bofors Posted November 21, 2007 Share Posted November 21, 2007 The United Nations decided that Zionism is a form of Racism in 1975: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nation...Resolution_3379 Do you think that Zionism is Racism? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bxsci(macuser) Posted November 22, 2007 Share Posted November 22, 2007 well... it was revoked. But i hate the UN anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apowerr Posted November 22, 2007 Share Posted November 22, 2007 I won't say what I voted, but I do feel that: A ) The creation of Israel was unfair B ) The Palestinians should be angry C ) Zionist do act like Jews 'deserve' special rights/treatment Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bxsci(macuser) Posted November 22, 2007 Share Posted November 22, 2007 I won't say what I voted, but I do feel that:A ) The creation of Israel was unfair B ) The Palestinians should be angry C ) Zionist do act like Jews 'deserve' special rights/treatment a) The land was British property and they had every right to give it away, the fact that they split it was completely fair. b ) the Palestinians have the right to be angry that they were moved, the fact that they (speaking in terms of the PLO here) want any non-arab organization removed from the middle east is wrong. c) Israel is a JEWISH state, it is meant to be a haven to Jews everywhere. The only "special" right Jews have over anyone else in Israel is that any Jew anywhere has the right to become a citizen of Israel and move there immediately (this right also extends to the spouses, children, children's spouses, grand-children, and grand-childrens spouses of jews) - The only thing withheld from Israeli-Arabs is being drafted into the military at 18. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apowerr Posted November 22, 2007 Share Posted November 22, 2007 a) The land was British property and they had every right to give it away, the fact that they split it was completely fair.b ) the Palestinians have the right to be angry that they were moved, the fact that they (speaking in terms of the PLO here) want any non-arab organization removed from the middle east is wrong. c) Israel is a JEWISH state, it is meant to be a haven to Jews everywhere. The only "special" right Jews have over anyone else in Israel is that any Jew anywhere has the right to become a citizen of Israel and move there immediately (this right also extends to the spouses, children, children's spouses, grand-children, and grand-childrens spouses of jews) - The only thing withheld from Israeli-Arabs is being drafted into the military at 18. A ) No matter how the land was owned etc, If I was a Palestinian I would feel it was unfair. B ) Yes, Palestinians like many Muslims are far too radical C ) Even before WWII Zionism was around, seeking a Jewish state. Zionism was coming from the western world, which tends to be secular. States based around one religion, and established to meet the needs of one religious people are not the norm (in Europe). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alessandro17 Posted November 22, 2007 Share Posted November 22, 2007 A ) The creation of Israel was unfairB ) The Palestinians should be angry C ) Zionist do act like Jews 'deserve' special rights/treatment I agree, absolutely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Superhai Posted November 22, 2007 Share Posted November 22, 2007 I am tired like i think the entire world is of the Israel/palestine conflict. And zionism is a very wide term, and some have definitley rascist elements, but some are just a fight for their own religion to have their own country. But I would add a few facts first. The british mandate was meant to be temporary and britain received it after the peace treaty with the ottomans (which was divided) after world war one. They were supposed to administer it until the inhabitants was able to administer the areas alone. They were split into transjordan and westernmost area was undecided but the bristish balfour declaration stipulated a draft for a "jewish homeland" based on "historic documents" which was the bible. At that time there were around 20000 jews and 700000 arabs in the area. The inhabitants rejected the declaration as that area had been under arab control for the last 12 centuries. Same time a secret document (sykes-picot) was leaked by lenin as the russians was rejected from that document following of the revolution. That document stated how french, british and russia would occupie the soon defeated ottoman kingdom. This was opposing the open letters that british made with the arabs (mcmahon-hussain) that procalimed that great britain was prepared to recognize the independence of the majority arab regions. Later Churchill issued statements that further clarified britains stand, and these were seen as further broken promises, lies and shifting position from the british by the arabs. Why would the british want a jewish homeland? In the end of the 19 century alot of jews came to britian from russia. And one easy way to "get rid of them" was to support zionism and give them their own region away from britain. It is interesting to note that the only jew in the british cabinet after the WWI opposed the balfour declaration, because it would make it antisemittic and also would mean that jews outside of palestine would be regarded as foreigners, and nonjews in palestine would be foreigners, and lastly it would cause hatred from the muslim world. Ok, I realize this a bit to shortned version, and I suggest that one reads those letters, declarations and statements made during and after the WWI about the ottoman state and the mandate of palestine. It is basically about how bad politicians and poor judgements have made an impact on the world. You find the essence to why the present arabs are distrusting the modern western world and of the israel/palestine conflict. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bxsci(macuser) Posted November 22, 2007 Share Posted November 22, 2007 A ) No matter how the land was owned etc, If I was a Palestinian I would feel it was unfair.B ) Yes, Palestinians like many Muslims are far too radical C ) Even before WWII Zionism was around, seeking a Jewish state. Zionism was coming from the western world, which tends to be secular. States based around one religion, and established to meet the needs of one religious people are not the norm (in Europe). Yah ok, the west is secular, right.... out of all the countries in Europe there are only 7 that do not have a state religion. and Zionism goes way way back, but what does that have to do with this argument. I could say that the other area considered to be the new Israel was Argentina, but that wouldnt have much effect of anything. I am tired like i think the entire world is of the Israel/palestine conflict. And zionism is a very wide term, and some have definitley rascist elements, but some are just a fight for their own religion to have their own country. But I would add a few facts first. The british mandate was meant to be temporary and britain received it after the peace treaty with the ottomans (which was divided) after world war one. They were supposed to administer it until the inhabitants was able to administer the areas alone. They were split into transjordan and westernmost area was undecided but the bristish balfour declaration stipulated a draft for a "jewish homeland" based on "historic documents" which was the bible. At that time there were around 20000 jews and 700000 arabs in the area. The inhabitants rejected the declaration as that area had been under arab control for the last 12 centuries. Same time a secret document (sykes-picot) was leaked by lenin as the russians was rejected from that document following of the revolution. That document stated how french, british and russia would occupie the soon defeated ottoman kingdom. This was opposing the open letters that british made with the arabs (mcmahon-hussain) that procalimed that great britain was prepared to recognize the independence of the majority arab regions. Later Churchill issued statements that further clarified britains stand, and these were seen as further broken promises, lies and shifting position from the british by the arabs. Why would the british want a jewish homeland? In the end of the 19 century alot of jews came to britian from russia. And one easy way to "get rid of them" was to support zionism and give them their own region away from britain. It is interesting to note that the only jew in the british cabinet after the WWI opposed the balfour declaration, because it would make it antisemittic and also would mean that jews outside of palestine would be regarded as foreigners, and nonjews in palestine would be foreigners, and lastly it would cause hatred from the muslim world. Ok, I realize this a bit to shortned version, and I suggest that one reads those letters, declarations and statements made during and after the WWI about the ottoman state and the mandate of palestine. It is basically about how bad politicians and poor judgements have made an impact on the world. You find the essence to why the present arabs are distrusting the modern western world and of the israel/palestine conflict. The only reason the brits (or rather the English in this case) allowed the Jews in in the first place, under cromwell, was because the Dutch let the jews in and they were doing amazing economy wise. So of course they didnt want the jews now that the industrial revolution was long underway. However what i do admire the Brits for is that they did just say "Get the {censored} out" as so many had before, rather they actually gave the jews land to live, granted it was the {censored}tyist land in the empire but none the less land. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
socal swimmer Posted November 22, 2007 Share Posted November 22, 2007 obsession over religion is so pointless. Religions differ on such insignificant points, yet people get so crazy and angry over these differences that they feel the need to steal land, and blow each other up, and discriminate, and denounce each other, and fight "holy wars" Why can't people realize that even though their religions say different things, they all have the same general values at heart? it would make the world so much better... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alessandro17 Posted November 22, 2007 Share Posted November 22, 2007 @ socal swimmer For once I find myself in total agreement with you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Superhai Posted November 22, 2007 Share Posted November 22, 2007 Why can't people realize that even though their religions say different things, they all have the same general values at heart? The problem is... that leading figures quickly found out the power religion have on people, therefore are many religious text been interpreted and/or adapted to the leading class' wish to control the peasants. Therefore it is so important to teach people the skill to read and make their own judgment from these texts as almost each and everyone of them are teaching that your path is to live in peace with the one around you and do good deeds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bofors Posted November 22, 2007 Author Share Posted November 22, 2007 I am tired like i think the entire world is of the Israel/palestine conflict. Ditto, the so-called "peace process" is a joke. The US could force Israel to fairly settle with the Palestinians at any time, it doesn't and this conflict goes on indefinitely. There are two reasons for this: (1) The powerful Jewish lobby and their control of US media. (2) The US Military-Industrial-Complex profits from war and instability in the Middle East. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apowerr Posted November 22, 2007 Share Posted November 22, 2007 (1) The powerful Jewish lobby and their control of US media. (2) The US Military-Industrial-Complex profits from war and instability in the Middle East. Wow, this is going to get nasty Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bxsci(macuser) Posted November 23, 2007 Share Posted November 23, 2007 Ditto, the so-called "peace process" is a joke. The US could force Israel to fairly settle with the Palestinians at any time, it doesn't and this conflict goes on indefinitely. There are two reasons for this: (1) The powerful Jewish lobby and their control of US media. (2) The US Military-Industrial-Complex profits from war and instability in the Middle East. The US could just as easily invade gaza and the west bank and make the PLO stfu and its not quite the "jewish lobby" its that Israel supplies equipment for US troops in the middle east as well as specific supplies all over the world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Superhai Posted November 23, 2007 Share Posted November 23, 2007 The US could just as easily invade gaza and the west bank and make the PLO stfu While that is true. It would most likely turn the opinion in every european country (maybe except UK) against USA, Russia would agree to an alliance with some arab countries, most muslim country (except most likely Saudis and Kuwait) would declare war directly or indirectly on USA, and Syria and Iran would have an excuse to attack Israel and Lebanon. Maybe not overnight, but those are the longterm consequences. To make "PLO stfu" they would be required to do a mass genocide. While it is true that Israel produce some gears for the US military it is not so that they can't be without. USA is still supporting the Israelis with military and monetary support, and that is largely a one way business. And why? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bofors Posted November 24, 2007 Author Share Posted November 24, 2007 There are two reasons for this: (1) The powerful Jewish lobby and their control of US media. "Peace, Propaganda & The Promised Land": Through the voices of scholars, media critics, peace activists, religious figures, and Middle East experts, Peace, Propaganda & the Promised Land carefully analyzes and explains how--through the use of language, framing and context--the Israeli occupation of the West Bank and Gaza remains hidden in the news media, and Israeli colonization of the occupied terrorities appears to be a defensive move rather than an offensive one. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eCL6WdnuNp4 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mo2HW4T7wK4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bofors Posted November 25, 2007 Author Share Posted November 25, 2007 BBC/Oxford DOHA Debates - The Pro Israel Lobby (AIPAC) At the latest Doha Debate held at the prestigious Oxford Union in the United Kingdom on May 1st, two-thirds of the student audience approved a motion claiming that Israel's supporters are stifling Western debate about Israel's actions. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7985100635045440998 Documentary 'The Israel lobby - The influence of AIPAC on US Foreign Policy' (--English version--) An episode of the Dutch documentary program "Tegenlicht" about the Israel lobby in the USA. This new documentary (April 2007) was created as a result of the controversy created by Mearsheimer and Walt's "The Israel Lobby" article. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2894821400057137878 Republican Paul Findley Dares to Speak Out -- Again ! - AIPAC Exposed Paul Findley served on Capitol Hill for 22 years. During this time, he had many encounters with Israel's lobby, which exhibited considerable control over Congressional decisions with respect to Israel and the Mid-East. He speaks of treachery and treason among the highest seats of the land, and how many Congressmen put Israel's interests ahead that of America's. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3252642434022358005 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alessandro17 Posted November 25, 2007 Share Posted November 25, 2007 Absolutely shocking. Although to me, as a European, it sounds pretty familiar. Do you want to bet that somebody here will say that Paul Findley "is not a reliable source" ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MilitantHippie Posted November 27, 2007 Share Posted November 27, 2007 The entire scenario is - naturally much more complex than it's being presented by OP. No serious person would boil zionism down to something as simple as an yes or no answer. What's important to keep in mind is, that, the Israeli's are not to blame. The majority of the population support the Peace movement which extends from the far left to centre-right, despite the fact that the Israeli government has a official censorship department which is responsible for 'creative' history-writing, i.e. removing the green line from official elementary schoolbooks and has established an agreement between the I.D.F and most media outlets(If I'm correct, Haaretz isn't one) that allows the I.D.F to view recordings and the like from missions, and discard them if it is determined that it would be detrimental to the public image of the I.D.F. A news outlet broke this agreement a couple of years ago and a video was released where I.D.F soldiers are seen raiding the homes of palestinian civilians and uttering hateful comments towards palestinians and islam afterwards. I believe there is some footage of the use of human shielding by the I.D.F as well. This video can be found on YouTube and others. I know some Israeli's, and I must admit, that most of them have a very disorted image of Israeli history, not to mention the history of the region itself. An Israeli girl I know is completely sure that the Phillistines drove the Israelis(Simple tribes at the time) out of Palestine 2000 years ago, and as a logical conclusion 'they just want they're land' back. What she fails to realize here, is that the two tribes lived less than 20 miles from eachother, making them no ethnically different. What further cements the irony of the statement, is that she is an ashkenazi jew, which means she actually has no real connection to 'the tribe' and In reality is the closest thing to a goy(gentile) that a jew can get. Note: Almost the entire government and members of the knesset(Israeli parliament) are ashkenazi jews. Using that sort of logic, Britain should have America, Australia, India, Hong Kong and many other parts of the world back. Let's see what Annapolis has to bring(nothing I presume). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OryHara Posted November 28, 2007 Share Posted November 28, 2007 I think its funny. Racism. Freedom of speech & expression. Liberals want to take it away from the right. {censored} marriage. The same. Its always been a state issue. The right wants to take it away from the left. However. Marriage is not up to the state, or the fed. Its up to you. It think its the sickest {censored} thing on the planet, but thats your decision. Not the feds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts