Join In On The Action "Register Here" To View The Forums

Already a Member Login Here

Board index Forum Index
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 4991
Joined: 08 Jun 2000, 10:26 am

Post 18 Mar 2015, 12:23 pm

rickyp wrote:rayjay
How does that define you and how does that define the Zionist Union?


If you accept the definition in wiki[pedia quoted as the modern defintion of of anti-zionist, which you call me, then yes I'm anti-zionist .
But then so is the Zionist Union. (nee labor party) .
because they also favor a two state solution...

That's not mangled logic. However it appears that you accept that the Zionist union is a Zionist party because of its name rather than its stated policies.


Must you be this way? How can I be a Zionist and an anti-Zionist all at the same time. I both believe in a 2-state solution and that the Jewish people have a right to a homeland.

Why don't you just say what you believe as it relates to these 2 points:

1. Do Jewish people have the right to their own country in part of the Biblical land of Israel?
2. Should there be a right of return for all Jews to Israel?

Why don't you say what makes you an anti-Zionist?
User avatar
Adjutant
 
Posts: 1111
Joined: 26 Mar 2011, 8:04 pm

Post 18 Mar 2015, 1:25 pm

Google doesn't work where you live?


Quite literally, no. It is, however, working now. Something screwy with Firefox...and fixing that is not my bailiwick. But yes it's working now., thank you for patiently answering.

Exactly 120 seats ... Israeli government are always coalitions (so far) ... Netanyahu's party received 30 seats by some reports ... the 2nd largest showing was the left of center Zionist Union which received 24. ... you need 61 for a majority and to become PM ... the expectation is that Netanyahu will get to 63 with right wing parties, religious parties, and centrist parties.


Gotcha.

OK now correct me if I am wrong here. If I understand multiparty parliamentary democracy well enough, and if Netanyahu forms a government good for 63 seats; the obvious danger is that if something happens to three MK's--resignation or death by heat stroke sound like good excuses--who are in one of the coalition parties, would not said coalition come down like a house of cards?

Perhaps Israel is responsible for nukes not yet being used in the Middle East.


I would say so, and I am glad you put it that bluntly, because a lot of people in the Middle east (and perhaps here?) do not want to admit that. And the entire paragraph of yours, Ray Jay, from which I drew that sentence is spot on. The Middle East owes a great debt to Israel, which will never be admitted nor paid.

There is however, a possibility we must consider. I hope nobody brought this up this far, and I apologize for my absence and jumping in the middle like this. However, does anybody but me think the Iranian grab for the Bomb is some sort of smoke screen? They want to distract us from their intended goal, namely, becoming the most powerful regional state, maybe even--if their grandest wet dreams come true--nudge the United States out of the region? And the nifty thing, for the Iranians, if the Bomb IS really a "smokescreen", or attempt to distract the United States (it's too damn easy for them) by making us fret over their one-day nuclear capability. They have always wanted Iraq "back", and that desire predates Islam. (The ancient "Persian empire", the one smashed by the Byzantines, its capital of Ctesiphon was not far from what is now Baghdad.) This is one of the situations where we cannot afford to think of them only in religious terms, even if that seems like the key to understanding everything about their society (hint: it's not).

On the other hand, if it isn't a smokescreen and they're bloody serious about refining uranium into plutonium and building their first fission bombs (possibly followed up by hydrogen bombs) we cannot talk. And I do not want to face the possibility of the thousands (maybe millions) of casualties of an Iranian-American War as we duke it out to prevent them from getting it once we have realized---far too late---that they're about to actually get it or are in the process of making them. It is for this reason, the lives that could be lost if Iran gets the bomb, and even more if they are confronted once we try to stop them from getting it but almost too late (as America typically reacts to global threats)....I have read comments of the last bunch of pages relating to Iran's nuclear program, and some Redscape members' support of Obama's "talk".

I may remind these members that this is another instance where people, Redscapers included, do not remember from the past mistakes of their own countries. And the only thing I can say to articulate my view at this point is a single word:

Munich.
User avatar
Statesman
 
Posts: 11324
Joined: 15 Aug 2000, 8:59 am

Post 18 Mar 2015, 1:26 pm

rayjay
Must you be this way?

You mean precise?

Why don't you say what makes you an anti-Zionist?

Its quite simple Ray. If you accept the modern definition of anti-Zionist that I quoted from Wikipedia.

In the modern era, anti-Zionism is broadly defined as the opposition to the idea of an establishment of a Jewish state in Palestine, the opposition to some policies of Israel and its extension, or to the modern State of Israel as defined as A Jewish and Democratic State


then I am an anti-Zionist. Because I believe in a 2 state solution that protects Palestine (the west bank) for a Palestinian sate. I don't see this as a slur.

so you are also an anti-zionist. Because you believe in a 2 state solution. (Unlike the apparent winner of the Israelis election). And for that matter so is teh Zionist Union since their official polciy is a negotiated 2 state solution.
answers
1. yes. as defined by the terms of a negotiated settlement that includes a Palestinian state.
2. sure. To Israel. Not to the occupied territory on the West Bank.

Whats going to happen now is that Netanyahu hard line is going to drive more of Europe to officially recognize Palestine, and Palestine will gain support for ICC charges... Sweden already does, and France and UK will follow. Increasingly Israel is going to be isolated. Including perhaps from the US.
It won't be possible for the US to continue to support Israel if there isn't even a pretense of negotiations or a potential solution for the illegal settlements.
And any influence that Israel hoped to have concerning Iran will be flushed as well. Who cares about an ally like Netanyahu?
User avatar
Statesman
 
Posts: 11324
Joined: 15 Aug 2000, 8:59 am

Post 18 Mar 2015, 1:40 pm

hacker
They want to distract us from their intended goal, namely, becoming the most powerful regional state,

they already are....
Their greatest regional rival was Iraq and the US invasion eliminated them and has turned the Iraqis into a client state of Tehran.
They also hold the greatest sway in Yemen and Lebanon and are allied and supporting the most effective military opposition to ISIS.

There are a number of reasons they want to produce nuclear energy that isn't discussed in much western media.
One is because they actually required nuclear plants to produce medical grade isotopes, since the sanctions cut off their supply. This would then be an exportable product.
Two is that they are genuinely interested in producing green energy. They are the largest solar energy producer in their region. Wind as well.
Oil is seen as an exportable product that they can take advantage of to produce revenue to develop their other economic sectors.
Nuclear is seen as an option that frees the oil for export.

There has been nothing stopping the mullahs from producing 90% enriched uranium (weapons grade) for years now. Except their own self control. Sanctions don't stop this from happening. All they do is take away any reward from NOT going nuclear.
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 4991
Joined: 08 Jun 2000, 10:26 am

Post 18 Mar 2015, 1:56 pm

Ricky, if you believe in a state for the Jewish people and the right of return for all Jews than you are not an anti-Zionist. You are just against the current government.

BTW, if you don't believe me, check out this video where a member of the Zionist Party defines the meaning of Zionism (especially in minute 2). She's very easy on the eyes and I bet you would vote for her if you lived there.

http://www.haaretz.com/news/national/1.638670
User avatar
Statesman
 
Posts: 11324
Joined: 15 Aug 2000, 8:59 am

Post 18 Mar 2015, 3:07 pm

ray jay
Ricky, if you believe in a state for the Jewish people and the right of return for all Jews than you are not an anti-Zionist. You are just against the current government


Does this mean you are apologizing for calling me anti-Zionist?

I think you should send a note to Wikipedia then...
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 4991
Joined: 08 Jun 2000, 10:26 am

Post 19 Mar 2015, 12:08 pm

rickyp wrote:ray jay
Ricky, if you believe in a state for the Jewish people and the right of return for all Jews than you are not an anti-Zionist. You are just against the current government


Does this mean you are apologizing for calling me anti-Zionist?

I think you should send a note to Wikipedia then...


Why would I apologize for calling you something that you call yourself?

Here's how Wikipedia defines Zionism:

Zionism ... is a nationalist and political movement of Jews and Jewish culture that supports the reestablishment of a Jewish homeland in the territory defined as the historic Land of Israel.


You've agreed that you do support such a homeland.

It then goes on to define several subsets of Zionism: Cultural, Stream, Reform (aka Progressive), Political, Practical, Synthetic, Religious, Labor, Revisionist, Revolutionary, etc. (oy, what's with my people :rolleyes: )

You are definitely not a Revolutionary Zionist, but you are probably supportive or not against the others.

For anti-Zionist, let's take Wikipedia's definition in parts:

Anti-Zionism is opposition to Zionism, a nationalism of Jews that supports a Jewish nation state in the territory defined as the Land of Israel.

Not you from what you've said.

In the modern era, anti-Zionism is broadly defined as the opposition to the idea of an establishment of a Jewish state in Palestine,
Not you.

the opposition to some policies of Israel and its extension
Certainly, everyone opposes some of Israel's policies; in fact, there are very few people on the planet who support all of any one government's policies. Now, "its extension" is the key words that you are using to define yourself as an anti-Zionist. Assuming that "its extension" means annexing Jerusalem or settling the West Bank, then yes, I would agree that you are an anti-Zionist.

moving on:
or to the modern State of Israel as defined as A Jewish and Democratic State
This is why I asked you about the Jewish right of return. That is an aspect of Israel that makes it a Jewish state. Yes, you get Yom Kippur off, but I presume you don't object to that anymore than you object to getting Christmas off in your own country. Using Hebrew as the national language should be relatively unobjectionable. It's really the right of return that makes Israel Jewish. I presume you are also unhappy with the educational perspective, but I'm sure it's no worse that the way we glorify the Boston Tea Party over here.

So, in summary, if you want to define yourself as anti-Zionist, go ahead. In my heart of hearts I believe you are better than that, even though you push my buttons with your sources and writing style. You should know that you are voluntarily joining a broad movement which includes, per the Wikipedia page that you've highlighted:

Claims that the Zionist movement controls world history or seeks to achieve world domination are roughly as old as the Zionist movement. The most influential of these claims is the Tsarist forgery, The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, which remains popular.

In 1939, the Nazi German paper Völkischer Beobachter, justified the German occupation of Czechoslovakia with the headline: "In Prague Jewry is in power". In 1968, the East German communist paper Neues Deutschland justified the Warsaw Pact invasion of Czechoslovakia with the headline "In Prague Zionism is in power".[113] Simon Wiesenthal subsequently found 39 formerly influential Nazi party members working in the East German press and now directing their campaigns at Zionists.

From the 1960s, the Soviet Union promoted the allegation of secret ties between the Nazis and the Zionist leadership. This included claims that the Zionist movement inflated or faked the impact of the Holocaust. The thesis of 1982 doctoral dissertation of Mahmoud Abbas (a co-founder of Fatah and president of the Palestinian Authority who earned his PhD in history at the Moscow Institute of Oriental Studies, with Yevgeny Primakov as thesis advisor) was The Secret Connection between the Nazis and the Leaders of the Zionist Movement.[114][115] In his 1983 book The Other Face: The Secret Connection Between the Nazis and the Zionist Movement, based on the dissertation, Abbas wrote:

“ It seems that the interest of the Zionist movement, however, is to inflate this figure [of Holocaust deaths] so that their gains will be greater. This led them to emphasize this figure [six million] in order to gain the solidarity of international public opinion with Zionism. Many scholars have debated the figure of six million and reached stunning conclusions—fixing the number of Jewish victims at only a few hundred thousand."[116][117][118] ”

A different version of this conspiracy theory claims that Nazis and Zionists had a shared interest or even cooperated in the extermination of Europe's Jewry, as persecution would force them to flee to Palestine, then under British administration. Similar claims are occasionally made by Hezbollah or Hamas sources.[citation needed]

In 1995, William Korey released a work entitled Russian antisemitism, Pamyat, and the demonology of Zionism. Korey's central argument is that the Soviet Union promoted an "official Judeophobic propaganda campaign" under the guise of anti-Zionism from 1967 to 1986; after this program was shut down by Mikhail Gorbachev, a populist and chauvinist group called Pamyat emerged in the more open climate of Glasnost to promote an openly anti-Semitic message.[119] Korey also argues that much official late-period Soviet anti-Semitism may be traced back to the influence of Protocols of the Elders of Zion. He notes, for instance, that a 1977 Soviet work entitled International Zionism: History and Politics contains the allegation that most major Wall Street financial institutions are "large financial-industrial Jewish monopolies" exercising control over many countries in the world.[120] Russian antisemitism was reviewed by Robert O. Freedman in the Slavic Review; while he concurs with the book's central thesis, Freedman nevertheless writes that the actual extent of Soviet anti-Semitism may have been less than Korey suggests.[121]

Before the Second World War many prominent Britons maintained that the tension between Germany and Britain was the result of Jewish warmongering. In 1935 the British Union of Fascists mounted a "peace campaign" against war, claiming an alliance of international financiers and Jews were leading Britain to war with Germany. However by 1938 the public mood had changed and Admiral Domville wrote "it is interesting to see how permeated these people are with the war germ. Israel has done its work well."[122] Similar accusations have been made regarding Zionism and the 2003 invasion of Iraq.[123][124][125]

The Sudanese government has alleged that the Darfur uprising (in which some 500,000 have been killed) is part of a wider Zionist conspiracy.[126] Egyptian media have alleged that the Zionist movement deliberately spreads HIV in Egypt.[127]

According to the Anti-Defamation League, Neo-Nazi and radical Muslim groups allege the US government is controlled by Jews, describing it as the "Zionist Occupation Government".[128]

Article 22 of the 1988 Hamas charter claims that the French Revolution, the Russian Revolution, colonialism and both world wars were created by the Zionists or forces supportive of Zionism.[129] Article 32 alleges that the Zionist movement seeks to create an Empire stretching from the Nile in Egypt to the Euphrates river in Iraq.

In April 2010, Abd Al-Azim Al-Maghrabi, the Deputy Head of Egyptian Arab Lawyers Union, stated in an interview with Al-Manar TV (as translated by MEMRI) that the Hepatitis C virus was produced by "the Zionists" and that "this virus is now spreading in Egypt like wildfire." He also called for it to be "classified as one of the war crimes perpetrated by the Zionist enemy."[130]

In June 2010, Egyptian cleric Mus’id Anwar gave a speech which aired on Al-Rahma TV (as translated by MEMRI) in which he alleged that the game of soccer (as well as swimming, bullfighting and tennis) was in fact a Zionist conspiracy, stating that:

As you know, the Jews, or the Zionists, have The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Over 100 years ago, they formulated a plan to rule the world, and they are implementing this plan. One of the protocols says: “Keep the [non-Jews] preoccupied with songs, soccer, and movies.” Is it or isn’t it happening? It is...The Zionists manage to generate animosity among Muslims, and even between Muslim countries, by means of soccer.[


Why would you want to be associated with that?
User avatar
Statesman
 
Posts: 11324
Joined: 15 Aug 2000, 8:59 am

Post 19 Mar 2015, 12:36 pm

rickyp much earlier
Who's anti-zionist?


ray jay earlier ....
Ricky, you are clearly an anti-Zionist ... why deny the charge? .
.

ricky in response

I guess I'm old fashioned Ray. I took anti-Zionism as opposing the State of Israel. And I don't.
But I do support a two state solution... and in modern terms I see that makes me anti-Zionist. (wikipedia below)


much back and forth followed by
ray
So, in summary, if you want to define yourself as anti-Zionist, go ahead
.

I see now how to change your mind about something. Agree with.

If I call myself anti-zionist based on my opposition to the occupation of the West Bank, can I stlll get in to Schwrtz's for a smoked meat? Cause if i can't I'll definitely have to re-evaluate the label.

http://www.schwartzsdeli.com/
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 4991
Joined: 08 Jun 2000, 10:26 am

Post 19 Mar 2015, 12:48 pm

now you are being anti-semitic
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 16006
Joined: 15 Apr 2004, 6:29 am

Post 19 Mar 2015, 2:11 pm

RJ, I look back through the thread and see it seemed to be you calling Ricky an anti-Zionist first, and that was after calling it a "disease". Now you call him antisemitic. Not sure on what ground, referring to a kosher deli?

Ricky, you have already demonstrated you can't read a dictionary and discern meanings.

Both, can we stop this silly back and forth?
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 16006
Joined: 15 Apr 2004, 6:29 am

Post 19 Mar 2015, 2:21 pm

Ray Jay wrote:Exactly 120 seats ... Israeli government are always coalitions (so far) ... Netanyahu's party received 30 seats by some reports ... the 2nd largest showing was the left of center Zionist Union which received 24. ... you need 61 for a majority and to become PM ... the expectation is that Netanyahu will get to 63 with right wing parties, religious parties, and centrist parties.


The parties that Netanyahu is signalling he wants to join with suggest a more right wing government than the last one. A concern for me is not so much the expressed opposition to a two-state solution while he's around (it just voices what most must surely assume by now and what Likud has long stood for), but the boost to settlement activity.

That expansion of settlements, especially in key points, is not about short-medium term concerns at Arab behaviour. It is part of a long term plan to ensure that a Palestinian state is not viable, cut off by settlements and the communications between them.
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 4991
Joined: 08 Jun 2000, 10:26 am

Post 19 Mar 2015, 2:46 pm

danivon wrote:RJ, I look back through the thread and see it seemed to be you calling Ricky an anti-Zionist first, and that was after calling it a "disease". Now you call him antisemitic. Not sure on what ground, referring to a kosher deli?

Ricky, you have already demonstrated you can't read a dictionary and discern meanings.

Both, can we stop this silly back and forth?


Amen. I think we are done ... I was partially joking when I called him anti-Semitic ... but really, are we saying that all Jewish delis have an established view on he middle east and will throw you out if you disagree? But mostly I was joking.

I've learned that there is a wide variety of anti-zionisms. I've quoted some from Wikipedia and they are a disease. But that's not Ricky.
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 4991
Joined: 08 Jun 2000, 10:26 am

Post 19 Mar 2015, 2:53 pm

danivon wrote:
Ray Jay wrote:Exactly 120 seats ... Israeli government are always coalitions (so far) ... Netanyahu's party received 30 seats by some reports ... the 2nd largest showing was the left of center Zionist Union which received 24. ... you need 61 for a majority and to become PM ... the expectation is that Netanyahu will get to 63 with right wing parties, religious parties, and centrist parties.


The parties that Netanyahu is signalling he wants to join with suggest a more right wing government than the last one. A concern for me is not so much the expressed opposition to a two-state solution while he's around (it just voices what most must surely assume by now and what Likud has long stood for), but the boost to settlement activity.

That expansion of settlements, especially in key points, is not about short-medium term concerns at Arab behaviour. It is part of a long term plan to ensure that a Palestinian state is not viable, cut off by settlements and the communications between them.


Regarding your 1st paragraph, I agree. To bring in his coalition partners, Netanyahu will have to promise some settlement activity. The agreement may be very specific on size, timing, and which ones. I also think is squashes any Palestinian hope, which is problematic. It's not the outcome I was hoping for, and I'm the biggest Zionist on these pages.

As to your 2nd paragraph, I don't agree. You suggest you know his conspiratorial intent. However, you also have to take into account that Netanyahu is partially responding (and groking the electorate's reaction) to the events on the ground in the region, including the brutality of Syria, Hamas, ISIS, U.S. softening vis-à-vis Iran, Hezbollah, a unity government between Hamas and the PA, etc.
User avatar
Adjutant
 
Posts: 1111
Joined: 26 Mar 2011, 8:04 pm

Post 19 Mar 2015, 3:22 pm

There has been nothing stopping the mullahs from producing 90% enriched uranium (weapons grade) for years now. Except their own self control. Sanctions don't stop this from happening. All they do is take away any reward from NOT going nuclear.


Self-control...well they haven't attacked the US fleet in the Gulf so far. But the statements made by their politicians over the years have been...alarming. It's more than just former-Pres. Ahmedinajad saying the Holocaust was B.S., it's been more than that.

What Iran does is mostly behind the scenes. They are smart, but I could never accuse the Iranian Government of being restrained. They're just smart about it so that some people will be deceived into believing they show self-control. I wonder who they're bent on destroying first, Israel, or the Arab powers?

Just as pre-Risorgimento Italy rotated on five internal powers, the Middle East had six power centers: Israel, KSA, Egypt, Syria, Iran and Iran. One of the six has been taken out of that role by ISIS and the Arab Spring; the other, by the United States/UK war of 2003-9 [etc.] A table with six legs, holding up a crapload of china dishes and cutlery, has had two of those legs removed.

And yet Israel, whatever you may say about an invasion of Gaza, building a wall on Palestinian territory & so forth; has showed a great deal more "restraint" than Iran. Iran's just smart enough (and in the right position) to do it a hell of a lot more covertly. I cannot therefore agree with you ricky that Iran has been "restrained".
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 16006
Joined: 15 Apr 2004, 6:29 am

Post 19 Mar 2015, 3:40 pm

Ray Jay wrote:Amen. I think we are done ... I was partially joking when I called him anti-Semitic ... but really, are we saying that all Jewish delis have an established view on he middle east and will throw you out if you disagree? But mostly I was joking.
Do you really think such accusations are a joking matter? Mind you, looks like ricky was joking too, but frankly it all falls flat after all the above and without any emoticons or indications of levity.

I've learned that there is a wide variety of anti-zionisms. I've quoted some from Wikipedia and they are a disease. But that's not Ricky.
All of them? I'm not sure I believe in an absolute right to return for all Jews to Israel (or for anyone to any ancestral homeland). I certainly disagree with the expansion of settlements in the occupied areas of Palestine. And I have reservations about founding a state based on ethno-religious grounds in an area where until recently that ethno-religious group was a minority (it's troubling enough in a majority).

Before the 1940s, Zionism and the opposition to it were about a potential future. Since then it is about a real present and past. We can't turn back the clock and undo the harms of the past. And so the Anti-Zionism that is about dismantling Israel is dangerous because that would cause more bloodshed.

But there has to be a way to describe opposition to the expansionism or separatist policies of prominent Israeli politicians and sometimes the government itself. And critics of the way that the Zionist project is being carried out, particularly by Likud and as envisioned by Yisrael Beitenyu or Jewish Home do need to be able to be heard.