What Being a Zionist Means

[DogOnPorch]

Rue: Ironically the vst majority of Jews and Arabs fought for the British despite the Mufti of Jerusalem's efforts or the pro Nazi regimes in Egypt, Syria and Iraq.

Most Arabs couldn't be bothered by the war as it never really reached into the region except as a distant rumble. The exception being those in North Africa. Some made the journey to the Balkans to join the SS under the Mufti but those units were mostly made-up of Bosnian Muslim troopers with German officers. Others joined other Axis units.

An all Jewish volunteer brigade was formed as part of the British Army at Churchill's suggestion which was made-up mostly from Jews living in the Mandate.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_Brigade

[jbg]

The British flooded Palestine with external Arabs to deliberately prevent a Jewish majority population from evolving.

I quibble here. I thought (and this is one time I'm more pro-Arab than you) that the Arabs flooded in themselves, lured by now-fertile land and job opportunities created by Zionist development. I was not aware, but remain to be educated, on deliberate "flooding" of the Holy Land with Arabs.

[bud]

I was not aware, but remain to be educated,

how about you educate yourself first by reading this post which is a respond to your typical historical revisionism. or as usual, you can remain silent when someone corrects you and not acknowledge how you`re not here to be 'educated`, but to spread propaganda for your team.

Edited December 11, 2011 by bud

[Guest American Woman]

I quibble here. I thought (and this is one time I'm more pro-Arab than you) that the Arabs flooded in themselves, lured by now-fertile land and job opportunities created by Zionist development. I was not aware, but remain to be educated, on deliberate "flooding" of the Holy Land with Arabs.

I'm not sure, but perhaps Rue is referring to the time period when Britain placed restrictions on Jewish immigration while Arab immigration was left wide open.

[DogOnPorch]

I'm not sure, but perhaps Rue is referring to the time period when Britain placed restrictions on Jewish immigration while Arab immigration was left wide open.

Indeed. Jews were being held in British camps while Arabs played the Great Game of Nationalism. The Mufti was practicing his own brand of Zionism by promoting Jerusalem as the #2 holy spot in Islam. Come to Jerusalem! Where Mohammed went to Heaven from after riding a 'winged-beast' in his dreams...errr...OK. Met Gabriel, too. No pictures, however. This was his goal from his first appearance circa 1919. It was the British, however, seeking the easiest path to stability, who enabled the Mufti over the years. This despite the Mufti's track record with the SS and personal involvment in the Holocaust and ODESSA (Organisation Der Ehemaligen SS-Angehörigen).

It was the Mufti, for example, who restored the Temple Mount mosques to their current condition with gold plate, etc, using donated money. Before that, they were in poor condition due to time + numerous earthquakes (as described by Samuel Clemens). Somewhat the megalomaniac, he viewed his clan as the keepers of Al-Aqsa much to the chagrin of the Hashimites who had...errr...similar views. This prompted the 1951 assassination of Jordan's first king by the Al-Husseini clan for not only wanting peace with the filthy Zionist entity, but, for ancient blood-fuedy reasons as well.

[jbg]

how about you educate yourself first by reading this post which is a respond to your typical historical revisionism. or as usual, you can remain silent when someone corrects you and not acknowledge how you`re not here to be 'educated`, but to spread propaganda for your team.

I just read portions of the linked articles. There are some statements that the British deliberately augmented the Arab population. I suspect that while there may have been some of that the lions' share of the increase was migration to seek work (the Jewish areas had that after all, and there was very little work being done elsewhere) and natural increase. The article points out that the reduction in infectious diseaaes played a role as well.

[Guest Manny]

So it seems that the whole world was really at fault for what happened to the Jews, not only during the holocaust but throughout the past 2000 years. Well, not necessarily the WHOLE whole world, but more specifically all European, North American and some Middle Eastern nations, are the historical enemies of the Jews. This is how they view us, there are Jews and non-Jews, who are their enemies, the Goyin. It's Jews vs. the world. Not individual persons, you and I, as I am friends with people who are Jews but our nations, governments and what they have done, could still do, and probably will do again given similar circumstances.

What I'm saying is, we can blame the Germans, but we have yet to hold our own nations actions accountable, we've yet to even admit it, let alone atone for what was done.

Edited December 11, 2011 by Manny

[cybercoma]

jbg, I find it interesting how supportive you are of Israel as being for "the existence of the Jewish people," but you've criticized Québec and Canada's policies towards Québec, although they would certainly see that province (or their independence) as being in support of the existence of the French in North America. It seems you believe that statehood can preserve a culture and religion, but at the same time you criticize this notion when it comes to the Québecois. Is it just that the Jews deserve it more for being persecuted by the Nazis? I'm not sure why you would support one and not the other, besides personal investment.

[jbg]

jbg, I find it interesting how supportive you are of Israel as being for "the existence of the Jewish people," but you've criticized Québec and Canada's policies towards Québec, although they would certainly see that province (or their independence) as being in support of the existence of the French in North America. It seems you believe that statehood can preserve a culture and religion, but at the same time you criticize this notion when it comes to the Québecois. Is it just that the Jews deserve it more for being persecuted by the Nazis? I'm not sure why you would support one and not the other, besides personal investment.

Since when were the French led by Anglophone Canadians to the gas chambers? Sorry, the Acadian exile just doesn't cut it, and in any case we down here welcomed them.

[Bonam]

What I'm saying is, we can blame the Germans, but we have yet to hold our own nations actions accountable, we've yet to even admit it, let alone atone for what was done.

I don't see Israel or Jews asking "our" nations to "atone" for anything. Germany pays reparations to families of Jews that perished in the Holocaust, and to Israel on behalf of those that had no surviving families, but aside from that no one expects any atonement. For the most part Jews just want to be treated fairly, whether it be when they are living as minorities in other nations, or in Israel.

[Bonam]

jbg, I find it interesting how supportive you are of Israel as being for "the existence of the Jewish people," but you've criticized Québec and Canada's policies towards Québec, although they would certainly see that province (or their independence) as being in support of the existence of the French in North America. It seems you believe that statehood can preserve a culture and religion, but at the same time you criticize this notion when it comes to the Québecois. Is it just that the Jews deserve it more for being persecuted by the Nazis? I'm not sure why you would support one and not the other, besides personal investment.

Since when were the French led by Anglophone Canadians to the gas chambers? Sorry, the Acadian exile just doesn't cut it, and in any case we down here welcomed them.

I don't think that's really relevant to be honest, jbg. A people, if they want to form an independent state and compose an overwhelming majority of the population in a contiguous geographic area should be free to form their own sovereign state. Why not? Ruling a population that does not want to be ruled is nothing but imperialism.

As for Quebec, I think it'd be perfectly fine if they wanted to go ahead and separate. However, referendums have shown that a majority of them do not really want to separate. And, while I believe people should have the right to go and form their own sovereign state, being entitled to special over-representation in a larger state is something else, and something that I don't agree with.

[jbg]

I don't think that's really relevant to be honest, jbg. A people, if they want to form an independent state and compose an overwhelming majority of the population in a contiguous geographic area should be free to form their own sovereign state. Why not? Ruling a population that does not want to be ruled is nothing but imperialism.

Ask Jefferson Davis and Robert E. Lee that question.

[Guest American Woman]

I don't think that's really relevant to be honest, jbg. A people, if they want to form an independent state and compose an overwhelming majority of the population in a contiguous geographic area should be free to form their own sovereign state. Why not? Ruling a population that does not want to be ruled is nothing but imperialism.

On the other hand, allowing a geographic area to form its own sovereign state whenever they don't like what the federal government mandates - after they've benefited from that union - is asking for a dissolution of the union. There's nothing wrong with expecting support even as a state/province doesn't like everything the government does. I'm guessing the vast majority of the population in the southern states have no regrets that they are still part of the U.S. Sometimes, during a certain period in history, the "majority of a population" might wish to act rashly, but not allowing it doesn't amount to "imperialism" as they are already part of the union by choice - it amounts to not allowing them to stamp their foot and say 'if you don't play my way, I quit!'

Edited December 12, 2011 by American Woman

[cybercoma]

Since when were the French led by Anglophone Canadians to the gas chambers? Sorry, the Acadian exile just doesn't cut it, and in any case we down here welcomed them.

And there it is: Jews were gassed in WWII, so they can be bastards to their neighbours now. If you don't like it, you support what the Nazis did. Edited December 12, 2011 by cybercoma

[cybercoma]

Basically, being a Zionist means you can persecute anyone you want with impunity because you'll just rub the Holocaust in people's faces when they criticize your state.

[Guest Manny]

I don't see Israel or Jews asking "our" nations to "atone" for anything. Germany pays reparations to families of Jews that perished in the Holocaust, and to Israel on behalf of those that had no surviving families, but aside from that no one expects any atonement. For the most part Jews just want to be treated fairly, whether it be when they are living as minorities in other nations, or in Israel.

of course the Jews want to be treated fairly. but they also have active groups seeking to get justice for the crimes that took place against them. One example is the hunting down of Nazis still living today. But they are well aware of the complicity of western governments, primarily in Europe but also to some extent Canada and the United States. Those European countries were directly complicit in willingly helping the Nazis get rid of their Jewish "problem". Countries like Switzerland, Holland, France, Spain, and many eastern European countries, Estonia, Romania, Bulgaria. The list is long. And I can provide you links with evidence, if you don't accept this. In some cases recently a few of these countries have finally admitted their complicity, like the Dutch. But many remain silent.

So you ask, why don't the Jewish organizations like Bnai Brith go after them? They may be trying now, I don't know. Western countries have apologized and said "Never again" etc. and the efforts after the war were to go after Nazis who escaped, and bring them to justice. IE. those who were immediately responsible. Now that most of them are dead and gone, it will be interesting to see if these organizations will put more effort into identifying who else was complicit.

They really have to, IMO, if they want to do everything they can to stop anti-semitism because it is on the rise again. Here is a timely article to illustrate my point.

Western society complicit, Steyn says

Written by Joanne Hill

Tuesday, 06 December 2011

TORONTO – “There is something profoundly wicked in the contortions that Europeans are willing to make with respect to their own complicated history with the Jewish people,” said Steyn. “We are on the verge of the biggest, most disgusting and evil event of all, in part because of the complicity of the West.”

He elaborated in an interview with the Jewish Tribune: “The Holocaust happened because people said Jews are sinister, rootless, cosmopolitan people, who are not citizens [with] allegiance to a conventional nation state. So the ones who were left got themselves a conventional nation state and now they’re hated for that, too. That tells you something about Jew-hatred’s ability to adapt. But the fact that the intellectual class in Europe is able to swivel so swiftly, from hating them for one reason in the 1930s to hating them for this reason now, says far more about Europeans than it does about Jews.”

Some Europeans can sidestep blame for the Holocaust because it truly was unprecedented and inconceivable, he continued. However, “when you go in the space of two generations to the fact that, not only is antisemitism rampant and resurgent, but that we are actually contemplating with equanimity” the genocide of millions of Jews in Israel, “history will be far less forgiving. It’s one thing if it happens the first time and you go, ‘oh, never again...’ If, two generations down the road, so-called civilization permits a crime of that magnitude to occur a second time, it’s far harder to take refuge in the defence that these crimes were literally unimaginable. Neville Chamberlain and Lord Halifax and the rest of them have that excuse; our generation does not.” Allowing a second Holocaust to occur “would illustrate an almost industrial-scale corrosion of basic humanity.”

[Guest Peeves]

Am Yisrael Chai

As we approach Chanukah I would but add...... "a holiday, which has its roots in a revolution against assimilation and the suppression of Jewish religion, that has become the most assimilated, secular holiday on our calendar."

Meaning of Am Yisrael Chai

There is no doubt that we Jews will outlive the Islamic republic of Iran

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was in Germany last week. While there, he visited Wannsee Villa in Berlin the place that the "Final Solution" for the destruction of Europe's Jews was planned in 1942 by Adolf Hitler and leaders of the Third Reich. In the visitors book Netanyahu wrote three words in Hebrew and then translated them into English: “Ams Yisrael Chai – The people of Israel live.”

These words are very powerful and loaded with meaning and emotion. We read each Passover on the Seder night that in every generation someone stands up to annihilate the Jews and the Almighty saves us from their evil hands. Since our dawn as a people we have survived countless attempts to destroy us.

Message to the World

PM at Wannsee Villa: The Jewish people live / Roni Sofer

Several hours after receiving Auschwitz concentration camp blueprints, Netanyahu visits place where Nazi Germany's leaders planned 'Final Solution' for Europe's Jews. 'If my father, who was murdered by the Nazis, was able to see me now, he would be proud,' says Minister Yossi Peled

Full story

The most serious attempt to obliterate the Jews took place in Wannsee Villa in Berlin where the decision to carry out the Holocaust took place. But that also failed and a mere 60 years later the prime minister of a powerful and successful Jewish state enters the building and declares that those who planned have failed and defiantly writes the words Am Yisrael Chai – the nation of Israel lives.

But as one thinks about this, two things come to mind. First we must recognize that threats to the Jewish people are serious. Those who stated that they wanted to kill us before meant it and those who say so today also do. We must always be vigilant. Iran must be stopped. If America won’t do it, Israel must. There is no doubt that we Jews will outlive the Islamic republic of Iran. But we must not allow them the capability to hurt us as they suffer their inevitable demise.

[jbg]

On the other hand, allowing a geographic area to form its own sovereign state whenever they don't like what the federal government mandates - after they've benefited from that union - is asking for a dissolution of the union. There's nothing wrong with expecting support even as a state/province doesn't like everything the government does. I'm guessing the vast majority of the population in the southern states have no regrets that they are still part of the U.S. Sometimes, during a certain period in history, the "majority of a population" might wish to act rashly, but not allowing it doesn't amount to "imperialism" as they are already part of the union by choice - it amounts to not allowing them to stamp their foot and say 'if you don't play my way, I quit!'

The other problem is that a state such as Texas could come in deeply indebted, and then exit when they discover oil. Doesn't sound fair, does it?

[jbg]

And there it is: Jews were gassed in WWII, so they can be bastards to their neighbours now. If you don't like it, you support what the Nazis did.

Basically, being a Zionist means you can persecute anyone you want with impunity because you'll just rub the Holocaust in people's faces when they criticize your state.

No, it means we have no less a right to a homeland than any other group.

[cybercoma]

No, it means we have no less a right to a homeland than any other group.

I agree entirely. I also believe Israel ought to be more diplomatic in its foreign policy though (ie, stop bulldozing people's homes). And the so-called "leaders" of the Palestinian territory need to do more to stop idiots from launching rockets at innocent civilians.

[jbg]

I agree entirely. I also believe Israel ought to be more diplomatic in its foreign policy though (ie, stop bulldozing people's homes). And the so-called "leaders" of the Palestinian territory need to do more to stop idiots from launching rockets at innocent civilians.

It's very hard to fight that kind of warfare with Marquis of Queensbury rules.

[bud]

the palestinians seem to be having difficulty negotiating with the netanyahu/lieberman lead bulldozer equiped peace team. obama and the us congress insist that such negotiations are the only way peace can be secured.

[jbg]

the palestinians seem to be having difficulty negotiating with the netanyahu/lieberman lead bulldozer equiped peace team. obama and the us congress insist that such negotiations are the only way peace can be secured.

People don't generally enjoy negotiating with people who don't agree with their existence.

[maple_leafs182]

I haven't read all the posts so I don't know if this has been said. Aren't Zionist suppose to be for an independent Jewish nation? Being dependent on the US for foreign aid isn't very independent.

[jbg]

I haven't read all the posts so I don't know if this has been said. Aren't Zionist suppose to be for an independent Jewish nation? Being dependent on the US for foreign aid isn't very independent.

I have a great idea in that regard. Eliminate all aid then to the "Palestinians". Shut down UNWRA. Allow Gaza and the West Bank to consume only what they can purchase on the open market or from proceeds of their own manufacturing.

Yes, I'd permit their "leaders" to repatriate their Swiss bank accounts to bolster their accounts.

You'd have a humanitarian crisis that would make Somalia, Biafra or the Khmer Republic look like a walk in the park.