BS: Anti-Semitism & The Left

Subject: RE: BS: Anti-Semitism & The Left
From: Peace
Date: 01 Mar 04 - 10:22 AM

bazza: It's genetic I suppose? How foolish. SSDD.

Subject: RE: BS: Anti-Semitism & The Left
From: Peace
Date: 01 Mar 04 - 10:33 AM

Hey out there. Someone else want to deal with this shithead? I'm not going to be able to handle it with my normal cool and calm.

Subject: RE: BS: Anti-Semitism & The Left
From: GUEST,Larry K
Date: 01 Mar 04 - 10:35 AM

Conservatives have been far more pro Jewish and pro Isreal in the USA than the left in the last few years.    If you don't believe George Will- how about Ed Koch.   In the current issue of Hadassah magazine Ed Koch (former mayor of New York and strong democratic liberal) has an article on why he is supporting George Bush for president.   He has also appeared on numerouse shows (Imus, Oreilly) to state the same thing.

Koch is a life long democrat.   He says that he disagrees with Bush on just about everything except Israel. He things George Bush has done more to support Jews than any other president, and far more than any other democratic candidate still in the race.   Therefore, he is overlooking all the other issues and supporting Bush.

Koch is a very respected political figure and being Jewish- very aware of the issues.   I think his endorsment is a very strong statement on how conservatives are more supportive of Israel.

Subject: RE: BS: Anti-Semitism & The Left
From: CarolC
Date: 01 Mar 04 - 10:39 AM

Just because Hardly's been calling you names doesn't make it right for you to be calling JtS names, too.

;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Anti-Semitism & The Left
From: Strick
Date: 01 Mar 04 - 10:47 AM

Forgive me brucie. I know Carol's husband from another life and I was quoting him in my reference to Conservative Canadians.

Subject: RE: BS: Anti-Semitism & The Left
From: CarolC
Date: 01 Mar 04 - 10:58 AM

I disagree that supporting the current government of Israel amounts to being "pro-Israel" while not supporting the current government of Israel amounts to being "anti-Israel". That makes just as much sense as saying that to be against the Bush administration amounts to being "anti-US". And to say that you support Jews by supporting the current government in Israel is an impossiblity, since a significant percentage of Jews don't support the current government in Israel.

I support Jews and I support Israel. But I support the Israel that was envisioned by Yitzhak Rabin, not the Israel that is envisioned by Ariel Sharon.

Subject: RE: BS: Anti-Semitism & The Left
From: GUEST,Martin Gibson
Date: 01 Mar 04 - 12:15 PM

Carol C.

Jews support Israel no matter who is in charge, because the loyalty is to Israel, not to the man. Israel is a democracy and elected Sharon. Someone may not agree with all of his politics, but I can tell you for a fact that Jews overall will support Israel no matter who is in charge.

I am sure that you come into contact with just as many Jews everyday from your perch overlooking the rural Alabama trailer court landscape as you do liberal intellectuals.

Subject: RE: BS: Anti-Semitism & The Left
From: CarolC
Date: 01 Mar 04 - 12:34 PM

Jews support Israel no matter who is in charge, because the loyalty is to Israel, not to the man. Israel is a democracy and elected Sharon. Someone may not agree with all of his politics, but I can tell you for a fact that Jews overall will support Israel no matter who is in charge.

I dont' disagree with this. My point is that to say that not supporting the current government of Israel amounts to not supporting Israel is a red herring and a non-sequiter.

I am sure that you come into contact with just as many Jews everyday from your perch overlooking the rural Alabama trailer court landscape as you do liberal intellectuals.

You're probably right. But I'm not in a perch overlooking the trailer court. I'm smack dab right in the middle of it the trailer court.

Subject: RE: BS: Anti-Semitism & The Left
From: Peace
Date: 01 Mar 04 - 01:48 PM

The shithead remark was for bazza

Subject: RE: BS: Anti-Semitism & The Left
From: CarolC
Date: 01 Mar 04 - 03:30 PM

Seems to me what bazza is doing is promoting a stereotype. But it also seem to me that the whole premise of this thread is the promotion of a stereotype. Peraonally, I don't have much use for stereotypes.

Subject: RE: BS: Anti-Semitism & The Left
From: GUEST,Martin Gibson
Date: 01 Mar 04 - 04:07 PM

I'm sure that you don't Carol C. I have to try to not picture you brushing only one tooth in the morning.

Jews do not eat red herring. Pickled herring, yes. You have to understand the people before you can make comments about what they might think.

Subject: RE: BS: Anti-Semitism & The Left
From: Peace
Date: 01 Mar 04 - 04:47 PM

I have use for stereotypes: Sanyo, JVC, Sony, GE, Panasonic, Hitachi, like that.

Subject: RE: BS: Anti-Semitism & The Left
From: CarolC
Date: 01 Mar 04 - 05:39 PM

I'm sure that you don't Carol C. I have to try to not picture you brushing only one tooth in the morning.

As it happens, there are quite a few people in this trailer park who are soldiers stationed at Fort Benning. Do you have difficulty picturing them with a full set of teeth?

You have to understand the people before you can make comments about what they might think.

I don't disagree with this.

Subject: RE: BS: Anti-Semitism & The Left
From: CarolC
Date: 01 Mar 04 - 05:55 PM

Here's what one Israeli Jew has to say about this subject:

Manufacturing Anti-Semites by URI AVNERY

Subject: RE: BS: Anti-Semitism & The Left
From: axman664
Date: 01 Mar 04 - 06:12 PM

"Yes, the right wing currently has an unholy alliance with Zionists, because in Christian fundamentalist belief Israel must be in Jewish hands for the prophecy of Revelation to be fulfilled."--Nerd

I'm not interested in contesting the above point; I feel that it should be mentioned that there are other reasons why conservatives are tending to ally themselves with Zionists. From what I observe (and I am no political scientist), many conservatives agree that the best way to ensure the security of our democracy is to democratize as much of the world as possible. This is undoubtedly one of the primary motivators for invading Iraq. And certainly if we wish to democratize the Middle East, we must support existing democracies, like that of Israel's, Pakistan's, India's, and now Afghanistan.

A sect of conservatives are called neoconservatives, or "neocons", and I think that many of these neocons are Jewish. Cf: Paul Wolfowitz. So to say that the right wing is anti-semitic is a bit blankety, don't you think?

Dan

Subject: RE: BS: Anti-Semitism & The Left
From: Sam L
Date: 01 Mar 04 - 06:52 PM

Ha! CarolC, that was pretty funny, I'm sorry to have not got your original sense. I'm a little dumb. I live in a hipster-doofus village that supports a few "alternative" newspapers and a major one that everyone says is left-leaning. But realistically, I bet you could find a few liberal intellectuals there too, even some of the soldiers. It's a good point that criticizing Sharon isn't anti-Israel. I think I've said what I can say--I'm not quite sure that the good things in the U.S. democracy weren't paid for with some of the bad things. It's hard for me to think I know if it could have survived and achieved good without the evil. I just don't know. And I'm not Jewish.
I'm about out of my depth here. But I do have this to say. I've met people who believe the Jewish conspiracy stuff, and even one who maintained the holocaust was a hoax (and she liked Dan Fogelberg). Well, I wasn't there, but if it's a hoax everyone might as well give up, because there's no point in resisting a conspiracy like that. Uncle. I also have some Jewish buddies who wish they could get some help from the big conspiracy sometimes, and not have to go to study in a dangerous place on just a shoestring with a few bucks saved from working like dogs at crappy jobs.

Subject: RE: BS: Anti-Semitism & The Left
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 01 Mar 04 - 07:04 PM

Hi Fred. I'm Carol's husband. I've lived near Fort Benning for nearly six yeas now and this

I bet you could find a few liberal intellectuals there too, even some of the soldiers.

is one of the funniest things I've seen in a while. I've met lots of intelligent people here but nearly none who could be called intellectual.

A liberal intellectual army officer?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

HA HA

Subject: RE: BS: Anti-Semitism & The Left
From: dianavan
Date: 01 Mar 04 - 08:50 PM

bazza: "...are a vey clever race" They are a culture not a race. As soon as you start talking about a race, you become a racist.

I didn't want to enter this discussion but now I feel compelled. I thought I agreed with Carole C. but now I know I'm in a league by myself. I don't think I'm anti-semetic or anti-Jewish but I have big problems with the current Israeli policies. I believe that liberals supported the state of Israel at one time but that the shift has occurred because of their treatment of their neighbors.

Unfortunately, the support the U.S. has given Israel has come at a very heavy price. Israel is perceived (by me at least) as an American puppet that is protecting American interests in the middle east. It is an unholy alliance that has created a situation where the Israelis have become oppressors. So I am anti-Israel but I am not anti-Jewish. Is this possible? Surely not all Jews are Israelis. I will even go so far as to say that I'm not even sure Israel has a right to exist as a material state. Zionism is as dangerous as any other extreme nationalism, if not more so.

So there you go. I'm standing here with my chin out.

d

Subject: RE: BS: Anti-Semitism & The Left
From: Peace
Date: 01 Mar 04 - 09:42 PM

Meanwhile, Arafat is getting his peepee slapped for having $300 million dollars that belong to ??????

Subject: RE: BS: Anti-Semitism & The Left
From: dianavan
Date: 02 Mar 04 - 01:16 AM

As if the world bank has any moral authority!

d

Subject: RE: BS: Anti-Semitism & The Left
From: Nerd
Date: 02 Mar 04 - 02:39 AM

I understand where dianavan and others who can't abide Israel are coming from. I agree too that what is at issue is the global perception of the Palestinian problem (although "treatment of their neighbors" is a vague and misleading phrase; presumably it's not Syria you're concerned about...) The perception that Israel is cruel to the Palestinians is exactly what is causing the left to waver in its support for Israel.

But it's a perception. The Palestinians are caught in the middle of a web of powerful interests, most of them Arab, who wish to keep them oppressed. There is little Israel can do about it.

I'll outline just a bit Israel's perspective on the matter. Although I'm not a big Zionist, I've heard many of the Zionist arguments from friends and family.

1) Israel began by simply obeying the terms of the partition created by Great Britain when Palestine was ceded; one state for Jews, one for Arabs. Many of the Arabs who lived in Israel tried to go to Jordan, but Jordan kicked them out again. Israel did not feel it had responsibility for these people anymore, so they became refugees. Remember, there are Arab citizens of Israel who never left, and are not refugees today but citizens with full rights. So the "Palestinians" who are made Israel's problem could be seen as an Arab responsibility, too.

2) Israel originally observed its original borders, but was repeatedly attacked by Arab neighbors and won some of their territory in the ensuing wars. Now those countries whine and whine about Israel having taken their land. They shouldn't have attacked Israel in the first place. People who criticize Israel from the US (or Canada) should remember that Israel has as much right to the west bank as we have to most of our lands; we weren't attacked before we seized them. Europeans who criticize Israel should remember that their own rapacious greed created the colonial morass out of which the Palestinian issue emerged. Judge not...

3) "created a situation where the Israelis have become oppressors." Surely you mean the Israeli government here. Remember that many citizens of Israel do not support the policies you vaguely allude to.

In a broader sense, what can Israel do? They have repeatedly tried to negotiate with Arafat, and Rabin essentially offered him everything he asked for; he STILL would not agree to any amicable arrangement. Arafat is the problem, not the Israeli government in general--although this Israeli government is awful.   Israel bounces from progressive to reactionary governments, and nobody can make any headway with Arafat. That alone should tell you who the problem is.

Here's the reason: Arafat's power is entirely based on the Palestinians being an oppressed minority. As soon as they negotiate and come up with a solution, he will be the scapegoat of the folks who want the whole of Israel to be an Arab country. He would be like Michael Collins was in Ireland: a patsy sent to negotiate because any solution would be seen as a failure. So he essentially refuses to negotiate in good faith. In the meantime he's become a multi-millionaire while he supposedly represents starving homeless refugees.

4) Arab governments the world over love to lament the plight of the Palestinians. Funny how they won't do a damn thing to help them, though. Arguably, the refugees are Jordan's mess as much as Israel's, but Jordan won't help. Other Arab countries also weep and wail about the cruel Israelis. But give Palestinians a place to live in THEIR countries? No way! That would take the heat off Israel, which is the last thing they want.

The Arab nations have achieved a massive PR coup in convincing the world that the Palestinian situation is Israel's fault. They have done it by keeping the Palestinians in poverty. The Palestinian situation was caused by a vague British mandate, an indifferent and callous Jordanian King, a series of wars uniformly started by Arabs, and an intransigent Palestinian authority. It was helped along by a group of Arab governments who want to use the Palestinians as pawns in their long war against Israel. Israel has been in a no-win situation with them from the beginning.

Remember the US's response to being attacked on 9-11. We attacked Afghanistan and then Iraq, killng many hundreds of people. While you and I may not agree with these actions, we generally don't say "I hate the US because of this, and I question its right to exist." When Israel kills four Palestinians after a suicide bombing, this is precisely the response they face from an increasingly hostile world.

Look, I too would prefer a world where states did not have religions. But the world Israel is in DOES have state religions, and in those countries religious minorities always suffer discrimination. If there can be hundreds of Muslim and Christian countries, why is one Jewish state so much to ask? And Israel is essentially no different from Bangladesh or Pakistan, Zaire or Zimbabwe, Bolivia or Peru: a relatively artificial creation of a departing colonial power. It has as much and as little right to exist as just about every country in Africa, the Middle East, South Asia and South America. Which is to say: every legal right that any authority in the world recognizes.

Axeman664,

Yes, of course it was too broad to suggest that "the right" as a blanket category, is anti-semitic, just as it is too broad to do that to "the left." That was not what I started out trying to say, but I DID sound that way. Sorry!

Subject: RE: BS: Anti-Semitism & The Left
From: Wolfgang
Date: 02 Mar 04 - 07:31 AM

Very good post, Nerd

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Anti-Semitism & The Left
From: Sam L
Date: 02 Mar 04 - 10:24 AM

As usual, Nerd.

Hello Jack The Sailor. I'm always glad to get a laugh, but I'm afraid I was in earnest. I'll take it, though, I'm not too proud. I have a Jewish friend in Alabama who believes in the Shroud of Turin--perhaps I'm disposed to expect the unexpected?

Not that I take the media and banking comments seriously, but the interesting thing it does point up is the failure of American Christians to make or accept good movies which embody instead of merely illustrate their values, in relation to a recognizable vision of contemporary life. Before Mel Gibson's current thing, there was some talk about a growing Christian movie industry, which was trying to move beyond the apocalypse sort of thing. The stories tend to come from revelations, or else it's robes and sandals and all that. They don't seem to know what else to do. There are plenty of exceptions, but the people I would think of as really great Christian storytellers (Scorcese, that guy who did The Mission and Black Robe, lots of stuff, many serious people) are not much embraced by any semblance of a Christian community. There's always this Sunday-School illustration mentality that proscribes against the work of grown-up artists. Christians don't seem to recognize themselves, or seem to know what their values are supposed to be, beyond not liking naughty words and boobies. I think if the Christian community could embrace their own voices, quit twisting in the wind, and um, well, quit posing as "Christians" for everyone to notice them, they'd soon see they've only been conspiring against themselves.

Subject: RE: BS: Anti-Semitism & The Left
From: CarolC
Date: 02 Mar 04 - 10:41 AM

Many of your points, Nerd, are factually incorrect. This one, for instance:

They have repeatedly tried to negotiate with Arafat, and Rabin essentially offered him everything he asked for; he STILL would not agree to any amicable arrangement.

Arafat signed the agreement with Rabin, and he and the PLO were living up to their part of the agreement. It was Israel (under Netanyahu, after Rabin was murdered) who pulled out of that agreement. This is even acknowleged by many Israelis. Had Israel complied with the Oslo agreement instead of reneging on it, the second intifada would probably never have been started. The Israeli government most certainly is responsible for the plight of the Palestinians.

Subject: RE: BS: Anti-Semitism & The Left
From: GUEST
Date: 02 Mar 04 - 11:42 AM

But, 'for instance' is not proof.

Subject: RE: BS: Anti-Semitism & The Left
From: CarolC
Date: 02 Mar 04 - 12:32 PM

Not proof of what? Shall I provide links to quotes from prominent members of the Israeli government, past and present?

Subject: RE: BS: Anti-Semitism & The Left
From: GUEST
Date: 02 Mar 04 - 01:12 PM

No thankyou.

Subject: RE: BS: Anti-Semitism & The Left
From: bazza
Date: 02 Mar 04 - 01:24 PM

I,m sorry if my comment caused upset,I thought my question would bring some replys saying the Jews are not running the film industry,banking etc and would come up with something to enlighten me,
these questiones are just curiosity no more,I have two Jewish first cousins and a close friend ,I apologize,Bazza.

Subject: RE: BS: Anti-Semitism & The Left
From: Nerd
Date: 02 Mar 04 - 01:33 PM

We disagree, CarolC. Obviously, more prominent members of the Israeli government are on my side of this disagreement than yours, and more prominent Palestinians on your side than mine. This alone does not prove anything, however.

Subject: RE: BS: Anti-Semitism & The Left
From: Nerd
Date: 02 Mar 04 - 02:21 PM

CarolC, I see where I went wrong in my first post above. I typed Rabin when I meant Ehud Barak; just a slip of the fingers! I was referrng to the 2000 Camp David meetings, where Barak offered so much he shocked the Israeli public and the US government, going far beyond the concessions offered in Oslo. As you know, Arafat rejected him out of hand.

As you also know, the Oslo accords signed by Rabin called for non-violence, which did not materialize. So Netanyahu did pull out, but if you break a contract and afterwards I send you an official letter terminating the contract on the grounds that you broke it, my official letter is not to blame for the dissolution of the contract. I'm not saying the Israeli government was blameless in some of the Oslo period violence, but the Palestinians violated Oslo at least as much as the Israelis. Which side officially pulled out of a non-functioning agreement is irrelevant.

As to the origins of the whole mess,

From palestinefacts.org

On November 29, 1947, the U.N. General Assembly by a two-thirds vote (33 to 13 with Britain and nine others abstaining) passed Resolution 181 partitioning Palestine into two states, one Jewish and one Arab. The Jewish community of Palestine jubilantly accepted partition despite the small size and strategic vulnerability of the proposed state. Not only were Judea, Samaria and the Gaza Strip not included, but also Jerusalem, most of the Galilee in the North and parts of the Negev desert in the South were excluded. The Arab national movement in Palestine, as well as all the Arab states, angrily rejected partition. They demanded the entire country for themselves and threatened to resist partition by force. Had they accepted the U.N. proposal in 1947, the independent Palestinian Arab state, covering an area much larger than the West Bank and Gaza, would have been created along with Israel. Instead, they launched a war to destroy the nascent Jewish state.

This was AFTER 77% of historical Palestine had already become (Trans)Jordan, which is itself a Palestinian Arab state. Just how is Israel supposed to be responsible for the supposed absence of a state for Palestinian Arabs? I must say I never understood this contention.

Subject: RE: BS: Anti-Semitism & The Left
From: Backstage Manager(inactive)
Date: 02 Mar 04 - 03:03 PM

There was a very interesting article in Sunday's NY Times Magazine about anti-Semitism in France, much of it coming from the left, or from those supported by the left.

Yet today, when synagogues are firebombed, she complained, the left is silent because the anti-Jewish violence is perceived as coming from radical Muslims, whose cause the left has adopted as its own.

You can read the whole article here.

Subject: RE: BS: Anti-Semitism & The Left
From: pdq
Date: 02 Mar 04 - 03:06 PM

I try to stay away from politics, but here is something to think about. Former

New York City mayor Ed Koch has endorsed President George W. Bush for

for re-election. Koch is a lifetime Liberal, a Democrat and a practising Jew.

He is not alone in feeling that another eight years of Clintonesque foreign

policy, where the US reacted to each crisis rather than planning ahead, will

likely result in the destruction of the state of Israel.   Liberals usually support

forcing Israel to make greater concessions than are practical. Democrats are

giving mixed signals to the Muslim nations and the Republicans are not.

Subject: RE: BS: Anti-Semitism & The Left
From: Peace
Date: 02 Mar 04 - 04:09 PM

bazza, I apologize to you. I didn't see the humour. Please excuse me.

Subject: RE: BS: Anti-Semitism & The Left
From: CarolC
Date: 02 Mar 04 - 05:36 PM

Nerd, Isreal never complied with it's obligation under Oslo. It was obliged to stop construction of settlements, and also to begin dismantling settlements. Not only did it not do that, it continued construction and even accelerated the rate of construction of settlements. The PLO did, in fact, comply with its obligation of non-violence. In the two year period after Oslo was signed, and before Rabin was murdered, there were no killings of Israelis by PLO terrorists. Two years.

The second intifada didn't begin until long after Israel had already violated the agreement. The second indifada started precisely because Israel wasn't honoring its obligations under Oslo.

Subject: RE: BS: Anti-Semitism & The Left
From: Bobert
Date: 02 Mar 04 - 07:13 PM

Danged if there ain't more than a few folks that ain't ssing things the way this ol' hillbilly been seein' 'um...

Ahhhh, this "right for the US to exist" crap is just that. With the US's military might and nuclear arsonal, the only thing that can bring it down is its arrogance and short-sightedness.

As fir why Arab countries ain't too trilled to get in the middle of the Isreali/Palestinain situation one only needs to check out Isreal's nuclear capabilities, which are unbelievably formadible coonsidering it's size.

Ahhh, this ain't 'bout religion as much as it's about one group of folks stealing others folks stuff. BTW, the US is on the wrong side of this little greedy bad habit.

Ahhh, contrary to my feelings that Clinton was the best Republican that the Republicans have had in the last 50 years, I would point out the tireless efforts of his administration made trying to broker a deal between Isreal and the Palestinians and deserves cerdit for that. The current administration initially turned its back on the Middle East and when it blew up, did and continues to do very little.

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Anti-Semitism & The Left
From: Bill D
Date: 02 Mar 04 - 08:53 PM

"... If there can be hundreds of Muslim and Christian countries, why is one Jewish state so much to ask?"

I'm unsure if the question is serious or rhetorical, but the answer is...because having ANY country based on and run by a single religion in this world, where every country has residents of 'other' religions, is a bad idea. Adding one more does not solve anything.

There is, technically, a difference between an Arab state and an Islamic state, but making that distinction at the partition of Palestine in 1947 would not have made much difference, as the fights would have gone on anyway.

Of course the Palestinians didn't want a bunch of land suddenly given to Jews...and of course the Jews didn't like being attacked when they thought they were finally getting a place to live where they had some say-so about their status and control over BEING Jewish. And of course the other Arab states didn't like losing territory to this upstart state that they didn't want in the first place...and of course no one was willing to back down or give in when a couple thousand years of religious/cultural bickering were at stake! And of course the USA and other countries felt they had to help defend and support Israel because of various social, religious and political considerations! How could there NOT have been wars and frustration and wrangling and debate over borders and rights and blame for the whole mess?

There is one, and ONLY one reasonable¹ solution to the whole thing...no borders, no fences, no state with ANY religion having official status in the area. Since 3 different religions claim it as a "Holy Land", it should be administered is such a way as to allow them all access and equality. Will it happen? Of course it will not happen...you'd be hard put to find 27 people on either side in the area who would agree to TRY my idea...and even if they did, they would fight for another 50 years over the details of how to administer it. "But they outnumber us.." "But we should have an equal number of votes on the council"..."Well, we should have areas 'they' can't go..."..etc.

(1)note, I say 'reasonable'...there are a couple solutions which are not even easy to contemplate)

Subject: RE: BS: Anti-Semitism & The Left
From: CarolC
Date: 02 Mar 04 - 09:29 PM

I'm curious to know what, in Koch's opinion, Bush has done or not done that has been beneficial (according to Koch's definition of "beneficial" in this situation) for Israel that Clinton did or did not do while he was in office.

Subject: RE: BS: Anti-Semitism & The Left
From: dianavan
Date: 02 Mar 04 - 09:48 PM

Bill D - Sounds like a reasonable solution to me. Maybe it should be declared a world heritage site (maybe it already is) and possibly be governed by a council with equal representation from each religion. I really don't think that the people who live there want this to continue. There is no purpose to this on-going conflict (unless, of course, it is for U.S. military strategic location). I think the whole thing is fuelled (in more ways than one) by the U.S. govt.

d

Subject: RE: BS: Anti-Semitism & The Left
From: Peace
Date: 02 Mar 04 - 10:14 PM

Tom Clancy proposed something similar in one of his novels (Red Rabbit?). Then we could make the Vatican, Mecca, Qom, Canterbury, Salt Lake City, etc., World Heritage sites. Yep. I guess what's good enough for one is good enough for all.

Subject: RE: BS: Anti-Semitism & The Left
From: Bill D
Date: 02 Mar 04 - 10:22 PM

brucie.."...we could make..." *grin*, oh, RIGHT!

dianavan...and would we allow people to LIVE in a heritage site? In equal numbers? Who would moderate disputes? Maybe we (whoever 'we' is..the UN?) ought to just PARTITION the area without asking permission of the battling factions, eh? That would be..ummm...interesting...

Subject: RE: BS: Anti-Semitism & The Left
From: GUEST,Martin Gibson
Date: 02 Mar 04 - 10:58 PM

Bill D.

Biggest problem I see with your idea is that virtually every Jewish prayer book would have to be re-written.

Jews won't give up Israel and the home of our religion, as promised to us by God. Moses didn't lead us to Saudi Arabia, you know.

dianavan, you obviously know nothing about the Jewish religion. No, we don't take off work for Hanukah.

Hey, for all you pseudo intellectual slobs, I started a pretty good thread. All this leftest bantering I believe supports what I said and know in the beginning. Jews are abondoning the left for the survival of Israel.

We take all of that money we have and put it behind the ones who support it. Long live the Jewish United Fund.

Subject: RE: BS: Anti-Semitism & The Left
From: Peace
Date: 02 Mar 04 - 11:36 PM

Golda M once made mention of Moses and his sense of direction.

Subject: RE: BS: Anti-Semitism & The Left
From: CarolC
Date: 02 Mar 04 - 11:42 PM

So Martin, to what degree do you think this money and the Jewish United Fund, along with the migration of Jews to the Right, will effect the outcome of the upcoming elections? Would you say that the outcome is a foregone conclusion?

Subject: RE: BS: Anti-Semitism & The Left
From: GUEST,einstein
Date: 03 Mar 04 - 12:08 AM

God is not a real estate agent.

Subject: RE: BS: Anti-Semitism & The Left
From: Peace
Date: 03 Mar 04 - 12:12 AM

He is a surreal estate agent.

Subject: RE: BS: Anti-Semitism & The Left
From: dianavan
Date: 03 Mar 04 - 12:13 AM

Marty: you said, "dianavan, you obviously know nothing about the Jewish religion. No, we don't take off work for Hanukah."

What are you talking about? I said nothing about Hanukah!

You're right about one thing. I know very little about the Jewish religion. Thats why I ask questions. Did I suggest that Jews give up their homeland? No, I suggest that they SHARE it with two other major religions that consider it their holy land. Whats your solution? Continual conflict? Don't answer that, I already know the answer. By the way, your attitude does more harm to the common perception of Jews than anything anyone else might say.

d

Subject: RE: BS: Anti-Semitism & The Left
From: CarolC
Date: 03 Mar 04 - 02:07 AM

Jews do not eat red herring. Pickled herring, yes. You have to understand the people before you can make comments about what they might think.

And some Jews eat falafel and flat bread, traditional Arabic foods:

Arabic Jews

(I wonder if Timna Brauer is a leftist.)

Subject: RE: BS: Anti-Semitism & The Left
From: Nerd
Date: 03 Mar 04 - 12:44 PM

BillD,

that's not a reasonable solution. It would make the Jews a tiny opressed minority in any state that would replace the current set-up. I think you know this.

Bobert, your theory of why the Arab countries would not "get in the middle" of the "Israeli-Palestinian" issue has two major flaws. One, we know by now that Israel could not use nuclear weapons against their neighboring Arab states because it would render much of Israel uninhabitable. Two, the Arab states did nothing to help the Palestinians, and indeed kept and in some cases forced the Palestinians out of trans-Jordan, Syria and other countries BEFORE Israel had any nuclear capability.

CarolC, most people simply do not agree with your interpretation of Oslo. You point out one obligation the Israelis did not meet and one obligation the Palestinians did meet. But there was much more to Oslo than this.

You make it sound like all the Palestinians have to do is not kill anyone and they're in compliance. In fact, there were many things that the Palestinian authority was supposed to do from the very outset of Oslo that they never did, for example, amending the Palestinian Covenant to stop it from calling for Israel's destruction. That's pretty basic, wouldn't you say? In fact, the Palestinians violated more basic tenets of Oslo than the Israelis did, according to both Jewish and Christian groups.

It may be that they refrained from murder for two whole years. (What prize do you suggest we give them?) What they did not do was refrain from calling for the elimination of Israel, while at the same time claiming hypocritically that they "recognized Israel's right to exist."

It's like saying "I recognize Jim's right to live, but he annoys me so I'll still call for his assassination!"

Israel did in fact cede territory and authority. They recognized the Palestinian Authority, released terrorist prisoners, granted amnesty to terrorists at large (we're talking about thousands of prisoners released and amnesty cases).

In some cases, you are right, settlements went on and even accelerated. But in light of the non-amendment of the Covenant, Israel did not see that they had to go out of their way to prevent settlements. So they met some obligations and not others, just like the Palestinians.

Then there's the question of what Oslo was meant to achieve. Faisal Husseini, the former PLO leader in Jerusalem and Palestinian Authority member, admitted that Oslo was:

"a Trojan Horse . . . just a temporary procedure . . . just a step towards something bigger: Palestine from the river to the sea," i.e., from the Jordan to the Mediterranean, eradicating Israel. According to Husseini, Oslo was a method of "ambushing the Israelis and cheating them."

They succeeded, because now more people (like you) are convinced that Israel is to blame.

Subject: RE: BS: Anti-Semitism & The Left
From: CarolC
Date: 03 Mar 04 - 01:03 PM

Yes. Oslo was flawed. There was no endgame from the standpoint of the Israelis. The Palestinians knew what they wanted, and they put their expectations right out there on the table. But Israel has never given any indication of what its endgame is. They have never acknoweleged the Palestinian's right to exist. Not only that, but the standard line that Israel has been using about the Palestinians is that not only do they not have a right to exist, but that they never even existed in the first place.

It may be that they refrained from murder for two whole years. (What prize do you suggest we give them?)

Israel could have stopped building settlements. And they should have. That would have been a sign to the Palestinians that Israel had negotiated in good faith.

What they did not do was refrain from calling for the elimination of Israel, while at the same time claiming hypocritically that they "recognized Israel's right to exist."

Why should ammend their covenant in that way if Israel refuses to recognise the Palestinian's right to exist? Israel won't even say that the Palestinians have a right to keep the land that they currently have.

Talk about hypocrisy.

Subject: RE: BS: Anti-Semitism & The Left
From: Peace
Date: 03 Mar 04 - 03:03 PM

Israel's endgame is what it has always been: Security and a homeland for Jews. I agree.