Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Creation of Israel.
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234 10>
Author
  Share Topic Share Topic  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
pebbles View Drop Down
Baron
Baron


Joined: 12-Oct-2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 409 		  Quote pebbles Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Creation of Israel.
    Posted: 12-Mar-2009 at 13:02
Originally posted by xristar

 
but it's true, most of Israel's Jewish population is of Arab origin in fact,expelled from their lands.
 
 
 
 
They're regard as " Oriental " Jews.Many years ago,I've read there is a division between European Jews & Oriental Jews.
 
 
 
 
Back to Top
xristar View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 05-Nov-2005
Location: Greece
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1028 		  Quote xristar Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Mar-2009 at 23:34
Have not paricipated in the thread, but it's true, most of Israel's jewish population is of arab origin in fact, expelled from their lands. Though question arise whther theu'd be expelled if Israel was created or not.
(I' going to do some digging in the thread right now propably, before I continue) 

Defeat allows no explanation
Victory needs none.
It insults the dead when you treat life carelessly.
Back to Top
eaglecap View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar
Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 15-Feb-2005
Location: ArizonaUSA
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3959 		  Quote eaglecap Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Mar-2009 at 22:45
Originally posted by Zaitsev

Let us not forget that it was, quite honestly, the fault of the Jewish population of Judea that they lost the territory in the first place. While the Jews certainly did suffer, that does not entitle them to any land. The Jewish population were, in fact, not really a Jewish population. They were citizens of Germany, Poland, France, Russia. They all had a country to return to. Dividing nations along religious/cultural grounds is something Western nations would typically describe as racist and totalitarian.


This is true to a point but many were refugees from Arab countries.
What about the 1 million Jews who were forced to leave Arab lands?

From youtube:



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iuq3GnOXXjg&eurl=http://www.jihadwatch.org/
Λοιπόν, αδελφοί και οι συμπολίτες και οι στρατιώτες, να θυμάστε αυτό ώστε μνημόσυνο σας, φήμη και ελευθερία σας θα ε
Back to Top
pebbles View Drop Down
Baron
Baron


Joined: 12-Oct-2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 409 		  Quote pebbles Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Feb-2009 at 09:15
Originally posted by Zaitsev

 


The "Jewish People" do not need a homeland.
 

 
 
Whether there is one or not,many Jews seem not wanting to live there as evident by Jew Diaspora still exists LOL ... why !?
 
They have been and still continue to whine about being prosecuted Ouch ( which is certainly true ) in adopted lands for thousand years,but they surely don't want to go back to their homeland.Why ?!
 
 
 
 
 
 
Back to Top
beorna View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar

Joined: 03-Dec-2007
Location: Germany
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 925 		  Quote beorna Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-Feb-2009 at 00:02

I was wondering about the high percentage of Jews we got on 16th of January from Hebrewtext.

The main immigration of Jews towards Ottoman Palestine began after 1880. The amount of Jews in 1880 was around 15000 Ottoman Jews and perhaps an estimated amount of 10000 foreign Jews. All in all there lived about 460000 people in Palestine, including about 43000 Christians.

In 1850 there lived 380000 people in Palestine. Just 13000 were Jews, 27000 were Christians but 340000 were Muslimes or Druze.

In 1914 from 720000 inhabitants there were just 39000 Ottoman Jews. The amount of jewish foreigners is difficult to say. Especially jewish sources claim it very high. Trustful sources give just about 20000 foreigners.
Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
King
King

Suspended

Joined: 06-Dec-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7035 		  Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24-Jan-2009 at 14:57
Originally posted by Leonidas

 oh geez

Originally posted by gcle2003

Originally posted by Leonidas


Proof
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_Return

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_National_Fund

look at how the treat Arab citizens, not the formal law but in reality
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_citizens_of_Israel
None of that is religious. Jews are favoured because they're Jews, not because of their religion. Atheist Jews have risen to top positions in Israel. (see my other post)


They're all Jewish, or at least believed to be. That's an ethnic distinction. They do NOT all believe in Judaism - in fact only a minority do. So it's not religious. The US is a far more religious country, de facto, than Israel is. The US only permits, de facto, Christian Presidents. On the other hand Obama can be president of the US, but could never be of Israel (again, de facto).

your splitting hairs in religiousness and religious affiliation.
It's a mighty big hair. There's a Church of England, but that doesn't mean I belong to it, or even share any of its tenets.
Yes you can have secular Jews and full on hardcore types, but their uniqueness is religious.
They're not unique in the first place.
There is no such thing as one type of ethnic Jew, they are many types but they share the same religious tradition/s.
You mean their ancestors followed Judaic teaching at some point? Possible I suppose, but then it's also possoible they can trace their ancestry back to Palestine. Both are ultimately unjustified assertions.
 
And again, most of my ancestors over the last 500 years were Church of England. Before that they were Roman Catholics. What's that supposed to mean about my religious beliefs (or lack of them)?
Now they may see themselves as ethnic 'via the mother' but they seem to struggle with just that definition alone. Same ethnic yet they come from Africa, India and M/East and treat each other differently by race.

lets dig a bit deeper

what is a jew according to the law of return


Definition

4B. For the purposes of this Law, "Jew" means a person who was born of a Jewish mother or has become converted to Judaism and who is not a member of another religion."

So, contrary to what you're trying to assert, the Law of Return does no bar Jews who do not practise Judaism (which is most of the Israeli citizenry) from citizenship. I'll leave in the rest of what you say, but on this point it's irrelevant.
 
Compare it for instance to Germany law of return, which is only open to persons of Germanic descent. Or Britain's for that matter, that only grants automatic right of residence to people with a British grandparent.
 
And note too that all this is only about automatic citizenship. Just like in other countries, people can become Israeli citizens with no ethnic or religious requirement through naturalisation, mush as with any other country.
 
 
Link

then stuff like this happens

Messianic Jews are not entitled to automatic Israeli citizenship, Israel's Supreme Court has ruled, concluding that their belief that Jesus was the Messiah makes them Christians instead of Jews.

...........................

In their ruling, the Israeli justices rejected this view. A Source of Tension

''Messianic Jews attempt to reverse the wheels of history by 2,000 years,'' Justice Elon wrote in a passage quoted by the Israeli newspapers. ''But the Jewish people has decided during the 2,000 years of its history'' that Messianic Jews ''do not belong to the Jewish nation and have no right to force themselves on it. Those who believe in Jesus are, in fact, Christians.''

The law in question has been a frequent source of tension between secular and religious Jews in Israel.

The main quarrel is over attempts by religious leaders to amend the law to recognize only converts to Judaism by Orthodox rabbis. Such a change would make it more difficult for many American and Canadian Jews who belong to the Reform and Conservative streams to immigrate.


 NYT 1989

they they seem to get a break eventaully in 2008

Myers told CBN News, "The bottom line is that if your father is Jewish or if any of your grandparents are Jewish from your father's side - even if you're a Messianic Jew - you can immigrate to Israel under the law of return or under the law of citizenship if you marry an Israeli citizen."

Myers also told CBNNews.com, "This is yet another battle won in our war to establish equality in Israel for the Messianic Jewish community just like every other legitimate stream of faith within the Jewish world."

Many of the applicants received letters saying they would not receive citizenship because they "commit missionary activity." One was told that because she "committed missionary activity," she was "acting against the interests of the State of Israel and against the Jewish people."

link

sometimes the ethnic but doesnt hold water or get you past the gates.

first lines of their declaration if independence, my bolding


ERETZ-ISRAEL [(Hebrew) - the Land of Israel, Palestine] was the birthplace of the Jewish people. Here their spiritual, religious and political identity was shaped. Here they first attained to statehood, created cultural values of national and universal significance and gave to the world the eternal Book of Books.
Link

If you want more proof of the religoius angle look at marraiges in isreal.
 
Most people in Britain get married in church. That's about all they go there for. It certainly doesn't make them religious.


.
The key to why you are wrong there is 'in tandem with the US'. The Saudis are interested in exporting their brand of Islam to the Muslim world, but, despite the rhetoric, they've never nbeen particularly aggressive toward Israel - partly because of the US alliance, but basically because the Saudis and Israel don't have much to quarrel about.
Yeah I agree they don't have much to quarrel about, The Saudi monarchy are more concerned about spending 'their' money and staying in power, you might not get such an attitude amongst its people. Two gloves for each hand of the US, hmm makes them less dangerous? surely not.  Isreal/US/Wahabi were eye to eye in using these very dangerous proxies and they came back to bite them on the arse at roughly the same time. Yet they point to Syria or Iran as being some how special or unique at this game? If you train a dog to attack and it mauls you once it gets the taste, you were at the very least partly mauled by your own action. not someone elses.

This is about percetion not reality. Syrian ideology is not religious or messianic, modern compared to the arab puppet states (which may be perceived as 'aggressive).
 

 Syria wants the Golan back and has made overtures, it is isreal thats not that interested.
Exactly. Israel doesn't have any Saudi territory, and the Saudis don't have any Israeli territory (or even any claims on the West Bank). Egypt and Jordan have made peace, Lebanon's too small to worry about, and that leaves Syria as the only real opponent.
hang on who being aggressive? or im missing something.
You're not missing something, you're making stuff up. I didn't say Syria was aggressive. I just said, in response to someone's specific question, Syria was more of an enemy than Saudi Arabia. You seem to agree with me on that.
 Peace overtues vs occupation.

I didnt say Syria and Israel were at loggerheads, merely that Syria was a bigger threat to Israel (potentially) than Saudi Arabia. And vice versa. Israel is the only threat to Syria around.
 
Turkey is a threat to Syria.
I wasn't aware of that. It's hardly very relevant though it does work to strike Turkey off the list of Israel's enemies (it used of course to be friendly with Israel anyway).
 
Syria is hardly a threat to Isreal (or Turkey)  if it prefers peace talks and has more pragmatic leadership than our media suggest. Bush is gone watch this space.

The biggest potential conventional threat is Egypt.
 
Not currently. In my original post I said Egypt was at one time until it saw sense. So far you haven't said one thing to go against my statement that Syria is more of an enemy to Israel than Saudi Arabia, or indeed any other country at the moment.
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24-Jan-2009 at 06:09
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eQoWJt5wfJ8

Pretty good documentary - and case in point to the treatment of non-Jews within Israel.
Back to Top
ArmenianSurvival View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1460 		  Quote ArmenianSurvival Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23-Jan-2009 at 20:34

Originally posted by gcle2003

The vast majority of the original Zionists were secular, many if not most of them Marxist: certainly only a few of them were Judaic believers.

 
This is very true. The atheist/agnostic Zionists made up the majority of the movement, including the most influential names like Herzl, Weizmann, Pinsker, etc. Its interesting when you read their views on religion--- they call rabbis "peddlers of influence" who will aid them in convincing people to move back to Palestine, even though they themselves did not believe in any "holy" or "divine" aspect of Palestine. They simply chose Palestine because they would be able to more easily trick people into going there based on vague religious references. There is a long story about how they chose Palestine--- Herzl was actually bullied into agreeing on Palestine by east European Zionists. Herzl was more in favor of Argentina. Actually if I remember correctly Herzl favored any option over Palestine.
 
You know what--- I'll try to find Zionist quotes where they talk about religion, and where they talk about locations other than Palestine--- I'll even try to find the quotes where European Zionists visited Jerusalem and did nothing but complain about it. These quotes are very revealing about the movement and how they used religious sentiment to trick the world and to trick many Jews into joining Zionism, which is a de-facto God-less movement.
 
 
Originally posted by Omar al Hashim

No its not. That's the whole point of Israel, and the whole reason Palestine was chosen. Because in Jewish belief it is the land given by God to the Jews. It doesn't matter in the slightest whether the zionists in the '40s were religious or not. They saw Palestine as their land because of their religious mythology. That's the whole point!
 
You're essentially right but you have the order backwards. Atheist/agnostic Zionists agreed on Palestine as the sight of a Jewish state simply because they would be able to herd the masses of Jews who were already settled into their respective countries--- they did NOT choose Palestine because of any religious significance--- if it was somehow easier to make world Jewry move to Argentina, they would have chosen Argentina (they almost did too).
 
Actually, Palestine alone would not have convinced Zionists to get up and move, since most Zionists were not religious. This brings us to Zionism's lust for antisemitism: European antisemitism was, according to Herzl, the greatest ally of Zionism. Case in point: Israelis were never a majority in Palestine until after the Holocaust. Even the previous Zionist migrations to Palestine were mostly made possible because of antisemitic pogroms in Europe, mostly eastern Europe, which is why it was eastern European Jews who bullied Herzl into choosing Palestine, because east European Jews lived in Jewish communities which were virtually closed off to the rest of their respective countries. They were still mostly atheist/agnostic, but their communities were closed off and the resulting antisemitism made them more of a nation than their religion did. Antisemitism helping Zionism--- a common theme in the movement and attitude of its followers.
 
 
Originally posted by Omar al Hashim

They didn't sit down in 1897 and decide to invade Palestine for no reason. They has always been waiting to 'go back to the holy land'. In the 1760s European Jews were all about to follow Sabbatai Zevi to Palestine until he swapped from Jewish Messiah to Muslim convert unexpectedly.
 
In 1897 they still had not decided on a location. That happened in the early 20th century, in 1904 I believe, when Herzl was bullied into changing his agenda.
 
As I already mentioned, the "return to Palestine" was never a yearning among world Jewry, it was another fabrication of God-less Zionism. If there was such a yearning to return, how come when Palestine was part of the Ottoman empire for centuries, most Ottoman Jews chose to live in places like Constantinople, Salonika, Alexandria, etc? Palestine was right under their noses and there was nothing stopping them from moving there for centuries--- yet, at the time of the Balfour declaration (1917) Jews made up less than 10% of Palestine's population with a mere 55,000 souls (compared to 700,000+ Palestinian Arabs). To compare this figure to other parts of the Ottoman empire, Jews in Salonika (Thessaloniki) made up over 50% of the population in the early 20th century with over 60,000 Jews living there (not counting crypto-Jews). Even if we ignore all Ottoman regions and only focus on Salonika and Palestine, only the minority of Jews lived in Palestine, at a time when they were free to move there.
 
 
Originally posted by Omar al Hashim

Playing with semantics. Modern Judaism is a ethno-religious identity. You can't separate the religious and ethnic components. An ethiopian Jew and a European Jew share nothing but religion, and a common claim on ancestory even if one or both of them may not be very religious.
 
So if 2 people, one African and another European, have nothing in common besides a religion that their grandparents believed in, which they themselves do not believe, then that automatically qualifies them as part of the same ethno-religious entity? By this logic we can fabricate nations out of thin air (as is already the case).
 
So I can claim to be part of the same ethno-religious group as an Ethiopian simply because we've both been baptised in eastern Churches? Or maybe I'm part of the same group as an Assyrian living in Iran for the same reason, even though I'm neither Assyrian nor Iranian? This is a very inconsistant way to identify nations. If I was a devout Christian, then maybe I can claim to be of the same entity as a devout Ethiopian Christian--- a very shaky claim, but it could work. Likewise Jews from different areas have virtually nothing in common if they are not devout Judaists. If most Zionists do not practice Judaism, then it disqualifies them as part of a "Jewish" or "Israeli" nation, or any nation for that matter, when you consider they each have different native tongues, different habits, different cuisines, different attitudes, each shaped by the country in which they were raised.


Edited by ArmenianSurvival - 23-Jan-2009 at 20:41
Mass Murderers Agree: Gun Control Works!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_Resistance

Քիչ ենք բայց Հայ ենք։
Back to Top
Leonidas View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar

Joined: 01-Oct-2005
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4613 		  Quote Leonidas Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23-Jan-2009 at 13:19
that is true there is no tensions there anymore. AKP at least is trying to balance that whole legacy coldwar anglo-zionist-turk threesome thing with some bridge building diplomacy. Not hard, the other two should try it.

ontop of all of that Iran offered to help the US in Afghanistan agianst the Taliban/al qeada powers and were re-buffed. Its was the Sauds and UAE that has to cut ties after 9/11. So all this 'aggressor' stuff is just code for independant policy/interests.
Back to Top
Beylerbeyi View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: Cuba
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1355 		  Quote Beylerbeyi Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23-Jan-2009 at 12:50
Yes. Turkey-Syria relations have improved greatly within the last decade (especially after AKP government). Turkey is mediating peace talks between Israel and Syria as well. I think it is not impossible that Syria may agree to peace in return for Golan like Egypt did. The problem was the neo-cons had Syria on their hit list. Luckily they frack up everything in Iraq and Afghanistan as well as at home, so Syria is safe now.     
Back to Top
Leonidas View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar

Joined: 01-Oct-2005
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4613 		  Quote Leonidas Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23-Jan-2009 at 11:35
 oh geez

Originally posted by gcle2003

Originally posted by Leonidas


Proof
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_Return

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_National_Fund

look at how the treat Arab citizens, not the formal law but in reality
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_citizens_of_Israel
None of that is religious. Jews are favoured because they're Jews, not because of their religion. Atheist Jews have risen to top positions in Israel. (see my other post)


They're all Jewish, or at least believed to be. That's an ethnic distinction. They do NOT all believe in Judaism - in fact only a minority do. So it's not religious. The US is a far more religious country, de facto, than Israel is. The US only permits, de facto, Christian Presidents. On the other hand Obama can be president of the US, but could never be of Israel (again, de facto).

your splitting hairs in religiousness and religious affiliation. Yes you can have secular Jews and full on hardcore types, but their uniqueness is religious. There is no such thing as one type of ethnic Jew, they are many types but they share the same religious tradition/s. Now they may see themselves as ethnic 'via the mother' but they seem to struggle with just that definition alone. Same ethnic yet they come from Africa, India and M/East and treat each other differently by race.

lets dig a bit deeper

what is a jew according to the law of return


Definition

4B. For the purposes of this Law, "Jew" means a person who was born of a Jewish mother or has become converted to Judaism and who is not a member of another religion."

Link

then stuff like this happens

Messianic Jews are not entitled to automatic Israeli citizenship, Israel's Supreme Court has ruled, concluding that their belief that Jesus was the Messiah makes them Christians instead of Jews.

...........................

In their ruling, the Israeli justices rejected this view. A Source of Tension

''Messianic Jews attempt to reverse the wheels of history by 2,000 years,'' Justice Elon wrote in a passage quoted by the Israeli newspapers. ''But the Jewish people has decided during the 2,000 years of its history'' that Messianic Jews ''do not belong to the Jewish nation and have no right to force themselves on it. Those who believe in Jesus are, in fact, Christians.''

The law in question has been a frequent source of tension between secular and religious Jews in Israel.

The main quarrel is over attempts by religious leaders to amend the law to recognize only converts to Judaism by Orthodox rabbis. Such a change would make it more difficult for many American and Canadian Jews who belong to the Reform and Conservative streams to immigrate.


 NYT 1989

they they seem to get a break eventaully in 2008

Myers told CBN News, "The bottom line is that if your father is Jewish or if any of your grandparents are Jewish from your father's side - even if you're a Messianic Jew - you can immigrate to Israel under the law of return or under the law of citizenship if you marry an Israeli citizen."

Myers also told CBNNews.com, "This is yet another battle won in our war to establish equality in Israel for the Messianic Jewish community just like every other legitimate stream of faith within the Jewish world."

Many of the applicants received letters saying they would not receive citizenship because they "commit missionary activity." One was told that because she "committed missionary activity," she was "acting against the interests of the State of Israel and against the Jewish people."

link

sometimes the ethnic but doesnt hold water or get you past the gates.

first lines of their declaration if independence, my bolding


ERETZ-ISRAEL [(Hebrew) - the Land of Israel, Palestine] was the birthplace of the Jewish people. Here their spiritual, religious and political identity was shaped. Here they first attained to statehood, created cultural values of national and universal significance and gave to the world the eternal Book of Books.
Link

If you want more proof of the religoius angle look at marraiges in isreal.

.
The key to why you are wrong there is 'in tandem with the US'. The Saudis are interested in exporting their brand of Islam to the Muslim world, but, despite the rhetoric, they've never nbeen particularly aggressive toward Israel - partly because of the US alliance, but basically because the Saudis and Israel don't have much to quarrel about.
Yeah I agree they don't have much to quarrel about, The Saudi monarchy are more concerned about spending 'their' money and staying in power, you might not get such an attitude amongst its people. Two gloves for each hand of the US, hmm makes them less dangerous? surely not.  Isreal/US/Wahabi were eye to eye in using these very dangerous proxies and they came back to bite them on the arse at roughly the same time. Yet they point to Syria or Iran as being some how special or unique at this game? If you train a dog to attack and it mauls you once it gets the taste, you were at the very least partly mauled by your own action. not someone elses.

This is about percetion not reality. Syrian ideology is not religious or messianic, modern compared to the arab puppet states (which may be perceived as 'aggressive).
 

 Syria wants the Golan back and has made overtures, it is isreal thats not that interested.
Exactly. Israel doesn't have any Saudi territory, and the Saudis don't have any Israeli territory (or even any claims on the West Bank). Egypt and Jordan have made peace, Lebanon's too small to worry about, and that leaves Syria as the only real opponent.
hang on who being aggressive? or im missing something. Peace overtues vs occupation.

I didnt say Syria and Israel were at loggerheads, merely that Syria was a bigger threat to Israel (potentially) than Saudi Arabia. And vice versa. Israel is the only threat to Syria around.
 
Turkey is a threat to Syria. Syria is hardly a threat to Isreal (or Turkey)  if it prefers peace talks and has more pragmatic leadership than our media suggest. Bush is gone watch this space.

The biggest potential conventional threat is Egypt.


Edited by Leonidas - 23-Jan-2009 at 11:38
Back to Top
Beylerbeyi View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: Cuba
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1355 		  Quote Beylerbeyi Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23-Jan-2009 at 10:49
In the 1760s European Jews were all about to follow Sabbatai Zevi to Palestine until he swapped from Jewish Messiah to Muslim convert unexpectedly.
Unexpectedly? Well, let me put it this way, the Ottomans 'made him an offer he can't refuse'.  
Back to Top
Omar al Hashim View Drop Down
King
King

Suspended

Joined: 05-Jan-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5697 		  Quote Omar al Hashim Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23-Jan-2009 at 06:26
Originally posted by gcle2003

Originally posted by Omar al Hashim

Originally posted by gcle2003

How can it be a religious state when the large majority of the population don't believe in the religion (or any other, from the polls I've seen)? Israel has religious courts, but they're subject to control by the secular ones: what Arab countries is that true of? (I accept there probably are some.)

Because it was created in order to replicate a religious myth, for a religious group,

That is quite simply and factually untrue. The vast majority of the original Zionists were secular, many if not most of them Marxist: certainly only a few of them were Judaic believers.

because 'God gave them the land', and it serves that particular religious group over and above all others.

'God gave them the land' was never a Zionist slogan: it only recently emerged as a slogan at all. The majority strand of Zionism, represented by Ben Guron, was socialist, indeed Marxist, while there was strong 'centrist' liberal (in the English sense) faction represented by Weizmann, and even Jabotinsky's right wing was more fervently nationalist than religious. Wikipedia seems to be down at the moment so I can't suggest anything there but http://arts.monash.edu.au/publications/eras/edition-7/dubnovarticle.php
has an interesting discussion of Zionism centred on the British liberal Isaiah Berlin.

No its not. That's the whole point of Israel, and the whole reason Palestine was chosen. Because in Jewish belief it is the land given by God to the Jews. It doesn't matter in the slightest whether the zionists in the '40s were religious or not. They saw Palestine as their land because of their religious mythology. That's the whole point!

They didn't sit down in 1897 and decide to invade Palestine for no reason. They has always been waiting to 'go back to the holy land'. In the 1760s European Jews were all about to follow Sabbatai Zevi to Palestine until he swapped from Jewish Messiah to Muslim convert unexpectedly.

The Russians created a Jewish homeland but that never attracted millions of migrants. Because most Jews weren't interested in a homeland in Sibera. They wanted Palestine.
None of that is religious. Jews are favoured because they're Jews, not because of their religion. Atheist Jews have risen to top positions in Israel. (see my other post)

Playing with semantics. Modern Judaism is a ethno-religious identity. You can't separate the religious and ethnic components. An ethiopian Jew and a European Jew share nothing but religion, and a common claim on ancestory even if one or both of them may not be very religious.
The way people identify themselves does not fall easily into ethnic, nationalistic, or religious boxes.

How many sources would you like?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Zionism/firstcong.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabbatai_Zevi#Sabbatai_adopts_Islam
http://www.zionism-israel.com/his/Jerusalem_history.htm


Edited by Omar al Hashim - 23-Jan-2009 at 06:29
Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
King
King

Suspended

Joined: 06-Dec-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7035 		  Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22-Jan-2009 at 21:34
ArmenianSurvival's quotes are very interesting. Not one refers to God or Judaism or religion at all, except for one mention that Palestinians may oppose the Zionist movement because they are Muslim.
 
Originally posted by Leonidas

Originally posted by gcle2003

Originally posted by Leonidas

Nor is another religious state (Israel) ....
How can it be a religious state when the large majority of the population don't believe in the religion (or any other, from the polls I've seen)? Israel has religious courts, but they're subject to control by the secular ones: what Arab countries is that true of? (I accept there probably are some.)

its a state that is defined by its religion before anything else, it serves the Jews above all other groups. Citizenship is one thing but being Jewish gives you full rights and benefits.

Proof
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_Return

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_National_Fund

look at how the treat Arab citizens, not the formal law but in reality
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_citizens_of_Israel
None of that is religious. Jews are favoured because they're Jews, not because of their religion. Atheist Jews have risen to top positions in Israel. (see my other post)


This is essentially an ethnic/tribal/secular issue over land, not a religious one except for a few on either side.
well is being Jewish an ethnic thing or religious? maybe its a bit of both, but it is certainly not just ethnic. considering the broad range of backgrounds the Jewish immigrants have come from.
They're all Jewish, or at least believed to be. That's an ethnic distinction. They do NOT all believe in Judaism - in fact only a minority do. So it's not religious. The US is a far more religious country, de facto, than Israel is. The US only permits, de facto, Christian Presidents. On the other hand Obama can be president of the US, but could never be of Israel (again, de facto).
helping anyone else, certainly not Christians which get abused for being on the Arab side of the fence. Syria seems to be the more moderate country and why are they enemy number one and not the Wahhabi monarchy clowns?
Because the Saudis are further away and haven't been as aggressive in the past, and Syria is a neighbour with whom there are territorial disputes. Egypt used to be Israel's enemy number one until the two of them saw some sense. It has nothing much to do with religion, though political leaders on each side of course try and make out it does, so they can get sympathy and aid.
careful Graham, The Saudi's had been arm deep in exporting militant Islam, generally in tandem with the US, since the 70's. Hamas was one of their typical funding destinations (even if it was done 'privately'), they also hated the (syrain backed) national socailist Fatah movement. Syria/Iran copped the flack for Iraq but what was made of the saudi's? At least the first two had a nutter president picking a real fight and making threats.
The key to why you are wrong there is 'in tandem with the US'. The Saudis are interested in exporting their brand of Islam to the Muslim world, but, despite the rhetoric, they've never nbeen particularly aggressive toward Israel - partly because of the US alliance, but basically because the Saudis and Israel don't have much to quarrel about.
 
I think al-Jassas' attitude towards Palestine (which at root isn't too different from mine) is interesting and somewhat similar to the Saudi one.

 Syria wants the Golan back and has made overtures, it is isreal thats not that interested.
Exactly. Israel doesn't have any Saudi territory, and the Saudis don't have any Israeli territory (or even any claims on the West Bank). Egypt and Jordan have made peace, Lebanon's too small to worry about, and that leaves Syria as the only real opponent.
Well it is, but Bush was much more hardline with that country, infact the Syrain withdraw from lebanon helped unleashed the 2006 war. Isreal would of prefered the stability that old understanding had. Why would isreal be more intersted in peace? the current regime is much better than any alternative as well as boxing in problems like hezbollah.  The question that seems to have been raised in one of the stratfor analysis, I came across, was its either the put up with the odd extremist coming over the border or weaken damascus and have extremist running the country. Syria is a Alawai-baathist country that isnt as hardline as iran in its rhetoric and much better than the monarchist muppets who have committed Palistine to its prison.
I didnt say Syria and Israel were at loggerheads, merely that Syria was a bigger threat to Israel (potentially) than Saudi Arabia. And vice versa. Israel is the only threat to Syria around.
 


Edited by gcle2003 - 22-Jan-2009 at 21:38
Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
King
King

Suspended

Joined: 06-Dec-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7035 		  Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22-Jan-2009 at 21:19
Originally posted by Omar al Hashim

Originally posted by gcle2003

How can it be a religious state when the large majority of the population don't believe in the religion (or any other, from the polls I've seen)? Israel has religious courts, but they're subject to control by the secular ones: what Arab countries is that true of? (I accept there probably are some.)

Because it was created in order to replicate a religious myth, for a religious group,
That is quite simply and factually untrue. The vast majority of the original Zionists were secular, many if not most of them Marxist: certainly only a few of them were Judaic believers.
 
because 'God gave them the land', and it serves that particular religious group over and above all others.
'God gave them the land' was never a Zionist slogan: it only recently emerged as a slogan at all. The majority strand of Zionism, represented by Ben Guron, was socialist, indeed Marxist, while there was strong 'centrist' liberal (in the English sense) faction represented by Weizmann, and even Jabotinsky's right wing was more fervently nationalist than religious. Wikipedia seems to be down at the moment so I can't suggest anything there but http://arts.monash.edu.au/publications/eras/edition-7/dubnovarticle.php
has an interesting discussion of Zionism centred on the British liberal Isaiah Berlin.
 
Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
King
King

Suspended

Joined: 06-Dec-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7035 		  Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22-Jan-2009 at 20:57
Originally posted by Al Jassas

Hello gcle
 
All Arab regimes are staunchly secular with civil law as the basic law (based on the French system mostly), even in the "wahhabi" Saudi Arabia.
I'll take your word for it. That still leaves Israel in the same position.
 
Also, Israel has always been seen in religious terms, it has always been seen as a "Jewish" state not a secular democracy.
Jewish certainly, but not religious. Most Israeli Jews don't even believe in God, let alone Judaism[1]. It's a far more secular society than, say, the USA. They even offered the first presidency to Einstein, a noted atheist - that couldn't happen in the US. Waizmann, who actually got the job, may I think have been a Judaist but several of his successors weren't. How many Arab heads of state are non-Muslim? (Again, there may well be some.)
 
[1] I mean in a God like the God of the Torah. The original Zionists were secular, and they wanted to set up a socialist secular state. Recently though there's been some reporting from Israeli religious sources that the people have been 'turning back to Judaism' but there's not too much sign of it on the ground, and that's the kind of thing religious propagandists like to report.
Judaism is defacto state religion, just look at the exception jews get in Israel.
 
AL-Jassas
All I'm aware of is that religious students are exempt from military service. Ahain though, Jews may get preferred positions in Israel, but that's because they're Jewish not because they're religious.
Back to Top
ArmenianSurvival View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1460 		  Quote ArmenianSurvival Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22-Jan-2009 at 20:36

Here are a handful of the quotes I was referring to. It is important to note that a typical Zionist tactic is to imply that Palestine was "empty" or "backward", or simply not fit for self-determination. These quotes are from notable Zionists speaking about the population disparity in Palestine, amongst other things:

One of the most celebrated Zionists in Israel, Chaim Weizmann, using the typical Zionist tactic (emphases are mine):

 

"In its initial stage, Zionism was conceived by its pioneers as a movement wholly depending on mechanical factors: there is a country which happens to be called Palestine, a country without people, and, on the other hand, there exists the Jewish people, and it has no country. What else is necessary, then, than to fit the gem into the ring, to unite this people with this country? The owners of the country [the Ottoman Turks] must, there for, be persuaded and conceived that this marriage is advantageous, not only for the [Jewish] people and for the country, but also for themselves." (Expulsion of the Palestinians, p. 6)

"By a Jewish National Home I mean the creation of such conditions that as the country is developed we can pour in a considerable number of immigrants, and finally establish such a society in Palestine that Palestine shall be as Jewish as England is English or America American." (Expulsion of the Palestinians, p. 41)

"The Balfour Declaration of 1917 was built on air ... every day and every hour of these last 10 years, when opening the newspapers, I thought: Whence will the next blow come? I trembled lest the British Government would call me and ask: 'Tell us, what is this Zionist Organization? Where are they, your Zionists?' ... The Jews, they knew, were against us [the Zionists]; we stood alone on a little island, a tiny group of Jews with a foreign past." (UN: The Origins And Evolution Of Palestine Problem, section V)

 

 

Weizmann in the aftermath of the 1948 war: " a miraculous clearing of the land: the miraculous simplification of Israel's task." (Expulsion Of The Palestinians, p. 175 & Simha Flapan, p. 84)

 
 
Theodore Herzl, founder of modern Zionism:
 
"We can be the vanguard of culture against barbarianism." (One Palestine Complete, p. 150)
 
"The antisemites WILL BECOME our most loyal friends, the antisemites nations will become our allies." (One Palestine Complete, p. 47)
 
 
David Ben-Gurion:
 

"Zionist policy must be in agreement with the English and the [Palestinian] Arabs. . . [However,] without an agreement with the English, there is no point in talking about an agreement with the [Palestinian] Arabs, as long as we are not a majority." (Shabtai Teveth, p. 126)

". . . they [referring to Palestinians] showed new power and remarkable discipline. Many of them were killed . . . this time not murderers and rioters, but political demonstrators. Despite the tremendous unrest, the order not to harm Jews was obeyed. This shows exceptional political discipline. There is no doubt that these events will leave a profound imprint on the [Palestinian] Arab movement. This time we have seen a political movement which must evoke the respect of the world. (Shabtai Teveth, p. 126)
 
"Almost every [Palestinian] Arab" opposed Zionism, "because he is an Arab, because he is a Muslim, because he dislikes foreigners, and because we are hateful to him in every way." The conflict had lasted thirty years, and was liable "to continue for perhaps hundreds more." This was a "real war, a war of life or death."(Shabtai Teveth, p. 184)
 
 
Despite Zionist propaganda, there was clearly no Jewish majority, or there wouldn't be so much emphasis on immigration of Jews to Palestine and on whether or not the Palestinian Arabs would resist the Zionists.
Mass Murderers Agree: Gun Control Works!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_Resistance

Քիչ ենք բայց Հայ ենք։
Back to Top
Leonidas View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar

Joined: 01-Oct-2005
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4613 		  Quote Leonidas Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22-Jan-2009 at 12:42
My bad, i tend to group that era of Arab nationalist in that nether land like the Baathist. 
Back to Top
Beylerbeyi View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: Cuba
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1355 		  Quote Beylerbeyi Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22-Jan-2009 at 11:38
Leo,

good work underlining the US/Western support to the islamists. It was part of a general strategy called the 'Green Belt'. It's aim was to create a Green (being the colour of Islam) Belt around the Soviets by supporting and creating Islamist movements in the Middle East and rest of Asia with the help of Saudi oil money. That's why Bin Ladin was CIA-trained and even why Turkey has an islamist government today. 

One thing though, it is misleading to call Fatah movement "national socailist". That term means Nazi (which is not socialist), and Fatah was nothing similar. It was just nationalist. PLFP was more left wing than Fatah. 
Back to Top
Leonidas View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar

Joined: 01-Oct-2005
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4613 		  Quote Leonidas Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22-Jan-2009 at 10:43
Originally posted by gcle2003

Originally posted by Leonidas

Nor is another religious state (Israel) ....
How can it be a religious state when the large majority of the population don't believe in the religion (or any other, from the polls I've seen)? Israel has religious courts, but they're subject to control by the secular ones: what Arab countries is that true of? (I accept there probably are some.)

its a state that is defined by its religion before anything else, it serves the Jews above all other groups. Citizenship is one thing but being Jewish gives you full rights and benefits.

Proof
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_Return

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_National_Fund

look at how the treat Arab citizens, not the formal law but in reality
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_citizens_of_Israel


This is essentially an ethnic/tribal/secular issue over land, not a religious one except for a few on either side.
well is being Jewish an ethnic thing or religious? maybe its a bit of both, but it is certainly not just ethnic. considering the broad range of backgrounds the Jewish immigrants have come from.

helping anyone else, certainly not Christians which get abused for being on the Arab side of the fence. Syria seems to be the more moderate country and why are they enemy number one and not the Wahhabi monarchy clowns?
Because the Saudis are further away and haven't been as aggressive in the past, and Syria is a neighbour with whom there are territorial disputes. Egypt used to be Israel's enemy number one until the two of them saw some sense. It has nothing much to do with religion, though political leaders on each side of course try and make out it does, so they can get sympathy and aid.
helping anyone else, certainly not Christians which get abused for being on the Arab side of the fence. Syria seems to be the more moderate country and why are they enemy number one and not the Wahhabi monarchy clowns?
careful Graham, The Saudi's had been arm deep in exporting militant Islam, generally in tandem with the US, since the 70's. Hamas was one of their typical funding destinations (even if it was done 'privately'), they also hated the (syrain backed) national socailist Fatah movement. Syria/Iran copped the flack for Iraq but what was made of the saudi's? At least the first two had a nutter president picking a real fight and making threats.

 Syria wants the Golan back and has made overtures, it is isreal thats not that interested. Well it is, but Bush was much more hardline with that country, infact the Syrain withdraw from lebanon helped unleashed the 2006 war. Isreal would of prefered the stability that old understanding had. Why would isreal be more intersted in peace? the current regime is much better than any alternative as well as boxing in problems like hezbollah.  The question that seems to have been raised in one of the stratfor analysis, I came across, was its either the put up with the odd extremist coming over the border or weaken damascus and have extremist running the country. Syria is a Alawai-baathist country that isnt as hardline as iran in its rhetoric and much better than the monarchist muppets who have committed Palistine to its prison.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234 10>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.125 seconds.