Pro-Israel, Anti-Zionist

johnfás wrote:

Who said you had to be Jewish to be a Zionist? I made the point that if you are Jewish you are automatically entitled to be a citizen of Israel. I further stated that being a Christian will not automatically entitle you to be a citizen of any state. Would you like to contradict this statement?

No, he'd like to avoid that question.

I thought it couldn't get any worse. I say that zionism is not a religous term and what does Ibis say Zionism is not a religion but.....

There is always a BUT with Ibis.

As a nun used to say to me. "But me no buts please"

In other words you know you have lost when you go to the BUTS.

Now you wants to talk about Opus Dei. It is better Ibis is getting

youngdan wrote:

Now they are beginning to pull the piss Audi. Ibis now wants to talk about Ganley. Just ignore them.

You're welcome to put forward a reasoned argument as opposed to bellowing denunciations and anathemas from the sidelines if you like.

"No, he'd like to avoid that question" Ibis.

Even better yet, I tell John Fas that everyone knows that being Jewish entitles you to Israei citizenship and back Ibis comes,

makes a complete fool of himself

Youngdan, you haven't responded to any of the points made. Instead you've thrown a whole lot of strawmen into the mix to detract from the fact that it is you who have 'misspoken.'

Audi, don't mind him - he hasn't said anything at all, never mind anything that might contradict the points made by ibis and johnfás and to a lesser extent by me.

Shadow boxing, youngdan, shadow boxing.

It is youngdan's usual policy when he comments on anything other than economics. His usual policy because he seems to know nothing about anything except economics. Maybe when we have the new site up and running we can have a paypal donation scheme to buy him a few books. Boston has a decent public library youngdan, have you thought of using it? It is just off Copley Square.

ibis wrote:

youngdan wrote:

Everyone knows that. Why did you introduce religion into the conversation about Zionism. All 3 of you are trying to confuse Audi. You could have told Audi that religon and zionism are distinct but waffling suited you better

Audi. Zionism is a non religous term.

That's not even accurate. Zionism is not a religion, but it uses religion/ethnicity as a basis, which makes it a term with religious overtones alright. That's like claiming Opus Dei aren't a religious group.

Could we all then be Machine Nation Zionists and choose to pursue a homeland on Cactus farm?

I'll bring a goat and some solar panels.

edit
Is the religion absolutely necessary ??? I choose paganism if so.

johnfás wrote:

It is youngdan's usual policy when he comments on anything other than economics. His usual policy because he seems to know nothing about anything except economics. Maybe when we have the new site up and running we can have a paypal donation scheme to buy him a few books.

Well, I assume he knows about engineering as well, though.

Auditor #9 wrote:

ibis wrote:

youngdan wrote:

Everyone knows that. Why did you introduce religion into the conversation about Zionism. All 3 of you are trying to confuse Audi. You could have told Audi that religon and zionism are distinct but waffling suited you better

Audi. Zionism is a non religous term.

That's not even accurate. Zionism is not a religion, but it uses religion/ethnicity as a basis, which makes it a term with religious overtones alright. That's like claiming Opus Dei aren't a religious group.

Could we all then be Machine Nation Zionists and choose to pursue a homeland on Cactus farm?

I'll bring a goat and some solar panels.

Nah - that would simply make us MN nationalists. We'd need some kind of religion/ethnicity clause as well, plus a policy of destabilising Cactus' neighbours in pursuit of a greater MN. Plus of course we'd need to push Cactus off into the potting shed and treat her as a second class citizen. After a while we could build a wall around her.

(nose-tweaking now)

Anti Zionist
Pro Israel

Hmm.

Zionism is the belief that the Jewish people should have a home land - not necessarily in the middle east - other options were explored. Zionism opposed the view that German jews or other jewish people could live in an integrated way with non jews.

An anti-Zionist I assume is someone who thinks the opposite, or at least doesn't agree with the whole package/

Israel is a specific State founded to provide a homeland for Jewish people.

Israel, as it has turned out, has become a territorially agressive, expansionist and nuclear-armed State prone to multiple illegal assaults on the rights of neighbours, notwithstanding the opposition of a minority of Israelis to this course.

Ibis is defining what he means by pro-Israel in a very restricted way that I don't think most people would recognise.

ibis wrote:

Auditor #9 wrote:

ibis wrote:

youngdan wrote:

Everyone knows that. Why did you introduce religion into the conversation about Zionism. All 3 of you are trying to confuse Audi. You could have told Audi that religon and zionism are distinct but waffling suited you better

Audi. Zionism is a non religous term.

That's not even accurate. Zionism is not a religion, but it uses religion/ethnicity as a basis, which makes it a term with religious overtones alright. That's like claiming Opus Dei aren't a religious group.

Could we all then be Machine Nation Zionists and choose to pursue a homeland on Cactus farm?

I'll bring a goat and some solar panels.

Nah - that would simply make us MN nationalists. We'd need some kind of religion/ethnicity clause as well, plus a policy of destabilising Cactus' neighbours in pursuit of a greater MN. Plus of course we'd need to push Cactus off into the potting shed and treat her as a second class citizen. After a while we could build a wall around her.

(nose-tweaking now)

I would have shared.

This thread is about Zionism. It is you three who have introduced all sorts of strawmen from religion to Ganley. When ye look foolish ye want to change the subjct.

So show me where I introduced straw men.

It is time for you to put up or shut up

ibis wrote:

Auditor #9 wrote:

ibis wrote:

youngdan wrote:

Everyone knows that. Why did you introduce religion into the conversation about Zionism. All 3 of you are trying to confuse Audi. You could have told Audi that religon and zionism are distinct but waffling suited you better

Audi. Zionism is a non religous term.

That's not even accurate. Zionism is not a religion, but it uses religion/ethnicity as a basis, which makes it a term with religious overtones alright. That's like claiming Opus Dei aren't a religious group.

Could we all then be Machine Nation Zionists and choose to pursue a homeland on Cactus farm?

I'll bring a goat and some solar panels.

Nah - that would simply make us MN nationalists. We'd need some kind of religion/ethnicity clause as well, plus a policy of destabilising Cactus' neighbours in pursuit of a greater MN. Plus of course we'd need to push Cactus off into the potting shed and treat her as a second class citizen. After a while we could build a wall around her.

(nose-tweaking now)

We'd also have to starve her while letting her lovely vegetables rot outside, divert her water from its source in the garden shed to our new patch and have our soldiers wander -armed - around her shed while she attempts to go about her daily business in an ever decreasing space where there's one of the highest rates of unemployment on earth and of course prevent her from getting out to get food or water or a job anywhere else.


Youngdan, there's a difference -I appreciate it may be too subtle for you, between an illustrative example in the context of a discussion and a strawman, grasped hold of for want of anything constructive to say.

So Zionism is specificially referring to the twelve tribes of Israel (all the rest can go to Connaught)

Kate P you haven't answered my quesiton on why You are anti-Zionist

cactus flower wrote:

Anti Zionist
Pro Israel

Hmm.

Zionism is the belief that the Jewish people should have a home land - not necessarily in the middle east - other options were explored. Zionism opposed the view that German jews or other jewish people could live in an integrated way with non jews.

Well, no, there was also a movement called Territorialism (I think) that would have gone for a homeland anywhere. Zionism is specifically Israel.

cactus flower wrote:

An anti-Zionist I assume is someone who thinks the opposite, or at least doesn't agree with the whole package/

Israel is a specific State founded to provide a homeland for Jewish people.

Israel, as it has turned out, has become a territorially agressive, expansionist and nuclear-armed State prone to multiple illegal assaults on the rights of neighbours, notwithstanding the opposition of a minority of Israelis to this course.

Ibis is defining what he means by pro-Israel in a very restricted way that I don't think most people would recognise.

I would say I'm defining it in quite a broad way, and that it's evidence of how polarised the debate is that it should be assumed to narrowly refer to the Israel-Palestine conflict, or to support for the current policies of the Zionist Likud party.

Kate. You neither put up or shut up.

Why don't you at least answer Audi.

youngdan wrote:

Kate. You neither put up or shut up.

Why don't you at least answer Audi.

You may (or may not) have noticed that you're not actually dictating the terms of debate here - at least partly because you're not really contributing.

Are you Kate's puppet. Do you not think she has a brain of her own

youngdan wrote:

Are you Kate's puppet. Do you not think she has a brain of her own

Oh, I've no doubt she does.

Quote :

In 1902–03 Herzl was invited to give evidence before the British Royal Commission on Alien Immigration. The appearance brought him into close contact with members of the British government, particularly with Joseph Chamberlain, then secretary of state for the colonies, through whom he negotiated with the Egyptian government for a charter for the settlement of the Jews in Al 'Arish, in the Sinai Peninsula, adjoining southern Palestine.

On the failure of that scheme, which took him to Cairo, he received, through L. J. Greenberg, an offer (August 1903) on the part of the British government to facilitate a large Jewish settlement, with autonomous government and under British suzerainty, in British East Africa. At the same time, the Zionist movement being threatened by the Russian government, he visited St. Petersburg and was received by Sergei Witte, then finance minister, and Viacheslav Plehve, minister of the interior, the latter of whom placed on record the attitude of his government toward the Zionist movement. On that occasion Herzl submitted proposals for the amelioration of the Jewish position in Russia. He published the Russian statement, and brought the British offer, commonly known as the "Uganda Project," before the Sixth Zionist Congress (Basel, August 1903), carrying the majority (295:178, 98 abstentions) with him on the question of investigating this offer, after the Russian delegation stormed out.

In 1905, after investigation, the Congress decided to decline the British offer and firmly committed itself to a Jewish homeland in the historic Land of Israel.

Wikipedia

Has this discussion maybe come to an indeterminate conclusion? Nobody seems to have anything very coherent to add.

Where's Kate? does she have an answer for me or is she gone off milking those bullocks again.

cactus flower wrote:

Quote :

In 1902–03 Herzl was invited to give evidence before the British Royal Commission on Alien Immigration. The appearance brought him into close contact with members of the British government, particularly with Joseph Chamberlain, then secretary of state for the colonies, through whom he negotiated with the Egyptian government for a charter for the settlement of the Jews in Al 'Arish, in the Sinai Peninsula, adjoining southern Palestine.

On the failure of that scheme, which took him to Cairo, he received, through L. J. Greenberg, an offer (August 1903) on the part of the British government to facilitate a large Jewish settlement, with autonomous government and under British suzerainty, in British East Africa. At the same time, the Zionist movement being threatened by the Russian government, he visited St. Petersburg and was received by Sergei Witte, then finance minister, and Viacheslav Plehve, minister of the interior, the latter of whom placed on record the attitude of his government toward the Zionist movement. On that occasion Herzl submitted proposals for the amelioration of the Jewish position in Russia. He published the Russian statement, and brought the British offer, commonly known as the "Uganda Project," before the Sixth Zionist Congress (Basel, August 1903), carrying the majority (295:178, 98 abstentions) with him on the question of investigating this offer, after the Russian delegation stormed out.

In 1905, after investigation, the Congress decided to decline the British offer and firmly committed itself to a Jewish homeland in the historic Land of Israel.

Wikipedia

Has this discussion maybe come to an indeterminate conclusion? Nobody seems to have anything very coherent to add.

Well, we can refine that a bit:

Quote :

Zionism can be distinguished from Territorialism, a Jewish nationalist movement willing to contemplate a Jewish homeland anywhere. During the early history of Zionism, a number of proposals were made for settling Jews outside Europe, but ultimately all of these were rejected or failed. The debate over these proposals helped to define the nature and focus of the Zionist movement.

Also Wikipedia.

ibis wrote:

youngdan wrote:

Are you Kate's puppet. Do you not think she has a brain of her own

Oh, I've no doubt she does.

Why are you now insulting Kate. She has every right to think she has brain.

youngdan wrote:

cactus flower wrote:

No left winger would line up with an anti-semitic candidate.

This site is filled with your anti-israeli rants, I thought you were a left winger. There might be hope for you yet

This post is what started this pro israel anti zionist argument so in the interests of accuracy that the sitesisfull of anti-israeli rants. My understanding is that Cactus is anti israel but would be delighted if she is pro israel.

Hopefully Ibis will not claim to be both pro-israel and anti-israel

Balfour and his declaration to 2nd Baron Rothschild has a lot to answer for. A state created for what purpose exactly?