From: Adam <""4thwormcastfromthemolehill\"{at}the field.near
the bridge">

Ellen K. wrote:
> We've been over this before, and I'm not going to waste my time on a
> point-by-point response since anyway you're not interested.  Most of the
> Arabs who left Israel when the state was established left because their
> co-religionists persuaded them to join them in "driving all the Jews
> into the sea".

Lovely bit of glossing over history. No mention of the Europeans arriving
by the ship load to take over the land because of a religious belief that
it was given to them by God. No mention of the massacres, inurgency &
terrorism directed against entirely innocent arab civilians who just
happened to own property these europeans wanted to steal.

>  Jews owned a fair amount of land in what is now the
> state, acquired by purchase.

A fair amount? Really? Compared to the state of Israel, it would have been what %?


> This did not stop the Arabs from engaging
> in massacres such as that in Hebron in 1929, well before there was a
> state.

&? More bizarre diversions. In that case surely the place for the Jewish
state would have been somewhere between Berlin & Moscow.

>  I am not responsible for the fact that a Jewish country was not
> established in Africa, but if your position is that it was wrong to form
> a Jewish state in a place where another country existed, why would it
> have been OK to do it in Africa?

A) Because at that time other countries there did not exist (most were
creations of the post war pull out) &

B) There were vast tracts of land with very few inhabitants & certainly
no sites sacred to 3 religions.

> If it's OK for Jews to live anywhere,
> why did they have to leave Gaza?

Because they had been oppressing the locals through means of an army. I
don't supposed you noticed that. They'd also grabbed a whole load of the
land & property using these same armed foreign fighters & what's
worse is that they'd then engaged in wholesale mass punishment against the
locals using bulldozers to destroy entire neighborhoods etc.

So (a) it's not like they were going to be popular & (b) where would
they have stayed given they were unlikely to find locals who's rent
property to them.

> The Palestinian Authority could be in
> charge of the area, fine, why did the Jews all have to leave?
>

See above. If a bunch of foreign soldiers & settlers came into
California & took over, taking people's property as they felt like,
demolishing others etc would the US ask them to leave?

Never the less, this all goes to show that this was not a purely secular
fight & that Zionism was at it's root an exercise in officially
sanctioned religiously inspired violence.

Adam

> On Mon, 05 Dec 2005 13:30:00 +0000, Adam
> <""4thwormcastfromthemolehill\"{at}the field.near the
bridge"> wrote in
> message :
>
>
>>Ellen K. wrote:
>>
>>>You are mixing up a lot of different things.
>>>
>>
>>Ummm no I'm not.
>>
>>A) In 1945 there was no state of israel & indeed most of the land within
>>the area now known as Israel was held by non-Jewish people. True or false?
>>
>>B) People generally don't like to leave their homes & give their land to
>>strangers. True or false?
>>
>>C) So how exactly do you think legitimate landowners were
"persuaded" to
>>leave their land to make way for mostly white european people ? Flowers
>>& kisses?
>>
>>Maybe David Ben Gurion might know...hummm let's see what he says....
>>
>>"without Deir Yasin there would be no Israel."
>>
>>Gosh Really. So Ellen, elighten us all as to the events at Deir Yasin.
>>
>>
>>>A Jewish PERSON is anyone born of a Jewish mother or who converts
>>>according to Jewish law (which means an "Orthodox"
conversion).  Jewish
>>>LAW is established in the Talmud and codes.
>>>
>>>Many Jewish PEOPLE do not adhere to Jewish LAW in their daily lives.
>>>I'm sure everyone here knows Jews who do not observe the Sabbath or the
>>>dietary laws.  The "reform" and
"conservative" movements, while
>>>comprised of Jewish PEOPLE, have instituted many practices that are not
>>>in accordance with Jewish LAW.  To cite a non-political example, they
>>>use musical instruments in their Sabbath services.
>>>
>>>To LIVE in the land of Israel is part of normative Judaism.   However,
>>>the establishment of a STATE in the land of Israel is expected by
>>>normative Judaism to be brought about by the messiah, not by secular
>>>powers.
>>>
>>>The present state of Israel is a secular state, established by the UN.
>>
>>Rubbish. It should have been but both you & the Arabs rejected the UN
>>plan. In fact the Jewish terrorists went so far as to kill the UN rep
>>(Bernadotte).
>>
>>If you want to go back to the UN vision for the State of Israel then you
>>could try to press your case but I have a feeling the Israelis would
>>reject it out of hand just as they did then.
>>
>>
>>>G-d is not even mentioned in the national anthem.  In fact there were
>>>protests in the Orthodox communities at the time the secular state was
>>>under consideration, on the grounds that while every Jew who could do so
>>>should LIVE in the land of Israel, there should not be a Jewish STATE
>>>until the coming of the messiah.  While today the general position in
>>>the Orthodox community is that since the state does exist it should be
>>>recognized and supported, there are still groups who, although large
>>>numbers of their members live in the land of Israel, do not support the
>>>secular state and their members who live there refrain from voting in
>>>Israeli elections.
>>>
>>
>>So why was Israel not established in East Africa? The British were quite
>>willing to let the Zionists settle there. Why didn't they buy some other
>>chunk of a fairly borderless region & make that their home? Possibly a
>>medium sized island somewhere?
>>
>>Why south of lebanon, north of Egypt, west of the Jordan if there was no
>>biblical/torah imperative  ?
>>
>>
>>
>>>Zionism per se was a secular movement, part of the same phenomenon that
>>>resulted in the Jewish socialist movement --  a secularization of
>>>selected Jewish religious ideas but without the religion.  Normative
>>>Judaism says live in the land of Israel, Zionism says establish a
>>>secular state in the land of Israel.  Normative Judaism says a person
>>>has a duty to help the less fortunate, socialism says make a government
>>>that takes from the rich and gives to the poor.  (Actually the early
>>>kibbutzim were probably the only place socialism ever actually worked,
>>>due to the fact that the residents were there by idealistic choice.)
>>>
>>>From a secular political standpoint, the establishment of a state where
>>>Jews could be guaranteed entry was unfortunately proven necessary by the
>>>Holocaust.  Even the United States turned away refugees fleeing the
>>>Nazis.  In view of the fact that the people who are today screaming that
>>>the Jews took away the "Palestinians'" (in quotes
because there were no
>>>"Palestinians" then) land did not scream when Hitler
was exterminating
>>>6,000,000 Jews, it's difficult to attribute their current position to
>>>humanitarianism.
>>>
>>
>>This is where your deep bigotry & hatred becomes so obvious. In this
>>entire spiel where is any mention of the fact that the land was not
>>"empty"? The Zionists created Israel thorough terrorism,
violence, fear,
>>massacre etc. All the things which now you pretend to decry in others.
>>
>>Where is you condemnation of the King David Hotel terrorist attack or
>>the condemnation of Begin & Shamir etc as being "once a
terrorist always
>>a terrorist"? Oddly missing. Where is your condemnation of them killing
>>a peacemaker in the shape of the UN envoy in Jerusalem in much the same
>>way as the terrorists in Baghdad?
>>
>>Where is the condemnation of Deir Yassin & other massacres?
>>
>>All you can bring yourself to say is to try & divert from this via an
>>actual denial of very existence of the origianl inhabitants.
>>
>>""Palestinians'" (in quotes because there were no
"Palestinians" then"
>>
>>Call themn what you will Ellen, they were people who were driven from
>>their homes by terrorists & in some places massacred, in others turned
>>into refugees & in others penned up as their own house & towns were
>>turned into prisons.
>>
>>But hey we can't give them a name as that would imply they had faces &
>>untermensch don't deserve that.
>>
>>But then in order to justify that you launch into some "remember the
>>holocaust" piece. Tell me Ellen how many Death Camps did the Germans
>>build in Palestine? How many Palestinians were in the SS?
>>
>>So in what way should the Palestinians have to pay for the actions of
>>the Germans, US, France etc?
>>
>>Hey I tell you what, lots of Sudanese are being killed horribly so that
>>must give the survivors the right to seize California.
>>
>>
>>>Another inconsistency (to be polite) in the statements of the
>>>anti-Israel people is that these are the same people who would rightly
>>>say it is wrong to have residency restrictions based on race or
>>>religion, e.g. preventing black people from living in certain
>>>neighborhoods, but support the position that no Jews should be living in
>>>the land of Israel.   Why is "no blacks allowed"
wrong, but "Judenrein"
>>>right?
>>>
>>>
>>
>>German word. The most tolerant places for Jews before they started a war
>>against the arabs were the arab/turkish lands.
>>
>>Some very old synagogues in Tunisia, Morrocco, Yemen Egypt etc.
>>
>>As oon as the Palestinians have their own state then over time the
>>hatred of their occupiers will subside ( it will take a generation or 2,
>>look at the Jewish views on the Germans post 45 as an example) & trade
>>will increase.
>>
>>Personally I have no problem with Palestinian Jews. It's not like
>>they're a novel invention.
>>
>>Adam
>
>

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5