The Tragedy of Zionism

[georgephillip]

"'The tragedy of Zionism,' Walter
Laqueur wrote in his standard
history, 'was that it appeared on
the international scene when
there were no longer empty
spaces on the world map.'

"This
is not quite right.

"Rather it was
no longer politically tenable to
create such spaces:
extermination had ceased to be
an option of conquest. (5)

"Basically the Zionist movement
could only choose between two
strategic options to achieve its
goal: what Benny Morris has
labeled 'the way of South Africa'
- 'the establishment of an
apartheid state, with a settler
minority lording it over a large,
exploited native majority' - or
the 'the way of transfer'- 'you
could create a homogenous Jewish
state or at least a state with an
overwhelming Jewish majority by moving or transferring all or
most of the Arabs out.'" (6)

Transfer is still the preferred option for all good Zionists; however, with nearly equal numbers of Jews and Arabs living between the River and the sea, an apartheid state modeled on White South Africa seems a more likely option.

"Israel confronted the same dilemma
after occupying the West Bank and
Gaza as at the dawn of the Zionist
movement: it wanted the land but
not the people.

"Expulsion, however,
was no longer a viable option. In the
aftermath of the brutal Nazi
experiments with and plans for
demographic engineering,
international public opinion
had ceased granting any
legitimacy to forced population
transfers.

"The landmark Fourth
Geneva Convention, ratified in
1949, for the first time
'unequivocally prohibited
deportation' of civilians under
occupation (Articles 49, 147). (25)

"Accordingly Israel moved after the
June war to impose the second of its
two options mentioned above -
apartheid.

"This proved to be the
chief stumbling block to a
diplomatic settlement of the Israel
Palestine conflict.

5. Excerpt 2: ?An Introduction to the Israel Palestine Conflict? | michaellevinmusic | Michael Levin

 

[Hossfly]

"'The tragedy of Zionism,' Walter
Laqueur wrote in his standard
history, 'was that it appeared on
the international scene when
there were no longer empty
spaces on the world map.'

"This
is not quite right.

"Rather it was
no longer politically tenable to
create such spaces:
extermination had ceased to be
an option of conquest. (5)

"Basically the Zionist movement
could only choose between two
strategic options to achieve its
goal: what Benny Morris has
labeled 'the way of South Africa'
- 'the establishment of an
apartheid state, with a settler
minority lording it over a large,
exploited native majority' - or
the 'the way of transfer'- 'you
could create a homogenous Jewish
state or at least a state with an
overwhelming Jewish majority by moving or transferring all or
most of the Arabs out.'" (6)

Transfer is still the preferred option for all good Zionists; however, with nearly equal numbers of Jews and Arabs living between the River and the sea, an apartheid state modeled on White South Africa seems a more likely option.

"Israel confronted the same dilemma
after occupying the West Bank and
Gaza as at the dawn of the Zionist
movement: it wanted the land but
not the people.

"Expulsion, however,
was no longer a viable option. In the
aftermath of the brutal Nazi
experiments with and plans for
demographic engineering,
international public opinion
had ceased granting any
legitimacy to forced population
transfers.

"The landmark Fourth
Geneva Convention, ratified in
1949, for the first time
'unequivocally prohibited
deportation' of civilians under
occupation (Articles 49, 147). (25)

"Accordingly Israel moved after the
June war to impose the second of its
two options mentioned above -
apartheid.

"This proved to be the
chief stumbling block to a
diplomatic settlement of the Israel
Palestine conflict.

5. Excerpt 2: ?An Introduction to the Israel Palestine Conflict? | michaellevinmusic | Michael Levin

Gobbletygook, George. Mumbo Jumbo.

 

[MJB12741]

The tragedy of Zionism is what it has now become. A safe haven for Palestinian terrrorists from their own Arab brothers. Peace offerings, a security fence & land concessions so the squatters can stay in Israel to kill Israeli citizens. Face it you Zionists, no surrounding Arab country, who know the Palestinianhs best, ever treated them like Israel does. History has proven that only king Hussein knew how to establish a lasting peace from Palestinians. When will those Zionists in Israel ever learn? LET THERE BE PEACE ALREADY!

"'The tragedy of Zionism,' Walter
Laqueur wrote in his standard
history, 'was that it appeared on
the international scene when
there were no longer empty
spaces on the world map.'

"This
is not quite right.

"Rather it was
no longer politically tenable to
create such spaces:
extermination had ceased to be
an option of conquest. (5)

"Basically the Zionist movement
could only choose between two
strategic options to achieve its
goal: what Benny Morris has
labeled 'the way of South Africa'
- 'the establishment of an
apartheid state, with a settler
minority lording it over a large,
exploited native majority' - or
the 'the way of transfer'- 'you
could create a homogenous Jewish
state or at least a state with an
overwhelming Jewish majority by moving or transferring all or
most of the Arabs out.'" (6)

Transfer is still the preferred option for all good Zionists; however, with nearly equal numbers of Jews and Arabs living between the River and the sea, an apartheid state modeled on White South Africa seems a more likely option.

"Israel confronted the same dilemma
after occupying the West Bank and
Gaza as at the dawn of the Zionist
movement: it wanted the land but
not the people.

"Expulsion, however,
was no longer a viable option. In the
aftermath of the brutal Nazi
experiments with and plans for
demographic engineering,
international public opinion
had ceased granting any
legitimacy to forced population
transfers.

"The landmark Fourth
Geneva Convention, ratified in
1949, for the first time
'unequivocally prohibited
deportation' of civilians under
occupation (Articles 49, 147). (25)

"Accordingly Israel moved after the
June war to impose the second of its
two options mentioned above -
apartheid.

"This proved to be the
chief stumbling block to a
diplomatic settlement of the Israel
Palestine conflict.

5. Excerpt 2: ?An Introduction to the Israel Palestine Conflict? | michaellevinmusic | Michael Levin

 

[P F Tinmore]

"'The tragedy of Zionism,' Walter
Laqueur wrote in his standard
history, 'was that it appeared on
the international scene when
there were no longer empty
spaces on the world map.'

"This
is not quite right.

"Rather it was
no longer politically tenable to
create such spaces:
extermination had ceased to be
an option of conquest. (5)

"Basically the Zionist movement
could only choose between two
strategic options to achieve its
goal: what Benny Morris has
labeled 'the way of South Africa'
- 'the establishment of an
apartheid state, with a settler
minority lording it over a large,
exploited native majority' - or
the 'the way of transfer'- 'you
could create a homogenous Jewish
state or at least a state with an
overwhelming Jewish majority by moving or transferring all or
most of the Arabs out.'" (6)

Transfer is still the preferred option for all good Zionists; however, with nearly equal numbers of Jews and Arabs living between the River and the sea, an apartheid state modeled on White South Africa seems a more likely option.

"Israel confronted the same dilemma
after occupying the West Bank and
Gaza as at the dawn of the Zionist
movement: it wanted the land but
not the people.

"Expulsion, however,
was no longer a viable option. In the
aftermath of the brutal Nazi
experiments with and plans for
demographic engineering,
international public opinion
had ceased granting any
legitimacy to forced population
transfers.

"The landmark Fourth
Geneva Convention, ratified in
1949, for the first time
'unequivocally prohibited
deportation' of civilians under
occupation (Articles 49, 147). (25)

"Accordingly Israel moved after the
June war to impose the second of its
two options mentioned above -
apartheid.

"This proved to be the
chief stumbling block to a
diplomatic settlement of the Israel
Palestine conflict.

5. Excerpt 2: ?An Introduction to the Israel Palestine Conflict? | michaellevinmusic | Michael Levin

Indeed, Israel has put itself in a lose-lose situation.

 

[toastman]

"'The tragedy of Zionism,' Walter
Laqueur wrote in his standard
history, 'was that it appeared on
the international scene when
there were no longer empty
spaces on the world map.'

"This
is not quite right.

"Rather it was
no longer politically tenable to
create such spaces:
extermination had ceased to be
an option of conquest. (5)

"Basically the Zionist movement
could only choose between two
strategic options to achieve its
goal: what Benny Morris has
labeled 'the way of South Africa'
- 'the establishment of an
apartheid state, with a settler
minority lording it over a large,
exploited native majority' - or
the 'the way of transfer'- 'you
could create a homogenous Jewish
state or at least a state with an
overwhelming Jewish majority by moving or transferring all or
most of the Arabs out.'" (6)

Transfer is still the preferred option for all good Zionists; however, with nearly equal numbers of Jews and Arabs living between the River and the sea, an apartheid state modeled on White South Africa seems a more likely option.

"Israel confronted the same dilemma
after occupying the West Bank and
Gaza as at the dawn of the Zionist
movement: it wanted the land but
not the people.

"Expulsion, however,
was no longer a viable option. In the
aftermath of the brutal Nazi
experiments with and plans for
demographic engineering,
international public opinion
had ceased granting any
legitimacy to forced population
transfers.

"The landmark Fourth
Geneva Convention, ratified in
1949, for the first time
'unequivocally prohibited
deportation' of civilians under
occupation (Articles 49, 147). (25)

"Accordingly Israel moved after the
June war to impose the second of its
two options mentioned above -
apartheid.

"This proved to be the
chief stumbling block to a
diplomatic settlement of the Israel
Palestine conflict.

5. Excerpt 2: ?An Introduction to the Israel Palestine Conflict? | michaellevinmusic | Michael Levin

Indeed, Israel has put itself in a lose-lose situation.

You have things mixed up. It is the Hostile Palestinians who have put themselves in a situation like that. They started off in a small hole, but now they have dug themselves so deep that it is almost impossible to come back out. The forgotten vicitms in this case are the many good Paleatinians who just wanted peace with Israel

 

[georgephillip]

"'The tragedy of Zionism,' Walter
Laqueur wrote in his standard
history, 'was that it appeared on
the international scene when
there were no longer empty
spaces on the world map.'

"This
is not quite right.

"Rather it was
no longer politically tenable to
create such spaces:
extermination had ceased to be
an option of conquest. (5)

"Basically the Zionist movement
could only choose between two
strategic options to achieve its
goal: what Benny Morris has
labeled 'the way of South Africa'
- 'the establishment of an
apartheid state, with a settler
minority lording it over a large,
exploited native majority' - or
the 'the way of transfer'- 'you
could create a homogenous Jewish
state or at least a state with an
overwhelming Jewish majority by moving or transferring all or
most of the Arabs out.'" (6)

Transfer is still the preferred option for all good Zionists; however, with nearly equal numbers of Jews and Arabs living between the River and the sea, an apartheid state modeled on White South Africa seems a more likely option.

"Israel confronted the same dilemma
after occupying the West Bank and
Gaza as at the dawn of the Zionist
movement: it wanted the land but
not the people.

"Expulsion, however,
was no longer a viable option. In the
aftermath of the brutal Nazi
experiments with and plans for
demographic engineering,
international public opinion
had ceased granting any
legitimacy to forced population
transfers.

"The landmark Fourth
Geneva Convention, ratified in
1949, for the first time
'unequivocally prohibited
deportation' of civilians under
occupation (Articles 49, 147). (25)

"Accordingly Israel moved after the
June war to impose the second of its
two options mentioned above -
apartheid.

"This proved to be the
chief stumbling block to a
diplomatic settlement of the Israel
Palestine conflict.

5. Excerpt 2: ?An Introduction to the Israel Palestine Conflict? | michaellevinmusic | Michael Levin

Gobbletygook, George. Mumbo Jumbo.

 

[georgephillip]

The tragedy of Zionism is what it has now become. A safe haven for Palestinian terrrorists from their own Arab brothers. Peace offerings, a security fence & land concessions so the squatters can stay in Israel to kill Israeli citizens. Face it you Zionists, no surrounding Arab country, who know the Palestinianhs best, ever treated them like Israel does. History has proven that only king Hussein knew how to establish a lasting peace from Palestinians. When will those Zionists in Israel ever learn? LET THERE BE PEACE ALREADY!

"'The tragedy of Zionism,' Walter
Laqueur wrote in his standard
history, 'was that it appeared on
the international scene when
there were no longer empty
spaces on the world map.'

"This
is not quite right.

"Rather it was
no longer politically tenable to
create such spaces:
extermination had ceased to be
an option of conquest. (5)

"Basically the Zionist movement
could only choose between two
strategic options to achieve its
goal: what Benny Morris has
labeled 'the way of South Africa'
- 'the establishment of an
apartheid state, with a settler
minority lording it over a large,
exploited native majority' - or
the 'the way of transfer'- 'you
could create a homogenous Jewish
state or at least a state with an
overwhelming Jewish majority by moving or transferring all or
most of the Arabs out.'" (6)

Transfer is still the preferred option for all good Zionists; however, with nearly equal numbers of Jews and Arabs living between the River and the sea, an apartheid state modeled on White South Africa seems a more likely option.

"Israel confronted the same dilemma
after occupying the West Bank and
Gaza as at the dawn of the Zionist
movement: it wanted the land but
not the people.

"Expulsion, however,
was no longer a viable option. In the
aftermath of the brutal Nazi
experiments with and plans for
demographic engineering,
international public opinion
had ceased granting any
legitimacy to forced population
transfers.

"The landmark Fourth
Geneva Convention, ratified in
1949, for the first time
'unequivocally prohibited
deportation' of civilians under
occupation (Articles 49, 147). (25)

"Accordingly Israel moved after the
June war to impose the second of its
two options mentioned above -
apartheid.

"This proved to be the
chief stumbling block to a
diplomatic settlement of the Israel
Palestine conflict.

5. Excerpt 2: ?An Introduction to the Israel Palestine Conflict? | michaellevinmusic | Michael Levin

"The tragedy of Zionism is what it has now become. A safe haven for Palestinian terrrorists from their own Arab brothers. Peace offerings, a security fence & land concessions so the squatters can stay in Israel to kill Israeli citizens. Face it you Zionists, no surrounding Arab country, who know the Palestinianhs best, ever treated them like Israel does. History has proven that only king Hussein knew how to establish a lasting peace from Palestinians. When will those Zionists in Israel ever learn? LET THERE BE PEACE ALREADY!

In order for peace to come to Palestine we would first have to address the Jewish question:

"To resolve what was called the
'Jewish question' - i.e., the
reciprocal challenges of Gentile
repulsion or anti-Semitism and
Gentile attraction or assimilation
- the Zionist movement sought in
the late nineteenth century to
create an overwhelmingly, if not
homogeneously, Jewish state in
Palestine. (1)

"Once the Zionist
movement gained a foothold in
Palestine through Great Britain's
issuance of the Balfour
Declaration, (2) the main
obstacle to realizing its goal
was the indigenous Arab
population.

"For, on the eve of
Zionist colonization,
Palestine was overwhelmingly
not Jewish but Muslim and
Christian Arab. (3)

Why are so many Jews arrogant enough to believe they are entitled to steal land and water from a pre-existing population?

5. Excerpt 2: ?An Introduction to the Israel Palestine Conflict? | michaellevinmusic | Michael Levin

 

[SherriMunnerlyn]

To answer your question, I think it is because they set themselves above God even.

I want to share what is written in Jewish religious writings, I found this in a book called The Life And Times Of Jesus The Messiah, by Alfred Edersheim, written 1883, a book available on Kindle for just a few dollars. He is what we would today call a Messianic Jew, raised as a Jew, he accepts Jesus as Messiah.

"More than that , God had created the world on account of Israel (Yalkut Section 2), and for their merit, making preparation for them long before their appearance on the scene, just as a king who forsees the birth of his son; nay, Israel had been in Gods thoughts before anything had actually been created, but even before every other creative thought. (Ber.R.1)"

Page 58, The Life And Times Of Jesus The Messiah, Alfred Edershem.


About sources, there is a table of abbreviations in the back of the book.

Yalkut is The great collectaneum; Yalkut Shimeoni, which is a catena on the whole Old Testament, containing also quotations from lost works.

Ber.R. is The Midrash (or Commentary) Bereshith Rabba, on Genesis

The tragedy of Zionism is what it has now become. A safe haven for Palestinian terrrorists from their own Arab brothers. Peace offerings, a security fence & land concessions so the squatters can stay in Israel to kill Israeli citizens. Face it you Zionists, no surrounding Arab country, who know the Palestinianhs best, ever treated them like Israel does. History has proven that only king Hussein knew how to establish a lasting peace from Palestinians. When will those Zionists in Israel ever learn? LET THERE BE PEACE ALREADY!

"'The tragedy of Zionism,' Walter
Laqueur wrote in his standard
history, 'was that it appeared on
the international scene when
there were no longer empty
spaces on the world map.'

"This
is not quite right.

"Rather it was
no longer politically tenable to
create such spaces:
extermination had ceased to be
an option of conquest. (5)

"Basically the Zionist movement
could only choose between two
strategic options to achieve its
goal: what Benny Morris has
labeled 'the way of South Africa'
- 'the establishment of an
apartheid state, with a settler
minority lording it over a large,
exploited native majority' - or
the 'the way of transfer'- 'you
could create a homogenous Jewish
state or at least a state with an
overwhelming Jewish majority by moving or transferring all or
most of the Arabs out.'" (6)

Transfer is still the preferred option for all good Zionists; however, with nearly equal numbers of Jews and Arabs living between the River and the sea, an apartheid state modeled on White South Africa seems a more likely option.

"Israel confronted the same dilemma
after occupying the West Bank and
Gaza as at the dawn of the Zionist
movement: it wanted the land but
not the people.

"Expulsion, however,
was no longer a viable option. In the
aftermath of the brutal Nazi
experiments with and plans for
demographic engineering,
international public opinion
had ceased granting any
legitimacy to forced population
transfers.

"The landmark Fourth
Geneva Convention, ratified in
1949, for the first time
'unequivocally prohibited
deportation' of civilians under
occupation (Articles 49, 147). (25)

"Accordingly Israel moved after the
June war to impose the second of its
two options mentioned above -
apartheid.

"This proved to be the
chief stumbling block to a
diplomatic settlement of the Israel
Palestine conflict.

5. Excerpt 2: ?An Introduction to the Israel Palestine Conflict? | michaellevinmusic | Michael Levin

"The tragedy of Zionism is what it has now become. A safe haven for Palestinian terrrorists from their own Arab brothers. Peace offerings, a security fence & land concessions so the squatters can stay in Israel to kill Israeli citizens. Face it you Zionists, no surrounding Arab country, who know the Palestinianhs best, ever treated them like Israel does. History has proven that only king Hussein knew how to establish a lasting peace from Palestinians. When will those Zionists in Israel ever learn? LET THERE BE PEACE ALREADY!

In order for peace to come to Palestine we would first have to address the Jewish question:

"To resolve what was called the
'Jewish question' - i.e., the
reciprocal challenges of Gentile
repulsion or anti-Semitism and
Gentile attraction or assimilation
- the Zionist movement sought in
the late nineteenth century to
create an overwhelmingly, if not
homogeneously, Jewish state in
Palestine. (1)

"Once the Zionist
movement gained a foothold in
Palestine through Great Britain's
issuance of the Balfour
Declaration, (2) the main
obstacle to realizing its goal
was the indigenous Arab
population.

"For, on the eve of
Zionist colonization,
Palestine was overwhelmingly
not Jewish but Muslim and
Christian Arab. (3)

Why are so many Jews arrogant enough to believe they are entitled to steal land and water from a pre-existing population?

5. Excerpt 2: ?An Introduction to the Israel Palestine Conflict? | michaellevinmusic | Michael Levin

 

[georgephillip]

"'The tragedy of Zionism,' Walter
Laqueur wrote in his standard
history, 'was that it appeared on
the international scene when
there were no longer empty
spaces on the world map.'

"This
is not quite right.

"Rather it was
no longer politically tenable to
create such spaces:
extermination had ceased to be
an option of conquest. (5)

"Basically the Zionist movement
could only choose between two
strategic options to achieve its
goal: what Benny Morris has
labeled 'the way of South Africa'
- 'the establishment of an
apartheid state, with a settler
minority lording it over a large,
exploited native majority' - or
the 'the way of transfer'- 'you
could create a homogenous Jewish
state or at least a state with an
overwhelming Jewish majority by moving or transferring all or
most of the Arabs out.'" (6)

Transfer is still the preferred option for all good Zionists; however, with nearly equal numbers of Jews and Arabs living between the River and the sea, an apartheid state modeled on White South Africa seems a more likely option.

"Israel confronted the same dilemma
after occupying the West Bank and
Gaza as at the dawn of the Zionist
movement: it wanted the land but
not the people.

"Expulsion, however,
was no longer a viable option. In the
aftermath of the brutal Nazi
experiments with and plans for
demographic engineering,
international public opinion
had ceased granting any
legitimacy to forced population
transfers.

"The landmark Fourth
Geneva Convention, ratified in
1949, for the first time
'unequivocally prohibited
deportation' of civilians under
occupation (Articles 49, 147). (25)

"Accordingly Israel moved after the
June war to impose the second of its
two options mentioned above -
apartheid.

"This proved to be the
chief stumbling block to a
diplomatic settlement of the Israel
Palestine conflict.

5. Excerpt 2: ?An Introduction to the Israel Palestine Conflict? | michaellevinmusic | Michael Levin

Indeed, Israel has put itself in a lose-lose situation.

"Indeed, Israel has put itself in a lose-lose situation."

Elite racists like Avigdor Lieberman and the current Israeli defense minister, Moshe Yaalon, are doing what elite Jews often do best; self destructing in slow motion while blaming anti-Semites for their self-imposed meltdowns:

"In a private briefing, disclosed last week by the Yedioth Aharonoth newspaper, Yaalon called Kerry 'obsessive and messianic', denounced his peace plan as 'not worth the paper it was written on', and wished he would win 'the Nobel prize and leave us alone'.

"Yaalon could hardly claim he was caught in an unguarded moment.

"According to reports, he has been making equally disparaging comments for weeks. Back in November, for example, an unnamed 'senior Israeli minister' dismissed Kerry’s ideas as 'simply not connected to reality … He is not an honest broker.'

"On this occasion, however, Washington’s response ratcheted up several notches. US officials furiously denounced the comments as 'offensive' and demanded that Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu publicly slap down his minister..."

"Not suprisingly, the Palestinian leadership is celebrating the latest evidence of Israel’s increasingly self-destructive behaviour. Such outbursts against Kerry will make it much harder for Washington to claim the Palestinians are to blame if, or more likely when, the talks collapse.

"The Israeli government is not only hurling insults; it is working visibly to thwart a peace process on which the Obama administration had staked its credibility."

Jews being Jews.
Can the Samson option be far behind?

Cracks in the Alliance? » CounterPunch: Tells the Facts, Names the Names

 

[SherriMunnerlyn]

If what were written in those Jewish religious writings was put in the proper perspective, taking into account God's progressive revelation of God to mankind, that culminates in Jesus, its actually not that objectionable. The way its written reminds me of John 1.

But when it elevates one people as above God, well you see how stealing land from other people can so easily be rationalized.

 

[georgephillip]

"'The tragedy of Zionism,' Walter
Laqueur wrote in his standard
history, 'was that it appeared on
the international scene when
there were no longer empty
spaces on the world map.'

"This
is not quite right.

"Rather it was
no longer politically tenable to
create such spaces:
extermination had ceased to be
an option of conquest. (5)

"Basically the Zionist movement
could only choose between two
strategic options to achieve its
goal: what Benny Morris has
labeled 'the way of South Africa'
- 'the establishment of an
apartheid state, with a settler
minority lording it over a large,
exploited native majority' - or
the 'the way of transfer'- 'you
could create a homogenous Jewish
state or at least a state with an
overwhelming Jewish majority by moving or transferring all or
most of the Arabs out.'" (6)

Transfer is still the preferred option for all good Zionists; however, with nearly equal numbers of Jews and Arabs living between the River and the sea, an apartheid state modeled on White South Africa seems a more likely option.

"Israel confronted the same dilemma
after occupying the West Bank and
Gaza as at the dawn of the Zionist
movement: it wanted the land but
not the people.

"Expulsion, however,
was no longer a viable option. In the
aftermath of the brutal Nazi
experiments with and plans for
demographic engineering,
international public opinion
had ceased granting any
legitimacy to forced population
transfers.

"The landmark Fourth
Geneva Convention, ratified in
1949, for the first time
'unequivocally prohibited
deportation' of civilians under
occupation (Articles 49, 147). (25)

"Accordingly Israel moved after the
June war to impose the second of its
two options mentioned above -
apartheid.

"This proved to be the
chief stumbling block to a
diplomatic settlement of the Israel
Palestine conflict.

5. Excerpt 2: ?An Introduction to the Israel Palestine Conflict? | michaellevinmusic | Michael Levin

Indeed, Israel has put itself in a lose-lose situation.

If what were written in those Jewish religious writings was put in the proper perspective, taking into account God's progressive revelation of God to mankind, that culminates in Jesus, its actually not that objectionable. The way its written reminds me of John 1.

But when it elevates one people as above God, well you see how stealing land from other people can so easily be rationalized.

Is there any way of know what percentage of the Jews living in Israel today subscribe to that belief?

 

[Hossfly]

"'The tragedy of Zionism,' Walter
Laqueur wrote in his standard
history, 'was that it appeared on
the international scene when
there were no longer empty
spaces on the world map.'

"This
is not quite right.

"Rather it was
no longer politically tenable to
create such spaces:
extermination had ceased to be
an option of conquest. (5)

"Basically the Zionist movement
could only choose between two
strategic options to achieve its
goal: what Benny Morris has
labeled 'the way of South Africa'
- 'the establishment of an
apartheid state, with a settler
minority lording it over a large,
exploited native majority' - or
the 'the way of transfer'- 'you
could create a homogenous Jewish
state or at least a state with an
overwhelming Jewish majority by moving or transferring all or
most of the Arabs out.'" (6)

Transfer is still the preferred option for all good Zionists; however, with nearly equal numbers of Jews and Arabs living between the River and the sea, an apartheid state modeled on White South Africa seems a more likely option.

"Israel confronted the same dilemma
after occupying the West Bank and
Gaza as at the dawn of the Zionist
movement: it wanted the land but
not the people.

"Expulsion, however,
was no longer a viable option. In the
aftermath of the brutal Nazi
experiments with and plans for
demographic engineering,
international public opinion
had ceased granting any
legitimacy to forced population
transfers.

"The landmark Fourth
Geneva Convention, ratified in
1949, for the first time
'unequivocally prohibited
deportation' of civilians under
occupation (Articles 49, 147). (25)

"Accordingly Israel moved after the
June war to impose the second of its
two options mentioned above -
apartheid.

"This proved to be the
chief stumbling block to a
diplomatic settlement of the Israel
Palestine conflict.

5. Excerpt 2: ?An Introduction to the Israel Palestine Conflict? | michaellevinmusic | Michael Levin

Indeed, Israel has put itself in a lose-lose situation.

If what were written in those Jewish religious writings was put in the proper perspective, taking into account God's progressive revelation of God to mankind, that culminates in Jesus, its actually not that objectionable. The way its written reminds me of John 1.

But when it elevates one people as above God, well you see how stealing land from other people can so easily be rationalized.

Is there any way of know what percentage of the Jews living in Israel today subscribe to that belief?

Everyone knows it's around 127%.

 

[editec]

Why are so many Jews arrogant enough to believe they are entitled to steal land and water from a pre-existing population?

Because they read history, perhaps?

The world almost without exception is comprised of nations that were founded on the bloody ground of aboriginal people who were moved, murdered or assimiliated by the nation states that exist, today.

Obviously the WESTERN HEMISPHERE is the best example of that reality.

So the question for Isreal is NOT, is this a moral STATE?

That's a preposterous question because ALL STATES are amoral.

The ONLY question that matters to Zionists is this: How long can Israel exist when a significant population both inside and outside of its borders do NOT support the existence of that state?


History tells us the answer is that a STATE occupation of formerly foreign land can be a long long time ESPECIALLY if the STATE has colonized it with its own people.

Northern Ireland is a pretty good example... it has been occupied by England for nearly 700 years .


OTOH, no EUROPEAN occupation of any land in the fertrile crescent has lasted more than about 200 years.

 

[georgephillip]

Indeed, Israel has put itself in a lose-lose situation.

If what were written in those Jewish religious writings was put in the proper perspective, taking into account God's progressive revelation of God to mankind, that culminates in Jesus, its actually not that objectionable. The way its written reminds me of John 1.

But when it elevates one people as above God, well you see how stealing land from other people can so easily be rationalized.

Is there any way of know what percentage of the Jews living in Israel today subscribe to that belief?

Everyone knows it's around 127%.

That was Bibi's percentage of the vote in his last election.
Try to keep up.

 

[MHunterB]

If what were written in those Jewish religious writings was put in the proper perspective, taking into account God's progressive revelation of God to mankind, that culminates in Jesus, its actually not that objectionable. The way its written reminds me of John 1.

But when it elevates one people as above God, well you see how stealing land from other people can so easily be rationalized.

Since Judaism and Christianity are two DIFFERENT religions, it is exceedingly disingenuous and dishonest to label that book "Jewish" religious writings.

Further, the book was written over 160 years ago: it's not exactly relevant to today's situation.

And the author being an apostate - what reason is there to accept his words regarding the religion he deserted? By that 'logic' one must also accept Walid Shoebat's descriptions of Islam.

 

[georgephillip]

Why are so many Jews arrogant enough to believe they are entitled to steal land and water from a pre-existing population?

Because they read history, perhaps?

The world almost without exception is comprised of nations that were founded on the bloody ground of aboriginal people who were moved, murdered or assimiliated by the nation states that exist, today.

Obviously the WESTERN HEMISPHERE is the best example of that reality.

So the question for Isreal is NOT, is this a moral STATE?

That's a preposterous question because ALL STATES are amoral.

The ONLY question that matters to Zionists is this: How long can Israel exist when a significant population both inside and outside of its borders do NOT support the existence of that state?


History tells us the answer is that a STATE occupation of formerly foreign land can be a long long time ESPECIALLY if the STATE has colonized it with its own people.

Northern Ireland is a pretty good example... it has been occupied by England for nearly 700 years .


OTOH, no EUROPEAN occupation of any land in the fertrile crescent has lasted more than about 200 years.

The Jewish State's timing also seems a little suspect.
The world's tolerance for forced displacement of indigenous populations waned noticeably post Hitler:

"In the
aftermath of the brutal Nazi
experiments with and plans for
demographic engineering,
international public opinion
had ceased granting any
legitimacy to forced population
transfers.

"The landmark Fourth
Geneva Convention, ratified in
1949, for the first time
'unequivocally prohibited
deportation" of civilians under
occupation (Articles 49, 147). (25)'"

5. Excerpt 2: ?An Introduction to the Israel Palestine Conflict? | michaellevinmusic | Michael Levin

There are currently voices in the Knesset calling for expulsion of West Bank and Gaza Arabs into surrounding Muslim states.

 

[MHunterB]

Why are so many Jews arrogant enough to believe they are entitled to steal land and water from a pre-existing population?

Because they read history, perhaps?

The world almost without exception is comprised of nations that were founded on the bloody ground of aboriginal people who were moved, murdered or assimiliated by the nation states that exist, today.

Obviously the WESTERN HEMISPHERE is the best example of that reality.

So the question for Isreal is NOT, is this a moral STATE?

That's a preposterous question because ALL STATES are amoral.

The ONLY question that matters to Zionists is this: How long can Israel exist when a significant population both inside and outside of its borders do NOT support the existence of that state?


History tells us the answer is that a STATE occupation of formerly foreign land can be a long long time ESPECIALLY if the STATE has colonized it with its own people.

Northern Ireland is a pretty good example... it has been occupied by England for nearly 700 years .


OTOH, no EUROPEAN occupation of any land in the fertrile crescent has lasted more than about 200 years.

The Jews of Germany - about 1% of the German population ca 1933 - could attest to the fact that the Jews of Europe, Eastern or Western, were never considered by 'the average man' to be 'European'.

And as Leo Frank would join Mendel Beilis in explaining to you, Jewish citizens of America were not always accepted as "equals" either.

Let's be clear on this: EVERY Allied government knew about Hitler's genocide against the Jews - and not one actually *did* anything in terms of taking in the refugees they KNEW were going to be murdered otherwise......

Given that the LARGEST group of Israeli Jews (over half) are not of 'European' origin whatsoever, but the descendants of Jews ethnically cleansed from all the Arab League nations - it's disingenuous and inaccurate to misrepresent Israel as 'European'.

 

[georgephillip]

"'The tragedy of Zionism,' Walter
Laqueur wrote in his standard
history, 'was that it appeared on
the international scene when
there were no longer empty
spaces on the world map.'

"This
is not quite right.

"Rather it was
no longer politically tenable to
create such spaces:
extermination had ceased to be
an option of conquest. (5)

"Basically the Zionist movement
could only choose between two
strategic options to achieve its
goal: what Benny Morris has
labeled 'the way of South Africa'
- 'the establishment of an
apartheid state, with a settler
minority lording it over a large,
exploited native majority' - or
the 'the way of transfer'- 'you
could create a homogenous Jewish
state or at least a state with an
overwhelming Jewish majority by moving or transferring all or
most of the Arabs out.'" (6)

Transfer is still the preferred option for all good Zionists; however, with nearly equal numbers of Jews and Arabs living between the River and the sea, an apartheid state modeled on White South Africa seems a more likely option.

"Israel confronted the same dilemma
after occupying the West Bank and
Gaza as at the dawn of the Zionist
movement: it wanted the land but
not the people.

"Expulsion, however,
was no longer a viable option. In the
aftermath of the brutal Nazi
experiments with and plans for
demographic engineering,
international public opinion
had ceased granting any
legitimacy to forced population
transfers.

"The landmark Fourth
Geneva Convention, ratified in
1949, for the first time
'unequivocally prohibited
deportation' of civilians under
occupation (Articles 49, 147). (25)

"Accordingly Israel moved after the
June war to impose the second of its
two options mentioned above -
apartheid.

"This proved to be the
chief stumbling block to a
diplomatic settlement of the Israel
Palestine conflict.

5. Excerpt 2: ?An Introduction to the Israel Palestine Conflict? | michaellevinmusic | Michael Levin

Indeed, Israel has put itself in a lose-lose situation.

You have things mixed up. It is the Hostile Palestinians who have put themselves in a situation like that. They started off in a small hole, but now they have dug themselves so deep that it is almost impossible to come back out. The forgotten vicitms in this case are the many good Paleatinians who just wanted peace with Israel

Arab Muslims and Christians outnumbered Jews 10:1 in Palestine when a political movement called Zionism first lurched into existence during the last twenty five years of the 19th Century. Many Jews living in Palestine at that time wanted no part of a "Jewish homeland" populated by immigrants from the bowels of Europe. Indigenous Jews were well aware of Zionist designs and so were their Muslim and Christian neighbors:

"Across the mainstream Zionist
spectrum, it was understood
from the outset that Palestine's
indigenous Arab population
would not acquiesce in its
dispossession."

Would you?

5. Excerpt 2: ?An Introduction to the Israel Palestine Conflict? | michaellevinmusic | Michael Levin

 

[MHunterB]

"The Jewish State's timing also seems a little suspect.
The world's tolerance for forced displacement of indigenous populations waned noticeably post Hitler:"

Yeah, sure - Given that only the tiny nation of Denmark did anything of real significance to prevent the deportation and murder of their Jewish citizens, that noble outrage is hilarious..... Not to mention the misrepresentation of any Arab whatsoever as 'indigenous' is similarly obscene: how is it that Muslims and Christians from around the ME are "indigenous" in your eyes, but not the Jews from around the ME????

Over HALF of Israeli Jews are refugees or descendants of same from the ethnic cleansing perpetrated against them by the Arab League nations. Yet the "pro-Palestinian" posters NEVER acknowledge that fact.

 

[georgephillip]

Why are so many Jews arrogant enough to believe they are entitled to steal land and water from a pre-existing population?

Because they read history, perhaps?

The world almost without exception is comprised of nations that were founded on the bloody ground of aboriginal people who were moved, murdered or assimiliated by the nation states that exist, today.

Obviously the WESTERN HEMISPHERE is the best example of that reality.

So the question for Isreal is NOT, is this a moral STATE?

That's a preposterous question because ALL STATES are amoral.

The ONLY question that matters to Zionists is this: How long can Israel exist when a significant population both inside and outside of its borders do NOT support the existence of that state?


History tells us the answer is that a STATE occupation of formerly foreign land can be a long long time ESPECIALLY if the STATE has colonized it with its own people.

Northern Ireland is a pretty good example... it has been occupied by England for nearly 700 years .


OTOH, no EUROPEAN occupation of any land in the fertrile crescent has lasted more than about 200 years.

The Jews of Germany - about 1% of the German population ca 1933 - could attest to the fact that the Jews of Europe, Eastern or Western, were never considered by 'the average man' to be 'European'.

And as Leo Frank would join Mendel Beilis in explaining to you, Jewish citizens of America were not always accepted as "equals" either.

Let's be clear on this: EVERY Allied government knew about Hitler's genocide against the Jews - and not one actually *did* anything in terms of taking in the refugees they KNEW were going to be murdered otherwise......

Given that the LARGEST group of Israeli Jews (over half) are not of 'European' origin whatsoever, but the descendants of Jews ethnically cleansed from all the Arab League nations - it's disingenuous and inaccurate to misrepresent Israel as 'European'.

Prove it.