News What do you do with a problem like Ahmadinejad?

[Yonoz]

Generalisation, and not a very *open* minded...

On the contrary, I think it is very open minded. You chose to interpret this negatively, I simply see the Muslim world for what it is and have no intention on judging its culture and values.

 

[Yonoz]

Anyway what would you call and orthodox Jew rocking back and forth at the wailing wall, mumbling prayers under his breath? Fanatic or following his religion?

I would say he's both.

 

[Anttech]

On the contrary, I think it is very open minded. You chose to interpret this negatively, I simply see the Muslim world for what it is and have no intention on judging its culture and values.

"Yonzo: you have a closed, traditional mindset that favours fanaticism."

Did that make you feel all guey as if I was giving you a compliment, or conversely did that make you feel like I was insulting you?

Its not a very open minded thing to generalise the whole by a small fraction of one of its parts.

 

[Yonoz]

"Yonzo: you have a closed, traditional mindset that favours fanaticism."

Did that make you feel all guey as if I was giving you a compliment, or conversely did that make you feel like I was insulting you?

It insulted me because it is against my values. Had I been in a closed society such as MENSA I would be happy to acknowledge that fact. Had I been a traditional Jew I would see traditionalism as a virtue. Had I been brought up to believe martyrs are the epitome of good, I would take no offense in being told I favour fanaticism.

Its not a very open minded thing to generalise the whole by a small fraction of one of its parts.

You can refer to those PEW server results I posted on the previous page.

 

[Anttech]

Had I been in a closed society such as MENSA I would be happy to acknowledge that fact. Had I been a traditional Jew I would see traditionalism as a virtue. Had I been brought up to believe martyrs are the epitome of good, I would take no offense in being told I favour fanaticism

Lots of *ifs* there, I think you will find that it was an insult no matter whom you project it towards.

 

[Yonoz]

Lots of *ifs* there, I think you will find that it was an insult no matter whom you project it towards.

Perhaps because the entity it is projected at has not come to full terms with itself. It is not any fault of mine.
Is the Muslim world not more traditional in comparison with the western world? Is it not more closed than western societies? To study at the long-respected Sunni Al-Azhar University in Cairo one must practice Islam - followers of other religions are not admitted. Does the Muslim world not favour fanaticism? One need only look at the rhetoric of Muslim leaders to witness it.

 

[kyleb]

kyleb, it is quite apparent to me that no answer I give will satisfy you.

Actually, all I'm asking for is what you believe Israels final boarders should be and any objective answer would do. A map would be perfect, I can show you one with my answer as an example if you like.

You ignoring repeat half-truths that I have refuted... ...I suggest you take some time to introspect.

As highlighted by your confusion which I addressed above; your extrospection is at fault here and the ignorant half-truths you refute are constructs of your own myopic perspective, chicane strawmen you subconsciously(?) construct in order to dodge my question. I can adress your confusion on those other points if you like, but first I'd like an objective answer to my question; at what point will you be done with this process of taking their land?

 

[Yonoz]

Actually, all I'm asking for is what you believe Israels final boarders should be and any objective answer would do. A map would be perfect, I can show you one with my answer as an example if you like.

Actually, your question was:

So the question is; when will Israel call this transformation complete?

- in reference to an article from 1937 that calls for the transformation of the entire British mandated territory - from the Mediterranean to Iraq - into a British-sponsored Jewish State with a Jewish majority. This "transformation" you ask of never took place, as it was rejected by an overwhelming majority. The author of this article never represented any sort of majority of Zionists - as a matter of fact, he established his own "New Zionist Organisation" when the Zionist Organisation did not accept this plan.
This is no individual incident. All of your "questions" lately seem more like statements - hateful, slandering, skewed statements. When faced with an answer not to your liking you simply return to your familiar mantras.
If you expect any sort of further cooperation on my part, I suggest you mend your ways. Perhaps you should undertake some sort of sensitivity training, I'm quite amazed by some of the ideas you present regarding Zionism and its followers.
There is no shame in admitting to your mistakes.

 

[kyleb]

Part of Palestine has been transformed into Israel, Israel contunues to take land from Palestine. I am simply asking, how much more do you feel Israel should take?

 

[Hurkyl]

Unfortunately, in the name of Zionism and Middle East dominance, our leaders are actively trying to push us into this war with Iran.

I thought they were doing it in the name of nonproliferation.

Nah, if nonproliferation was the goal then we wouldn't be looking to hook India up with more nukes.

Since you have avoided my question, I will assome you meant what you originally said.

Please, find me a source proving that our leaders are actively trying to push us into this war with Iran in the name of Zionism and Middle East dominance.

This is not a request to find a link hinting at a secret motive or hidden agenda. I'm asking you to support "our leaders are actively trying to push us into this war with Iran in the name of Zionism and Middle East dominance." That means you have to do something like find a quote of Bush saying "Let's take out Iran for the sake of Zionism!"

If you did not mean to suggest that Zionism and Middle East dominance is being used as an overt justification for trying to push us into this war with Iran, then just say so, and stop evading the question.

Perhaps you've heard the plans referred to under a more benign sounding catch phrase like "a new Middle East" or such.

No, I have not.

I was asking if you really wanted people to stop shooting at you. Am I to take your answer to mean that you would rather people continue to shoot at you as you continue to take their land?

It's certainly preferable to the likely alternative: people continue to shoot at me as I refuse to confiscate the land they're shooting from.


It doesn't matter whether Israel's content with its 1967 (or whatever year it is you like) borders or if Israel is trying to seize land to grow -- the point is that the Palestinians have created a situation where confiscating their land is a reasonable, defensible, and even appropriate action on the Israeli's part.

 

[kyleb]

http://www.answers.com/in+the+name+of&r=67" ; and again, Zionists created the situation by choosing to colonize Palestine, the Palestinians never encouraged that.

 

[Hurkyl]

In the Name of, a new Middle East;

Nothing on that page talks about doing anything in the name of Zionism or in the name of Middle Eastern dominance. Did you really believe that this link satisfied my challenge? Or did you have a different purpose in mind?

the Palestinians never encouraged that.

Obviously not intentionally. But when you attack someone, especially with the intent of annihilating them, you force them to do what they can to stop you.

 

[kyleb]

The first link is to clear up your incomplete understanding of the idiom you took question with, and the second provides examples of the catch phrase which you claimed you had never heard used. And again you are getting your causation backwards, when you continue to colonize peoples land they will resist; without the colonization there would'nt be any Israel to attack.

 

[Hurkyl]

The first link is to clear up your incomplete understanding of the idiom you took question with

In what way was my understanding incomplete? Definitions 1, 3, 5, and 6 are not applicable to this situation, 4 is exactly how I'm using it, and 2 is very similar. And all six of them are overt; I cannot see how to construe any of the six definitions to refer to anything secret or concealed.

and the second provides examples of the catch phrase which you claimed you had never heard used.

Thank you.

And again you are getting your causation backwards, when you continue to colonize peoples land they will resist;

No, I have it right. Even if we suppose that your version of history is correct, when the resistance shoots at Israel, Israel must do what they can to stop them.

And since the current "resistance" wants Israel annihilated, bribing them with land or promises of `good behavior' isn't an option.

without the colonization there would be any Israel to attack.

So you are in the camp that believes there should be no Israel at all, then. I don't see why it took you so long to say it, and why you don't bother to just say it explicitly. I don't understand why you would talk about peace in the area -- isn't that antithetical to your belief that Israel shouldn't be there in the first place?

 

[kyleb]

I didn't say anything about anything being secret or concealed, I didn't say anything about giving back any land, I am most certainly not in the camp that believes there should be no Israel, and I'd really appreciate if you try to avoid being so presumptuous and argumentative.

 

[Hurkyl]

I'd really appreciate if you try to avoid being so presumptuous and argumentative.

I feel that you don't often say what you mean, and make evasive replies -- this forces people to assume what you mean, and also to keep pressing you if they want you to actually answer or even acknowledge something. Whether my impression is accurate or not, it's the impression I have.

I didn't say anything about giving back any land

For example, what was the whole point about arguing that you shouldn't exist in a car you stole from me? I'm almost certain I've seen you complain about past "colonization". And, of course, that you've managed to go all this time with people explaning to you the problems with giving back the land without ever bothering to clear up the misconception ...

 

[Anttech]

I feel that you don't often say what you mean, and make evasive replies -- this forces people to assume what you mean, and also to keep pressing you if they want you to actually answer or even acknowledge something. Whether my impression is accurate or not, it's the impression I have.

I feel the Same could be said about you.. I find Kyleb's posts rather *easy* to understand, with little to no subversion.

 

[Hurkyl]

Clarity and subversion are not mutually exclusive. But yes, I'm often "subversive". (Though it seems odd to use the word in this context) The foundations of an argument are often where the conflict lies; IMO, in such situations, it's a waste of everybody's time to ignore the foundations.

If Alice believes in X, and Bob doesn't, it does Alice no good to use X to argue for Y! And conversely, it does Bob no good to argue against Y.

 

[kyleb]

I feel that you don't often say what you mean, and make evasive replies -- this forces people to assume what you mean, and also to keep pressing you if they want you to actually answer or even acknowledge something. Whether my impression is accurate or not, it's the impression I have.

I do say exactly what I mean, aside from my dyslexic spelling and proofreading abilities anyway. I don't spend much time acknowledging assumptions; that isn't done out of any attempt to be evasive though but quite to the contrary, in a contours effort to stay on point. That point being, Iran and all those who refuse to accept Israel's existence most certainly won't do so as long as Israel continues to take land. That has to stop some time before they can ever be resolution.
But, for the sake of understanding.

For example, what was the whole point about arguing that you shouldn't exist in a car you stole from me?

It was what I said it was, an analogy to explain Iran's position on this.

I'm almost certain I've seen you complain about past "colonization".

I pointed out that colonization incites resistance, just as Ze'ev Jabotinsky did back in 1923.

And, of course, that you've managed to go all this time with people explaining to you the problems with giving back the land without ever bothering to clear up the misconception ...

And that is because I never said anything about giving back any land, so all those explanations were off point. Like you said, If 'Alice' believes in not giving back any land, then it does me no good to argue against that. So, my question stands; how much more land are you willing to take?

 

[Hans de Vries]

And that is because I never said anything about giving back any land, so all those explanations were off point. Like you said, If 'Alice' believes in not giving back any land, then it does me no good to argue against that. So, my question stands; how much more land are you willing to take?

Every time when the reasonable part of Israel tries to wrestle itself out of
the grips of religious fundamentalism and its compulsive greed for biblical
territory, fanatism shows its ugly teeth and the adventure is short lived.

Worse, religious fanatism seems to play a larger role today as it did in
the past. Neither Israel nor, say, the PLO, was particular religious in its
conception. Jewish lunatism is not hard to find in the main stream
right wing press nowadays:


50 Americans to be punished for every Jew:

As soon as Gush Katif on the Gaza Coast was destroyed, God unleashed a tremendous hurricane on the United States' Gulf Coast. In Israel ten thousand righteous Jews lost their homes, their livelihood and the land they loved, so ten thousand gentiles in the Big Easy, a city of vice and sin, were drowned in a sea of divine anger. George Bush's U.S. is roughly fifty times Israel in population, so for expelling then thousand Jews in Gaza, God expelled five hundred thousand Americans in the Gulf. Thanks to George W. Bush! The cost of Israel's greatest catastrophe was two billion dollars. The cost of the U.S.'s greatest catastrophe will be fifty times as great -- one hundred billion dollars. Thanks to George W. Bush! The Lord's justice is measure for measure.

http://web.israelinsider.com/Views/6622.htm


Regards, Hans

 

[Yonoz]

Jewish lunatism is not hard to find in the main stream
right wing press nowadays:

Mainstream? I beg to differ. That site is neither Israeli nor mainstream. Here's a http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_newspapers_in_Israel" . The most popular are Yedioth Ahronoth, Haaretz and Maariv. You won't find such opinions there.

 

[Anttech]

http://www.israelinsider.com/

Israel's daily newsmagazine September 14, 2006© 2001-2005 Koret Communications Ltd. All rights reserved. Terms of Use. Site Credit.

Since 1992, Koret Communications has established itself as Israel's leading provider of English language communication services for the technology and financial sectors, serving over 150 clients, including more than 30 public companies.

It is Israeli

 

[Yonoz]

It is Israeli

Koret Communications also runs Africana.com - are they both Israeli and African?
Simply because a site declares itself to be Israel's daily news magazine doesn't make it so.

 

[Anttech]

http://www.koret.com/

Go to the link, is it not safe to assume this is an Israel run Web Site?

Israeli's also developed Check-Point firewalls systems and they have offices and staff everywhere. Just because a Media company runs some sites *outside* its base is neither here nor there to where the actual company is based. Its called globalisation!

Koret Communications Ltd.
Tel. +972 ...
Fax. +972 ...

Perhaps they are using some telephone proxy and bouncing calls of a Teleco switch in Israel to Africa? Or just maybe they are an Israel run media company with offices in Israel. Which do you think?

 

[Yonoz]

http://www.koret.com/

Go to the link, is it not safe to assume this is an Israel run Web Site?

Thanks, but I've already done my research.

Israeli's also developed Check-Point firewalls systems and they have offices and staff everywhere. Just because a Media company runs some sites *outside* its base is neither here nor there to where the actual company is based. Its called globalisation!

Koret Communications Ltd.
Tel. +972 ...
Fax. +972 ...

Perhaps they are using some telephone proxy and bouncing calls of a Teleco switch in Israel to Africa? Or just maybe they are an Israel run media company with offices in Israel!

It may be an Israeli run media company, but it's quite clear that israelinsider is a magazine aimed at the Jewish population in the US. It's obvious when you look at the advertisements, writers, sponsors and publisher. Israeli sites tend to have articles in Hebrew or Arabic.
Do we at least agree that it is definitely not mainstream?

 

[Anttech]

Do we at least agree that it is definitely not mainstream?

Maybe it isn't mainstream, but it is still Israel, and that is what I was contending with you regardless of which market it was aimed at.

 

[Yonoz]

Maybe it isn't mainstream, but it is still Israel, and that is what I was contending with you regardless of which market it was aimed at.

Hans' comment was about Israel, and his example was intended to show "grips of religious fundamentalism and its compulsive greed for biblical territory" over Israel. In this case, his example is void since the source he provided is not a part of the Israeli public debate.

 

[Hans de Vries]

Hans' comment was about Israel, and his example was intended to show "grips of religious fundamentalism and its compulsive greed for biblical territory" over Israel. In this case, his example is void since the source he provided is not a part of the Israeli public debate.

A link to www.israelinsider.com[/URL] can be found on Israel's main Wiki page in
the list of English-language periodicals: [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel[/url]

It's good to see though that it is indeed considerally less popular compared
to other Israeli media based on their www Net ranking:

rank 1116: Haaretz
rank 2913: YnetNews
rank 63605: IsraelInsider

[URL]http://toolbar.netcraft.com/site_report?url=http://www.haaretz.com[/URL]
[url]http://toolbar.netcraft.com/site_report?url=http://www.ynetnews.com[/url]
[URL]http://toolbar.netcraft.com/site_report?url=http://web.israelinsider.com[/URL]


Regards, Hans

 

[Anttech]

Its only an indication of traffic, not to be 100% relied on, but yes it can give a good understand at the volume of traffic a www site receives.

 

[kyleb]

www.jpost.com[/url] isn't religious but certainly right-wing and quite popular, [url=http://toolbar.netcraft.com/site_report?url=http://www.jpost.com]rank 695[/URL]. But the continuing expropriation of Palestinian land isn't really a matter of partisanship or faith either, rather it is generally supported by all sides with few exceptions.

 

[Yonoz]

A link to www.israelinsider.com[/URL] can be found on Israel's main Wiki page in
the list of English-language periodicals: [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel[/url][/QUOTE]That's right - there it is:[QUOTE]IsraelInsider - Independent, [B]right wing outlet[/B]. Target audience is [B]American Jewry[/B].[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=Hans de Vries]It's good to see though that it is indeed considerally less popular compared
to other Israeli media based on their www Net ranking:

rank 1116: Haaretz
rank 2913: YnetNews
rank 63605: IsraelInsider

[url]http://toolbar.netcraft.com/site_report?url=http://www.haaretz.com[/url]
[url]http://toolbar.netcraft.com/site_report?url=http://www.ynetnews.com[/url]
[URL]http://toolbar.netcraft.com/site_report?url=http://web.israelinsider.com[/URL][/QUOTE]Thanks for that data, it seems a quite useful tool. :approve:
If you're interested in Israeli public dialogue you can have a look at Haaretz's opinions section. ynet is alright too.

 

[Yonoz]

Here's what the World Jewish Congress is doing with a problem like Ahmadinejad: http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3303247,00.html":

Edgar M. Bronfman, President of the World Jewish Congress, has urged United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan to restage the UN Holocaust exhibition during next week's visit by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
In a letter to the Secretary-General, Mr. Bronfman cited President Ahamadinejad's claim that the Holocaust is a 'myth', Ahmadinejad's own Holocaust-denial conference and exhibition of Holocaust cartoons, Iran's sponsorship of international terrorism, and its pursuit of a nuclear weapons capability in violation of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
...
Mr. Bronfman emphasized, "Hate speech which incites violence should be met with condemnation and at the very least must be countered with education and affirmation of human dignity."

 

[Anttech]

Yes well I thought we had established he didnt actually it was a *myth*

 

[Yonoz]

Here's one for Bystander (he asked about this a while back): http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3309015,00.html".

Vice Premier Shimon Peres said that "the war in Lebanon was not only a struggle between Israel and Hizbullah, but part of an Iranian attempt to exert Shiite hegemony in the Middle East. The combination of religious fanaticism and nuclear capability is dangerous to the entire world."


On the Palestinian issue Peres said that "Israel supports a Palestinian state which will live peacefully beside Israel, but we will not turn over lands which will be turned into launching areas for rockets against Israel." (Ronny Sofer and Hagit Klaiman)

 

[kyleb]

Hezbollah wanted a personal swap, and Iran most certainly isn't the one who talked Israel opting for for the 34 days of war instead.

but in real Ahmadinejad news, news news which most of our media shamelessly ignores as they perpetuate this conflict:

Welcome! President Ahmadinejad

The Traditional Jewish Approach
September 20, 2006

Neturei Karta International, a world wide organization of Orthodox Jews opposed to Zionism has officially extended her hand, together with many believing Jews, to the Iranian President Ahmadinejad, upon his historic visit to the United States. The respectful display of friendship brings peace, harmony, respect and trust. It is the sincere hope of Torah true Jews, with the help of the Almighty, that this expression of peace will counter the provocations of the Zionist organizations. The motes operandi of Zionism and its organizations, is the cause of animosity and mistrust, which can only bring catastrophic results, endangering Jews and non-Jews alike, in Palestine, the U.S.A. and around the world.

Despite media and Zionist hysteria to the contrary, the Iranian President has always been a dear friend of the Jewish people and has profound respect for the Jewish religion.

http://www.nkusa.org/activities/Statements/2006Sept20.cfm"

But of course or media will have no of that as they'd rather keep absurdly labeling the man as a bigot and a Holocaust denier, disgracefully overlooking the the awful fact that some prominent Zionist were in fact http://www.jewsagainstzionism.com/antisemitism/holocaust/index.cfm . When will this madness stop?

 

[Evo]

Hezbollah wanted a personal swap, and Iran most certainly isn't the one who talked Israel opting for for the 34 days of war instead.

but in real Ahmadinejad news, news news which most of our media shamelessly ignores as they perpetuate this conflict:

But of course or media will have no of that as they'd rather keep absurdly labeling the man as a bigot and a Holocaust denier, disgracefully overlooking the the awful fact that some prominent Zionist were in fact http://www.jewsagainstzionism.com/antisemitism/holocaust/index.cfm . When will this madness stop?

That's not a recognized news source and the article sounds absolutely ridiculous.

It's an ultra tiny fringe group "Estimates of their membership range from 5,000 to less than 1,000."

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

Stop with the propaganda Kyleb.

 

[kyleb]

I'm just trying to counter all the warmonger propaganda with a healthy dose of reality. I'm Sorry if that sounds ridiculous to you, but 'recognized news sources' are the ones who cheered us into the quagmire of Iraq are at it again Iran.

 

[Yonoz]

but in real Ahmadinejad news, news news which most of our media shamelessly ignores as they perpetuate this conflict

REAL news? It's a press release from an anti-Zionist organisation!
It's funny how you talk of extremists and look up to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neturei_Karta" in the same breath.

Neturei Karta (Aramaic: נטורי קרתא; "Guardians of the City") is a group of Haredi (Ultra-Orthodox) Jews who reject all forms of Zionism and actively oppose the existence of the State of Israel. They are concentrated in Jerusalem, with branches in and around New York City and in Bet Shemesh near Jerusalem. Estimates of their membership range from 5,000 to less than 1,000. Other small groups associated with Neturei Karta but not actual members of the group, can be found in London, Vienna (Austria), Antwerp (Belgium), New York City, and other parts of New York state.

Some mainstream Orthodox Jewish communities, including some who oppose Zionism, have denounced Neturei Karta's activities; according to The Guardian, "[e]ven among Charedi, or ultra-Orthodox circles, the Neturei Karta are regarded as a wild fringe". Neturei Karta claims that the mass media deliberately downplays their viewpoint and makes them out to be few in number. Their protests are usually attended by just a few dozen people.

But of course or media will have no of that as they'd rather keep absurdly labeling the man as a bigot and a Holocaust denier, disgracefully overlooking the the awful fact that some prominent Zionist were in fact http://www.jewsagainstzionism.com/antisemitism/holocaust/index.cfm .

Fact? According to whom, jewsagainstzionism.com?
What do you mean by holocaust appeasers?
So that thorough report on the supposed Red Cross ambulances strike was simply a "conspiracy blog", yet jewsagainstzionism.com is good enough for you?

 

[kyleb]

They are reprinting quotes and citing their sources, and if you like you can find much info on the subject in the book https://www.amazon.com/dp/1569802351/?tag=pfamazon01-20. Also, since this is Physics forums, hopefully no one would take issue with me citing a letter from, among others, Albert Einstein:

New Palestine Party
Visit of Menachem Begin and Aims of Political Movement Discussed

TO THE EDITORS OF THE NEW YORK TIMES:

Among the most disturbing political phenomena of our times is the emergence in the newly created state of Israel of the �Freedom Party� (Tnuat Haherut), a political party closely akin in its organization, methods, political philosophy and social appeal to the Nazi and Fascist parties. It was formed out of the membership and following of the former Irgun Zvai Leumi, a terrorist, right-wing, chauvinist organization in Palestine.

The current visit of Menachem Begin, leader of this party, to the United States is obviously calculated to give the impression of American support for his party in the coming Israeli elections, and to cement political ties with conservative Zionist elements in the United States. Several Americans of national repute have lent their names to welcome his visit. It is inconceivable that those who oppose fascism throughout the world, if correctly informed as to Mr. Begin�s political record and perspectives, could add their names and support to the movement he represents.

http://www.globalwebpost.com/farooqm/study_res/einstein/nyt_letter.html"

 

[Yonoz]

They are reprinting quotes and citing their sources, and if you like you can find much info on the subject in the book https://www.amazon.com/dp/1569802351/?tag=pfamazon01-20.

Hah. Take a look at this quote:

Chaim Weizmann, the first president of Israel, made this Zionist policy very explicit:
The hopes of Europe’s six million Jews are centered on emigration. I was asked: “Can you bring six million Jews to Palestine?” I replied, “No.” ... From the depths of the tragedy I want to save ... young people [for Palestine]. The old ones will pass. They will bear their fate or they will not. They are dust, economic and moral dust in a cruel world ... Only the branch of the young shall survive. They have to accept it.

Chaim Weizmann reporting to the Zionist Congress in 1937 on his testimony before the Peel Commission in London, July 1937. Cited in Yahya, p. 55.

Now one may assume the tragedy Chaim Weizmann is referring to is the holocaust, until one looks at the date. Also, the amount of editing on this quote makes it even more dubious. But the best example of the fringe nature of this group is in the following quote, under the heading "Exaggerated Stories of Starvation? You Decide...": Salli Mayer: “. . . what is happening in Poland are exaggerated stories. . . the way of the Ost Yuden. . .always asking for money.” - Who is Salli Mayer? and what's with all the "..."? Are they saying the reports of starvation in the holocaust are exaggerated?
EDIT: I'd just like to add exactly what the Peel Commission was, for people who may not know. By 1937 the Arabs in the Mandated territories resisted British rule and Jewish immigration in several violent uprisings. The British then issued limits to Jewish immigration. The British Peel Commission wanted to solve the matter of the Mandated territories, and as such they asked Zionist leaders what their intententions were regarding Jewish immigration in light of Arab resistance. So when Chaim Weizmann said he cannot bring 6 million Jews to Palestine, he meant he was quite aware it could not be done by legal immigration with British permission.
Weizmann could not know a holocaust would begin very shortly, and was concerned with protecting the Jewish nation by a more permanent mean - i.e. a Jewish State in Israel, that needs to be developed, and considering British immigration limits, it is very logical young people will be preferred.

Also, since this is Physics forums, hopefully no one would take issue with me citing a letter from, among others, Albert Einstein:

I thought you admired Jabotinsky's teachings
Einstein wasn't the only one to object to the Revisionists. As I previously mentioned, they were ostracised by the World Zionist Organisation to the point where they left it and set up their own New Zionist Organisation.
It wasn't until 1977 that Begin won the seat of Prime Minister. 30 years in opposition apparently taught him a few things, as after two years in office he had already signed the first Arab-Israeli peace treaty, agreeing to return more than half the territory held by Israel.

FYI that book is by an anti-zionist marxist.

 

[kyleb]

Yes it is, but the documents he compiled are from Zionists all the same. And yeah, look at the date on Chaim Weizmann's comment and note that the consideration and labor camps started up 4 years prior. As for Salli Mayer, he was a Zionist representative in Switzerland, and he was the one shamefully claiming the reports of starvation were exaggerated. Also, I didn't quote Einstein to show that he was opposed to the Revisionists, but because the text of the letter explains why. And again, from last like we spoke of Jabotinsky, please get a grip on the fact that there is a difference between respecting a man's intelligence and admiring his teachings.

 

[jpr0]

Edit by Evo - we don't just post links to satire sights.

 

[Yonoz]

Yes it is, but the documents he compiled are from Zionists all the same.

These Zionists were persona non grata in mainstream Jewish and Zionist circles. Presenting them as any kind of Zionist authority is like saying that the few Anglo-Saxon Americans and Britons that fought with Al-Qaeda represent their respective home nations. Neturei Karta are ostracised by every other Jewish group, including other non-Zionists.

And yeah, look at the date on Chaim Weizmann's comment and note that the consideration and labor camps started up 4 years prior.

kyleb, there were very few people who believed in 1937 that Nazi Germany would orchestrate a genocide of the European Jewry. As a matter of fact, most victims did not resist even as they were being led to their deaths, because they simply refused to believe it was true. These people have lived through so much violence, they were desensitized and expected it to blow over and that they will start afresh in a different place, as was many times the case with their forefathers.

As for Salli Mayer, he was a Zionist representative in Switzerland, and he was the one shamefully claiming the reports of starvation were exaggerated.

I could not find any reliable information on him, perhaps you can be of use.

Also, I didn't quote Einstein to show that he was opposed to the Revisionists, but because the text of the letter explains why.

Well Einstein was referring to the revisionists, and the majority of Jews and Zionists at the time held a similar view. That is why they were ostracised and never won an election until 1977.

 

[kyleb]

All the same, they were the ones who cleared the way for the strong Jewish majority in the land which became Israel; and their parties went on to shape policy as Lukid and melded to mainstream acceptance in Kadima, thereby continuing the polices that still serve to expropriate land from Palestine today. Regardless, while Ahmadinejad simply suggests the idea the that Holocaust justifies running the Palestinians off their land is a myth, both Revisionist and Labor leaders worked with the Nazis to further their agendas. Considering the latter, along with the fact that Iran openly declared their support for reaching a two-state peace agreement, trying to pass Ahmadinejad off as some genocidal bigot comes off rather as disingenuous to me.

 

[Yonoz]

All the same, they were the ones who cleared the way for the strong Jewish majority in the land which became Israel;

Absolutely not. They were a very small minority, and most of them were burguois living in the established cities while the labour Zionists did the real road clearing.

and their parties went on to shape policy as Lukid and melded to mainstream acceptance in Kadima, thereby continuing the polices that still serve to expropriate land from Palestine today.

No they have not. In a historic speech Ariel Sharon while he was still Likud's leader declared revisionists must face the reality that we must "consolidate" ourselves - ie give away land as he later did when he ripped families away from their homes in Gaza.

Regardless, while Ahmadinejad simply suggests the idea the that Holocaust justifies running the Palestinians off their land is a myth, both Revisionist and Labor leaders worked with the Nazis to further their agendas.

Nope. There was a small group whose leader was uncovered by the Haganah and handed over to the British authorities. As you already saw, we deal harshly with our terrorists. And Ahmedinejad said the holocaust was a myth.

Considering the latter, along with the fact that Iran openly declared their support for reaching a two-state peace agreement, trying to pass Ahmadinejad off as some genocidal bigot this claim that you made in the past.

You've yet to prove that statement.

 

[Anttech]

trying to pass Ahmadinejad off as some genocidal bigot

Unfortunately in the world of catch sound bites, this seems to work. Take a quote, rip it from its context and run with it.

 

[kyleb]

Absolutely not. They were a very small minority, and most of them were burguois living in the established cities while the labour Zionists did the real road clearing.

I wasn't talking about road clearing, I was talking about talking about their handling of the demographic issue.

No they have not. In a historic speech Ariel Sharon while he was still Likud's leader declared revisionists must face the reality that we must "consolidate" ourselves - ie give away land as he later did when he ripped families away from their homes in Gaza.

Their homes which were built on Palestinian land, yet he also continued to expand settlements in the West Bank and so does Olmert.

Nope. There was a small group whose leader was uncovered by the Haganah and handed over to the British authorities. As you already saw, we deal harshly with our terrorists.

I'd argue that it is a bit more complecated than you suggest, but I suppose it would be better we don't go too far off topic in this thread about Ahmedinejad.

And Ahmedinejad said the holocaust was a myth.

A myth as in a half-truth, the idea that it justifes taking the Palestinian's land being the half he takes issue with.

You've yet to prove that statement.

It took me quite a bit of digging though our warmongering media, but I did find a small reference to part of Khamenei's more recent declaration:

In June, the country's supreme leader, Ayatollah Khamenei, declared that "Iran shares a common view with Arab countries about the most important Islamic-Arabic issue, namely the issue of Palestine". That means that Iran accepts the Arab League position: normalisation of relations if Israel withdraws to the international border.

I also found this mention of a previous offer:

The document lists a series of Iranian aims for the talks, such as ending sanctions, full access to peaceful nuclear technology and a recognition of its "legitimate security interests." Iran agreed to put a series of U.S. aims on the agenda, including full cooperation on nuclear safeguards, "decisive action" against terrorists, coordination in Iraq, ending "material support" for Palestinian militias and accepting the Saudi initiative for a two-state solution in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

And also in my digging, I came across a Yedioth Ahronoth interview with Chomsky which I had read a few months ago which I recommend reading as it mentions Iran's interest in peaceful resolution among other issues.

 

[Yonoz]

I wasn't talking about road clearing, I was talking about talking about their handling of the demographic issue.

I meant that as a response to your statement that the revisionists "cleared the way":

All the same, they were the ones who cleared the way for the strong Jewish majority in the land which became Israel;

What do you mean by "their handling of the demographic issue"?

Their homes which were built on Palestinian land, yet he also continued to expand settlements in the West Bank and so does Olmert.

There was Jewish settlement in the area before the war of independence, it was abandoned when the Egyptian military overran the Gaza Strip on its way to Tel-Aviv.

A myth as in a half-truth, the idea that it justifes taking the Palestinian's land being the half he takes issue with.

Do you think the holocaust is a half-truth?

It took me quite a bit of digging though our warmongering media, but I did find a small reference to part of Khamenei's more recent declaration:

What a silly journalist. ISRAEL ISN'T EVEN MENTIONED IN THE ACTUAL QUOTE. This is an unacceptable interpretation.
It is an opinion piece, and the author is entitled to his opinion. But Khameinei made the most veiled comment about what Iran finds agreeable regarding the "Arab-Islamic issue", thus they do not even see Israel as a party in this issue. No, "Iran shares a common view with Arab countries about the most important Islamic-Arabic issue, namely the issue of Palestine" does not mean that Iran accepts the Arab League position: normalisation of relations if Israel withdraws to the international border.

I also found this mention of a previous offer:

That's an interesting bit of information there, and thanks for bringing it to my attention - but let's not jump to conclusions. It seemed like a sweet deal at first, and then I read it again, slowly.

The document lists a series of Iranian aims for the talks, such as ending sanctions, full access to peaceful nuclear technology and a recognition of its "legitimate security interests."

These are the aims of the talks.

Iran agreed to put a series of U.S. aims on the agenda, including full cooperation on nuclear safeguards, "decisive action" against terrorists, coordination in Iraq, ending "material support" for Palestinian militias and accepting the Saudi initiative for a two-state solution in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

So they did not actually agree to any of this - they agreed to put it on the agenda. So until we see the offer in more detail this could simply be a spin.

And also in my digging, I came across a Yedioth Ahronoth interview with Chomsky which I had read a few months ago which I recommend reading as it mentions Iran's interest in peaceful resolution among other issues.

With all due respect to Professor Chomsky's achievements, the man does not have his feet on the ground. He calls the English-language Israeli press "IDF handouts". He's just too disconnected from reality for me to pay attention to anything he says.

 

[kyleb]

Chomsky knows how Revisionists handled the demographic issue, he knows the difference between a Jewish settlement and Israel land, he knows that the Holocaust doesn't justify Israel's continuing occupation and exportation Palestinian land, and he knows that Iran would like to see a reasonable resolution to that injustice. But of course I can see how all that might look like he doesn't have his feet on the ground to someone who would rather ignore those realities and drag us into yet another war.

 

[Yonoz]

Chomsky knows how Revisionists handled the demographic issue, he knows the difference between a Jewish settlement and Israel land, he knows that the Holocaust doesn't justify Israel's continuing occupation and exportation Palestinian land, and he knows that Iran would like to see a reasonable resolution to that injustice. But of course I can see how all that might look like he doesn't have his feet on the ground to someone who would rather ignore those realities and drag us into yet another war.

Take it easy.
I know it's hard to adopt an entire world view, but your old one simply doesn't hold water.