift is a complete unknown. Worrying about complete unknowns is truly, deeply paranoid. You have a right to your paranoia, of course, I don't begrudge it of Christians, but a lot of Palestinians are getting screwed because of it. [emphasis added] ...
Um. So, you do know that Palestinians, generally, aren't too on board with the whole capitalist/liberal democracy/enlightenment thing, yeah?
Posted by Blayne Bradley (Member # 8565) on :
I hated the Navi as the blue skinned hippie Mary Sue race they are.
Posted by Foust (Member # 3043) on :
quote:Um. So, you do know that Palestinians, generally, aren't too on board with the whole capitalist/liberal democracy/enlightenment thing, yeah?
I was speaking about the west. Western Europe, US, Canada. Lisa is justifying sweeping and violent political action based on "what if all the progress made in the west was suddenly reversed? WHAT IF?"
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by Foust:
quote:Um. So, you do know that Palestinians, generally, aren't too on board with the whole capitalist/liberal democracy/enlightenment thing, yeah?
I was speaking about the west. Western Europe, US, Canada. Lisa is justifying sweeping and violent political action based on "what if all the progress made in the west was suddenly reversed? WHAT IF?"
No, I wasn't. Go back and reread my posts. Slowly, if that helps.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
quote:Originally posted by scifibum: "Since then my people have never experienced main stream acceptance."
Yes, they have. They hold national offices, run public corporations, and as you noted, get lots of positive press.
I suppose that depends on what he means by "mainstream." Jews of all religious minorities in America are certainly the best represented in business, politics, education, and entertainment. Mostly gone are the days of the "token Jew," while they remain for blacks, who represent a much larger percentage of the American population. Not to say there is not extant anti-semitism in America, but then there is anti-everything extant in America. Institutionalized bias against Jews has mostly disappeared in the last 50 years- and in many ways Jews have gained "mainstream acceptance," in America.
Posted by Armoth (Member # 4752) on :
I think it's funny that we're getting into a debate as to whether or not Jews feel this way.
My grandparents are still alive. They'd look at you like you're a maniac if you gave them any of these arguments. My Grandfather had no faith that Israel would survive and he would run drills with my mother and her uncle - he made shoes with false heels in which to hide gold and diamonds, stored an unbelievable amount of flour...
My other grandparents trust no one. They make weekly visits to the bank to make sure that their money is still there.
My grandparents and their generation built Israel. My father served in the ministry of defense.
We love America. I live here. I feel safe. But I also feel like that could change. Not quickly, but possibly. The atmosphere in France, is scary. The atmosphere in England is becoming scary. The atmosphere in French Canada is scary.
Our generation can say to all the generations before us - don't worry, we have Israel.
Look. It's a bit annoying that you can say something like: "Your unfounded fears are causing a lot of Palestinians harm" - as I said, it didn't exactly go down like that.
Can you believe the fact that the UN voted to create Israel? That the British thought it would be a good idea to create Israel. For them, with the holocaust staring them in the face, I think they realized that it was necessary. So when the decades go by, all of a sudden what - what are you guys suggesting? "Well that was a nice experiment, but come on back to America."
What happened happened. Any attempt to undo the existence of Israel will just heighten the Jewish survivor mentality.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
"If you try to stop us from oppressing the Palestinians, we will only want to do it more."
Not a good argument.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
I am certainly not debating whether or not Jews feel that way. I am debating whether or not the fact that they feel this way means they should get a back-up, "comfort" country.
Posted by Armoth (Member # 4752) on :
::rolls eyes:: Whatever Kat. Your one-liners and wonderful advice concerning BOTH sides are enlightening and helpful.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
kmbboots: I may note that they already have what they perceive as a back-up "comfort" country. Maybe the relevant debate is not whether they should get one, but how you and your like-minded debaters can convince them to give it up.
Posted by Stephan (Member # 7549) on :
quote:Originally posted by Lisa: And there are plenty of Jews who would agree with you. It's a case of "those who refuse to learn from history are doomed to repeat it." Everyone seems to think that their world and culture is unique. I bet there were nice Spaniards who said the same thing you're saying back in 1450. And Germans who said the same thing you're saying back in 1925. Hell, there were Jews in the Spanish court and in the Weimar government. And believe it or not, when Hitler was elected, he got a not insignificant number of Jewish votes.
The Jews in Germany wanted nothing more to be the best Germans in the world. They were "Germans of Mosaic persuasion". When they'd hear about anti-semitism, they would say, "Oh, they don't mean us. They mean those dirty Ausyidden (eastern Jews) who insist on being different.
And then when things went bad, most of their good friends turned on them like rabid dogs. Okay, maybe many of them did so because they didn't want to get painted as Jew-lovers, but the motivation doesn't really matter.
See, if you'd said, "I would fight to prevent that from happening," I would have been happy. But when you say that it isn't realistic to think that it'll happen, it just saddens me that one more person won't be doing anything about it.
It is disturbing and depressing that I actually agree with what you write here. Teaching history these past couple of years has proved to me if nothing else that history does repeat itself. Assuming that the United States will never fall from the grace it has found is blind. Our 200+ years are a blink of an eye when looking at human history. It doesn't take a cataclysm to turn people against a minority group.
Now, I truly believe Jews are currently safer in the United States than in any other country at any other time in history. We have way too many minoroty groups for everyone to gang up on one specific group. But things change, they always do.
Posted by MattP (Member # 10495) on :
quote:Your ancestors were Mormon, but correct me if I'm wrong you do not identify by the faith anymore. It's not the same thing.
Most of the people that I know and love, including my wife and children, identify as Mormons. Is that sufficient basis for me to have a personal investment in whether Mormons are likely to ever face any actual persecution in the future?
As a member of a group for which public disdain is still acceptable and public distrust exceeds that for all other demographics, I have to wince when any group with the sort of political power wielded by the Mormons complains about their marginalization and persecution or the potential thereof.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
quote:Originally posted by Armoth: I think it's funny that we're getting into a debate as to whether or not Jews feel this way.
It's rather clear how you feel. You feel like a victim. That's why you project onto what I said an argument I am not attempting to make- I am not attempting to portray how Jews *feel*. I can only portray how I see things, whatever value that may be to you. Please be clear on that.
Posted by scifibum (Member # 7625) on :
"Your ancestors were Mormon, but correct me if I'm wrong you do not identify by the faith anymore. It's not the same thing."
Depends if you think the persecution you will face will use recent tithing receipts to identify the victims. Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
quote:Originally posted by MattP:
quote:Your ancestors were Mormon, but correct me if I'm wrong you do not identify by the faith anymore. It's not the same thing.
Most of the people that I know and love, including my wife and children, identify as Mormons. Is that sufficient basis for me to have a personal investment in whether Mormons are likely to ever face any actual persecution in the future?
As a member of a group for which public disdain is still acceptable and public distrust exceeds that for all other demographics, I have to wince when any group with the sort of political power wielded by the Mormons complains about their marginalization and persecution or the potential thereof.
Matt: What I meant was that a person who does not self identify as Mormon is not going to be treated the same way as somebody who maintains that identification.
If you were in say France, Czech Republic, or The Netherlands you would be in a very sizable minority. I don't really want to get into a, "I'm a bigger martyr!" contest with you. I don't self identify with Utah very much, and that is the seat of Mormonism's power.
I know this is a weird time to mention it, but I still feel somewhat remiss that we've never managed to meet for lunch or dinner.
Posted by MightyCow (Member # 9253) on :
Are we actually suggesting that Jews would feel safer in Israel than in America? The world is going to have to flip turn upside down before I can imagine that being a realistic scenario.
Posted by Clive Candy (Member # 11977) on :
quote:Originally posted by MightyCow: Are we actually suggesting that Jews would feel safer in Israel than in America? The world is going to have to flip turn upside down before I can imagine that being a realistic scenario.
I suspect a reason for this is that they're very tribal and ethnocentric and feel that just about any day now the rest of America is going to find out about these tendencies of theirs and come after them for it.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
I think it's partially because of anti-semitic scumbags like yourself.
Posted by Clive Candy (Member # 11977) on :
Lisa whining about anti-semitism is like a Klansman complaining about bigotry against the Scotch-Irish.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by MightyCow: Are we actually suggesting that Jews would feel safer in Israel than in America? The world is going to have to flip turn upside down before I can imagine that being a realistic scenario.
Absolutely. In so many ways.
Posted by The White Whale (Member # 6594) on :
Lisa, please expand on that. I have trouble picturing it.
Posted by MattP (Member # 10495) on :
quote:I don't really want to get into a, "I'm a bigger martyr!" contest with you.
Not a chance. I never complain about persecution or marginalization. I just have to give an exasperated "oh please!" when I hear it (and I hear it *ALL THE TIME*) from my Mormon friends. Though it does sound even sillier coming from, say, Evangelicals. "I'm being persecuted!" is starting to mean "I'm being criticized!".
quote:I know this is a weird time to mention it, but I still feel somewhat remiss that we've never managed to meet for lunch or dinner.
Heh. Being exasperated in person would be a richer experience. I kid. We'll have to work something out.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by The White Whale: Lisa, please expand on that. I have trouble picturing it.
Sure. I live in Chicago. I have a better chance of dying in a traffic accident or getting shot or mugged than I do of getting hurt in Israel.
It's sort of like plane crashes. They may not be that common, but when they happen, they're pretty horrendous.
And yes, I've had close calls in Israel. After I moved there in 1987, I got a card from a government agency offering me a job. I went out to Tel Aviv and interviewed, and turned it down (they wanted me to go to Africa as part of an Israel "Peace Corps" thing). The chilling thing is that I took the 405 bus to Tel Aviv, leaving Jerusalem at 9-something in the morning. The same exact bus the very next day was the subject of a terrorist attack, when a peace-loving Palestinian went up to the front of the bus, grabbed the steering wheel, and twisted it, throwing the bus off a mountain cliff.
And I had a friend who was riding the 14 bus to Talpiot one day when a poor downtrodden victim of Israel aggression decided to blow it up. It was actually the first time a friend of mine had been murdered. I used to live in Talpiot, incidentally, and the 14 was the bus I'd use to go into downtown Jerusalem and back.
So yes, stuff like that happens. But here's what doesn't happen. I can go to the store in Israel, and if my daughter wanders off, I don't have to worry. Here in Chicago, I have a virtual heart attack every time that happens, because in uncivilized America, people steal children.
When Tova was a baby, we used to go to the store with her in a stroller. The aisles in most stores in Israel are half the size of your average grocery store aisle here. Maybe a third the size. So pushing a stroller through the store isn't very practical. So we'd leave her in the stroller at the front of the store while we shopped. Now, I remember when I was a kid (in Chicago), and my mother used to leave us in the car while she ran into the grocery store. Totally normal and reasonable thing to do in the 60s and 70s. Now it's illegal, and probably for good reason.
One of the big differences is that here, we're afraid of crime. And in Israel, we're afraid of war crimes. But the army and police in Israel is a little less shackled by political correctness than their counterparts here in America, which makes me feel safer there.
Racial profiling? Well, hell yes. The very idea that you'd risk your life and the lives of those around you rather than offend someone's delicate sensibilities is one of the more insane ideas I've ever heard of. In Israel, when you go to the airport, the security is trained to look for suspicious actions, or appearance. And when they check your things, they talk to you. They aren't just low-paid automatons making you take your shoes off and throwing away your water bottles. And they damned well do pay closer attention to people matching the profile of those who are most likely to commit atrocities.
Clear enough?
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by Clive Candy: Lisa whining about anti-semitism is like a Klansman complaining about bigotry against the Scotch-Irish.
Whining? Oh, I don't think so. Everyone on this forum knows that you and Ace are Jew-hating scumbags.
Posted by steven (Member # 8099) on :
quote:Originally posted by Lisa:
quote:Originally posted by The White Whale: Lisa, please expand on that. I have trouble picturing it.
Sure. I live in Chicago. I have a better chance of dying in a traffic accident or getting shot or mugged than I do of getting hurt in Israel.
It's sort of like plane crashes. They may not be that common, but when they happen, they're pretty horrendous.
And yes, I've had close calls in Israel. After I moved there in 1987, I got a card from a government agency offering me a job. I went out to Tel Aviv and interviewed, and turned it down (they wanted me to go to Africa as part of an Israel "Peace Corps" thing). The chilling thing is that I took the 405 bus to Tel Aviv, leaving Jerusalem at 9-something in the morning. The same exact bus the very next day was the subject of a terrorist attack, when a peace-loving Palestinian went up to the front of the bus, grabbed the steering wheel, and twisted it, throwing the bus off a mountain cliff.
And I had a friend who was riding the 14 bus to Talpiot one day when a poor downtrodden victim of Israel aggression decided to blow it up. It was actually the first time a friend of mine had been murdered. I used to live in Talpiot, incidentally, and the 14 was the bus I'd use to go into downtown Jerusalem and back.
So yes, stuff like that happens. But here's what doesn't happen. I can go to the store in Israel, and if my daughter wanders off, I don't have to worry. Here in Chicago, I have a virtual heart attack every time that happens, because in uncivilized America, people steal children.
When Tova was a baby, we used to go to the store with her in a stroller. The aisles in most stores in Israel are half the size of your average grocery store aisle here. Maybe a third the size. So pushing a stroller through the store isn't very practical. So we'd leave her in the stroller at the front of the store while we shopped. Now, I remember when I was a kid (in Chicago), and my mother used to leave us in the car while she ran into the grocery store. Totally normal and reasonable thing to do in the 60s and 70s. Now it's illegal, and probably for good reason.
One of the big differences is that here, we're afraid of crime. And in Israel, we're afraid of war crimes. But the army and police in Israel is a little less shackled by political correctness than their counterparts here in America, which makes me feel safer there.
Racial profiling? Well, hell yes. The very idea that you'd risk your life and the lives of those around you rather than offend someone's delicate sensibilities is one of the more insane ideas I've ever heard of. In Israel, when you go to the airport, the security is trained to look for suspicious actions, or appearance. And when they check your things, they talk to you. They aren't just low-paid automatons making you take your shoes off and throwing away your water bottles. And they damned well do pay closer attention to people matching the profile of those who are most likely to commit atrocities.
Clear enough?
What does any of that have to do with you being Jewish? Am I missing something? I thought your point was that you were afraid of being targeting because you are a Jew in America. I'm not sure I saw where you defended that statement in your post. Did you?
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
Not to speak for Lisa, but I think it was two separate points. Feeling safer IN Israel (and I entirely agree with her explanation of how and why) is a separate issue from feeling safer because there IS an Israel.
Posted by MrSquicky (Member # 1802) on :
quote: Here in Chicago, I have a virtual heart attack every time that happens, because in uncivilized America, people steal children.
No, they don't. If I remember right, the average is slightly above 100 for children kidnapped by strangers per year in America.
Posted by steven (Member # 8099) on :
quote:Originally posted by rivka: Not to speak for Lisa, but I think it was two separate points. Feeling safer IN Israel (and I entirely agree with her explanation of how and why) is a separate issue from feeling safer because there IS an Israel.
NO, RIVKA, her point was that she was afraid of being targeting for harrassment or worse in America for being Jewish. Stop backpedaling. You are losing credibility by the boatload. Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
quote:Originally posted by MrSquicky: No, they don't. If I remember right, the average is slightly above 100 for children kidnapped by strangers per year in America.
Still, it wouldn't surprise me if the actual rate was higher in Chicago than in Israel. When a co-worker went to Israel, I was surprised to see that the homicide rate was substantially higher in places like Chicago or Philadelphia than Israel, although that has more to do with the ridiculous amounts of crime in the former two than anything particularly out of the ordinary in the latter when you compare things back to Canada.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by steven:
quote:Originally posted by rivka: Not to speak for Lisa, but I think it was two separate points. Feeling safer IN Israel (and I entirely agree with her explanation of how and why) is a separate issue from feeling safer because there IS an Israel.
NO, RIVKA, her point was that she was afraid of being targeting for harrassment or worse in America for being Jewish. Stop backpedaling. You are losing credibility by the boatload.
As I said, I'm not speaking for her. So maybe you are correct about what she meant. It's not what I meant, though. You can call your misunderstanding backpedaling if you like.
And I don't think I could possibly care less about what you think of my credibility.
Posted by MrSquicky (Member # 1802) on :
It's possible that the rate is higher. Of course, let's say that there are 120 stranger abductions a year. A low estimate of children under 18 in the US is 73 million.
So, in that case, the rate of stranger abductions would be 0.00000164.
There's about 2.5 million children in Israel. That's about 30 times less than in the US. For the rate to be lower in this case, there would have to be less than 4 children abducted by strangers in Israel.
---
Crime is a huge problem in the U.S. It's higher here than just about anywhere else. But this particular worry that there is this mass of people just looking to abduct your children if you take your eye off them for a minute is false.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
If you are not black, the odds of your being involved in a violent crime in America are pretty negligible.
Posted by steven (Member # 8099) on :
quote:Originally posted by rivka:
quote:Originally posted by steven:
quote:Originally posted by rivka: Not to speak for Lisa, but I think it was two separate points. Feeling safer IN Israel (and I entirely agree with her explanation of how and why) is a separate issue from feeling safer because there IS an Israel.
NO, RIVKA, her point was that she was afraid of being targeting for harrassment or worse in America for being Jewish. Stop backpedaling. You are losing credibility by the boatload.
As I said, I'm not speaking for her. So maybe you are correct about what she meant. It's not what I meant, though. You can call your misunderstanding backpedaling if you like.
And I don't think I could possibly care less about what you think of my credibility.
You just backpedaled for Lisa...is your "crediblity-destroying-argument-detector" on the blink?
Posted by Geraine (Member # 9913) on :
quote:By that standard, atheists should be invading somewhere with a conveniently low military potential and making it their homeland. Are you seriously claiming that every religious group needs a nation-state (religion-state?) so its adherents will have somewhere safe to retreat to?
On behalf of atheists everywhere, I call dibs on California. The present population will just have to move out.
If you want all of the atheists to have California, thats fine with me. It will eventually fall into the ocean anyways.
And Clive, leave us Scotts alone.
Posted by Ace of Spades (Member # 2256) on :
quote:Originally posted by BlackBlade: I don't really want to get into a, "I'm a bigger martyr!" contest with you.
I do, but I can't. Nobody hates me.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by steven: What does any of that have to do with you being Jewish? Am I missing something? I thought your point was that you were afraid of being targeting because you are a Jew in America. I'm not sure I saw where you defended that statement in your post. Did you?
More reading comprehension problems. Why do I waste my time with you? Other people read it without having your problem.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by MrSquicky:
quote: Here in Chicago, I have a virtual heart attack every time that happens, because in uncivilized America, people steal children.
No, they don't. If I remember right, the average is slightly above 100 for children kidnapped by strangers per year in America.
Risk management multiples the chance of an event happening by the severity of the event. Either one of the two by itself is fairly irrelevant.
And that's anyway probably more than 100 times higher than it is in Israel.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by steven:
quote:Originally posted by rivka: Not to speak for Lisa, but I think it was two separate points. Feeling safer IN Israel (and I entirely agree with her explanation of how and why) is a separate issue from feeling safer because there IS an Israel.
NO, RIVKA, her point was that she was afraid of being targeting for harrassment or worse in America for being Jewish. Stop backpedaling. You are losing credibility by the boatload.
Imbecile. Rivka has a brain and read what I wrote correctly. You have a giant chip where a brain would otherwise be, and did not. I'm shocked.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by MrSquicky: There's about 2.5 million children in Israel. That's about 30 times less than in the US. For the rate to be lower in this case, there would have to be less than 4 children abducted by strangers in Israel.
Fewer.
quote:Originally posted by MrSquicky: Crime is a huge problem in the U.S. It's higher here than just about anywhere else. But this particular worry that there is this mass of people just looking to abduct your children if you take your eye off them for a minute is false.
Do you have kids?
Posted by MrSquicky (Member # 1802) on :
Just thought this would be amusing to throw out there:
quote:A statement from their website reads: “ ChristianExodus.org was founded in November of 2003 in response to the moral degeneration of American culture, and the rampant corruption among the powers that be. The initial goal was to move thousands of Christian constitutionalists to South Carolina to accelerate the return to self-government based upon Christian principles at the local and State level. This project continues to this day, with the ultimate goal of forming an independent Christian nation that will survive after the decline and fall of the financially and morally bankrupt American empire. We have learned, however; that the chains of our slavery and dependence upon godless government have more of a hold on us than can be broken by simply moving to another State.
As many like-minded Christian activists pursue independent Christian living without relocating, the scope has expanded to promote "personal secession" though many and various tracks, wherever they can be implemented. The long process of disentanglement from idolatrous dependencies includes such practices of moving towards a home-centered economy, with intentional community, home-schooling, home-gardening, house churches, health-cost sharing, private exchange, unlicenced ministry, and any other way in which we might live free and godly lives in Christ Jesus, without prostrating ourselves to eat from the hand of the imperial magistrate.
Honestly, I think we could afford to lose South Carolina if it would rid us of the sort of conservative Christians that would buy into this, but that's probably overly uncharitable of me.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: If you are not black, the odds of your being involved in a violent crime in America are pretty negligible.
Woof. And yet I'm the one getting accused of racism?
Though I'll grant that the people who've so accused me are either antisemitic dreck or just really, really bad people (and you both know who you are), so the accusations aren't a big deal.
Posted by Clive Candy (Member # 11977) on :
quote:Originally posted by Lisa: Though I'll grant that the people who've so accused me are either antisemitic dreck or just really, really bad people (and you both know who you are), so the accusations aren't a big deal.
This is my along my thoughts when you cry about anti-Jew bigotry.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
You think? Who would have guessed?
Posted by Clive Candy (Member # 11977) on :
quote:Originally posted by Lisa: You think? Who would have guessed?
Well it's just hilarious how you're trying to create a special, vile status for those who disagree with your views when it's clear that's you're the one who's vile and despicable herself. Pot, kettle, etc.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote:Woof. And yet I'm the one getting accused of racism?
I point out, rather, that filtering out black-on-black violence from violent crime statistics in this country dramatically changes the numbers, so the actual chance of suffering a violent crime in America if you are Jewish and not black is much lower than a casual examination of the statistics might imply.
quote:Do you have kids?
For what it's worth, I do. Two daughters, in fact. I have absolutely no fear that they will be abducted -- or, more appropriately, I fear that they will drown in the bath far more than I fear that they will be abducted.
[ February 19, 2010, 02:32 PM: Message edited by: TomDavidson ]
Posted by Papa Janitor (Member # 7795) on :
I'm sorry I didn't get here sooner. I have a new baby in the house, two other sick children, and out of town guests.
Ace, if you want to take part in the discussion, you may. If you want solely to keep making snide remarks, then please stay out. Lisa, please don't resort to name-calling. Lisa and Clive, maybe it would be better if you didn't speak directly to each other (though speaking about one another is probably worse).
As has been made obvious over and over, emotions run high on this issue (among others). Please take that into account both when you (general) post and when you read someone else's post. Try to tread lightly, and give others the benefit of the doubt.
--PJ
Posted by Stephan (Member # 7549) on :
Anyone paranoid about abduction (yeah I can now say I have a child!) should never put their child in a car. Your child WILL be in an auto accident one day. The average person has about one accident every 13 years.
Everyday people are scared to death of getting on a plane, strangers taking their children, and terrorists. Yet we happily get into a death trap on a daily basis to drive to work and take our children to school.
Posted by Clive Candy (Member # 11977) on :
quote:Originally posted by Stephan: Anyone paranoid about abduction (yeah I can now say I have a child!) should never put their child in a car. Your child WILL be in an auto accident one day. The average person has about one accident every 13 years.
Everyday people are scared to death of getting on a plane, strangers taking their children, and terrorists. Yet we happily get into a death trap on a daily basis to drive to work and take our children to school.
Trenchant insight. But what does this have to do with Israeli aggression against Palestinians?
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by Clive Candy: Trenchant insight. But what does this have to do with Israeli self-defense against Palestinians?
Fixed that for you.
Posted by MightyCow (Member # 9253) on :
quote:Originally posted by Lisa:
quote:Originally posted by Clive Candy: Trenchant insight. But what does this have to do with Israeli self-defense against Palestinians?
Fixed that for you.
Yeah, this has become a very constructive discussion, yet again.
You know Lisa, I don't expect you to change, but you do more for your opposition with this kind of attitude than you do for your side.
Posted by MrSquicky (Member # 1802) on :
quote:Originally posted by Lisa:
quote:Originally posted by MrSquicky: [qb]There's about 2.5 million children in Israel. That's about 30 times less than in the US. For the rate to be lower in this case, there would have to be less than 4 children abducted by strangers in Israel.
Fewer.
No, I meant less. I'm open to the possibility of some percentage of a child being abducted.
Posted by Clive Candy (Member # 11977) on :
quote:Originally posted by Lisa:
quote:Originally posted by Clive Candy: Trenchant insight. But what does this have to do with Israeli self-defense against Palestinians?
Fixed that for you.
That Nazis said they were acting in self-defense too.
Posted by MrSquicky (Member # 1802) on :
quote:Originally posted by Clive Candy:
quote:Originally posted by Lisa:
quote:Originally posted by Clive Candy: Trenchant insight. But what does this have to do with Israeli self-defense against Palestinians?
Fixed that for you.
That Nazis said they were acting in self-defense too.
Well, more specifically, the Nazis said that somebody kept stealing their donuts. No matter how tasty a given donut may be, I don't think it's theft constitutes a serious assault on a person such that concerns of self-defense comes into play.
I may be going against the grain here, but I think the Nazis were very wrong.
I'm also not sure that they even make donuts in Israel.
[ February 19, 2010, 05:21 PM: Message edited by: MrSquicky ]
Posted by MattP (Member # 10495) on :
quote:I'm also not sure that they even make donuts in Israel.
I think they make bagels. Or is that a culturally insensitive association?
Posted by MightyCow (Member # 9253) on :
If they don't make donuts, how can they call it the hole-ly land?
I'll be here all week.
Posted by Dobbie (Member # 3881) on :
I'll come back next week.
Posted by MightyCow (Member # 9253) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dobbie: I'll come back next week.
Jew-ish that was as funny as my joke. Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by MrSquicky: I'm also not sure that they even make donuts in Israel.
Nope. Just sufganiyot.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by MightyCow: If they don't make donuts, how can they call it the hole-ly land?
I'll be here all week.
There's a bagel place called Holy City Bagels. Is that close enough?
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by Clive Candy:
quote:Originally posted by Lisa:
quote:Originally posted by Clive Candy: Trenchant insight. But what does this have to do with Israeli self-defense against Palestinians?
Fixed that for you.
That Nazis said they were acting in self-defense too.
We aren't talking about your family here.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
cool, it's like the third grade in here now, only with Godwin
Posted by LargeTuna (Member # 10512) on :
quote:Originally posted by Clive Candy:
quote:Originally posted by Stephan: Anyone paranoid about abduction (yeah I can now say I have a child!) should never put their child in a car. Your child WILL be in an auto accident one day. The average person has about one accident every 13 years.
Everyday people are scared to death of getting on a plane, strangers taking their children, and terrorists. Yet we happily get into a death trap on a daily basis to drive to work and take our children to school.
Trenchant insight. But what does this have to do with Israeli aggression against Palestinians?
Hey Clive, I was just wondering if you seriously believe that the Israelis are the main aggressors in this CURRENT conflict? If so, I can only say wow. Regardless of how things went on in the past, at the very worst I would call it mutual aggression. (and that's a huge stretch for me since the goals of the two groups are so vastly different, and to me one of them is ay worse)
Posted by Clive Candy (Member # 11977) on :
quote:Originally posted by Lisa:
quote:Originally posted by Clive Candy:
quote:Originally posted by Lisa:
quote:Originally posted by Clive Candy: Trenchant insight. But what does this have to do with Israeli self-defense against Palestinians?
Fixed that for you.
That Nazis said they were acting in self-defense too.
We aren't talking about your family here.
At least I have a family.
Posted by Dobbie (Member # 3881) on :
quote:Originally posted by Clive Candy: At least I have a family.
Posted by just_me (Member # 3302) on :
quote:Originally posted by Papa Janitor: ... Lisa and Clive, maybe it would be better if you didn't speak directly to each other (though speaking about one another is probably worse). ...
It's official. My 20 month old son, who smiles, laughs and does exactly what you just told him not to, listens better than Lisa and Clive.
Posted by Dan_Frank (Member # 8488) on :
quote:Originally posted by Stephan:
quote:Originally posted by Lisa: And there are plenty of Jews who would agree with you. It's a case of "those who refuse to learn from history are doomed to repeat it." Everyone seems to think that their world and culture is unique. I bet there were nice Spaniards who said the same thing you're saying back in 1450. And Germans who said the same thing you're saying back in 1925. Hell, there were Jews in the Spanish court and in the Weimar government. And believe it or not, when Hitler was elected, he got a not insignificant number of Jewish votes.
The Jews in Germany wanted nothing more to be the best Germans in the world. They were "Germans of Mosaic persuasion". When they'd hear about anti-semitism, they would say, "Oh, they don't mean us. They mean those dirty Ausyidden (eastern Jews) who insist on being different.
And then when things went bad, most of their good friends turned on them like rabid dogs. Okay, maybe many of them did so because they didn't want to get painted as Jew-lovers, but the motivation doesn't really matter.
See, if you'd said, "I would fight to prevent that from happening," I would have been happy. But when you say that it isn't realistic to think that it'll happen, it just saddens me that one more person won't be doing anything about it.
It is disturbing and depressing that I actually agree with what you write here. Teaching history these past couple of years has proved to me if nothing else that history does repeat itself. Assuming that the United States will never fall from the grace it has found is blind. Our 200+ years are a blink of an eye when looking at human history. It doesn't take a cataclysm to turn people against a minority group.
Now, I truly believe Jews are currently safer in the United States than in any other country at any other time in history. We have way too many minoroty groups for everyone to gang up on one specific group. But things change, they always do.
Well... this is an interesting report. Headline is "More global anti-Semitic incidents reported in 2009 than any year since WWII". And the US doesn't seem totally exempt, though the article doesn't say if the two anti-semitic murders in the US are more or less than previous averages.
Depressing.
Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
Two? Dude, statistical noise. I'd be unsurprised to learn that this is roughly equal to the amount of anti-atheist murders; but those rarely get media attention.
Posted by Dan_Frank (Member # 8488) on :
KoM, as I said, I don't know that the two in the US are part of the main trend. Just some examples. The trend seems to be global, and I don't think it's specifically based on anti-semitic murders.
It mentions that anti-semitic events in France, for instance, are up to 631 from 474 last year. That's not insignificant.
Posted by MightyCow (Member # 9253) on :
Well, with two anti-semitic murders in the US last year, if that kind of increase keeps up Lisa's fears will be well founded in a scant hundreds of years.
Posted by Dan_Frank (Member # 8488) on :
How many anti-semitic murders do you think occurred in Germany prior to the Nazi regime? It doesn't take a murderer to sit by and let terrible things happen. It just takes a climate of distrust/resentment/contempt/etc.
Edited to fix a typo.
[ February 23, 2010, 03:59 PM: Message edited by: Dan_Frank ]
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
Again. WHy does that mean that Jewish people should get an extra back-up country?
Posted by Stephan (Member # 7549) on :
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots: Again. WHy does that mean that Jewish people should get an extra back-up country?
Actually it is sort of nice that I would be mostly welcomed in Israel, Ireland, the UK, Germany, and Russia.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots: Again. WHy does that mean that Jewish people should get an extra back-up country?
Stop spinning it that way. In the first place, it's our homeland. Period. Forget the antisemitism -- it's our home. And we didn't lose title to it just because we were exiled from it by force.
There was never a time during our history when there weren't some people who braved the sea and the hostility of the occupiers (Christians, and then Muslims) to return. There were towns from which the Jews never left at all. They managed to keep a low enough profile that they were able to evade the powers which expelled us.
Don't think that Jews returning to our land is something that started with the secular Zionist movement. That's simply not true. It was the secular Zionist movement which ramped it up into waves and waves of immigration.
Prior to that, no state existed in our land. It was controlled from afar by foreigners who held it for reasons of economics and/or war. Rome and then Byzantium and then Egypt and then Istanbul again. Those of us who lived there and those of us who returned lived alongside the Muslims and Christians who lived there.
There was no Arab polity in Palestine. There was no Palestinian nation. There were Arabs who lived on each side of the Jordan river, as well as Arabs who lived further north, in what is now Syria and Lebanon. There was no national distinction between any of them. Damascus, Beirut, Jerusalem, Petra... it was all one big area, with a very low populationd density, and a populace that had no nationality, but was ruled by whoever ruled. Most recently, the Ottoman Turks.
So Herzl saw what happened to Dreyfus in France, and started a Zionist movement, and Jews started returning home in larger numbers. Arabs from all over migrated to Jewish areas because they were creating jobs. We're talking about European Jews bringing European technology in and making areas that had been turned into desert bloom for the first time in centuries. Almost millenia. The Arabs were glad enough for the economic boom, but then WWI happened.
The Turks got into WWI and lost, so the whole area got taken away from them. The Europeans thought it'd be easier to manage the region if they split it into mandates and created little nation-states. They gave some to France and some to Britain. And Lord Balfour in Britain issued a proclamation stating that Britain looked favorably upon the establishment of a Jewish state in Palestine. Not at the expense of any Arabs, mind you. There were no nations there, and no nationalities. That was only just getting started.
By this time, there were a lot of Jews who'd been living in the area for at least as long as most of the newly arrived Arabs. The allies split northern Syro-Palestine off and called it Syria. And called what was left just Palestine (which was roughly what's now Israel and the disputed territories and Jordan). Jews had raised money and bought substantial amounts of land from the owners of record before WWI, and they continued to do so afterwards. But then Britain found themselves with a Hashemite prince named Abdullah who needed a princedom. So they gave him all of Palestine to the east of the Jordan, and named it the Emirate of Transjordan. The Jewish villages in the east were forced out (I don't hear a lot about any "right of return" for us to the lands we owned in what's now Jordan, incidentally, where Jews can't even own land).
So we focused on the positive and kept building. But by this time, the Arabs realized that nationalism was going to be the wave of the future, and while they hadn't had a big problem with Jews as individuals living in what they considered an Arab region, the idea of Jews running things didn't sit well with them. So they started getting very antagonistic. In 1929, they butchered the students learning in the Jewish seminary in Hebron, and drove out an ancient community of Jews who'd lived there since before Muhammed.
Things got bad. The Brits by this time had changed their minds and decided that they needed the Arabs and their oil, and tried to stop any more Jews from immigrating. They made it illegal on pain of death for a Jew to be caught with a firearm (and hanged our boys who they caught). Meanwhile, they turned a blind eye to the Arabs and their firearms and their violence, figuring that they didn't have to kick us out. Once we realized that it was an unsafe place for us, we'd leave of our own volition.
But we didn't. We did something that Jews hadn't done for very many centuries. We fought. We defended ourselves, and we answered violence with violence. Finally, the Brits washed their hands of the whole thing and gave the mandate back to the UN (technically, they'd received it from the League of Nations, but the UN was the successor body). The UN decided to split the area (a mere 21% of the Palestine they'd been given as a mandate) into 7 sections. Three Arab sections, three Jewish sections, and Jerusalem. here is a map for you to see. Notice that more than half of what the Jews were given was the Negev desert, while the Arabs were given the heartland, with Jerusalem in the middle of one of the Arab areas, without any possible access for Jews. Look at that orange area, Kate, and tell me how long you think it'd survive.
So now we were down to an offer of 11% of the Palestine Mandate. But we accepted it. The Arabs rejected it and invaded. Iraq invaded. Lebanon invaded. Egypt invaded. Transjordan invaded. Saudi Arabia invaded. Syria invaded. They killed a full percent of the Jews. One percent might not sound like a lot, but in the US, that'd be about 3,000,000 people.
We managed to survive, and during the course of the war, we managed to take enough extra land that the three Jewish sections were attached. The Jews living in those other sections were killed or expelled. The Arabs living in our sections were given citizenship. Somehow, people lose sight of the vast difference in outlook between the sides.
That's our land, Kate. It isn't a "backup state", though it can serve that purpose as well, if need be.
We have sufficient basis for our ownership on religious grounds for that to be enough for some people. We have sufficient basis for our ownership on recent historical grounds to be enough for others. And then there are some people who want to throw a pity party and say that it's a matter of having a place to run to. All of these are true and valid, and none of them are the whole story.
Posted by Foust (Member # 3043) on :
I see a handful of mainpoints there.
quote:In the first place, it's our homeland.
This is a purely religious idea, and I don't accept it anymore than I accept creationism.
I'd respond that there is no such thing as a "homeland," only places people live. Anything else is a nationalistic fantasy.
Which ties into this:
quote:Prior to that, no state existed in our land.
The only thing this means is that it would be easier to take the land, either by signing treaties or by force. States protect land by force, but they do not justify ownership in anyway. The lack of a state does not disqualify ownership.
quote:We managed to survive, and during the course of the war, we managed to take enough extra land that the three Jewish sections were attached. The Jews living in those other sections were killed or expelled. The Arabs living in our sections were given citizenship. Somehow, people lose sight of the vast difference in outlook between the sides.
That's our land, Kate.
You fought for it, and you won. No moral justification here.
If you minus out the religious narrative, you see it for what it is: the colonial legacy of the region.
Posted by AvidReader (Member # 6007) on :
I give up. Do you consider the colonial legacy to be invalid? That Isreal is less a state than other states established by force?
Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
Can't speak for Foust, but personally I'm quite happy for the Israelis to have a state established and maintained by force. I just object to the said force being subsidised by my taxes. (And yes, I object equally to the subsidies to Egypt and Jordan.) There was perhaps some justification for the Great Powers enforcing limitations on ME wars in the seventies, when each side was the client of one party to the Cold War and things could escalate. But now we've got this alliance which, like NATO, has served its purpose and should go. There is no longer any national interest either for the US or for the European states in whether Israel is ruled by Jews or Arabs; let them fight it out. With knives, if necessary. Unfortunately this isn't very realistic as domestic politics.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by King of Men: Can't speak for Foust, but personally I'm quite happy for the Israelis to have a state established and maintained by force. I just object to the said force being subsidised by my taxes. (And yes, I object equally to the subsidies to Egypt and Jordan.)
Same here, on all counts.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
I'd drink to that.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by Foust:
And people wonder why I lose my temper discussing this issue. Who the hell do you think has a better claim on that area than we do? The Arabs? Based on what?
No other country in the world has to deal with ridiculous logic-chopping about its very existence like this.
Posted by Geraine (Member # 9913) on :
If the country of Israel were a country that had no religious tolerance at all, then I may have a problem with it.
The thing is, Israel is one of the most religiously tolerant countries in the world. There are many holy sites for many of the worlds religions in the country of Israel that are important to Christians, Muslims, and Jews. Israel recognizes this and takes care of these sites and allows anyone to come and visit them. As far as I know, no one is denied.
I guess I just don't see what the problem is. There was fighting between people in the US and Indians back in the day, you could argue we did the same thing. The Muslim religion did the same in the Middle Eastern region. It doesn't mean one side is more right than another.
Personally I'm fine with Israel. It belonged to the Jewish faith for thousands of years. In the Jewish faith, it STILL belonged to them, even though they were not living there. In the Jewish faith, (correct me if I am wrong Lisa) the land was given to their people by God himself. When the Creator of the Earth gives you land, its yours. None of the "You can't really own land" arguments would apply in that case. To the Jewish people, it has been and always will be theirs.
I'm not saying it is right, just pointing this out or those that may not understand.
Posted by Dobbie (Member # 3881) on :
quote:Originally posted by Geraine: The thing is, Israel is one of the most religiously tolerant countries in the world. There are many holy sites for many of the worlds religions in the country of Israel that are important to Christians, Muslims, and Jews. Israel recognizes this and takes care of these sites and allows anyone to come and visit them. As far as I know, no one is denied.
Some people are denied access to holy sites.
Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
quote:When the Creator of the Earth gives you land, it's yours.
I'm glad to hear you say so. The Creator of the Earth appeared to me in a dream this morning and gave me your house. Please move out by the first of March. You can leave the keys on the porch.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
quote:Originally posted by Lisa:
quote:Originally posted by Foust:
And people wonder why I lose my temper discussing this issue. Who the hell do you think has a better claim on that area than we do? The Arabs? Based on what?
No other country in the world has to deal with ridiculous logic-chopping about its very existence like this.
So if you do a very good job, you can spare some other poor nation down the road the same difficulty. Posted by Geraine (Member # 9913) on :
quote:Originally posted by King of Men:
quote:When the Creator of the Earth gives you land, it's yours.
I'm glad to hear you say so. The Creator of the Earth appeared to me in a dream this morning and gave me your house. Please move out by the first of March. You can leave the keys on the porch.
You take me out of context. I was pointing out that this was a common belief among the Jewish community. It does not reflect my views.
If you are joking with me, I apologize for not seeing that.
Dobbie, judging fromt he article you linked, my statement I made previously still stands. If you cannot produce proper documents, then you should be denied entry. The country needs to look out for the safety of others as well as the buildings. This is not a religious issue. I was pointing out that Israel does not discriminate religiously, not that they allowed anyone and everyone to enter any building they wanted without proper identification.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dobbie:
quote:Originally posted by Geraine: The thing is, Israel is one of the most religiously tolerant countries in the world. There are many holy sites for many of the worlds religions in the country of Israel that are important to Christians, Muslims, and Jews. Israel recognizes this and takes care of these sites and allows anyone to come and visit them. As far as I know, no one is denied.
True that. I remember when I was first in Israel reading a letter to the editor in the Jerusalem Post. It was from a Christian tourist who'd gone up to the Temple Mount. She was so overwhelmed by the spirituality of being by the site of God's Temples that she began to recite Psalms quietly.
An Arab guard saw her lips moving and brought Israeli police over, who immediately arrested her. Eventually, she managed to convince them that she was a Christian, and not a Jew, so they let her go.
Posted by Ace of Spades (Member # 2256) on :
Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
quote:You take me out of context. I was pointing out that this was a common belief among the Jewish community.
I was mocking people who believe such justifications for naked land-grabs, which indeed includes many Jews. I'm aware that you don't believe anything.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by Ace of Spades:
Not very funny, actually. Tragic is more like it.
Posted by Blayne Bradley (Member # 8565) on :
Can we ban Ace of Spades?
Posted by Armoth (Member # 4752) on :
quote:Originally posted by Blayne Bradley: Can we ban Ace of Spades?
Seconded
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
Thirded. With extreme prejudice.
Posted by Dobbie (Member # 3881) on :
There's no such thing as "thirded".
Posted by MrSquicky (Member # 1802) on :
Or, and this is just a wild suggestion here, you could stop giving the obvious troll exactly what he wants.
Posted by Foust (Member # 3043) on :
quote:I give up. Do you consider the colonial legacy to be invalid? That Isreal is less a state than other states established by force?
All states, all laws, are established by force. Pointing that out is no moral judgment; my goal in that post was to remove moral justifications (as opposed to some kind of moral analysis) from the situation. Let's not pretend that what dictates the situation is anything other than force.
Israel is trapped in a situation where it cannot justify its actions, but (at least people like Lisa) refuses to acknowledge this. All that is really open to Israel is to say "don't like it? tough luck" - not "Goddidit." The rest of us are perfectly within our rights to say that we don't like it.
quote:Who the hell do you think has a better claim on that area than we do? The Arabs? Based on what?
No other country in the world has to deal with ridiculous logic-chopping about its very existence like this.
Well, when you've slaughtered or marginalized the Palestinians to the extent that Americans slaughtered the Native Americans, then the "logic chopping" will go away for you too. Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
Hard to do in an era of cheap AK-47s and missiles.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by Foust:
quote:Who the hell do you think has a better claim on that area than we do? The Arabs? Based on what?
No other country in the world has to deal with ridiculous logic-chopping about its very existence like this.
Well, when you've slaughtered or marginalized the Palestinians to the extent that Americans slaughtered the Native Americans, then the "logic chopping" will go away for you too.
That's an imbecilic comparison. What's your basis for claiming that the Arabs have any more claim on the land than we do. Or ever did.
Posted by AvidReader (Member # 6007) on :
quote:Originally posted by Foust: Israel is trapped in a situation where it cannot justify its actions, but (at least people like Lisa) refuses to acknowledge this.
I disagree. First many Jews moved to the area and purchased land. Then they asked for a country. Then they were told no, attacked, won a war, and took it.
Or do you mean the current situation where sixty years later no one's quite figured out what to do with the Palestinians? Cause that strikes me as a bit crazy. I don't pretend it would be easy or that it wouldn't require sacrifice, but I can't understand how this could possibly be so tangled as to take an entire lifetime to figure out.
Posted by Clive Candy (Member # 11977) on :
quote:Originally posted by Lisa:
quote:Originally posted by Foust:
quote:Who the hell do you think has a better claim on that area than we do? The Arabs? Based on what?
No other country in the world has to deal with ridiculous logic-chopping about its very existence like this.
Well, when you've slaughtered or marginalized the Palestinians to the extent that Americans slaughtered the Native Americans, then the "logic chopping" will go away for you too.
That's an imbecilic comparison. What's your basis for claiming that the Arabs have any more claim on the land than we do. Or ever did.
They lived there for hundreds of years before Jews came en masse from Europe and started oppressing them.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by Clive Candy:
quote:Originally posted by Lisa:
quote:Originally posted by Foust:
quote:Who the hell do you think has a better claim on that area than we do? The Arabs? Based on what?
No other country in the world has to deal with ridiculous logic-chopping about its very existence like this.
Well, when you've slaughtered or marginalized the Palestinians to the extent that Americans slaughtered the Native Americans, then the "logic chopping" will go away for you too.
That's an imbecilic comparison. What's your basis for claiming that the Arabs have any more claim on the land than we do. Or ever did.
They lived there for hundreds of years before Jews came en masse from Europe and started oppressing them.
Crap. Jews lived there for thousands of years. Yes, many of the Jews currently living there came recently, but the same is true of the Arabs currently living there. The town of Peqiin had a Jewish populace that lived there continuously since before the Roman conquest. Arab violence finally ended that last year. The continuous Jewish presence in Hebron was ended in 1929 by the Arab massacre.
Oppressing, my arse. They didn't start migrating in because we were oppressing them; they did so because we created jobs and made it possible for them to have a higher standard of living. Had we known that this would only whet their appetites, maybe we would have done some oppressing.
Posted by Clive Candy (Member # 11977) on :
quote: Yes, many of the Jews currently living there came recently, but the same is true of the Arabs currently living there.
MOST Jews currently living there came recently. The Arab population is far more native to the land than the Jewish one is. It's sad that the Romans and Germans screwed your people but that doesn't mean you have to take revenge on the Palestinians.
quote: The town of Peqiin had a Jewish populace that lived there continuously since before the Roman conquest.
Yes, perhaps. That one town.
quote: Arab violence finally ended that last year.
Maybe it's because the Arabs didn't like how those Jews were sympathetic to Arabs getting ethnically cleansed.
quote: The continuous Jewish presence in Hebron was ended in 1929 by the Arab massacre.
Once again, perhaps it's because those Arabs didn't care for Zionism -- something that was bad news for them. Indeed, it's a surprise more massacres didn't happen considering what Zionists Jews and their backers intended.
quote: Oppressing, my arse. They didn't start migrating in because we were oppressing them; they did so because we created jobs and made it possible for them to have a higher standard of living.
Oh certainly. The land was empty and there for the taking. The Arabs only came because they were attracted to Jewish money. What Arab natives?
quote: Had we known that this would only whet their appetites, maybe we would have done some oppressing.
Wet there appetites for what? They want you to leave entirely. The "we're creating jobs!" line was a mere ruse to pacify the Arab natives before their enemy was united enough to begin taking in earnest the land they coveted.
Posted by Blayne Bradley (Member # 8565) on :
Are you supporting the massacre of Jews living in Israel Clive? A yes or a no will suffice.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
I kid. We'll have to work something out.
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)