The Dark Inevitability of Zionism

[RoccoR]

RE: The Dark Inevitability of Zionism
※→ P F Tinmore, et al

You get things like this wrong all the time.

The Arab Palestinians DID NOT attempt to Independence until September 1948 (4 months later); and it was immediately in conflict by including the State of Israel as part of the Arab Sovereignty.

That is the point. The Palestinians declared independence on land inside its international borders. BTW, according to the 1949 armistice agreements, that Israel signed, those borders were still intact. So, what does Israel have to do with that?

• Israel-Egypt Armistice Agreement, 24 February 1949 •
Article XII
2. This Agreement, having been negotiated and concluded in pursuance of the resolution of the Security Council of 16 November 1948 calling for the establishment of an armistice in order to eliminate the threat to the peace in Palestine and to facilitate the transition from the present truce to permanent peace in Palestine, shall remain in force until a peaceful settlement between the Parties is achieved, except as provided in paragraph 3 of this Article.

√ Replaced by: Treaty of Peace between the Arab Republic of Egypt and the State of Israel, 26 March 1979 •​

• Lebanese-Israeli General Armistice Agreement, March 23, 1949 •
Article VIII
2. This Agreement, having been negotiated and concluded in pursuance of the resolution of the Security Council of 16 November 1948 calling for the establishment of an armistice in order to eliminate the threat to the peace in Palestine and to facilitate the transition frown the present truce to permanent peace in Palestine, shall remain in force until a peaceful settlement between the Parties is achieved, except as provided in paragraph 3 of this Article.

√ II. Report of the Secretary-General of 22 May 2000 (S/2000/460)
Letter dated 9 June 2000 from the President of Lebanon addressed to the Secretary-General
Paragraph 11 of this report states that “for the practical purpose of confirming the Israeli withdrawal, the United Nations needs to identify a line to be adopted conforming to the internationally recognized boundaries of Lebanon ...” and that “the United Nations will then identify physically, on the ground, those portions of the line necessary or relevant to confirming the withdrawal of Israeli forces”.​

• Jordanian-Israeli General Armistice Agreement, April 3, 1949 •
Article XII
2. This Agreement, having been negotiated and concluded in pursuance of the resolution of the Security Council of 16 November 1948 calling for the establishment of an armistice in order to eliminate the threat to the peace in Palestine and to facilitate the transition from the present truce to permanent peace in Palestine, shall remain in force until a peaceful settlement between the Parties is achieved except as provided in paragraph 3 of this article.

√ The Jordan-Israel Peace Treaty was signed on October 26, 1994 •​

• Israeli-Syrian General Armistice Agreement, July 20, 1949 •
Article VIII
2 This Agreement, having been negotiated and concluded in pursuance of the resolution of the Security Council of 16 November 1948, calling for the establishment of an armistice in order to eliminate the threat to the peace in Palestine and to facilitate the transition from the present truce to permanent peace in Palestine, shall remain in force until a peaceful settlement between the Parties is achieved, except as provided in paragraph 3 of this article.

√ No Peace or Border Arrangement​

As far as the West Bank and Gaza Strip are concerned, the Treaties with Jordan and Egypt voided the Armistice Lines. The separate Agreement (UNSECGEN - PRESIDENT of LEBANON) on the International Border with Lebanon replaces the Armistice Agreement on the border. Only a small portion of the Border, while defined, is still in dispute.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: The Dark Inevitability of Zionism
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

Well, that is your perspective. The discussion on the dispute has moved much farther along.

The fact that, while many criticize Israel for its position on the Administration of the territory (West Bank), the West Bank was not under any sovereignty until after the termination of the Mandate (May 1948) and the simultaneous independence of Israel. The Arab Palestinians DID NOT attempt to Independence until September 1948 (4 months later); and it was immediately in conflict by including the State of Israel as part of the Arab Sovereignty.

In 1949, the Armistice went into effect. The West Bank was Occupied by Jordanian Forces.
In April 1950, Jordan annexed the West Bank.

The territorial dispute wherein "the inadmissibility of seizure of land belonging to others by means of force or military invasion," is the mantra claimed,

Indeed, and when asked to prove otherwise you start dancing.

(COMMENT)

In 1967, after Jordanian Artillery fired first on Israeli Positions, Israel Forces pursued Jordanian Forces out of the West Bank. Israel now Occupied Jordanian Sovereign Territory (The West Bank).

∑ª: The Israelis never entered Sovereign Palestinian Territory.

There is no dancing. Your question presupposes that the Arab Palestinians has established some sort of sovereign control and the Israelis took that sovereignty and control away... That is 100% wrong.

※→ The question should be: WHAT Territory do you claim that the Arab Palestinian exercised sovereignty over, that Israel now occupies?

•∆• Answer: NONE​

Most Respectfully,
R

The Arab Palestinians DID NOT attempt to Independence until September 1948 (4 months later); and it was immediately in conflict by including the State of Israel as part of the Arab Sovereignty.

That is the point. The Palestinians declared independence on land inside its international borders. BTW, according to the 1949 armistice agreements, that Israel signed, those borders were still intact. So, what does Israel have to do with that?

Actually, the Palestinian Declaration of Independence in 1988 is the one more generally recognized by the international community (though not by me).

Recognition is not necessary.

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: The Dark Inevitability of Zionism
※→ P F Tinmore, et al

You get things like this wrong all the time.

The Arab Palestinians DID NOT attempt to Independence until September 1948 (4 months later); and it was immediately in conflict by including the State of Israel as part of the Arab Sovereignty.

That is the point. The Palestinians declared independence on land inside its international borders. BTW, according to the 1949 armistice agreements, that Israel signed, those borders were still intact. So, what does Israel have to do with that?

• Israel-Egypt Armistice Agreement, 24 February 1949 •
Article XII
2. This Agreement, having been negotiated and concluded in pursuance of the resolution of the Security Council of 16 November 1948 calling for the establishment of an armistice in order to eliminate the threat to the peace in Palestine and to facilitate the transition from the present truce to permanent peace in Palestine, shall remain in force until a peaceful settlement between the Parties is achieved, except as provided in paragraph 3 of this Article.

√ Replaced by: Treaty of Peace between the Arab Republic of Egypt and the State of Israel, 26 March 1979 •​

• Lebanese-Israeli General Armistice Agreement, March 23, 1949 •
Article VIII
2. This Agreement, having been negotiated and concluded in pursuance of the resolution of the Security Council of 16 November 1948 calling for the establishment of an armistice in order to eliminate the threat to the peace in Palestine and to facilitate the transition frown the present truce to permanent peace in Palestine, shall remain in force until a peaceful settlement between the Parties is achieved, except as provided in paragraph 3 of this Article.

√ II. Report of the Secretary-General of 22 May 2000 (S/2000/460)
Letter dated 9 June 2000 from the President of Lebanon addressed to the Secretary-General
Paragraph 11 of this report states that “for the practical purpose of confirming the Israeli withdrawal, the United Nations needs to identify a line to be adopted conforming to the internationally recognized boundaries of Lebanon ...” and that “the United Nations will then identify physically, on the ground, those portions of the line necessary or relevant to confirming the withdrawal of Israeli forces”.​

• Jordanian-Israeli General Armistice Agreement, April 3, 1949 •
Article XII
2. This Agreement, having been negotiated and concluded in pursuance of the resolution of the Security Council of 16 November 1948 calling for the establishment of an armistice in order to eliminate the threat to the peace in Palestine and to facilitate the transition from the present truce to permanent peace in Palestine, shall remain in force until a peaceful settlement between the Parties is achieved except as provided in paragraph 3 of this article.

√ The Jordan-Israel Peace Treaty was signed on October 26, 1994 •​

• Israeli-Syrian General Armistice Agreement, July 20, 1949 •
Article VIII
2 This Agreement, having been negotiated and concluded in pursuance of the resolution of the Security Council of 16 November 1948, calling for the establishment of an armistice in order to eliminate the threat to the peace in Palestine and to facilitate the transition from the present truce to permanent peace in Palestine, shall remain in force until a peaceful settlement between the Parties is achieved, except as provided in paragraph 3 of this article.

√ No Peace or Border Arrangement​

As far as the West Bank and Gaza Strip are concerned, the Treaties with Jordan and Egypt voided the Armistice Lines. The separate Agreement (UNSECGEN - PRESIDENT of LEBANON) on the International Border with Lebanon replaces the Armistice Agreement on the border. Only a small portion of the Border, while defined, is still in dispute.

Most Respectfully,
R

Rafah is on the international border between Palestine and Egypt. You can go from there to Jericho without crossing a border. Or you can go north from Rafah and the next border you see is the international border between Palestine and Lebanon.

So, where does the 1948 declared Palestine encroach on Israel?

 

[RoccoR]

RE: The Dark Inevitability of Zionism
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

As a stand-alone document, it is acknowledged. But it is not accompanied or followed up by a sovereign territory. In the 28 years since the 1988 Declaration, the Arab Palestinians have been unable to achieve by force, any territory that is congruent with the 1988 intent. Similarly, the Arab Palestinians have never really attempt to put forth a good faith effort to resolve political differences using the Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States.

Actually, the Palestinian Declaration of Independence in 1988 is the one more generally recognized by the international community (though not by me).

(COMMENT)

I don't think that the 1988 Declaration by the PLO was any more successful than the 1948 Declaration by the All Palestine Government. And I doubt that any one in the entire body of Hostile Arab Palestinians, that masquerading as diplomats and Politicians, has every seen The Convention and the Settlement of Dispute, much less use it.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Darkwind]

When did Palestinian become a race?

 

[abi]

RE: The Dark Inevitability of Zionism
※→ Rocco, et al, (if I use these silly little symbols do my posts become more believable?)

This is propaganda design to misrepresent the truth and incite violence and hatred.

Interesting, coming from one who does this daily right here.

(COMMENT)

In 1967, after Jordanian Artillery fired first on Israeli Positions...

(COMMENT)

That is a long debunked Israeli talking point. Who debunked this? None other than your friends over there at the

Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs

In June 1967 we again had a choice. The Egyptian army concentrations in the Sinai approaches do not prove that Nasser was really about to attack us. We must be honest with ourselves. We decided to attack him.
http://www.mfa.gov.il/mfa/foreignpo... by prime minister begin at the national.aspx

There is no "racist persecution of Palestinians;" at least on the part of the Israelis.

How can you even type this? Not with a straight face I presume.

From the viewpoint of Theodor Herzl, Zionism was a Solution to antisemitism. But in the early 20th Century, there was widespread opposition to "Zionism

Another great example of how you mix in morsels of truth with your lies. Of course Jews were opposed to zionism as it goes against the most basic tenets of Judaism. But let me educate you on Herzl and what he actually wrote about antisemitism in his, The Complete Diaries of Theodor Herzl. Vol. 1.

"It would be an excellent idea to call in respectable, accredited anti-Semites as liquidators of property. To the people they would vouch for the fact that we do not wish to bring about the impoverishment of the countries that we leave. At first they must not be given large fees for this; otherwise we shall spoil our instruments and make them despicable as 'stooges of the Jews.' Later their fees will increase, and in the end we shall have only Gentile officials in the countries from which we have emigrated. The anti-Semites will become our most dependable friends, the anti-Semitic countries our allies."
(emphasis mine)

 

[RoccoR]

RE: The Dark Inevitability of Zionism
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

That is absolutely correct. Because there must be a sovereign claim.

Recognition is not necessary.

(COMMENT)

Foolishness.

Get a map and draw-out the territory where the Arab Palestinian actually exercises full autonomous authority (sovereignty).

Article II

The permanent boundary between Egypt and Israel is the recognized international boundary between Egypt and the former mandated territory of Palestine, as shown on the map at Annex II, without prejudice to the issue of the status of the Gaza Strip. The Parties recognize this boundary as inviolable. Each will respect the territorial integrity of the other, including their territorial waters and airspace.​

Recognition is a Treaty Requirement. The Treaty takes precedence.

BTW: There is no route from Jericho (West Bank - just north of the Dead Sea) to the Rafah Border Crossing (Gaza Strip) without crossing into and out of sovereign Israeli Territory (unless you go by boat). However, if you drive the entire way in either Area "C" zones, the number of security checkpoints can be reduced.

AND: The Rafah Border Crossing is an intermittent controlled border crossing (Egypt-PLO). It has only been re-opened (intermittently) for a month now.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: The Dark Inevitability of Zionism
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

That is absolutely correct. Because there must be a sovereign claim.

Recognition is not necessary.

(COMMENT)

Foolishness.

Get a map and draw-out the territory where the Arab Palestinian actually exercises full autonomous authority (sovereignty).

Article II

The permanent boundary between Egypt and Israel is the recognized international boundary between Egypt and the former mandated territory of Palestine, as shown on the map at Annex II, without prejudice to the issue of the status of the Gaza Strip. The Parties recognize this boundary as inviolable. Each will respect the territorial integrity of the other, including their territorial waters and airspace.​

Recognition is a Treaty Requirement. The Treaty takes precedence.

BTW: There is no route from Jericho (West Bank - just north of the Dead Sea) to the Rafah Border Crossing (Gaza Strip) without crossing into and out of sovereign Israeli Territory (unless you go by boat). However, if you drive the entire way in either Area "C" zones, the number of security checkpoints can be reduced.

AND: The Rafah Border Crossing is an intermittent controlled border crossing (Egypt-PLO). It has only been re-opened (intermittently) for a month now.

Most Respectfully,
R

Get a map and draw-out the territory where the Arab Palestinian actually exercises full autonomous authority (sovereignty).

The Palestinians have the right to sovereignty over all of Palestine but have been prevented by illegal external interference.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

RE: The Dark Inevitability of Zionism
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

That is absolutely correct. Because there must be a sovereign claim.

Recognition is not necessary.

(COMMENT)

Foolishness.

Get a map and draw-out the territory where the Arab Palestinian actually exercises full autonomous authority (sovereignty).

Article II

The permanent boundary between Egypt and Israel is the recognized international boundary between Egypt and the former mandated territory of Palestine, as shown on the map at Annex II, without prejudice to the issue of the status of the Gaza Strip. The Parties recognize this boundary as inviolable. Each will respect the territorial integrity of the other, including their territorial waters and airspace.​

Recognition is a Treaty Requirement. The Treaty takes precedence.

BTW: There is no route from Jericho (West Bank - just north of the Dead Sea) to the Rafah Border Crossing (Gaza Strip) without crossing into and out of sovereign Israeli Territory (unless you go by boat). However, if you drive the entire way in either Area "C" zones, the number of security checkpoints can be reduced.

AND: The Rafah Border Crossing is an intermittent controlled border crossing (Egypt-PLO). It has only been re-opened (intermittently) for a month now.

Most Respectfully,
R

Get a map and draw-out the territory where the Arab Palestinian actually exercises full autonomous authority (sovereignty).

The Palestinians have the right to sovereignty over all of Palestine but have been prevented by illegal external interference.

The Palestinians have the right to sovereignty over all of Palestine

That's funny!

 

[RoccoR]

RE: The Dark Inevitability of Zionism
※→ abi, et al,

I have to smile.

(if I use these silly little symbols do my posts become more believable?)

(COMMENT)

The silly little symbols (Power Point and Flash Bullets) are for me, not you. The information content in "any bullet" is in thought organization --- and NOT information conveyance. I wrote a lot of information presentations (with abstract forms, BLUF forms and summation forms).

That is a long debunked Israeli talking point. Who debunked this? None other than your friends over there at the

Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs

In June 1967 we again had a choice. The Egyptian army concentrations in the Sinai approaches do not prove that Nasser was really about to attack us. We must be honest with ourselves. We decided to attack him.
http://www.mfa.gov.il/mfa/foreignpolicy/mfadocuments/yearbook6/pages/55 address by prime minister begin at the national.aspx

http://www.mfa.gov.il/mfa/foreignpo... by prime minister begin at the national.aspx
(COMMENT)

You are mixing the Jordanian Front with the Egyptian Front. In the confrontation with the Jordanians, the Jordanians fire first, attempting to fulfill the terms of the Egyptian-Jordanian Mutual Defense Pact.

In the first three months of '67, there were over over 250 border "incidents" of military concern in Israel.

In regards to the initial opening of hostilities, clearly the IDF fired first on the Egyptian Forces...

In any civilian leaders and military decision making process, there is debate. Not all politicians agree, not all military commanders agree. But at the end of the day the decision often centers around the question: Is there a credible threat to use force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Israel? [Article 2(4) UN Charter] There is the question of risk... How much are the Israelis willing to risk on the bet that Egypt will NOT attack. (Are you willing to go "all in" and trust the Egyptians in what they say.)

​

It is clear that the decision, not unanimous, was made to take the preemptive position. Obviously, the intent was there; fore it was only six years latter that the Arab League, once again, attempted to use military force as an alternative means in diplomacy.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[abi]

The silly little symbols (Power Point and Flash Bullets) are for me, not you.

You don't need them.

You are mixing the Jordanian Front with the Egyptian Front.

No, you are pretending that Israel did not start that war that led to a massive land grab. They did. They admit this.

And are we clear now on Herzyl's actual comments on antisemitism, since you brought that up in the form of more lies?

 

[Hollie]

RE: The Dark Inevitability of Zionism
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

That is absolutely correct. Because there must be a sovereign claim.

Recognition is not necessary.

(COMMENT)

Foolishness.

Get a map and draw-out the territory where the Arab Palestinian actually exercises full autonomous authority (sovereignty).

Article II

The permanent boundary between Egypt and Israel is the recognized international boundary between Egypt and the former mandated territory of Palestine, as shown on the map at Annex II, without prejudice to the issue of the status of the Gaza Strip. The Parties recognize this boundary as inviolable. Each will respect the territorial integrity of the other, including their territorial waters and airspace.​

Recognition is a Treaty Requirement. The Treaty takes precedence.

BTW: There is no route from Jericho (West Bank - just north of the Dead Sea) to the Rafah Border Crossing (Gaza Strip) without crossing into and out of sovereign Israeli Territory (unless you go by boat). However, if you drive the entire way in either Area "C" zones, the number of security checkpoints can be reduced.

AND: The Rafah Border Crossing is an intermittent controlled border crossing (Egypt-PLO). It has only been re-opened (intermittently) for a month now.

Most Respectfully,
R

Get a map and draw-out the territory where the Arab Palestinian actually exercises full autonomous authority (sovereignty).

The Palestinians have the right to sovereignty over all of Palestine but have been prevented by illegal external interference.

I don’t think that your conspiracy theories are really helpful. Further, there is no indication that Arabs-Moslems in either Gaza or the West Bank have any ability to exercise sovereignty. It is, as usual, your insistence that Arabs-Moslems be given what they are not capable of exercising.

 

[P F Tinmore]

RE: The Dark Inevitability of Zionism
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

That is absolutely correct. Because there must be a sovereign claim.

Recognition is not necessary.

(COMMENT)

Foolishness.

Get a map and draw-out the territory where the Arab Palestinian actually exercises full autonomous authority (sovereignty).

Article II

The permanent boundary between Egypt and Israel is the recognized international boundary between Egypt and the former mandated territory of Palestine, as shown on the map at Annex II, without prejudice to the issue of the status of the Gaza Strip. The Parties recognize this boundary as inviolable. Each will respect the territorial integrity of the other, including their territorial waters and airspace.​

Recognition is a Treaty Requirement. The Treaty takes precedence.

BTW: There is no route from Jericho (West Bank - just north of the Dead Sea) to the Rafah Border Crossing (Gaza Strip) without crossing into and out of sovereign Israeli Territory (unless you go by boat). However, if you drive the entire way in either Area "C" zones, the number of security checkpoints can be reduced.

AND: The Rafah Border Crossing is an intermittent controlled border crossing (Egypt-PLO). It has only been re-opened (intermittently) for a month now.

Most Respectfully,
R

Get a map and draw-out the territory where the Arab Palestinian actually exercises full autonomous authority (sovereignty).

The Palestinians have the right to sovereignty over all of Palestine but have been prevented by illegal external interference.

I don’t think that your conspiracy theories are really helpful. Further, there is no indication that Arabs-Moslems in either Gaza or the West Bank have any ability to exercise sovereignty. It is, as usual, your insistence that Arabs-Moslems be given what they are not capable of exercising.

So you have a link for that slime?

 

[Hollie]

RE: The Dark Inevitability of Zionism
※→ P F Tinmore, et al,

That is absolutely correct. Because there must be a sovereign claim.

Recognition is not necessary.

(COMMENT)

Foolishness.

Get a map and draw-out the territory where the Arab Palestinian actually exercises full autonomous authority (sovereignty).

Article II

The permanent boundary between Egypt and Israel is the recognized international boundary between Egypt and the former mandated territory of Palestine, as shown on the map at Annex II, without prejudice to the issue of the status of the Gaza Strip. The Parties recognize this boundary as inviolable. Each will respect the territorial integrity of the other, including their territorial waters and airspace.​

Recognition is a Treaty Requirement. The Treaty takes precedence.

BTW: There is no route from Jericho (West Bank - just north of the Dead Sea) to the Rafah Border Crossing (Gaza Strip) without crossing into and out of sovereign Israeli Territory (unless you go by boat). However, if you drive the entire way in either Area "C" zones, the number of security checkpoints can be reduced.

AND: The Rafah Border Crossing is an intermittent controlled border crossing (Egypt-PLO). It has only been re-opened (intermittently) for a month now.

Most Respectfully,
R

Get a map and draw-out the territory where the Arab Palestinian actually exercises full autonomous authority (sovereignty).

The Palestinians have the right to sovereignty over all of Palestine but have been prevented by illegal external interference.

I don’t think that your conspiracy theories are really helpful. Further, there is no indication that Arabs-Moslems in either Gaza or the West Bank have any ability to exercise sovereignty. It is, as usual, your insistence that Arabs-Moslems be given what they are not capable of exercising.

So you have a link for that slime?

Indeed, I think you can look at the history of failures and ineptitudes that have defined the behaviors of the competing islamic terrorist franchises in Gaza and the West Bank.

Indeed, You might want to make your own assessment using the facts from as recently as 2005 when your islamic terrorist heroes were fighting an ugly civil war that included street killings, capture and some really nasty incidents of torture.

Indeed, your description of slime won't put a burqa on the facts.

 

[RoccoR]

RE: The Dark Inevitability of Zionism
※→ abi, et al,

I don't think we are compatible debating opponents.

The silly little symbols (Power Point and Flash Bullets) are for me, not you.

You don't need them.

(COMMENT)

I'm going to level my bullet settings right where they are. Thank you, for you concern. Remember Bertrand Russel's advise: "It is the essence of what is said, not the manner in which it is said, that counts." In contemporary time, you will hear many say: "Wisdom and truth" are not altered by the manner dressed."

You are mixing the Jordanian Front with the Egyptian Front.

No, you are pretending that Israel did not start that war that led to a massive land grab. They did. They admit this.

(COMMENT)

First, the territorial control was established on the advance and in pursuit of Jordanian Forces in retreat. It was no a massive land grab. "Land Grab" is an attempt to colorfully solicit sympathy.

I am not "pretending" anything of the sort. I merely counter with the "justification" that the Arab World (specifically Egypt) issued the "THREAT" and made overt acts in the furtherance of that threat.

✪ IF a party makes the threat to burn your house down, and THEN brings the gasoline right up to the sidewalk in from of your house, defense action does not require you to weight for that party to splash the gasoline and light it before you take action. This is especially true in arson case involving an inhabited dwelling.

✪ IF the threat is real and the offense is about to be committed, THEN there is reasonably rounds to believe it is necessary to defend a nation, its sovereignty and its people from the imminent use of military force.​

WHEN two or more nations, are observed preparing for a coordinated armed attack, this become both a political and military conspiracy. The overt act is the marshaling forces the along the border in preparation for the assault. Especial when peacekeeping forces are ordered to move out of the way.

And are we clear now on Herzyl's actual comments on antisemitism, since you brought that up in the form of more lies?

(COMMENT)

First: Theodor Herzl died a decade before the Great War and 44 years before the establishment of Israel. Theodor Herzl was a notable figure, but not the only personality that held adopted views on the movement.

Second: I did not speak to the issue of what Theodor Herzl had to say, only on a common viewpoint; and how others in contemporary times view "Zionism." One phrase of position fragment does not define the entirety Herzl's position. It is more complex than that. But since Herzl died in a time before even the Balfour Declaration was written, the way in which the "Zionist view" was interpreted had already begun to evolve.

Quoting Herzl, does not alter the fact that today --- there are a number of interpretations out there. I would venture to say that there is no practical resemblance between the Zionism of Theodor Herzl and that of the modern (2017) Progressive Zionist Movements. And there is enormous discussions in progress on the validity of Zionism.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[abi]

First: Theodor Herzl died a decade before the Great War and 44 years before the establishment of Israel. Theodor Herzl was a notable figure, but not the only personality that held adopted views on the movement.

Irrelevant, I was simply debunking your previous lie.

The zionists to this day still promote antisemitism just as Herzl laid out. Denying his significance to the zionist movement is beyond stupid. It are the zionists who are the most dangerous to the Jewish people, regardless of how you people spin this.

Again:

It would be an excellent idea to call in respectable, accredited anti-Semites as liquidators of property. To the people they would vouch for the fact that we do not wish to bring about the impoverishment of the countries that we leave. At first they must not be given large fees for this; otherwise we shall spoil our instruments and make them despicable as 'stooges of the Jews.' Later their fees will increase, and in the end we shall have only Gentile officials in the countries from which we have emigrated. The anti-Semites will become our most dependable friends, the anti-Semitic countries our allies.

 

[RoccoR]

RE: The Dark Inevitability of Zionism
※→ abi, et al,

Your manners have a lot to be desired. I told no "lie" ( "untruth").

First: Theodor Herzl died a decade before the Great War and 44 years before the establishment of Israel. Theodor Herzl was a notable figure, but not the only personality that held adopted views on the movement.

Irrelevant, I was simply debunking your previous lie.

(COMMENT)

I said (Posting #11) "From the viewpoint of Theodor Herzl, Zionism was a Solution to antisemitism."

Herzl was suggesting that if the level of antisemitism raised high enough, the general consensus would be to create a Land the Jewish could call their own. Zionism was, at its core, a form of nationalism that

✪ See: Studies of immigration records reflect increased immigration to the Zionist state during times of increased antiSemitism. Torah News: Home /Zionism and Anti-Semitism​

That is what is meant by "Zionism" (immigration to the Jewish National Home) was the solution to antiSemitism.

The use of anti-Semitism as a tool to coerce immigration to the
Zionist state continues to the present day:
---------------------------------------------------------------------Prime Minister Sharon
​

There are many ways to restate Herzl principles about his version of Zionism. I have to know what it means, and not just cut'n'paste clauses without an understanding. Herzl wanted the Jewish People to escape the antisemitism that plagued the culture and expelled them over and over again.

(SIDEBAR)

I suggest you take a course in the Practice of basic courtesy.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Hollie]

First: Theodor Herzl died a decade before the Great War and 44 years before the establishment of Israel. Theodor Herzl was a notable figure, but not the only personality that held adopted views on the movement.

Irrelevant, I was simply debunking your previous lie.

The zionists to this day still promote antisemitism just as Herzl laid out. Denying his significance to the zionist movement is beyond stupid. It are the zionists who are the most dangerous to the Jewish people, regardless of how you people spin this.

Again:

It would be an excellent idea to call in respectable, accredited anti-Semites as liquidators of property. To the people they would vouch for the fact that we do not wish to bring about the impoverishment of the countries that we leave. At first they must not be given large fees for this; otherwise we shall spoil our instruments and make them despicable as 'stooges of the Jews.' Later their fees will increase, and in the end we shall have only Gentile officials in the countries from which we have emigrated. The anti-Semites will become our most dependable friends, the anti-Semitic countries our allies.

Your rant really makes little sense.

http://m.jpost.com/Diaspora/German-Jews-stop-wearing-Kippot-amid-Muslim-attacks-515457

Members of the small Jewish community in the West German city of Bochum announced that they will no longer wear kippot because of attacks on them by Muslim youths.



I would offer that The Dark Inevitability of Islamic Hate and Intolerance is the real threat to Jews In Europe.