Stop trying to divide "Jews" from "Zionists."

[Lipush]

Zionism is a political philosophy / ideology which seeks to as its primary goal to confiscate Arab / Palestinian land and allocate it to Jews !!!

Thank you for proving my point.

I LOVE YOUR AVATAR

 

[HistoryBefore67]

Here is a question for each poster - in your view, what is Zionism?

Respectfully, the fact that you're asking the question is part of the problem.

Zionism is a movement that advocates the existence of a Jewish State in Israel.

That's it. Plain and simple.

When you open up the term to be defined by each person, you play into the hands of those who are trying to mask anti-Semitism. You allow them to say, "oh, well for me, Zionism means the desire to remove all non-Jews from Israel," or "for me, Zionism means the goal of displacing Arabs to expand Jewish land." Neither of these are accurate definitions of Zionism, but many anti-Semites will say things like that so they can hide their bigotry behind the term "anti-Zionism."

So it turns out that Lewis Carroll's Humpty Dumpty was wrong when he said “When I use a word, it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less."

Words have meanings.

That is the absurdity of your claims...How about anti-Semites like Harry Truman whose support at the UN was crucial for Israel to become a State? Why did he put his Nation's Interest for a puppet state to put fear into the Arab Oil states over his obvious bigotry...

There are people on the boards who are bigots and many are Zionists.

Your example has nothing to do with anything I said. Certainly, an anti-Semite could, if he or she believed it furthered other interests, act in a way that favors Israel. Just as many racists wear the jerseys of African-American athletes.

 

[Coyote]

Here is a question for each poster - in your view, what is Zionism?

Respectfully, the fact that you're asking the question is part of the problem.

Quite likely.

That is why I want to know what each person's view of Zionism is. People seem to define it differently and that effects where their argument is coming from.

Zionism is a movement that advocates the existence of a Jewish State in Israel.

That's it. Plain and simple.

When you open up the term to be defined by each person, you play into the hands of those who are trying to mask anti-Semitism. You allow them to say, "oh, well for me, Zionism means the desire to remove all non-Jews from Israel," or "for me, Zionism means the goal of displacing Arabs to expand Jewish land." Neither of these are accurate definitions of Zionism, but many anti-Semites will say things like that so they can hide their bigotry behind the term "anti-Zionism."

Don't you think some of those are what they truly believe Zionism is?

The other thing is - meanings can change over time in how they are used by a group. Once respectable terms can become slurs. I do agree though, that definitions are important when terms (for example racism or anti-semitism or nazi) are thrown about willy nilly.

Zionism is a term I've not given a lot of thought to nor used. My arguments are usually against Israel's political actions, the settlement policies, injustices and inequalities that I see occurring.

It's not so much "opening up" the definition as to try and see where people are coming from. If there is anti-semitism, it's usually present in other forms throughout their argument.

So it turns out that Lewis Carroll's Humpty Dumpty was wrong when he said “When I use a word, it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less."

Words have meanings.

I totally agree - but not everyone knows the meaning

 

[Lipush]

I suspect most people don't have a clear understanding of what Zionism is - myself included. It's a term that seems to be used loosely and broadly and perhaps has drifted away from it's original definition.

I always assumed Zionists referred to the more extreme views such as those represented by the settler movement, views which believe that a religion has granted a people the right to an entire region irregardless of peoples already living there. That is a view not shared by all Jews. I don't think it's even shared by most Jews. It is, however, a view shared by many religious extremists who feel "entitled" by virtue of their religious identity - for example Muslim extremists.

Disliking that view and speaking critically of it is not "hating Jews".

I think you are right though, that in some cases - anti-Zionism is also a subtle way of masking anti-semitism. What determines it though is not opposition to Zionism, but the bigger picture of the person's arguments.

'Settlers' have no "movement"

People talk about settlements as they do on people who have clear ideology of taking over Palestinian lands.

But about half of the settlers sit in the settlements simply because the housing is cheaper in those areas.

Many of them couldn't care less about politics.

I don't agree. From what I've read they feel entitled to those lands and they seem to represent a fundamentalist - frontier sort of mentality. That's the attitude that comes across as well as a deliberate attempt to create more and more new settlements to "stake their claims".

Yet they are being waved at with things they're not to be blamed for.

I'm not sure what you mean?

Actually - I'm not even sure what Zionism is anymore. Does it mean the same thing now as it did at the turn of the century? Or has it simply become a slur?

Zionism in its core, is the ideology that says that the Jews have a connection that cannot be denied to the land of Israel.

That is where many of you are wrong.

Zionism in its base was never about "Arabs" or "Palestinians". It was always about the connection between the land of Israel and the people of Israel.

More specifically, the connection between the people of Israel and Jerusalem.

"By the rivers of Babylon, there we sat down, yea, we wept, when we remembered Zion."- this is not just a song but the first to open the Psalm 137.

It started even there. And it was not about "land grabbing" or I don't know what, its base are with the simple thinking that the land its within the heart of the people.

Zionism at first didn't even talk about the state, in early days people talked about "The holy land", it was not even an issue of STATE, not to mention Palestinians or Arabs or wars. It was a belief that was within our thinking in times our people were tormented by Gentile regimes all over the world in different time periods.

THAT is what Zionism is.

 

[Coyote]

This is how Wikipedia defines Zionism:

Zionism (Hebrew: ציונות*, Tsiyonut; Arabic: صهيونية*, Șahyouniyyah) is a form of nationalism of Jews and Jewish culture that supports a Jewish nation state in the territory defined as the Land of Israel.[1] Zionism supports Jews upholding their Jewish identity, opposes the assimilation of Jews into other societies and has advocated the return of Jews to Israel as a means for Jews to be a majority in their own nation, and to be liberated from antisemitic discrimination, exclusion, and persecution that had historically occurred in the diaspora.[1] Zionism emerged in the late 19th century in central and eastern Europe as a national revival movement, and soon after this most leaders of the movement associated the main goal with creating the desired state in Palestine, then an area controlled by the Ottoman Empire.[2][3][4] Since the establishment of the State of Israel, the Zionist movement continues primarily to advocate on behalf of the Jewish state and address threats to its continued existence and security. In a less common usage, the term may also refer to non-political, cultural Zionism, founded and represented most prominently by Ahad Ha'am; and political support for the State of Israel by non-Jews, as in Christian Zionism.

Defenders of Zionism say it is a national liberation movement for the repatriation of a dispersed socio-religious group to what they see as an abandoned homeland millennia before.[5][6][7] Critics of Zionism see it as a colonialist[8] or racist[9] ideology that led to the denial of rights, dispossession and expulsion of the "indigenous population of Palestine".[10][11][12][13]

 

[HistoryBefore67]

Here is a question for each poster - in your view, what is Zionism?

Respectfully, the fact that you're asking the question is part of the problem.

Quite likely.

That is why I want to know what each person's view of Zionism is. People seem to define it differently and that effects where their argument is coming from.

Zionism is a movement that advocates the existence of a Jewish State in Israel.

That's it. Plain and simple.

When you open up the term to be defined by each person, you play into the hands of those who are trying to mask anti-Semitism. You allow them to say, "oh, well for me, Zionism means the desire to remove all non-Jews from Israel," or "for me, Zionism means the goal of displacing Arabs to expand Jewish land." Neither of these are accurate definitions of Zionism, but many anti-Semites will say things like that so they can hide their bigotry behind the term "anti-Zionism."

Don't you think some of those are what they truly believe Zionism is?

The other thing is - meanings can change over time in how they are used by a group. Once respectable terms can become slurs. I do agree though, that definitions are important when terms (for example racism or anti-semitism or nazi) are thrown about willy nilly.

Zionism is a term I've not given a lot of thought to nor used. My arguments are usually against Israel's political actions, the settlement policies, injustices and inequalities that I see occurring.

It's not so much "opening up" the definition as to try and see where people are coming from. If there is anti-semitism, it's usually present in other forms throughout their argument.

So it turns out that Lewis Carroll's Humpty Dumpty was wrong when he said “When I use a word, it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less."

Words have meanings.

That's why we have to keep reminding people.

It is a common Arab tactic to hijack words and use them for their own purpose. Whether its changing the definition of Apartheid, Holocaust, ethinic-cleansing, or Zionist, its a dishonest tactic.

I will continue to point out this type of dishonesty when I encounter it.
I totally agree - but not everyone knows the meaning

That's why we have to keep reminding people.

It is a common Arab tactic to hijack words and use them for their own purpose. Whether its changing the definition of Apartheid, Holocaust, ethinic-cleansing, or Zionist, its a dishonest tactic.

I will continue to point out this type of dishonesty when I encounter it.

 

[Indofred]

So, those who are trying to "divide and conquer" by separting Jews (good) from Zionists (bad), are kidding themselves.

If you call yourself an "anti-Zionist," you are essentially saying that you are against the VAST MAJORITY of Jews.

I disagree.

Are all Muslims terrorists because some are and some express support for terrorism?

If not; your position is a load of old bollocks.

Racism and bigotry are not acceptable, regardless of who the target is.

 

[Coyote]

'Settlers' have no "movement"

People talk about settlements as they do on people who have clear ideology of taking over Palestinian lands.

But about half of the settlers sit in the settlements simply because the housing is cheaper in those areas.

Many of them couldn't care less about politics.

I don't agree. From what I've read they feel entitled to those lands and they seem to represent a fundamentalist - frontier sort of mentality. That's the attitude that comes across as well as a deliberate attempt to create more and more new settlements to "stake their claims".

Yet they are being waved at with things they're not to be blamed for.

I'm not sure what you mean?

Actually - I'm not even sure what Zionism is anymore. Does it mean the same thing now as it did at the turn of the century? Or has it simply become a slur?

I am sorry, but that is not a question of weather you agree or not, it's a FACT.

And a FACT I know because I KNOW personally more than 1 or 2 settlers.

And as the saying goes- "What is seen from here, is not seen from there".

That's not what this article says: The Settler Movement - Israel & Judaism Studies

The settler movement began after the Six-day War in 1967, when an ultra-religious "Land of Israel Movement" was founded by Rabbi Moshe Levinger, with the aim of promoting Jewish settlement in the ancient Biblical heartland of Judea and Samaria on the West Bank. In 1968, adherents of the movement, in disguise as tourists, infiltrated the Arab city of Hebron, which is the site of the tombs of the Hebrew patriarchs, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, holy to both Jews and Muslims. Hebron had always been a religious centre with a small Jewish population until the Jews were massacred in the riots of 1929, and it had great ideological significance for the movement...

...By 1975, the settlement movement had adopted the name Gush Emunim (the “Bloc of the Faithful”). The movement followed the teachings of the religious Zionist philosopher Rabbi Abraham Kook, who held that the redemption of the Land of Israel was divinely ordained, and that it could occur even before the coming of the Messiah. As the Gush leader Israel Medad interpreted the teachings of Rabbi Kook’s son, “the main purpose of the Jewish people is to attain both physical and spiritual redemption by living in and building up a complete Land of Israel. The territory of the Land of Israel is assigned a sanctity which obligates its retention…as well as its settlement, even in defiance of government authority.”

...As at 2005 the Israeli population in the Territories was over 210,000, about 3% of Israel’s population. Among the settlements on the West Bank are a number of substantial towns, some secular and some religious. There are also small villages, and tiny unauthorised outposts of people living in caravans.

A typical such settlement is the small modern town of Efrat located at about 15 minutes’ drive south of Jerusalem. It was established in 1980, and as at 2005 it had some 7,500 residents. Efrat's population is mostly religious Zionist, and includes many “Modern Orthodox” Jews who have emigrated from the United States. It is in the area of the Etzion Bloc of Jewish villages, most of whose inhabitants were killed by the Arab Legion of Transjordan in 1948 and which were rebuilt after 1967. ...

The article makes it sound while they are a mixture of religious and secular, and quite likely include the need for cheaper housing - it is also a definate movement with an ideology that includes resettling the entire biblical territory.

 

[Coyote]

That's why we have to keep reminding people.

It is a common Arab tactic to hijack words and use them for their own purpose. Whether its changing the definition of Apartheid, Holocaust, ethinic-cleansing, or Zionist, its a dishonest tactic.

I will continue to point out this type of dishonesty when I encounter it.

It's not just an Arab tactic - I see the same thing occuring against Muslims by attempting to redefine terms such as Taquiya (sp?) or Sharia (utilizing extreme examples to define the entire concept).

While I disagree with the use of "Holocaust" in describing any situations not part of WW2 and I disagree with the use of the term genocide against Israel - I think ethnic cleansing as talked about by historians like Benny Morris, can be applicable and I think comparisons to apartheid can be part of the debate. I don't think that is dishonest in regards to some of the injustices and inequalities that do occur.

 

[HistoryBefore67]

Are all Muslims terrorists because some are and some express support for terrorism?

No, but that has absolutely nothing to do with anything I've written on this thread or any other, so I'm not sure why you'd ask that question.

 

[Roudy]

Yeah, that's probably why I didn't say that they are the same thing and I did acknowlege that a small segment of Jews are not Zionists. But thanks for pointing out what I already said. Its very helpful.

And, yes, you are playing weak logic games in an effort to escape the undeniable point of this discussion: that most who speak of Zionists in hateful terms do so because they hate Jews, but think its more "politically correct" to use the term "Zionist."

I suspect most people don't have a clear understanding of what Zionism is - myself included. It's a term that seems to be used loosely and broadly and perhaps has drifted away from it's original definition.

I always assumed Zionists referred to the more extreme views such as those represented by the settler movement, views which believe that a religion has granted a people the right to an entire region irregardless of peoples already living there. That is a view not shared by all Jews. I don't think it's even shared by most Jews. It is, however, a view shared by many religious extremists who feel "entitled" by virtue of their religious identity - for example Muslim extremists.

Disliking that view and speaking critically of it is not "hating Jews".

I think you are right though, that in some cases - anti-Zionism is also a subtle way of masking anti-semitism. What determines it though is not opposition to Zionism, but the bigger picture of the person's arguments.

'Settlers' have no "movement"

People talk about settlements as they do on people who have clear ideology of taking over Palestinian lands.

But about half of the settlers sit in the settlements simply because the housing is cheaper in those areas.

Many of them couldn't care less about politics.

Yet they are being waved at with things they're not to be blamed for.

I compare many of the settlers to those who went to the Frontiers of America in its early stages. They are going there to start a new life and because they can afford it. Of course there are some that are very religious. However they are generally non violent and pacifist.

 

[Coyote]

I suspect most people don't have a clear understanding of what Zionism is - myself included. It's a term that seems to be used loosely and broadly and perhaps has drifted away from it's original definition.

I always assumed Zionists referred to the more extreme views such as those represented by the settler movement, views which believe that a religion has granted a people the right to an entire region irregardless of peoples already living there. That is a view not shared by all Jews. I don't think it's even shared by most Jews. It is, however, a view shared by many religious extremists who feel "entitled" by virtue of their religious identity - for example Muslim extremists.

Disliking that view and speaking critically of it is not "hating Jews".

I think you are right though, that in some cases - anti-Zionism is also a subtle way of masking anti-semitism. What determines it though is not opposition to Zionism, but the bigger picture of the person's arguments.

'Settlers' have no "movement"

People talk about settlements as they do on people who have clear ideology of taking over Palestinian lands.

But about half of the settlers sit in the settlements simply because the housing is cheaper in those areas.

Many of them couldn't care less about politics.

Yet they are being waved at with things they're not to be blamed for.

I compare many of the settlers to those who went to the Frontiers of America in its early stages. They are going there to start a new life and because they can afford it. Of course there are some that are very religious. However they are generally non violent pacifists.

That's a great comparison actually, because there's another component to the American frontier movement that encouraged westward expansion at the expense of indiginous people, and that was Manifest Destiny. The frontier movement was a combination of a belief that it was right and just and divinely ordained and the need for land and a chance to start a new life, often from immigrants who came from areas that had no such opportunities.

 

[pbel]

Respectfully, the fact that you're asking the question is part of the problem.

Zionism is a movement that advocates the existence of a Jewish State in Israel.

That's it. Plain and simple.

When you open up the term to be defined by each person, you play into the hands of those who are trying to mask anti-Semitism. You allow them to say, "oh, well for me, Zionism means the desire to remove all non-Jews from Israel," or "for me, Zionism means the goal of displacing Arabs to expand Jewish land." Neither of these are accurate definitions of Zionism, but many anti-Semites will say things like that so they can hide their bigotry behind the term "anti-Zionism."

So it turns out that Lewis Carroll's Humpty Dumpty was wrong when he said “When I use a word, it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less."

Words have meanings.

That is the absurdity of your claims...How about anti-Semites like Harry Truman whose support at the UN was crucial for Israel to become a State? Why did he put his Nation's Interest for a puppet state to put fear into the Arab Oil states over his obvious bigotry...

There are people on the boards who are bigots and many are Zionists.

Your example has nothing to do with anything I said. Certainly, an anti-Semite could, if he or she believed it furthered other interests, act in a way that favors Israel. Just as many racists wear the jerseys of African-American athletes.

Although you did not address Zionist Bigotry makes one presume that Bigotry is not a player on these boards and the mere accusation is an Insult and should be noted to the USMB monitors...

Do you agree?

 

[Roudy]

'Settlers' have no "movement"

People talk about settlements as they do on people who have clear ideology of taking over Palestinian lands.

But about half of the settlers sit in the settlements simply because the housing is cheaper in those areas.

Many of them couldn't care less about politics.

Yet they are being waved at with things they're not to be blamed for.

I compare many of the settlers to those who went to the Frontiers of America in its early stages. They are going there to start a new life and because they can afford it. Of course there are some that are very religious. However they are generally non violent pacifists.

That's a great comparison actually, because there's another component to the American frontier movement that encouraged westward expansion at the expense of indiginous people, and that was Manifest Destiny. The frontier movement was a combination of a belief that it was right and just and divinely ordained and the need for land and a chance to start a new life, often from immigrants who came from areas that had no such opportunities.

However the difference between this and the Frontier Movement is that the Arabs are recent invaders to the land (as in the last two centuries) and the Jews, unlike the White Europeans do have ties and a deep history in the land, far more than the Arabs.

 

[Coyote]

I compare many of the settlers to those who went to the Frontiers of America in its early stages. They are going there to start a new life and because they can afford it. Of course there are some that are very religious. However they are generally non violent pacifists.

That's a great comparison actually, because there's another component to the American frontier movement that encouraged westward expansion at the expense of indiginous people, and that was Manifest Destiny. The frontier movement was a combination of a belief that it was right and just and divinely ordained and the need for land and a chance to start a new life, often from immigrants who came from areas that had no such opportunities.

However the difference between this and the Frontier Movement is that the Arabs are recent invaders to the land (as in the last two centuries) and the Jews, unlike the White Europeans do have ties and a deep history in the land, far more than the Arabs.

There's not really much of a difference. The Palestinians and Jews are largely the same people: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2000/05/000509003653.htm - so there are no "recent invaders".

I shouldn't have said "indiginous" but rather current inhabitants of that land who do have deep ties and a deep history there.

 

[Wonky Pundit]

You mean those 20 Naturea Karta nutjobs who think Israel should be destroyed and are regular guests at Iran's Holocaust denial conventions? They aren't even considered Jews nor do they represent the opinions of about 15 million Jews worldwide. I can tell you in my entire life, I have yet to meet a single Jew that believed "establishing Israel was a mistake", even the most liberal crazy Jews don't believe that. Some of them are actually even more Zionists than right wingers. They are just delusional in their approach to the Palestinian / Israeli conflict.

Now you've just met one. I also have several friends and family members who believe the same thing, and I wouldn't call any one of us "zionists."

One day you'll need Israel and then you'll get your mistake.

I hope I don't, but only because I see myself as an American (to the core) and not an Israeli.

Which is why, when those in power talk about trying to selectively change the way the law treats people of a particular ethnicity or religion, I'll fight them. To the death if necessary. For me, that's a major part of what it means to be American.

 

[HistoryBefore67]

That is the absurdity of your claims...How about anti-Semites like Harry Truman whose support at the UN was crucial for Israel to become a State? Why did he put his Nation's Interest for a puppet state to put fear into the Arab Oil states over his obvious bigotry...

There are people on the boards who are bigots and many are Zionists.

Your example has nothing to do with anything I said. Certainly, an anti-Semite could, if he or she believed it furthered other interests, act in a way that favors Israel. Just as many racists wear the jerseys of African-American athletes.

Although you did not address Zionist Bigotry makes one presume that Bigotry is not a player on these boards and the mere accusation is an Insult and should be noted to the USMB monitors...

Do you agree?

Um... yeah... I have no clue what you're trying to say there.

 

[Wonky Pundit]

Oh sure. Any true Jew would not call themselves an "anti Zionist." That is ridiculous. Zionism is embedded as part of the Jewish faith. When a Jew marries part of the oath he swears is to never forget Jerusalem (Zion), when he/she prays it is towards Jerusalem, when he/she is buried it is towards Jerusalem, when the Messiah comes it will be in Zion, etc. And so on.

And I'm Superman. It's easy to be whoever you want to be on internet. LOL

Why the hell would I bother to lie about something like that?

Apart from which, I don't call myself either an anti-zionist or a zionist. I'm Jewish by ancestry only, and I no longer practice Judaism. (I've got nothing against it, but the rituals just don't mean much to me personally.) If you want to think that means I'm not a "true Jew," whatever that is, that's your business. I'm not ashamed of my background or my choices.

Oh then you're an atheist, that explains it. Case closed.

Depends on how you define "God." But as I said, whatever you think I am is your business, so I'm perfectly happy to close that case.

 

[MHunterB]

Here is a question for each poster - in your view, what is Zionism?

Respectfully, the fact that you're asking the question is part of the problem.

Zionism is a movement that advocates the existence of a Jewish State in Israel.

That's it. Plain and simple.

When you open up the term to be defined by each person, you play into the hands of those who are trying to mask anti-Semitism. You allow them to say, "oh, well for me, Zionism means the desire to remove all non-Jews from Israel," or "for me, Zionism means the goal of displacing Arabs to expand Jewish land." Neither of these are accurate definitions of Zionism, but many anti-Semites will say things like that so they can hide their bigotry behind the term "anti-Zionism."

So it turns out that Lewis Carroll's Humpty Dumpty was wrong when he said “When I use a word, it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less."

Words have meanings.

That is the absurdity of your claims...How about anti-Semites like Harry Truman whose support at the UN was crucial for Israel to become a State? Why did he put his Nation's Interest for a puppet state to put fear into the Arab Oil states over his obvious bigotry...

There are people on the boards who are bigots and many are Zionists.

Phil, there's a logic fallacy there. First of all, 'anti-semitism' like any other bigotry is not an 'on/off' function: it's a gradation which would form into some bell-shaped curve (NB: this is NOT a reference to the book of that title!!!!!). One can hold a number of views which are within the 'constellation' of malignant memes which are characteristically repeated by more extreme/committed anti-semites - and yet not be overall and entirely given over to anti-Semitism.

Although his research was conducted on racial attitudes, one might look at the work of Dr. A. Poussaint for a (MUCH!) better explanation.

Indeed, being a Zionist does not vaccinate one against bigotry - any more than does being a pacifist, a humanitarian, a Christian, a clergyperson, whatever. As to the 'many', that's your personal opinion - which is worth exactly what anyone else's opinion of your opinions is worth to that person.

There are several possible answers to your question about Truman:
1) His bigotry being a personal feeling, he set it aside to do what he believed would be best for the interests of the US. I think this is the most likely, as Truman is also the one who ordered the full racial integration of the US Armed Forces: wasn't he described as a 'racist'?

2) His bigotry was merely on the level of 'baggage' from his childhood and his recorded words are no worse than those of many cotemporary 'ordinary' Americans. I've had friends who didn't understand that 'I jewed him down' was an anti-Semitic expression. And my own Christian relatives had a phrase 'a Jew picnic' which they inherited from a grandmother who wasn't any more of a bigot than the average Yankee, and probably less.... We don't think about the import of the phrases we grew up hearing, as a rule - not until someone shows us it's a problem.

3) I dunno: I think the other two are the most reasonable, but there's always room for a full assortment of conspiracy 'theories' - I'm not going there.

In short: Not all who use anti-Semitic expressions from time to time are actual anti-semites. I knew a guy who would shout 'Nxxxxx!' if he hit his thumb with a hammer - and yet he wasn't a racist, he never expressed any overt negative attitudes towards blacks, had black friends. He grew up with a father who 'cussed' that way, and it was a 'blind' habit he worked hard to break - but it drove me bonkers hearing it.

Not every last anti-Semite is 'anti-Israel' - but very many of those who ARE 'anti-Israel' are so because they are 'anti-Jew' first of all.

Logically, 'all A are B' does not equate to 'all B are A' - that's the fallacy. All apples are fruits, but NOT all fruits are apples.

And of course, human beings are a great deal more complex than apples : )) There are ALWAYS exceptions to any general statement one can make about humans.....

 

[sealadaigh]

That's why we have to keep reminding people.

It is a common Arab tactic to hijack words and use them for their own purpose. Whether its changing the definition of Apartheid, Holocaust, ethinic-cleansing, or Zionist, its a dishonest tactic.

I will continue to point out this type of dishonesty when I encounter it.

It's not just an Arab tactic - I see the same thing occuring against Muslims by attempting to redefine terms such as Taquiya (sp?) or Sharia (utilizing extreme examples to define the entire concept).

While I disagree with the use of "Holocaust" in describing any situations not part of WW2 and I disagree with the use of the term genocide against Israel - I think ethnic cleansing as talked about by historians like Benny Morris, can be applicable and I think comparisons to apartheid can be part of the debate. I don't think that is dishonest in regards to some of the injustices and inequalities that do occur.

in ireland we have learned that when you give up the words, you give up the struggle.

zionism is what is practised by israel with cluster bombs in lebanon, willie peter rounds in gaza, IDF T shirts saying "one shot, two kills" with a pregnant women in the crosshairs.

words and meanings evolve. you mentioned "manifest destiny". it had a totally different meaning in the mid 1800s on to the antonio lopez de santa ana and the mexican peoples and mahpia luta, totanka yotanka, tashunka witko and the native tribal groups than it did for pres. james polk, general zachry taylor, and general george custer as they lied, cheated, and killed their way through north america..

"Historians have for the most part agreed that there are three basic themes to Manifest Destiny. 1. The special virtues of the American people and their institutions; 2. America's mission to redeem and remake the world in the image of America; A divine destiny under God's direction to accomplish this wonderful task." (R.J. Miller)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manifest_destiny

"zionism" is what is going on in israel today and it includes land theft, war crimes, human rights abuses, and acts of genocide...and i ain't fooled.

you can put as much lipstick on that pig as you want but i sure as hell ain't gonna kiss it.