Young Jews Disrupt Netanyahu at Jewish General Assembly

[Rue]

Bud I stated:

"I don't need to shove it down anyone's throat nor will I. It is what I am. It is simply who I am. Don't ever presume to tell me who I am again."

The above refers to me needing to tell people I am a Jew and preface my opinions by using my Jewish identity as an automatic pretext that because I am a Jew it makes my opinions more valid when I criticize Israel.

Then I stated:

"No I do not make the ridiculous comments these youths made. I expect them to lose their temper and have tantrums. I expect them to do that because that is what some of our people do. They are afraid to be Zionists and admit they have a distinct identity and they believe if they scream about how bad Zionism is, they will suddenly no longer be seen as Jews and be assimilated and accepted."

There is no contradiction in what I said you of course however do not understand what it is to be a Zionist or what Zionism is so to you this would appear to be a contradiction.

Zionism refers to the collective term Jew. It is a collective term for many components that go into our collective identity. What I am criticizing are Jews who are afraid to think of themselves as a collective with a right to universal sufferage NOT criticizing them for not going around prefacing their remarks for negating their collective identity of being Jewish by saying they hate Israel.

You clearly did not get it.

Let me put it in the simple black and white terms you understand. A secure Jew neither needs shove their Jewish identity down anyone's face when expressing an opinion nor do they need to openly have tantrums degrading Jews who see themselves as having a right to be collectively recognized.

There is a manner in which to discuss such identity issues and acting like baboons in public is not the way to do it.

You think Bob is an extremist? He let you off easy. Wait. You think I am done?

You think I will sit passively by while you dictate to me what is an acceptable jewish opinion and what isn't and who should speak for me and who I should consider brave or appropriate. I have news for you, whether I am a Jew or a gentile, black or white, female or male, Christian or Hindu, what-ever you and Naomi and your band of politially appropriate extremists do not speak for me or any one else but yourselves.

heh. seriously. you are a walking contradiction.

[Rue]

jewish independence and self-determination should not come at the cost of violating international law and human rights.

Can't resist the need to lecture and patronize....no Bud, I am not your Jewboy. Save the patronizing tone for someone else. I am not interested in joining your golf club or be told what part of the beach to stand on.

Don't lecture me on what the cost of Jewish independence is or what the cost of self-determination to Jews has been. You are way out of line presuming you can point your patronizing finger.

Unless your blood line is free of any wrong doing and is comes from pure angels who never harmed anyone take that righteous presumption that sounds distinctly like a pretentious leftist I know what is good for everyone tone of command and restrain it.

Self-determination shouln't come at the cost of violating international law and human rights? Really. Will you make the same patronizing speech to Hamas, Hezbollah, Intifada, the PFLP, Iran, Syria, Farah Hawks, Al Quaeda, Muslim Brotherhood, on and on? Or do you have selective bias as to who you save such lectures for.

Are you suggesting Israel has acted in a vacuum and simply set out to do what it did for no reason other then a bunch of Jews woke up one morning and said, hey let's go start a country so we can violate some human rights.

Say now, I know. When the holocaust transpired and millions of Jews had no where to go, they should have just gone poof right Bud because I mean after all, The Mufti of Jerusalem said its not fair they go to Palestine. The 900,000 expelled from Arab League Nations of which 700,000 were forced to flee to Israel with nothing....poof begone to them...you know why Bud...because using your logic, the Arab world felt it wasn't fair they move to Israel.

Violate human rights? Right only Israel has. The Arab League never violated any international laws or human rights. None. Zero. Neither did your ancestors. You are clean as a whistle. You were born to lecture the Jew as to what the price of their freedom is-you just can't shrug off the need to dictate to Jews and lecture us-old habits die hard-the dang jew does not know the price of freedom and his place.

Right Bud?

[Rue]

these young people have a lot of balls. kudos to them and anyone else who does not allow nationalism cloud their judgement.

There you go again presuming to know how I think and imposing black and white patronizing assumptions on those who disagree with you.

get this clear Bud, the fact I am a Zionist does not mean I give unreserved support for all Israeli state policies.

You know nothing about me or the millions of Jews, some Israeli, some who live in the diaspora who support the right of Israel to exist and what our opinions are. You assume its black and white, and if we are Zionist, we automatically side with all Israeli policies. Well take your assumptions once again and dance with them.

The fact I believe Jews have the right to universal sufferage does not cloud my judgement. My contempt for people like you though, who lump people into simplistic categories does. That I openly admit.

[Rue]

I've gotta say Rue, I like you.

Thank you for the kind words.

[Rue]

1-it's okay to be jewish and not excuse and try to justify violations of human rights.

2-some of the biggest leaders in this fight against modern zionism happen to be jewish.

-people like noam chomsky and norman finkelstein are not insecure about being jewish. rather, they prefer to apply and expect justice and fairness across the board and not only on non-jews.

In regards to 1, you engage in stereotypes against Jews and suggest the fact that I am Jewish and support the right of my people to universal sufferage means I justify Israel violating human rights. Those of us who support Israel's right to exist also criticize certain of its policies and we do not need you to lecture us on when and what we should criticize. Your need to continually lecture only continues to evidence your patronizing approach to Jews or anyone who does no agree with you. You lump us all in the great unwashed savage category.

Read back your patronizing comment. No human should violate another human's rights if they can help it. Being jewish is irrelevant to that equation.

In regards to 2, the religion of anti-Zionists is irrelevant unless they try expolit their identity to imply automatic credibility because of it. The fact an anti-Zionist Jewish does not give them instant credibility and where you get off patronizing me or anyone else let alone Jews and tell us who you think an appropriate Jew is, is the height of absurdity.

Once again you not I raise their Jewishness to try suggest they are superior to me because they are anti-Zionist and I am Zionist and because we are both Jews, the one who is against having a collective identity must automatically assumed to be superior.

Spit it out Bud. Chomsky and Finklestein are good Jews. I am a bad one. They know their place, I do not.

Everyone on this board gentile or Jew, white or black, women or men, gay or straight has a right to their opinion and no I do not need you to lecture me on whether I am a politically acceptable Jew to you.

There are many of us who support Israel's right to exist and do not need you to lecture us on human rights, or what is appropriate.

You know nothing about me, what I witnessed in the Middle East, what groups I have been involved in and how I choose to express my collective identity. Don't presume to know what I or anyone else believes.

I have had the fortune to have learned from native Canadian elders, Shaman, Bahaiis, Hindus, Muslims, Unitarians, Christians, Taoists, Buddists, Jews, Wiccans, Jains, humanist atheists and people of many disciplines and approaches to life and will continue to do so. You know nothing of the Zionism I believe in and how it was taught to me or how it interacts with the collective cultural identities of others.

Don't presume to tell me who is my leader and who has credibility for me or any other Jew or non Jew.

[Rue]

Bud here you want to lecture me on who an appropriate Jew

is...now its my turn.....here read...

http://frontpagemag.com/2010/02/16/the-pathology-of-jewish-anti-semitism/

Once again Bud, before you presume to tell me who is good for me

and who should be my leader, keep something in mind, me, not you, decides

whose opinions I agree with, and there being jewish or gentile means f..ck

all to me, their merit and the content of their words is what matters to me.

[Bob]

Shalom Aleyhem Rue,

I would define Zionism slightly more thoroughly than you just did in previous posts. Although it's probably the case that bud and others don't really understand what Zionism is, and use the term pejoratively to appeal to other anti-Semites, allow me to elaborate a little on what it means to me. At the risk of being presumptuous, I'd imagine that the following description of Zionism will resonate with most Jews and people of noble character.

What Zionism is, essentially, is a Jewish liberation and civil rights movement. After centuries of persecution, certain groups of Jews at least as early as the mid-19th century began to conceptualize a movement towards Jewish statehood as a solution to the persecution Jews were facing in Europe and in the Muslim world. We don't need to go into too many details, but several major historical events hurt the Jewish people significantly, leading several of us to the natural conclusion that some resolution had to be made towards ensuring Jewish survival and protection of our basic rights. That solution manifested itself into Zionism - Jewish statehood.

Broadly speaking, we unapologetically claim basic rights as a people. These rights are, primarily: self-determination, independence, cultural preservation as well as ongoing development. It is crucial to understand that these are rights as well as obligations that lie not only with Jewish individuals, but with the collective of the Jewish nation. There are individual rights, as well as collective (national) rights. We will not compromise at all on these fundamentals, as these are our basic inalienable rights.

Moreover, these fundamentals are best secured via statehood - Israel. We cannot be denied basic rights as individual Jews in our own country, as was done in the past and continues to be done in many countries today. Given the world's history of anti-Semitism, Israel provides and will always provide a safe-haven for any Jewish person who wishes to return to his or her homeland.

As far as the movement goes, that's it in a nutshell.

[Bob]

Norman Finkelstein is openly an atheist. His self-declared connection to Judaism is pretty much his last name. He is also a communist, and opposed to all differences between people arising from groups, nations, ethnicities, etc. He is basically opposed to the independence of varying nations and groups of people, and wants everyone to become like everyone else in a stateless world. Naturally, he is opposed to Zionism as Zionism, at least in part, seeks the preservation of the unique Jewish people. Norman Finkelstein cannot really be held up as a Jewish person, at least as far as his own self-description. Who are we to group Finkelstein in with the Jewish people if he doesn't identify himself with the Jewish people? Moreover, the Jewish people, by and large, don't identify with him.

Chomsky had more of a religious Jewish upbringing, but even he does not openly identify himself as Jewish. Although he is certainly relatively knowledgeable about many things Jewish (history, culture, and faith), he still does not identify with it or practise it. If he doesn't identify himself as being a part of the Jewish nation, who are others to define his identity for him? As was mentioned in the above example with Finkelstein, I would imagine a significant portion of the Jewish people don't identify with Chomsky's virulently anti-Zionist positions.

In all seriousness, the Jewish heritage of Chomsky and Finkelstein aren't really relevant. Consistently bringing it up, as bud also did with Richard Goldstone, is a transparent and infantile attempt to add "credibility" up his anti-Semitic/anti-Zionist positions. As if someone's ethnicity in and of itself matters or validates a political opinion.

[KeyStone]

While eloquently written Rue, you are missing one obvious truth here.

Now, you suggest that one's level of Judaism is completely irrelevant to the equation, and it should be, but it is not.

The reason that Chomsky has been elevated as a champion among the left in standing up to Israel, is partly because he is Jewish. There are certain Israeli apologists, who believe that the vast majority of criticism leveled at Israel is the result of hatred of Jews, and nothing else.

The charge of Jew-hating is not as easy to direct towards Chomsky and other Jews, simply because they are Jewish.

Of course, as Bob will tell you, by being critical of Israel, they can not possible be 'real Jews'.

[Rue]

I hope this doesn't seem unfair, as I do not want to portray myself as the judge of who is or isn't Jewish (I can share with you popular Halaha on this issue, though), but let's venture in, anyways. For those who claim to be Jewish, when's the last time you said tefilla? When's the last time you lit the Shabbat candles? When's the last time you donated to a legitimate Jewish charity? When's the last time you attended a Jewish class (history, religion, food, Kabbalah, or anything) or read a Jewish book? I love my fellow Jews, secular and religious, but for those anti-Zionist Jews who try to leverage their last names as a way to increase their credibility on issues relating to Israel, I wonder if I could distinguish you from the Goyim without knowing your last names. More than likely, these anti-Zionists are indistinguishable from the Goyim. It's sad, but true.

Bob you have read my words. You know what kind of Jew I am. I am not religious in the traditional sense. I tried going to a synagogue and found organized religion full of two faced insincere people including the Rabbia.

I make no claims to being politically appropriate. I am blunt and to the point. I have had heated discussions and mounted challenges to people on this board with many who I like.

The regulars on this forum no where I stand. I make no apologies for supporting Israel's right to exist but I do not hate Goyim nor will I engage in hateful stereotypes against them and challenge you for doing the same.

We Jews I believe need to reach out to non Jews. I have had much guidance from native Canadian elders and Buddists and Taoists and many other peoples that have helped me become a better Jew.

My vision of Zionism is the one born of existential despair-it was born out of necessity to prevent extinction. It was not envisioned to be used to hate Arab peoples, gentiles or anyone.

So no Bob, don't ask me to lump all goyim in a nasty category. Many Jews and goyim who criticize Israel do so with good intentions and good faith. Friends do that not just enemies.

I am not so insecure nor is Israel and Israelis so insecure they can not handle criticism of Israeli state policies. The country has a volatile press that each day challenges the government. The country is full of political parties and their representatives who openly debate and question the government's policies. There are as you are well aware hundreds of civil rights and human rights groups in Israel.

Israel is a boiling brew of criticism because that is our way. We are a people born to debate and continuously question and never stop questioning. The Talmud was designed so we would constantly question and never be satisified with answers and constantly seek to challenge and reform them.

I openly welcome any criticism of Israeli state policies. I am not afraid of it. I am also not afraid of someone engaging me in religious debate questioning certain religious doctrine or asking me how the God of the Old Testament appears so unforgiving and angry. How else will people reach out to us if they can not question and engage us?

My battle is against anyone, jew or non Jew who stereotypes another with negative generalizations.

It is wrong when people do it to Jews. Its wrong when we Jews engage ourselves in anti-semitism as well. But it is also wrong for you and I to make sweeping generalizations of distrust towards non Jews.

The world I was born in is a world of co-existence and mutual respect. It is a world of nations among nations. It is a world where each individual has the potential to heal or injure the world through their actions.

No I will not be party to insulting and making sweeping negative generalizations about goyim.

Israel vividly remembers the righteous gentiles. Included in that salute is a salute to righteous Muslims.

Israel was not founded to hate other people-it was founded to assure we did not become extinct and offer a refuge for victims of the holocaust, dhimmitude and thousands of years of persecution. It was not created to justify hating anyone or defining ourselves as superior or better than anyone else or to

create an isolationist ghetto either.

Yes I have read the doctrine of Zionism. Sorry but it did not tell us to go out and hate goyim or disrespect anyone.

I make no claims to being a righteous Jew or a good Jew. I am a rude, impatient, blunt shmuck. But one thing I know is that it is the Jew in me that taught me I am a child of the universe, a child of a reality where there are many visions of possibility not just mine and where the expression of life and hope can be found not just in my people's shared history, but in the history of others.

None of us is an island. We can not hide in a shell and see the external outside our own reality as hostile and ever hope to grow and evolve and become better for having done that.

That is what I think. Bud can say I blow hot air. But it is a sincere hot air and one that many share.

[Bob]

Rue, when did I ever make, or even imply, sweeping generalizations of Gentiles? Where in the world did I ever imply that our intention or desire is to hate or oppress others? You erected quite a few strawmen there, or, at the very least, you implied that I had said thing that I certainly never even implied. Your post seems littered with statements attacking prejudice against Gentiles... why did that even need to be said? Where has anyone in here attacked Goyim?

Quite strange...

[Bob]

While eloquently written Rue, you are missing one obvious truth here.

Now, you suggest that one's level of Judaism is completely irrelevant to the equation, and it should be, but it is not.

The reason that Chomsky has been elevated as a champion among the left in standing up to Israel, is partly because he is Jewish. There are certain Israeli apologists, who believe that the vast majority of criticism leveled at Israel is the result of hatred of Jews, and nothing else.

The charge of Jew-hating is not as easy to direct towards Chomsky and other Jews, simply because they are Jewish.

Of course, as Bob will tell you, by being critical of Israel, they can not possible be 'real Jews'.

I have specifically stated, several times, that criticism of Israel in and of itself isn't anti-Semitic. What I have stated, and will continue to state, is that denial of Jewish fundamental collective rights is anti-Semitism. Anti-Zionism is anti-Semitism, and it is a denial of our independence, self-determination, cultural preservation and continues development. Finkelstein is anti-Zionist, and therefore anti-Semitic. Chomsky is more subtle, but he is quite dishonest is his historical revisionism.

Believe it or not, people with Jewish heritage can be anti-Semitic. A person's last name doesn't insulate themselves from being called out for prejudice when they demonstrate prejudice.

[ToadBrother]

I have specifically stated, several times, that criticism of Israel in and of itself isn't anti-Semitic. What I have stated, and will continue to state, is that denial of Jewish fundamental collective rights is anti-Semitism. Anti-Zionism is anti-Semitism, and it is a denial of our independence, self-determination, cultural preservation and continues development. Finkelstein is anti-Zionist, and therefore anti-Semitic. Chomsky is more subtle, but he is quite dishonest is his historical revisionism.

Believe it or not, people with Jewish heritage can be anti-Semitic. A person's last name doesn't insulate themselves from being called out for prejudice when they demonstrate prejudice.

Can you give me an example of what anti-Zionism would constitute? For instance, if I were to say "I disagree with Israel building settlements on the West Banks", would I now be an anti-Zionist, and thus, by your logic, an anti-Semite?

[Oleg Bach]

The leadership in Israel is not representative of the young Jewish citizenry. The leadership in America is not representative of youthful aspirations based in fine idealism..The leadership in Canada is not representative of the purity and truth that is youth. It would probably be good if all adult leadership in the mentioned nations stepped down and let the 16 year olds run the place - it would probably go smoother and in a more civilized manner.

[Bob]

Can you give me an example of what anti-Zionism would constitute? For instance, if I were to say "I disagree with Israel building settlements on the West Banks", would I now be an anti-Zionist, and thus, by your logic, an anti-Semite?

Being anti-Zionist means opposing Zionism's core values, which I listed earlier. A broad statement opposing all Israeli developments in Judea and Samaria (which you call the "West Bank"), without any qualifiers, is suspect.

I would suspect, however, that you cannot even name three Israeli cities or town (which you refer to as "settlements", located in what you call "the West Bank".

[KeyStone]

Being anti-Zionist means opposing Zionism's core values, which I listed earlier. A broad statement opposing all Israeli developments in Judea and Samaria (which you call the "West Bank"), without any qualifiers, is suspect.

I would suspect, however, that you cannot even name three Israeli cities or town (which you refer to as "settlements", located in what you call "the West Bank".

I think you're missing the point Bob.

Anti-semitism simply refers to those people that hate Jews, simply because they are Jews. If they hate people who happen to be Jewish because of encroaching settlements, murdering children under the guise of defense, or just actively spreading lies against Muslims, then they are not anti-semitic. The key difference is to oppose those responsible for the perceived wrong actions, and the Israeli government itself, as opposed to worldwide Jews.

An extension of that would be holocaust denial, which while not anti-semitism in itself, but the belief of which coincides with anti-semitism in 99.9% of cases.

You, however, believe that simply opposing expanded settlements in the occupied territories, addressing the perceived wrongs of Israel in disproportionate efforts to other worldwide injustices, or daring to call the inconsistencies between how Jews and Arabs are treated in Israel as apartheid, are all anti-semitism.

[ToadBrother]

Being anti-Zionist means opposing Zionism's core values, which I listed earlier. A broad statement opposing all Israeli developments in Judea and Samaria (which you call the "West Bank"), without any qualifiers, is suspect.

I would suspect, however, that you cannot even name three Israeli cities or town (which you refer to as "settlements", located in what you call "the West Bank".

In other words, your definition of "anti-Zionist" is so incredibly broad that it basically catches just about anyone who criticizes Israel, with the added bonus that apparently being "anti-Zionist" also means be "anti-Semitic".

You're arguing yourself in circles. You simply don't want any criticism of Israel, and hope if you can bludgeon people with the "anti-Semitic" tag everyone will abandon their position. It's a ludicrous, disingenuous and ultimately self-defeating form of debate, sort of like all those feminists who spent years arguing that pinching asses and forced sexual intercourse were equivalent crimes. In the end, you only degrade the definition of "anti-Semitism", giving the real anti-Semites even more latitude, not less.

I refuse to accept that being critical of Israel is the same as anti-Semitism. You can lob around all your pseudo-mystical nonsense all you like, but Israel is a state like any other damned state, it's governments are just as corrupt and inept as any other governments, its special interests as unbending, self-righteous and self-defeating as any other special interest.

I do support Israel as a state and as a concept, and do think that the Palestinians have to accept that their Arab brethren screwed them out of a lot of territory. But Israel has some right bastards in its government, the kind of people you find in any government, and the kind of people that should be dumped into deep water.

Edited November 25, 2010 by ToadBrother

[TimG]

You, however, believe that simply opposing expanded settlements in the occupied territories, addressing the perceived wrongs of Israel in disproportionate efforts to other worldwide injustices, or daring to call the inconsistencies between how Jews and Arabs are treated in Israel as apartheid, are all anti-semitism.

We have a neighborhood full of thugs. Yet only one of them gets singled out for international condemnation. Why is that? It is no different than a situtation where a bar fight breaks out and the police arrest the lone black guy. Most would call that racism even if the black guy deserved to be arrested. Edited November 25, 2010 by TimG

[Rue]

Rue, when did I ever make, or even imply, sweeping generalizations of Gentiles? Where in the world did I ever imply that our intention or desire is to hate or oppress others? You erected quite a few strawmen there, or, at the very least, you implied that I had said thing that I certainly never even implied. Your post seems littered with statements attacking prejudice against Gentiles... why did that even need to be said? Where has anyone in here attacked Goyim?

Quite strange...

I read these words to mean you were asking me to make a negative generalization about gentiles:

"...but for those anti-Zionist Jews who try to leverage their last names as a way to increase their credibility on issues relating to Israel, I wonder if I could distinguish you from the Goyim without knowing your last names. More than likely, these anti-Zionists are indistinguishable from the Goyim. It's sad, but true. "

If I misunderstood the meaning of the above and you were not making a negative comment about gentiles I apologize Bob.

I thought it was a sweeping bite at gentiles.

Bob where I am coming from is not to accuse you of anything you did not say and so if I have I apologize. I am just trying to be consistent and say most of this on this board gentile or Jew, whatever we are, we pretty much agree-its not rocket science that we all want to be treated without being defined in negative stereotypes.

Its why I have been barking a lot on this thread. I hate it when people put labels on me or anyone else.

We all deserve to be judged on the merits of our statements and not someone's preconceived notions of what our identity makes us.

Sorry if I misunderstood what you said.

[Rue]

I have specifically stated, several times, that criticism of Israel in and of itself isn't anti-Semitic. What I have stated, and will continue to state, is that denial of Jewish fundamental collective rights is anti-Semitism. Anti-Zionism is anti-Semitism, and it is a denial of our independence, self-determination, cultural preservation and continues development. Finkelstein is anti-Zionist, and therefore anti-Semitic. Chomsky is more subtle, but he is quite dishonest is his historical revisionism.

Believe it or not, people with Jewish heritage can be anti-Semitic. A person's last name doesn't insulate themselves from being called out for prejudice when they demonstrate prejudice.

Bob to clarify, I believe and I state this as a Jew, Zionist and first and foremost Canadian it is quite possible for someone to be anti Zionist or be critical of specific Israeli state policies and not necessarily intend to be anti-semitic.

I am not comfortable with the automatic inference that if one is anti-Zionist they are necessarily anti-semitic. I think it is quite possible to keep the two distinct. I lol, have rarely seen it done, but I think its quite possible and we need to look at the full context of what is said

for its meaning.

I believe Finklestein and Chomsky are blatant anti-semites not because they are anti Zionist but because they deliberately choose to insult all Jews and raise negative stereotypes against Jews and openly insult Jews assigning us negative false beliefs.

I consider Finklestein and Chomsky deliberately hateful in their comments. Their words speak for themselves. There is also a reason both of them are failed academics and had to go outside their actual disciplines.

Neither when discussing Israel follows standard academic protocol. They have been caught plagerizing, misquoting and they engage in the lowest level of discourse, and that is to take events out of context and then attach their subjective opinions onto those events to explain why they happened, ignoring the actual context in which they happened. Its a fool's game and it plays t people who do not understand contextual reference or why standard conventional historians do not invent meanings to events merely

document the cause and effect of them and report them without injecting their own political biases.

This is why they call themselves revisionist historians. They had to create a new name for their exercise since historians don't revise history but discipline themselves to simply report it.

The cause and effect or sequential movement of events is what the historian lays out. What Finklestein and Chomsky do is to ignore the sequence, lift out an event, ignore the events that happened before and after it, and then engage in snap shot analysis-looking at it as an isolated phenomena. They then editorialize and pass off their subjective theories or opinions as facts.

Edited November 26, 2010 by Rue

[Rue]

Can you give me an example of what anti-Zionism would constitute? For instance, if I were to say "I disagree with Israel building settlements on the West Banks", would I now be an anti-Zionist, and thus, by your logic, an anti-Semite?

Well Toad brother I want to add to what you stated because

I understand what you are trying to state and which to

acknowledge it through further clarification.

For example, I consider myself a Zionist and I argue there should

be a freeze on continued settlements on the West Bank and I would argue

many Zionists and Israelis would argue that.

I would contend the above opinion in itself is not anti-Zionist, just a

political opinion.

I would argue we need more context to determine if its anti anything.

If for example you went on to say you believe in the above

because you don't think Israel has a legitimate right to exist as

a Jewish state, then yes I would say you were an anti-Zionist.

If you went on to say you believe in the above because Jews are evil and think they are better

than Palestinians and want to wipe them all out, then I would say that is an anti-semitic

remark.

If you stated the above and made a comment that all Israelis are savages and inconsiderate

then I would argue that is an anti-Israeli comment.

The context of your comment I would argue gives it, its meaning.

I believe it is possible to argue against certain Israeli policies and still be a Zionist

or for that matter not be either a pro or anti Zionist.

Just to label you anti Zionist for the above comment alone is for me pointless name

calling.

Of course within Israel there is great debate between Israels as to the future of the West Bank.

Of course there are many discussions within the Jewish community both in Israel and the diaspora as

to the future of the West Bank and all of Israel. There is a huge range of beliefs within both

the Zionist and non Zionist Jewish communities just as there would be in the non Jewish world.

I am loath to steretype or label anyone and I confess

labelling people has come back to bite me in my Zionist bum many a time.

I might challenge you depending on the context of your words but

I am loath to quickly label you and I think challenging Israeli

state policies is part of the democratic political process.

I do though myself when talking Middle East politics and realize I am

speaking to an Israeli or Palestinian defer to them and change my

tone. I am reluctant to speak in any way they may construe as telling

them what they should do. They both get enough of that from all

sides.

The respect I show Israelis is because I believe their living

in Israel is keeping me alive.

The respect I show Palestinians is because I believe they

genuinely did not ask for the mess they live in now and as a Zionist

I was taught they have a right to live in peace and be respected

and Israel was not created to harm them.

The first people to generously donate land to Zionists who came

to Israel were Palestinian Muslims. People forget that. They

forget the animosity and trials and tribulations came about as a result

of foreign colonial elements injected to divide and conquer both

Muslims and Jews. The first thing colonial powers do is to pit

one indigenous tribe against the other. It destabilizes the

area and gives the colonial power the excuse to step in and

oversee. We saw it in Africa, Asia and then the Middle East

as the preferred method of operation for setting up colonial

puppet states.

Ironically people forget modern Syria, Lebanon, Jordan and Iraq were created

as colonial puppet states but Israel was not and this is precisely

why it was supported by the Soviets not British and French or ex German

Nazis during the war of independence who all sided with the Arab League

of Nations in their bid to wipe Israel out.

It was in fact Stalin releasing thousands of Jews from Russia, and the state

of Czechoslovakia that supported Israel and who stated they were in

fact finding the colonialist puppets of Britain, France and the ex German

Nazi regime.

Israel would not have come into existence without the Soviets sending

them manpower and Czech military assistance and not to mention Elenor

Roosevelt single handedly taking on the entire UN as well as US State

Department, its then Joint Chiefs of Staff and Truman who did not want

to support Israel.

Israel would also have not survived if it wasn't for an assortment of

World War Two vets who volunteered to go to Israel and many of those

were gentiles not just Jews.

It was the British who led the Arab League armies and flew the Egyptian

Air Force in the War of Independence and it was the ex Nazis who ran

Egypt, Syria and Iraq's armies.

Edited November 26, 2010 by Rue

[KeyStone]

We have a neighborhood full of thugs. Yet only one of them gets singled out for international condemnation. Why is that? It is no different than a situtation where a bar fight breaks out and the police arrest the lone black guy. Most would call that racism even if the black guy deserved to be arrested.

It is an argument that resonates well, and it may seem like anti-semitism, but there are a number of other explanations.

You are absolutely right that Israel treats its own citizens better than any of its neighbours. Why then do we not have protests against Syria?

1) There is a difference between how a nation treats its own citizens, and how it treats others.

Africa is full of abuse stories, but the crimes are perpetrated within their own borders, and thus the international community believes that is an internal matter. Do you know of any other nations that have killed hundreds of children outside of its own borders in the past ten years?

2) While many injustices are committed around the world, the killing of children by Israel is the only one that is vigorously defended by its apologists. If someone posts about how terrible it is that the Hutu are killing the Tutsi, I won't get ten people popping up telling me that the Hutu need to massacre the Tutsi. There is no debate. There is no difference of opinion.

3) The media (in Canada) also defends Israel on a regular basis. The National Post can not go two consecutive days without an article talking about how evil the Arab/Persians are, talking about the prevalence of anti-semitism, or defending Israel. When we are bombarded with such one-sided opinions on such a regular basis, we can not help but rise up in protest.

4) Israel demands a place at the table of respect, alongside countries such as Canada, Sweden, and Australia. Syria, Iran, Mozambique have no such illusions. None of them are proper global citizens. Israel wants to compare itself to Syria when it comes to moral responsibility, but wants to compare itself to Canada when its time to set up trade deals and wield influence. If you want a seat at the table of respect, then you must hold yourself to the standard of countries such as Canada, not those of Iran.

5) Our politicians can not shut up about Israel. They visit Israel. They defend every action Israel does. They mention every Jewish holiday in existence (but don't mention Christmas), and visit synagogues, and Jewish community centers at every opportunity. They pander more to the Jewish community than the Christian community despite the relatively small numbers of Jewish people in Canada. The disproportionate amount of influence that Jewish Canadians have over our foreign policy is appalling.

[TimG]

Do you know of any other nations that have killed hundreds of children outside of its own borders in the past ten years?

You complain about apologists for Israel defending Israel yet you lead off with a statement that can be only described as hate mongering?

Think about it. Israel does not have a policy of "killing children" which you imply. Any deaths are unfortunate consequences of policies designed to prevent Israelis from being murdered by terrorists that use civilians as shields. You probably know that but instead of accurately describing the nature of the problem you frame in a way designed to encourage people to hate Israel. It is irresponsible.

It is possible to criticize Israeli policies without engaging in hate mongering. People who do that would not be considered anti-semites. But very few critics of Israel do that. They do what you just did and that is why many people see critics of Israel as anti-semites. The way to deal with it is to dial down the rhetoric, acknowledge the complexities and criticize people who agree with you on Israel if they engage in hate mongering instead of constructive criticism.

That said, I can agree that broad condemnation of Arabs/Muslims is just as bad but Muslim extremists do regularily try to blow up US planes. No other group with a beef against the US does this. Why and how do we protect ourselves?

Edited November 26, 2010 by TimG

[KeyStone]

You complain about apologists for Israel defending Israel yet you lead off with a statement that can be only described as hate mongering?

Think about it. Israel does not have a policy of "killing children" which you imply. Any deaths are unfortunate consequences of policies designed to prevent Israelis from being murdered by terrorists that use civilians as shields. You probably know that but instead of accurately describing the nature of the problem you frame in a way designed to encourage people to hate Israel. It is irresponsible.

It is possible to criticize Israeli policies without engaging in hate mongering. People who do that would not be considered anti-semites. But very few critics of Israel do that. They do what you just did and that is why many people see critics of Israel as anti-semites. The way to deal with it is to dial down the rhetoric, acknowledge the complexities and criticize people who agree with you on Israel if they engage in hate mongering instead of constructive criticism.

That said, I can agree that broad condemnation of Arabs/Muslims is just as bad but Muslim extremists do regularily try to blow up US planes. No other group with a beef against the US does this. Why and how do we protect ourselves?

Tim, you're a perfect example of the problem.

I have stated that Israel has killed hundreds of children which is a fact.

From that statement, you have inferred that I am anti-semite.

No one says that the Japanese killed all those civilians in Hiroshima and Nagasaki because they did not surrender.

We all agree that the US killed those civilians.

Now, you can certainly argue that Israel had no choice in the matter, and that is a fair argument.

But telling me that I am an anti-semite because I have stated that Israel has killed children is intellectually dishonest and cowardly.

You are a perfect example of the apologist that smears everyone as an anti-semite for finding fault with Israel. Sure, it is always tempered with some vague suggestion that it is ok to criticize Israel, but it appears that the list of items in which criticism of Israel is acceptable is fairly limited. What can we criticize? Taxes are too high, and traffic takes too long?

Furthermore, I never said it was Israeli policy to kill children as you seem to have inferred. I am simply explaining why people pick on Israel more than other nations. Israel has killed children.

[TimG]

First check my wording:

"They do what you just did and that is why many people see critics of Israel as anti-semites."

I did not call you an anti-semite. In fact, I tried very carefully to ensure I did not make that accusation. I simply said that rherotic like yours is why you are perceived to be an anti-semite.

I have stated that Israel has killed hundreds of children which is a fact.

A fact with no context is propoganda. It is no different than suggesting a policemen is murder because he shot someone with his gun. You need to know why the policeman felt it was necessary to use his gun.

We all agree that the US killed those civilians.

Same problem. Many people like to call dropping the atomic bombs a war crime while omitting the context. And even those that report the context (Japanese started a war) omit other context (The US boycotted Japan leaving it with no access to oil) which, of course, omits more context (Japan invaded China).

All of these intractable problems have complex context. It helps no one when the discussion is reduced to meaningless slogans with no context.

Furthermore, I never said it was Israeli policy to kill children as you seem to have inferred. I am simply explaining why people pick on Israel more than other nations. Israel has killed children.

I did not get that from the way you worded it. You could have said that directly.

i.e. Isreal is condemned because children have been killed as a result of its policies.

But you said:

"Do you know of any other nations that have killed hundreds of children outside of its own borders in the past ten years"

I don't think my interpretation was unreasonable.

Edited November 26, 2010 by TimG