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

[MHunterB]

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.

jewish people exclude the millions of non-jewish victims in their definition of the holocaust, which is bigotry.

This is a lie. Unless one has spoken to absolutely every Jew. And the fact that SOME Jews may indeed do so, can be attributed to their individual ignorance rather than the 'bigotry' you are insisting.

as for genocide, there is a legal definition and the word "intent" is used in that definition, as are the words "national, ethnical, racial, or religious group.

And such 'intent' on the part of Israel vis a vis mistreatment of Palestinians simply does not exist - particularly not on any national, organized, official manner. The same CANNOT be said about the PLO/PA and HAMAS Charters.

the jewish people claim that no one did anything when the holocaust was happening to prevent it.

Again, this is an exceedingly Inappropriate use of 'the Jewish people' - and it is absolutely false. It's also not a 'claim' but demonstrable fact: the Allies held a conference to talk about Hitler's genocide, and concluded they didn't need to do anything to interfere..... The US State Dep't actively obstructed the efforts of US citizens to rescue their family members from Nazi Germany.

i do not want my grandchildren to ask me someday why no one did anything to prevent the genocide of the palestinians.

And here we have a monstrous perversion of history - trying to assert there's a parallel between the situation of the Palestinians via vis Israel and that of 'Jews' (and everyone else) vis a vis Nazi Germany.

 

[sealadaigh]

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.

jewish people exclude the millions of non-jewish victims in their definition of the holocaust, which is bigotry.

as for genocide, there is a legal definition and the word "intent" is used in that definition, as are the words "national, ethnical, racial, or religious group.

the jewish people claim that no one did anything when the holocaust was happening to prevent it. i do not want my grandchildren to ask me someday why no one did anything to prevent the genocide of the palestinians.

It's a very ineffective genocide since Palestinians have only multiplied exceedingly.
Sarcasm aside, practically every Jewish family has been affected by the Holocaust, since we're such a small nation. Do you have relatives that were killed in the Holocaust? Also, Hitler screamed, "Kill the Jews" the loudest and especially hated us. We are fully aware that six million other individuals were killed in concentration camps, and 50 million soldiers from all nations, and bombing victims, also died.

the dead are the dead and none are more special than the others.

i have been called a nazi by jewish posters several times on these boards and have two uncles who died in WWII and a father who died earlier than he should have from wounds suffered at tthe hands of the german army, leaving me, as the oldest child, the pleasure of helping raise four younger siblings.

no, i do not have any relatives who died in the holocaust. do you have any relatives who died in "the Starvation".

my dead are no more special than yours and yours are no more dead than mine.

well, actually, yours may be more important. a national memorial museum was built to dead european jews of WWII before even a memorial was built to those american men and women who gave their lives in that conflict...but hey, it is what it is.

you may actually want to look up the accepted legal definition of genocide. it is not a numbers game.

why do jews, as a group, insist on seperating themselves from the trajedies other peoples suffer when their should be some empathy. i mean, they can minimise the sacrifices of my family and people and i will pretty much shrug my shoulders...but it certainly doesn't engender any good will, and some people do become very offended and resentful of that. a shared and common tragedy should be shared, not hoarded an used to seperate,

i empathise with the palestenian people in their struggle against the planters, settlers, whatever. we all should.

 

[HistoryBefore67]

why do jews, as a group, insist on seperating themselves from the trajedies other peoples suffer when their should be some empathy. .

I've already proven that is not the case with a simple link to Yad Vashem's website. Why do you think that, by repeating your lies, they will ultimately become the truth?

But, hey... if you want me to humiliate you more, I certainly can oblige...

Would you like for me to post links to articles about Israel setting up field hospitals in Haiti following their tragic earthquake?

How about articles about Israel providing high-tech medical treatment to Arabs?

Or maybe some about how Israel offered assistance during natural disasters in Turkey, notwithstanding that country's increasingly hostile stance?

I could post about the many Jews who played key roles in the U.S. Civil Rights movement in the 1960s.

Or even simple references to the efforts of Jewish filmmakers to raise awareness of the plights of non-Jews through their artistic endeavors.

You are a bigot, Sir.

You denigrate Jews with every word you post.

You're not fooling anyone.

 

[MHunterB]

definitions evolve and change.

we could discuss etymology forever to no end.

why are you even discussing the meaning of "zionism". just post the standard dictionary definition.

Okay...

According to Webster's, Zionism is "an international movement originally for the establishment of a Jewish national or religious community in Palestine and later for the support of modern Israel."

Any questions?

that's fine. we now have your opinion. you are no longer needed....we can discuss the meaning or "national" or "nation" at some later date.

For a person who's been so quick to cite others' words as 'rude' - I really think you may wish to reconsider the bolded part I particular

i am opposed to the creation of religious states.

Most Americans are, yes.

i guess that makes me an anti-zionist

Not necessarily.

and, according to some jewish posters, an anti-semite.

No, being opposed to religious states does not make one an anti-Semite. Being opposed to Israel but*not* to KSA or any other nation which disallows the practice of some religions (Iran), suggests that one's 'opposition to religious states' is actually 'opposition to *Jewish* religious states' - which indeed by any reasonable definition is exactty 'antisemitism' (in the original 'German' definition)

i think you will find that most americans are opposed to the modern creation of religious states,

Yes, I said so. But that's fairly irrelevant, since that's not really what's under discussion.

and i am opposed to all religious states in general,

So you insist: however I note that I've never seen a single post by you relating to the outlawing of the Baha'i faith in Iran, or the fact that KSA has outlawed any religion but Islam.

other than small, titular states for the administration and education of that particular religion but i am not for granting them any kind of political power as a state.

OK, so you want to make an exception for the Vatican. Since you've been so vocal about your Cathoicism, though - one might well wonder if that's the reason for your desiring this 'exception'?

i suppose i could make an exception to those beliefs

It seems possible to me that you already have (see above)

but if i treat one people more favourably than other peoples, that would make me a bigot, and i am not that way.

No comment - although I admit I did find myself thinking of a quatrain by Robert Burns upon reading that.

 

[pbel]

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.

What is it precisely that you can't grasp? What I said was that bigotry by Zionists on this board raise the anti-Semitism defense when at a loss for a rational defense...that's what all bigots do.

 

[HistoryBefore67]

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.

What is it precisely that you can't grasp? What I said was that bigotry by Zionists on this board raise the anti-Semitism defense when at a loss for a rational defense...that's what all bigots do.

If you think that Zionism is bigotry, then you are not worth having a conversation with.

 

[sealadaigh]

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.

jewish people exclude the millions of non-jewish victims in their definition of the holocaust, which is bigotry.

This is a lie. Unless one has spoken to absolutely every Jew. And the fact that SOME Jews may indeed do so, can be attributed to their individual ignorance rather than the 'bigotry' you are insisting.


And such 'intent' on the part of Israel vis a vis mistreatment of Palestinians simply does not exist - particularly not on any national, organized, official manner. The same CANNOT be said about the PLO/PA and HAMAS Charters.

the jewish people claim that no one did anything when the holocaust was happening to prevent it.

Again, this is an exceedingly Inappropriate use of 'the Jewish people' - and it is absolutely false. It's also not a 'claim' but demonstrable fact: the Allies held a conference to talk about Hitler's genocide, and concluded they didn't need to do anything to interfere..... The US State Dep't actively obstructed the efforts of US citizens to rescue their family members from Nazi Germany.

i do not want my grandchildren to ask me someday why no one did anything to prevent the genocide of the palestinians.

And here we have a monstrous perversion of history - trying to assert there's a parallel between the situation of the Palestinians via vis Israel and that of 'Jews' (and everyone else) vis a vis Nazi Germany.

you are way to antsy. it is quite common to refer to people in general terms. it occurs all the time. "red sox fans were ecstatic...", not "some red sox fans were ecstatic..." jews often refer to jewish people. i think a greater percentage of jewish people exclude non-jews from their definition nof the holocaust than muslims are savages or palestinians use their children as human shields.

charters are historical documents essentially and mean very little beyond that, israel saaid they were going to make a cconstitution early on. they haven't. so what.

i am not equating or comparing the palestinians plight to the holocaust.

"jewish people" is not inappropriate, unless you are claiming there is no jewish people jewish "nation". all you are doing is exhibiting your double standard because you do not object when SOME of the jewish posters use similar generalisations and you nyourself as well.

personally, i have no problem with including catholic clergy, gays, the roma, the disabled, and the millions and millions of others killed bu the nazis in the camps as victims of the holocaust. it is a done deal. we can fight this and educate those jews and gentiles who exclude them. OK?

it will be a pleasure to work with you in acknowledging these people..

 

[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.

jewish people exclude the millions of non-jewish victims in their definition of the holocaust, which is bigotry.

To some degree, I agree - the Holocaust involved the wholesale slaughter of many people and that is often overlooked. However, in terms of overall numbrs the Jews were the single largest group singled out via deliberate propaganda, numbers killed, and geographic terroritories covered. It was, for them, a Holocaust. In other countries - it was a means of getting rid of undesirable minorities - Roms, disabled, certain religious groups - but in every country involved it included the Jews.

as for genocide, there is a legal definition and the word "intent" is used in that definition, as are the words "national, ethnical, racial, or religious group.

Genocide - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The 1948 United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (CPPCG). Article 2 of this convention defines genocide as "any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such: killing members of the group; causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life, calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; [and] forcibly transferring children of the group to another group."[4]



I don't think genocide is applicable to Israel based on intent - they want to get drive out the Palestinians in the Occupied Territories and replace them with Jewish settlers. I think ethnic cleansing is.

Ethnic Cleansing: Ethnic cleansing (compare Serbo-Croatian etničko čišćenje[1]) is the process or policy of eliminating unwanted ethnic or religious groups by deportation, forcible displacement, mass murder, or by threats of such acts, with the intent of creating a territory inhabited by people of a homogeneous or pure ethnicity, religion, culture, and history. Ethnic cleansing usually involves attempts to remove physical and cultural evidence of the targeted group in the territory through the destruction of homes, social centers, farms, and infrastructure, and by the desecration of monuments, cemeteries, and places of worship.

the jewish people claim that no one did anything when the holocaust was happening to prevent it. i do not want my grandchildren to ask me someday why no one did anything to prevent the genocide of the palestinians.

I see your point but - the differences between what was happening during the Holocaust and currently in I/P are huge orders of magnitude - not even truly comparable.

 

[MHunterB]

Thanks to Coyote for fixing my post : )) I can't get this computer to do things most of the time....

 

[sealadaigh]

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

What is it precisely that you can't grasp? What I said was that bigotry by Zionists on this board raise the anti-Semitism defense when at a loss for a rational defense...that's what all bigots do.

If you think that Zionism is bigotry, then you are not worth having a conversation with.

jaysus...he didn't saay that.

 

[HistoryBefore67]

What is it precisely that you can't grasp? What I said was that bigotry by Zionists on this board raise the anti-Semitism defense when at a loss for a rational defense...that's what all bigots do.

If you think that Zionism is bigotry, then you are not worth having a conversation with.

jaysus...he didn't saay that.

His words are so garbled I really don't know what point he's trying to make. It seemed to be an attempt to call Zionists bigots but, quite frankly, I really don't care what his point was.

 

[Coyote]

the jewish people claim that no one did anything when the holocaust was happening to prevent it.

Again, this is an exceedingly Inappropriate use of 'the Jewish people' - and it is absolutely false. It's also not a 'claim' but demonstrable fact: the Allies held a conference to talk about Hitler's genocide, and concluded they didn't need to do anything to interfere..... The US State Dep't actively obstructed the efforts of US citizens to rescue their family members from Nazi Germany.

I have to agree, and it's a shameful period in our history - we turned away refugees and sent them back. I can't begin to imagine the terror and desperation of those people who had no where to go but back.

 

[Coyote]

Thanks to Coyote for fixing my post : )) I can't get this computer to do things most of the time....

The quote functions can be annoyingly picky

 

[Roudy]

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.

Nah, that's Zionism according to an anti Semite and a neo Nazi.

Zionism has a pretty simple definition, actually.

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: Its general definition means the national movement for the return of the Jewish people to their homeland and the resumption of Jewish sovereignty in the Land of Israel.

Since the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948, Zionism has come to include the movement for the development of the State of Israel and the protection of the Jewish nation in Israel through support for the Israel Defense Forces. From inception, Zionism avocated tangible as well as spiritual aims. Jews of all persuasions - left, right, religious and secular - formed the Zionist movement and worked together toward its goals.

Zionism, Jewish nationalist movement that has had as its goal the creation and support of a Jewish national state in Palestine, the ancient homeland of the Jews (Hebrew: Eretz Yisraʾel, “the Land of Israel”). It is in many ways a continuation of the ancient nationalist attachment of the Jews and of the Jewish religion to the historical region of Palestine, where one of the hills of ancient Jerusalem was called Zion.

 

[sealadaigh]

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.

jewish people exclude the millions of non-jewish victims in their definition of the holocaust, which is bigotry.

To some degree, I agree - the Holocaust involved the wholesale slaughter of many people and that is often overlooked. However, in terms of overall numbrs the Jews were the single largest group singled out via deliberate propaganda, numbers killed, and geographic terroritories covered. It was, for them, a Holocaust. In other countries - it was a means of getting rid of undesirable minorities - Roms, disabled, certain religious groups - but in every country involved it included the Jews.

as for genocide, there is a legal definition and the word "intent" is used in that definition, as are the words "national, ethnical, racial, or religious group.

Genocide - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The 1948 United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (CPPCG). Article 2 of this convention defines genocide as "any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such: killing members of the group; causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life, calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; [and] forcibly transferring children of the group to another group."[4]



I don't think genocide is applicable to Israel based on intent - they want to get drive out the Palestinians in the Occupied Territories and replace them with Jewish settlers. I think ethnic cleansing is.

Ethnic Cleansing: Ethnic cleansing (compare Serbo-Croatian etničko čišćenje[1]) is the process or policy of eliminating unwanted ethnic or religious groups by deportation, forcible displacement, mass murder, or by threats of such acts, with the intent of creating a territory inhabited by people of a homogeneous or pure ethnicity, religion, culture, and history. Ethnic cleansing usually involves attempts to remove physical and cultural evidence of the targeted group in the territory through the destruction of homes, social centers, farms, and infrastructure, and by the desecration of monuments, cemeteries, and places of worship.

the jewish people claim that no one did anything when the holocaust was happening to prevent it. i do not want my grandchildren to ask me someday why no one did anything to prevent the genocide of the palestinians.

I see your point but - the differences between what was happening during the Holocaust and currently in I/P are huge orders of magnitude - not even truly comparable.

i am not comparing the magnitudes and i do not even like the suggestion that i am. it would be hard to find something to equal the magnitude of the holocaust.

to me an injustice is an injustice, and that is the basis for my statement. nothing is comparable to anything then.

fine though. all other genocides pale in comparison to the inviable holocaust and are not even worth mentioning. i will drop the subject and take it up again when however many an acceptable amount are killed. little genocides are A-OK.

as for intent. you do not think it is the intent of israel or zionists to annex judea and samaria at some point, depriving what the palestinian want as their national homeland.

 

[Roudy]

Joos Joos Joos. This guy hates Jews with a passion:

Squeal:

jewish people exclude the millions of non-jewish victims in their definition of the holocaust, which is bigotry.

So I guess Armenians practice bigotry when they mention only themselves as the Victims of Turkish / Ottoman genocide? Insane logic. Ha ha ha

 

[Roudy]

why do jews, as a group, insist on seperating themselves from the trajedies other peoples suffer when their should be some empathy. .

I've already proven that is not the case with a simple link to Yad Vashem's website. Why do you think that, by repeating your lies, they will ultimately become the truth?

But, hey... if you want me to humiliate you more, I certainly can oblige...

Would you like for me to post links to articles about Israel setting up field hospitals in Haiti following their tragic earthquake?

How about articles about Israel providing high-tech medical treatment to Arabs?

Or maybe some about how Israel offered assistance during natural disasters in Turkey, notwithstanding that country's increasingly hostile stance?

I could post about the many Jews who played key roles in the U.S. Civil Rights movement in the 1960s.

Or even simple references to the efforts of Jewish filmmakers to raise awareness of the plights of non-Jews through their artistic endeavors.

You are a bigot, Sir.

You denigrate Jews with every word you post.

You're not fooling anyone.

 

[Coyote]

jewish people exclude the millions of non-jewish victims in their definition of the holocaust, which is bigotry.

To some degree, I agree - the Holocaust involved the wholesale slaughter of many people and that is often overlooked. However, in terms of overall numbrs the Jews were the single largest group singled out via deliberate propaganda, numbers killed, and geographic terroritories covered. It was, for them, a Holocaust. In other countries - it was a means of getting rid of undesirable minorities - Roms, disabled, certain religious groups - but in every country involved it included the Jews.



Genocide - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The 1948 United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (CPPCG). Article 2 of this convention defines genocide as "any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such: killing members of the group; causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life, calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; [and] forcibly transferring children of the group to another group."[4]



I don't think genocide is applicable to Israel based on intent - they want to get drive out the Palestinians in the Occupied Territories and replace them with Jewish settlers. I think ethnic cleansing is.

Ethnic Cleansing: Ethnic cleansing (compare Serbo-Croatian etničko čišćenje[1]) is the process or policy of eliminating unwanted ethnic or religious groups by deportation, forcible displacement, mass murder, or by threats of such acts, with the intent of creating a territory inhabited by people of a homogeneous or pure ethnicity, religion, culture, and history. Ethnic cleansing usually involves attempts to remove physical and cultural evidence of the targeted group in the territory through the destruction of homes, social centers, farms, and infrastructure, and by the desecration of monuments, cemeteries, and places of worship.

the jewish people claim that no one did anything when the holocaust was happening to prevent it. i do not want my grandchildren to ask me someday why no one did anything to prevent the genocide of the palestinians.

I see your point but - the differences between what was happening during the Holocaust and currently in I/P are huge orders of magnitude - not even truly comparable.

i am not comparing the magnitudes and i do not even like the suggestion that i am. it would be hard to find something to equal the magnitude of the holocaust.

to me an injustice is an injustice, and that is the basis for my statement. nothing is comparable to anything then.

I agree and one of my gripes with Israel some of it's more one-sided supporters is they are trying to correct one injustice by perpetrating another. That doesn't work...

fine though. all other genocides pale in comparison to the inviable holocaust and are not even worth mentioning. i will drop the subject and take it up again when however many an acceptable amount are killed.

It's not what is an acceptable amount - it's what it is is (in my opinion ). It's two different terms with different orders of magnitude. I would call Rwanda genocide, I would call Bosnia genocide. I would call the Palestinian situation - which is the extension of a long-going conflict, ethnic cleansing at this point

as for intent. you do not think it is the intent of israel or zionists to annex judea and samaria at some point, depriving what the palestinian want as their national homeland.

Agree - that is what I see as intent, but is an intent I see with ethnic cleansing. If you call consider that intent as grounds for a charge of genocide then how would you define the Palestinians who want to take the entire area including Israel for their state?

 

[sealadaigh]

To some degree, I agree - the Holocaust involved the wholesale slaughter of many people and that is often overlooked. However, in terms of overall numbrs the Jews were the single largest group singled out via deliberate propaganda, numbers killed, and geographic terroritories covered. It was, for them, a Holocaust. In other countries - it was a means of getting rid of undesirable minorities - Roms, disabled, certain religious groups - but in every country involved it included the Jews.



Genocide - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The 1948 United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (CPPCG). Article 2 of this convention defines genocide as "any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such: killing members of the group; causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life, calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; [and] forcibly transferring children of the group to another group."[4]



I don't think genocide is applicable to Israel based on intent - they want to get drive out the Palestinians in the Occupied Territories and replace them with Jewish settlers. I think ethnic cleansing is.

Ethnic Cleansing: Ethnic cleansing (compare Serbo-Croatian etničko čišćenje[1]) is the process or policy of eliminating unwanted ethnic or religious groups by deportation, forcible displacement, mass murder, or by threats of such acts, with the intent of creating a territory inhabited by people of a homogeneous or pure ethnicity, religion, culture, and history. Ethnic cleansing usually involves attempts to remove physical and cultural evidence of the targeted group in the territory through the destruction of homes, social centers, farms, and infrastructure, and by the desecration of monuments, cemeteries, and places of worship.



I see your point but - the differences between what was happening during the Holocaust and currently in I/P are huge orders of magnitude - not even truly comparable.

i am not comparing the magnitudes and i do not even like the suggestion that i am. it would be hard to find something to equal the magnitude of the holocaust.

to me an injustice is an injustice, and that is the basis for my statement. nothing is comparable to anything then.

I agree and one of my gripes with Israel some of it's more one-sided supporters is they are trying to correct one injustice by perpetrating another. That doesn't work...

fine though. all other genocides pale in comparison to the inviable holocaust and are not even worth mentioning. i will drop the subject and take it up again when however many an acceptable amount are killed.

It's not what is an acceptable amount - it's what it is is (in my opinion ). It's two different terms with different orders of magnitude. I would call Rwanda genocide, I would call Bosnia genocide. I would call the Palestinian situation - which is the extension of a long-going conflict, ethnic cleansing at this point

as for intent. you do not think it is the intent of israel or zionists to annex judea and samaria at some point, depriving what the palestinian want as their national homeland.

Agree - that is what I see as intent, but is an intent I see with ethnic cleansing. If you call consider that intent as grounds for a charge of genocide then how would you define the Palestinians who want to take the entire area including Israel for their state?

i question, as always, whether the jewish religion has a right to establish a state on the land of a native people.

i see no reason for any of the people o the middle east to suffer becasuse ot the acts of europeans and i do not think england or the UN had any right to divvy up that land.

here is what i find amazing. i think most people who think that the creatin of israel is acceptable but would reject that notion when applied to anyone else. for instance, why shouldn't black americans be allowed to form a country out of the gulf states and evict the current inhabitants. why shouldn't mormons be allowed to create a state in utah based upon their religious beliefs.

yet i am the bigot for not willing to afford jewish people, a religious people, with special privilege.

i think those few palestinians who want a "judenfrei" palestine are guilty of genocide as well but i also think they are well within their rights to object to a"a jewish state" in the region.

this is a european mess and american mess and we should take care of it. we owe reparations. america and europeaan states should absorb all those in refugee camps and offer them a life.

america is rapidly becoming a majority catholic nation. can you imagine the protests should the united states declare themselves a catholic state. it would be just wrong.

the palestinians didn't make this mess.

 

[sealadaigh]

the jewish people claim that no one did anything when the holocaust was happening to prevent it.

Again, this is an exceedingly Inappropriate use of 'the Jewish people' - and it is absolutely false. It's also not a 'claim' but demonstrable fact: the Allies held a conference to talk about Hitler's genocide, and concluded they didn't need to do anything to interfere..... The US State Dep't actively obstructed the efforts of US citizens to rescue their family members from Nazi Germany.

I have to agree, and it's a shameful period in our history - we turned away refugees and sent them back. I can't begin to imagine the terror and desperation of those people who had no where to go but back.

thank god israel doesn't turn away refugees or crimialise them.