NationStates Jolt Archive

When you look at the news on the television and read the paper on a daily basis like I do you must notice how at some point Isreal is doing quite the same as the Nazi's did in Germany prior to the mass extermination in the deathcamps. I'm talking about the 1930-1939 period of time here. Palestinian homes are bulldozed, mosques destroyed... Many people on the run for the violence and bloodshed. Jewish shops burned, people harassed, many jews fleeing to The Netherlands or France... Looks very much the same to me. But that's not the point here.

We all know the middle east is anti-American, but when you're anti-American the line between Israel and the USA is thin. The USA used their right to veto a resolution concerning Israel, like they did in the past to protect their only "stable" bastion in the east. Does it surprise you in anyway the anti-semitism is growing in the world? I'm not surprised at all. I have to point out, I am not anti-jewish or those people who yell ZOG at every country that's on the news.

I'd like to hear your thoughts about this.

When you look at the news on the television and read the paper on a daily basis like I do you must notice how at some point Isreal is doing quite the same as the Nazi's did in Germany prior to the mass extermination in the deathcamps. I'm talking about the 1930-1939 period of time here. Palestinian homes are bulldozed, mosques destroyed... Many people on the run for the violence and bloodshed. Jewish shops burned, people harassed, many jews fleeing to The Netherlands or France... Looks very much the same to me. But that's not the point here.

We all know the middle east is anti-American, but when you're anti-American the line between Israel and the USA is thin. The USA used their right to veto a resolution concerning Israel, like they did in the past to protect their only "stable" bastion in the east. Does it surprise you in anyway the anti-semitism is growing in the world? I'm not surprised at all. I have to point out, I am not anti-jewish or those people who yell ZOG at every country that's on the news.

I'd like to hear your thoughts about this.

Bzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.

There. You heard my thoughts.

Have a nice day somewhere else

Does it surprise you in anyway the anti-semitism is growing in the world? I'm not surprised at all.

I agree.

they are actually. its a semi-fascsit state and the government's corrupt.. yet the USA support it. probably cuz there are many powerful israelies in america.. anyway this how the situation works

*Terrorists attack israel
*israel "cracks down" on terror
*Civillians are hit in the "crack down"
*Tensions rise in the world community
*The ball gets rolling on a UN resolution
*The resolution blocked by the USA
*USA points at arafat
*Arafat hotly protests
*which inflames passions
*passions boil over into hate
*Terrorists feed on hate
*Terrorist attack Israel
*israel "cracks down" on terror
*Civillians are hit in the "crack down"
*Tensions rise in the world community
*The ball gets rolling on a UN resolution
*The resolution blocked by the USA
etc....
etc...
etc..
etc.
..

Problem is you start expressing anti-Israeli-Government sentiment and all of a sudden everybody's accusing you of hating Jews.

I don't like the American Government either - or the British one, come to that - so does that mean I want to wipe out all Christians? No.

The cycle keeps going. Exactly how it is and the worst thing is their abused excuse of "ridding the world of terrorists".

I agree.

Is it growing? Anti-semitism used to be far more popular in the middle ages and at the beginning of the 20th century (not just in Nazi Germany but in France and the Soviet Union).

It's just that nowadays maybe there are three factors that make it appear a bigger problem:

1) The growth in Communications, especially the Internet;
2) The recent war on terror has given the assumption that all muslims hate all jews;
3) Maybe now unlike before, there is an actual Jewish State which, like a lot of other modern states, is not very popular with other states because of its actions. Maybe it appears so popular because for the first time in history there are Jews in power and are cocking things up as much as Christians, Muslims and Atheists etc have done previously.

From where I'm sitting I'd say antisemitism has always existed. Maybe it's rising in your country, but honestly I just don't see it.

We support Israel just like we'd support the U.K. As for why I'd say it's mainly the Religious Right part of the republican party.

1) The growth in Communications, especially the Internet;
The internet is the prime factor in increasing its growth as well IMHO.

2) The recent war on terror has given the assumption that all muslims hate all jews;
Yes, thats true.

3) Maybe now unlike before, there is an actual Jewish State which, like a lot of other modern states, is not very popular with other states because of its actions. Maybe it appears so popular because for the first time in history there are Jews in power and are cocking things up as much as Christians, Muslims and Atheists etc have done previously.
Possibly more so.

I think it is growing, but only because for the past 60 years it's been an almost untouchable issue. Now, people have kinda forgotten the first hand experience of WW2 as that generation begins to die out. Anti-semitism is starting a slow recovery, unfortunately.

Anti-semetism isn't new. For some reason jews were always hated by christans and muslims alike.

Is it growing? Anti-semitism used to be far more popular in the middle ages and at the beginning of the 20th century (not just in Nazi Germany but in France and the Soviet Union).

I agree that it may be much less than it was even at the beginning of the 20th century, but he just says it's on the rise, not that is more "popular" (don't know why you used that word) than ever; and I agree with that. It's bad, but you can't see the other way: then, is when problems REALLY grow.

I agree that it may be much less than it was even at the beginning of the 20th century, but he just says it's on the rise, not that is more "popular" (don't know why you used that word) than ever; and I agree with that. It's bad, but you can't see the other way: then, is when problems REALLY grow.

I know he said it is on the rise. My point was that it has decreased in comparison to what it was like for Jews in previous generations. Jews these days have it awfully good in comparison to previously, as they should.

Maybe it is on a rise at the moment to do with Palestine, but that's just because the Left Wing is the idiot's side of the political spectrum.

Both Israel and Palestine are equally at fault for the problems there. Why?
Because neither side is yet prepared to do what we in Britain eventually learned to do in Northern Ireland. Not to retaliate to the other side's aggression. When that happens, Peace may prosper in Israel. But that is a long way off.

Both Israel and Palestine are equally at fault for the problems there. Why?
Because neither side is yet prepared to do what we in Britain eventually learned to do in Northern Ireland. Not to retaliate to the other side's aggression. When that happens, Peace may prosper in Israel. But that is a long way off.
Did you ever read "The Sum of All Fears" by Tom Clancy? I know it's just a novel, but that would be an amazing solution. And just in case anyone saw the movie but didn't read the book: It doesn't have anything to do with it, the whole part I'm talking about doesn't exist in the movie (AKA the movie is crap).

Anti-semetism isn't new. For some reason jews were always hated by christans and muslims alike.

That's incorrect.

Jews were not always hated by Christians; in fact, Christians paid for little attention to Jews after Christ's death because they were spreading his message, his Word, and their faith.

Even today, most Christians are not anti-semetic; when it comes down to anti-semitism, it's all about a secular force - like Hitler - who wanted to wipe out the Jewish race to purify the German one.

Arn't the U.S.A anti-middle east

It's true. You see now that the Israelis are putting the Palestinians behind walls in ghettoes. You see, you must dehumanise your victims before you exterminate them.

It would be a sad day, indeed, to see Israel lash back with the same horrors with which they were dealt in Nazi Germany. Let's hope that the same precursory circumstances don't necessarily yield the same outcomes. As an American, I've always been nervous about our protective stance of Israel, but we have a large Jewish population in this country with considerable clout. We nearly had a Jewish vice president in 2000. Personally, I would rather be a Jew in America than a Jew in Israel where they trade blows for their beliefs... but this is a religious matter of "holy land" which as a non-practicing Christian, I just don't understand.

Arn't the U.S.A anti-middle east

More or less. They need the middle east for the oil but the USA can't stand the people living there.

More or less. They need the middle east for the oil but the USA can't stand the people living there.

I'd say the average American is indifferent to the peoples of the Middle East, but there are racists here just like everywhere else. Having said that I'd also have to say that most Americans disapprove of certain cultural issues, like women's rights in those countries.

Isreal is doing quite the same as the Nazi's did in Germany prior to the mass extermination in the deathcamps. I'm talking about the 1930-1939 period of time here. Palestinian homes are bulldozed, mosques destroyed... Many people on the run for the violence and bloodshed. Jewish shops burned, people harassed, many jews fleeing to The Netherlands or France... Looks very much the same to me. But that's not the point here.

The difference is the Jews didn't attack Germany the day Germany was made a nation. Nor did they blow themselves up in the name of honorable homocide.

When you look at the news on the television and read the paper on a daily basis like I do you must notice how at some point Isreal is doing quite the same as the Nazi's did in Germany prior to the mass extermination in the deathcamps. I'm talking about the 1930-1939 period of time here. Palestinian homes are bulldozed, mosques destroyed... Many people on the run for the violence and bloodshed. Jewish shops burned, people harassed, many jews fleeing to The Netherlands or France... Looks very much the same to me. But that's not the point here.

There are many problems with this comparison, not the least of which is that you're ignoring significant differences, such as the long history of attempts at a peace process, the period of Palestinian self-rule, the Palestinian violence towards Israelis, as well as the ideological gap between the Israeli government and that of the Third Reich.

Not to mention the fact that there are plenty of other countries who have, and continue to, engage in similar behavior to Israel. Does that make them "Nazi-like", as well?

We all know the middle east is anti-American, but when you're anti-American the line between Israel and the USA is thin. The USA used their right to veto a resolution concerning Israel, like they did in the past to protect their only "stable" bastion in the east. Does it surprise you in anyway the anti-semitism is growing in the world? I'm not surprised at all. I have to point out, I am not anti-jewish or those people who yell ZOG at every country that's on the news.

I don't find it surprising, but I also don't think it's related to Israel having America as an ally. I think it's related to Israel being powerful, and then using its power like America- we'll do whatever we want regardless of how it affects other people or what other people think. In Israel's case, I think this attitude towards the rest of the world is a bit more understandable than the US'.

You could theoretically make the case that increased anti-Americanism is related to the US' support of Israel, but I don't think the other way around can be really argued or proven.

Problem is you start expressing anti-Israeli-Government sentiment and all of a sudden everybody's accusing you of hating Jews.

I don't like the American Government either - or the British one, come to that - so does that mean I want to wipe out all Christians? No.

It's dependant on HOW you express your sentiments. If someone refers to Israelis as a monolith, or specifically invokes their Jewishness, or uses an anti-semitic buzzword or catch-phrase or conspiracy theory (like, "Jews control the government and media, that's why we support Israel"), then the accusation of "hating Jews" becomes more appropriate.

Another thing is exactly what you're criticizing the government for- the more specific one's critiques, the less likely they will be accused of merely hating Jews. There is a legitimate argument to be made that people who want the state of Israel to be abolished could be said to be anti-semitic- not that I necessarily agree with it, but it's a valid argument.

People who are fond of demonizing and oversimplifying the conflict also tend to verge quite close to the "hating Jews" line. Comments like "Sharon is just like Hitler", or "the Israelis are worse than the Nazis", or my personal favorite, which usually involves some permutation of, "It's too bad Hitler didn't finish the job" (which was chanted at several pro-Palestinian rallies in Berkeley about two years ago, followed by attacks on peaceful Jewish counter-protestors) seem like legitimate pieces of evidence one could use to argue that the speaker is, in fact, anti-Jewish, rather than merely being opposed to "Israeli government policy".

That's incorrect.

Jews were not always hated by Christians; in fact, Christians paid for little attention to Jews after Christ's death because they were spreading his message, his Word, and their faith.

To say that either Jews were "always" hated by Christians, or to alternately argue that Jews were "never" hated by Christians, is to engage in oversimplification. The attitudes towards the Jews in Christian thought have varied and evolved over its history. That said, there is a long history of hostility- and indeed, hatred- of Jews and Judaism in Christianity, and this should be acknowledged. One could argue that the early Christians were not "anti-Jewish" or "anti-Judaism" per se, since they were still in the process of creating their new religion and still considered themselves Jewish. However it is undeniable that early Christianity did see Judaism in a hostile light, and that later generations of Christians adapted these ideas, taking them from what they originally were, inter-Jewish critiques, and transforming them into excuses to hate, persecute, and kill Jews. Many pogroms were incited by priests' sermons, or by specific holidays (Easter tended to be a big one).

Even today, most Christians are not anti-semetic

You could argue that, but first you'd need to clarify exactly what constitutes anti-Semitism. For instance, Jerry Falwell supports Israel, but his reason is that when the end-times come, 2/3rds of the world's Jewish population will die and the remaining third will convert. Is this anti-Semitic? Are Christians who believe that Jews killed Christ anti-Semitic? Where's the dividing line?

when it comes down to anti-semitism, it's all about a secular force - like Hitler - who wanted to wipe out the Jewish race to purify the German one.

Bull. There are many documented cases of Jewish persecution being carried out by religious Christians, supported by Christian doctrine. See the first few Crusades, which took a detour through the Rhineland and practically eviscerated the Jewish communities there. Or take a look at some of the things the various Popes have said about or supported being done to Jews.

Protestants aren't off the hook, either. Martin Luther, like Mohammed before him, became quite mad when Jews wouldn't accept his religion- and, like Mohammed, wrote some very anti-Semitic stuff.

The difference is the Jews didn't attack Germany the day Germany was made a nation. Nor did they blow themselves up in the name of honorable homocide.

Yeah what he said. But those 72 virgins sound pretty tempting. But also frustrating, you know? Now I'm undecided.

QahJoh - I don't think saying "Sharon is just like Hitler" should be interpreted as anti-semitic. By comparing with Hitler you're automatically saying that what Hitler did to the Jews is wrong. And equally - that what Sharon (or rather, his government) is doing to the Palestinians is wrong. A very valid point.

But you could easily criticise the statement for being flawed:

- The root of the prejudices are very different, and so are the reactions of those being oppressed (no one can justify how the Palestinians react, even if their actions are more understandable than those of the Israeli government - they actually playing into the Israeli government's hands)

- Hitler was a dictator. Sharon is not.

- And many more, I'm sure, if you know a little more about the situation than I do.

Anyway, my initial point was that it is generally very easy to distinguish whether someone is being anti-semitic rather than anti-Israel, but many people will take offence either way, and many other will be scared of making any such comment for fear they will be accused of anti-semitism.

Anti-semetism isn't new. For some reason jews were always hated by christans and muslims alike.

Jews were hated by Muslims since the ancient times and vice versa.

By christians because they killed Jesus. However, Christians who hate Jews b/c of this really don't know what they are talking about. If Jesus hadn't died, then there would be no Christianity. Also, Jesus said not to hate.

Are Christians who believe that Jews killed Christ anti-Semitic?


Jews did kill Christ. It was jews' decision to crucify him, not Pilate's.

But it wasn't the Jews. Just some of them.

as Jesus was a jew himself, this is a very strange issue. ?

QahJoh: Mohammed was illiterate. He could not read or write. How could an illiterate man have written anything, let alone something anti-Semitic?

as Jesus was a jew himself, this is a very strange issue. ?

Not really. It's not like there were any Christians, is it? And as he was executed for heresy (at least in the jews' eyes - the Romans officially executed him for treason), you'd think he should be the same religion as them, wouldn't you?

Are Christians who believe that Jews killed Christ anti-Semitic?

They might be, but not in believing that the Jews killed Christ. If you believe the NT, you have to believe that some jews were very involved in the death of Christ. If a jew thinks that the NT is historically accurate in its description of the crucifixion, is that jew anti-semitic? Nope.

I don't think european christians in the middle ages persecuted jews because their ancestors killed christ. i think it was more to do with their obvious cultural and linguistic differences and people's liking for scapegoats and a place to direct their negative energy.

Also they practised usury (lending money with interest) which christians were forbidden from doing. Jews could only make good money from this because they were forbidden from owning land and weren't admitted into trade guilds. They often became wealthy through acting as bankers and were sometimes seen as loan sharks.

HP why why why! We went so long without this pointless, repetitive debate. I'm going to make one point at this time and that is that you see what the media want you to see. Logical, no? The media (majority) are very pro-palestinian. What did surprise me was a program aired by CNN called "Impact of Terror" I assume none of you saw it but anyway, it was a program (first of its kind I think, at least by CNN) That featured NO POLITICS. None at all. Just a suicide bombing, and the aftermath. The people involved, the families of the deceased speaking. Some of the pictures were sickening. Someone made a point about Israel "killing innocent civilians" which is, quite frankly, the biggest load of BS I have ever heard. In a few minutes when I return I will find a timeline of all the suicide bombings and show you the amount that targeted elderly or kids. And there lies the major difference. Israel target terrorists, Palestinian suicide bombers target civilians.

Even today, most Christians are not anti-semetic; when it comes down to anti-semitism, it's all about a secular force - like Hitler - who wanted to wipe out the Jewish race to purify the German one.

http://www.iahushua.com/JQ/Luther.htm

Was he secular?

as Jesus was a jew himself, this is a very strange issue. ?

Jew is not a race, it's a religion.

Anyone can become a jew, the Torah underlies how that occurs.

You can't become a race that you're not, you can become a religion.

Ethnically speaking, most modern jews are descendants of the Kazahks of a millenia ago.

the original post is rascist in its view little better than the KKK

HP why why why! We went so long without this pointless, repetitive debate. I'm going to make one point at this time and that is that you see what the media want you to see. Logical, no? The media (majority) are very pro-palestinian. What did surprise me was a program aired by CNN called "Impact of Terror" I assume none of you saw it but anyway, it was a program (first of its kind I think, at least by CNN) That featured NO POLITICS. None at all. Just a suicide bombing, and the aftermath. The people involved, the families of the deceased speaking. Some of the pictures were sickening. Someone made a point about Israel "killing innocent civilians" which is, quite frankly, the biggest load of BS I have ever heard. In a few minutes when I return I will find a timeline of all the suicide bombings and show you the amount that targeted elderly or kids. And there lies the major difference. Israel target terrorists, Palestinian suicide bombers target civilians.

Among other things, Israel keep Palestinians living in a "ghetto" (refugee camps, etc...) which are regularly attacked.
And no, Israel does NOT only target terrorists. In fact, they themselves said that the last raid in the gaza-strip was in reprisal for the last suicide attack (which means, firing rockets and levelling houses).

The cycle keeps going. Exactly how it is and the worst thing is their abused excuse of "ridding the world of terrorists".

And what do you propose as an alternative?

Among other things, Israel keep Palestinians living in a "ghetto" (refugee camps, etc...) which are regularly attacked.
And no, Israel does NOT only target terrorists. In fact, they themselves said that the last raid in the gaza-strip was in reprisal for the last suicide attack (which means, firing rockets and levelling houses).
Well, tell the militants to stop hiding their cowardly asses behind civilians then. They retaliated against known militants, they killed the head of "Islamic Jihad" remember, or did it slip your mind? And it was in retaliation for the launching of Qassam (sp?) rockets into Israeli villages, you know the attacks that killed 2 kids who were playing in the street? Next you'll be trying to cinvince me that the militants are nice people who are misunderstood:rolleyes:

And what do you propose as an alternative?

Integrating with the Palestinians would solve all problems, but the Israelians refuse to do so, as they would become "a minority" (heaven forbid equality! :rolleyes: )

And what do you propose as an alternative?
Well done Eutrusca. All you people are posting about how what Israel is doing is wrong, what would you do? Judging by your responses I would say let them attack us and hope they get bored. But, i'll let you explain to us all your simple and brilliant plan for eliminating terrorists. Over to you.

Well, tell the militants to stop hiding their cowardly asses behind civilians then. They retaliated against known militants, they killed the head of "Islamic Jihad" remember, or did it slip your mind? And it was in retaliation for the launching of Qassam (sp?) rockets into Israeli villages, you know the attacks that killed 2 kids who were playing in the street? Next you'll be trying to cinvince me that the militants are nice people who are misunderstood:rolleyes:

Oh please...I don't take sides in this conflict, I see atrocities on both sides... I'm just pointing out that the Israelians behave no better than the Palestinians.

Integrating with the Palestinians would solve all problems, but the Israelians refuse to do so, as they would become "a minority" (heaven forbid equality! :rolleyes: )
You know that all the arab villages in Israel have full citizenship, full rights, including voting rights right? And that a few years back Barak offered 97% of the territories to the Palestinians and yet during that precise fortnight Hamas unleashed the worst wave of bombings seen yet? I'm this close to ignoring you due to the fact that you try to debate about Israel yet you can't spell "Israelis":rolleyes:

It is obvious that both sides are acting complely stupid and needlessly violent. If Israel would just calm the hell down when a bombing happens maybe they'll make better progress. Instead of sending fighters into the air to fire rockets (that seem pretty inacurate) at buildings and automobiles maybe try the ground approach. Would certainly lessen the chance of killing innocents and giving more bodies for Islamic Jihad to send to kill Israelis. If Israel uses restraint and the Palestinains keep blowing up markets and buses killing women and children, any sympathy for them will disappear. It seemms unlikley that Palestinians will ever stop these terrorist attcaks anyway if Israel keeps doing these rash acts.

The current administration keeps saying that, "...the terrorists hate us for what we believe in."

The truth is closer to the fact that they hate us for what we do. Support for the repression of Palestinians and mercenary economics in the Middle East make us targets.

The current President's belief in End-time prophecy may be causing us more terrorist activity. The simple fact is that we cannot crush the terrorists while continuing our behavior. There will only be more to take their place. We need to rethink our support and actions throughout the Middle East and change our behavior.

Get out and VOTE if you are concerned about the direction this country is headed.

You know that all the arab villages in Israel have full citizenship, full rights, including voting rights right? And that a few years back Barak offered 97% of the territories to the Palestinians and yet during that precise fortnight Hamas unleashed the worst wave of bombings seen yet? I'm this close to ignoring you due to the fact that you try to debate about Israel yet you can't spell "Israelis":rolleyes:

The Hamas doesn't speak for all Palestinians, and of course they don't want integration to happen.
Sorry about the misspelling, English isn't my native language. If flawless english is absolutely vital to you, ignore me then.

The Israeli Government (or factions within it) are in bed with the thugs that are really running the show in palestine. Anyone hear about the High-level Palestinian officials buying cement from egypt and sellling it to the military contractor building that stupid wall? 20 bucks says some of that money funded the next boom, which was probably incited by that wall. IMHO when you find one thing like this, there's a dozen more that go unnoticed. The people making decisions in Israel do things that obviously antagonize the palestinians (i.e. demanding they police themselves better, blowing up the police station when they fail to do so, then raiding the neighborhood because the police aren't doing a good job). Hamas and the other organized crime groups stay in power using the palestinians hatred and frustration, of course they're going to send bombers out when it looks like peace might come. The only way that this MIGHT be solved is if Israel helps create an environment in which Palestinians can live normally, and the ambitious bastages have some other course to follow besides the charity/terrorist groups.

First off, the term "anti-semite" does not mean what people here have intended it to mean (someone who hates jews). "Semite" does not equal "jew" but is actually a much broader term that includes Arabs as well. Yes, Arabs are also semites.
Second, Israel's only claim to form a legitimate state in Palestine is based on divinity. God had "chosen" this land for the Jewish people and they are therefore entitled to it, even though 1) they had not lived there for thousands of years, and 2) there were already people happily living there at the time of Israel's creation in 1947. This was the first time a "divine legitimacy" has ever been deemed acceptable, and it was done so because the Western powers felt guilty over the atrocities they had suffered in the Holocaust. In my opinion, the formation of a state solely based on guilt is questionable.
Third, the Israeli state is NOT a democracy. It is a theocracy in disguise. A state cannot claim to be a democracy and still promote a single religious identity while denying the rights of the arab minority inside their border. Israel does this mostly by 1) confiscating land without reimbursement, and 2) diverting water resources away from the arab communities in the hopes of forcing them to relocate. This second part is especially important considering how vital water resources are in the area. This doesn't sound so different from the white Apartheid regime of South Africa and their relocation of blacks into "homelands" in order to deprive them of citizenship in their own country.
Fourth, the American government remains blind to the atrocities of the Israeli government due to the fact that they are choosing between what they see to be the lesser of two evils. Israelis look more or less like we do (many of them are in fact Americans) and we have a difficult time supporting any Arab country for any extended period of time that isn't Saudi Arabia (although we have at various times supported oppressive Iraqi, Iranian, and Afghanistani regimes). Can you imagine the political suicide it would be for an American official to declare that he is questioning his country's support of Israel? Not only would he lose the Jewish vote in a hertbeat, but he would immediately be decried as an anti-semite. Criticizing Israel has always been a touchy subject because of this.
Fifth, one must understand that terrorist bombings (I do NOT support terrorists, by the way) are done out of a feeling of hopelessness. When a people without an army and without effective leadership are confronted by a country with not only one of the strongest armies in the world but backed and almost fully funded by the most powerful country to ever exist, one can understand the predicament this places them in. Palestinians (as well as most of the arab and muslim world) see Israel as the imperialist arm of America gradually creeping its way into the Middle East attempting to destroy them and their way of life. Palestinians feel that the international community will not take them seriously (most of Western Europe actually does take them seriously, but America's veto power nullifies this) and they must therefore take their liberation into their own hands. Keep in mind, however, that the war between Israel and Palestine has resulted in nearly four times more Palestinian deaths than Israeli deaths, and yet all we hear about on good ol' CNN is innocent Israelis being killed.
Overall, there have been losses and atrocities on both sides, and I'm not entirely sure what can be done about it. Palestine has the support of many members of the security council, but as long as the US continues to veto in support of Israel there will never be a resolution. The US must look over these disagreements more objectively, and not in terms of the loss of votes or image.

It is unfortunate the things Israel has done in the name of it's security. Throwing bombs around that don't always hit their target is not a good way to try to end Palestinian terrorist attacks. I can understand Israels point of view since Arab armies have tried four seperate times to destroy their nation. There have been many times when a resolution might have been made. As I understand it Israel once gave the Palestinians a very good deal for land, and instead more terrorism occured. Perhaps if Egypt's President Sadat wasn't assinnated there would have been a resolution. I can definately see that nothing will happen as long as Sharon is in power and the U.S. refuses to deal with Yassar Arafat. The man commands great respect from the Palestinian people! Someone really needs to step up to try to find a solution that would put Carter's efforts at Camp David to shame. Perhaps this will calm the tempest of terrorist fears in our own country as well? That is one big reason we are hated in that part of the world. A resolution would cerainly be helpful for America as well.

Jew is not a race, it's a religion.

Anyone can become a jew, the Torah underlies how that occurs.

You can't become a race that you're not, you can become a religion.

Ethnically speaking, most modern jews are descendants of the Kazahks of a millenia ago.

Genetically speaking all arabian and semitic people are white, so it doesn't matter anyway.

QahJoh - I don't think saying "Sharon is just like Hitler" should be interpreted as anti-semitic.

It's largely a matter of personal interpretation. I think that the motivations that cause someone to make that specific comparison are what's really at issue- and stand firm in my statement that some of the people who make such statements are indeed prejudiced against Jews, not merely Zionism.

By comparing with Hitler you're automatically saying that what Hitler did to the Jews is wrong. And equally - that what Sharon (or rather, his government) is doing to the Palestinians is wrong. A very valid point.

Except that rarely seems to be the point actually being made- or at least not how it's taken.

But you could easily criticise the statement for being flawed

Agreed.

Anyway, my initial point was that it is generally very easy to distinguish whether someone is being anti-semitic rather than anti-Israel, but many people will take offence either way, and many other will be scared of making any such comment for fear they will be accused of anti-semitism.

And that's your opinion. I maintain that the distinction, particularly in recent times, where many anti-Semites have realized that they can get away with their anti-Semitism by couching it in "mere" anti-Zionism, has blurred.

Jews did kill Christ. It was jews' decision to crucify him, not Pilate's.

Well, the problem is what source to take as reliable. The NT's rendition of events contradicts the historical details. The Jews weren't in charge, Pilate was. And Pilate was a bloodthirsty and repressive dictator, eventually recalled by Rome for being TOO violent.

There is no historical record that I know of which chronicles the "Jewish custom" of letting one prisoner go at Passover time.

It's inconceivable that Pilate would have actually "washed his hands" of anything. The Jews were under Roman occupation, and he was Rome's official representative. Assuming ANY of the events actually happened as detailed in the NT, it seems likely that Jesus was just one more Jew crucified by a bloody Roman governor.

By the way- Jews didn't crucify people. They stoned them. Crucifixion was done by Romans, and, from what I understand, was generally reserved for those guilty of sedition against the empire.

Mohammed was illiterate. He could not read or write. How could an illiterate man have written anything, let alone something anti-Semitic?

According to Muslim lore, the Qu'ran is God's word as transmitted to Mohammed, who then told it to his followers, who in turn wrote it down, supposedly word for word. The Hadith is a collection of other sayings also attributed to Mohammed.

So, it depends how you want to analyze it- either Mohammed wrote the Qu'ran, or he merely dictated it. Either way, its anti-semitic content is on him. If you want to quibble over who actually "wrote" it, feel free.

They might be, but not in believing that the Jews killed Christ. If you believe the NT, you have to believe that some jews were very involved in the death of Christ. If a jew thinks that the NT is historically accurate in its description of the crucifixion, is that jew anti-semitic? Nope.

Interesting point- for religious Christians, the NT's accuracy is an article of faith, making this a difficult issue to tease out. I'd say it CAN be a component of anti-Semitic beliefs, depending on how it affects someone's conception of historical and modern Jews. Is that the only prism through which they view Jews and Judaism? Do they hold all Jews responsible, etc...

However, I'm not sure your example quite works- my impression is that most Jews don't consider the NT to be historically accurate on most points, crucifixion included.

They often became wealthy through acting as bankers and were sometimes seen as loan sharks.

Some became wealthy, but for many more, "Jewish wealth" was largely a myth. Many Jews were poor artisans and merchants, particularly as European countries started getting larger numbers of Jews. You have to remember, it took a certain degree of wealth to even get INTO money-lending to begin with.

Ethnically speaking, most modern jews are descendants of the Kazahks of a millenia ago.

That's a matter of debate. Many academics theorize that the Khazar influence on Ashkenazi genetics is existent but relatively minor.

I also fail to understand what your post had to do with the "Jews killing a Jew" thing the other poster pointed out.

Integrating with the Palestinians would solve all problems, but the Israelians refuse to do so, as they would become "a minority" (heaven forbid equality!

What a bunch of self-righteous bullshit. You are ignoring the fact that many "moderate" Palestinians want their OWN state, and that's not even counting Palestinian extremists, who want to kill, expel, and dominate non-Muslims.

If the Jews become a minority in a bi-national state (whose non-Jewish population has a significant proportion of people with a VIOLENT hatred of Jews) how long do you think it would be before Jews became targets and victims of violence?

You can't integrate people that don't want to be integrated. To attempt to do so is not only to ignore reality, but will also generate more bloodshed in the long-term.

If Israel uses restraint and the Palestinains keep blowing up markets and buses killing women and children, any sympathy for them will disappear.

But, to a certain extent, Israelis have to ask themselves, "so what"? They should just let terrorists kill Israelis without any response, because they might lose sympathy with the world? Why should they give a shit what the world thinks of them? It doesn't seem to much care when Israelis are getting blown up. I guess one issue is, why should Israel care about a world already hostile to them being more sympathetic to their enemies? In the Israeli worldview,

I somehow doubt that many nations would really be as restrained as people are constantly telling Israel to be if they were in its place. America certainly proved that.

The people making decisions in Israel do things that obviously antagonize the palestinians (i.e. demanding they police themselves better, blowing up the police station when they fail to do so, then raiding the neighborhood because the police aren't doing a good job).

Somewhat accurate, but also a bit of an oversimplification. It's been documented that, for instance, the Tanzim, Force 17, and Al Aqsa militias have a high proportion of Palestinian Policemen in their membership, and that they've been using Palestinian Police resources in their attacks- Palestinian Police force money, weapons, transportation, and police stations.

So, if Israel's going after terrorists, obviously at some point the police are going to become targets- particularly if they're known to, in some places, BE the people orchestrating attacks.

It seemms unlikley that Palestinians will ever stop these terrorist attcaks anyway if Israel keeps doing these rash acts

You can certainly make the case that the Israeli response HELPS perpetuate the situation, but to imply that terrorism would suddenly stop if Israel stopped responding to it seems somewhat naive.

The only way that this MIGHT be solved is if Israel helps create an environment in which Palestinians can live normally, and the ambitious bastages have some other course to follow besides the charity/terrorist groups.

It's a chicken-and-egg problem. Until the Palestinians' situation improve, moderates are unlikely to come to power. However, while the extremists are in control, it would basically be absurd for Israel to try to improve their situation, because it'll be exploited by the extremists. Israeli money for infastructure improvements will be diverted for terrorism; withdrawing troops and easing security will lead to more attacks, etc...

So the two sides are caught in the vicious cycle.

First off, the term "anti-semite" does not mean what people here have intended it to mean (someone who hates jews). "Semite" does not equal "jew" but is actually a much broader term that includes Arabs as well. Yes, Arabs are also semites.

Old argument.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Semitism#Etymology_and_usage

The political writer Wilhelm Marr is credited with coining the German word Antisemitismus in 1873, at a time when racial science was fashionable in Germany but religious prejudice was not. This term was offered as an alternative to the older German word Judenhass, meaning Jew-hating...he founded the League of Anti-Semites (Antisemiten-Liga), the first German organization committed specifically to combatting the alleged threat to Germany posed by the Jews, and advocating their forced removal from the country.

The term has always referred to prejudice towards Jews alone, and not to other people who speak semitic languages (e.g., Arabs) and this has been the only use of this word for more than a century. In recent decades some people have argued that the term anti-Semitism should be extended to include prejudice against Arabs, since Arabic is a semitic language. However, this usage has not been widely adopted.

Despite the use of the prefix "anti," the terms Semitic and Anti-Semitic are not antonyms. To avoid the confusion of the misnomer, many writers on the subject (such as Emil Fackenheim of the Hebrew University) now favor the unhyphenated term antisemitism.

An alternative term, "Judeophobia", stands for fear or irrational hatred of Jews. It was invented by Leon Pinsker and first appeared in his 1882 pamphlet Autoemancipation (text). As a professional physician, Pinsker preferred the medical term as he knew that a combination of mutually exclusive assertions is a characteristic of a psychological disorder.

Until the term becomes widely applied to other Semites, I see no reason not to continue using it in a Jewish context.

Second, Israel's only claim to form a legitimate state in Palestine is based on divinity. God had "chosen" this land for the Jewish people and they are therefore entitled to it

Wrong. First, the "chosen-ness" doctrine has nothing to do with the land. Second, the claim in part came from the original "promise" to the Jews, but also from the fact that Israel has been a constant fixture in Judaism for thousands of years. Jewish liturgy mentions a return to "Zion" three times a day. I'm not saying that religion justifies doing whatever you want, but there's more to the Jewish connection to Israel than merely "God gave it to us". Jews have been praying to return to "the Holy Land" for almost two millenia- and Zionism did NOT always involve the perception that Jews were "entitled" to the land. You're taking a really wide ideological spectrum here and significantly dumbing it down, possibly to the point of oversimplification and inaccuracy.

even though 1) they had not lived there for thousands of years

Somewhat accurate. There had been a Jewish presence in the region ever since the original Diaspora, although it tended to be pretty small. There was also, as I mentioned, the continuous religious and cultural attachment to the region despite exile.

2) there were already people happily living there at the time of Israel's creation in 1947.

True. Although, to be fair, the population was pretty small- 1 million at the highest estimate. (There's about 10-11 million total population, Israelis and Palestinians, living there today.) So it's not like the population it of itself precluded any further settlement or immigration.

This was the first time a "divine legitimacy" has ever been deemed acceptable

Bull-fucking-shit. Have you done ANY research into world history? Ever hear of the Chinese "mandate of heaven"? How about the Puritans' "legitimacy" for "settling" America? I wonder where that came from? For that matter, what gives Muslims- or any other religious or ethnic group- legitimacy over any of THEIR countries? Most of the countries in the 1900s were either the result of "divine legitimacy" origins, or of "might makes right" conquership. Who were they to lecture people on what legitimacy myth is "good enough"?

Third, the Israeli state is NOT a democracy. It is a theocracy in disguise.

Israel's religious Jews- harshly critical of the secular laws and aspects of the state- would disagree with you.

A state cannot claim to be a democracy and still promote a single religious identity while denying the rights of the arab minority inside their border.

You seem to be confusing the Palestinians, who are not citizens of Israel, with Israeli Arabs, who are. Israeli Arabs do suffer discrimination, and this should be changed, but they DO have rights, and it's unfair and dishonest to say otherwise. I also question how this constitutes proof that Israel is a theocracy.

Israel does this mostly by 1) confiscating land without reimbursement, and 2) diverting water resources away from the arab communities in the hopes of forcing them to relocate.

My impression is that this is mostly in the cases of Palestinians, not actual CITIZENS of Israel. I could be mistaken, however. (Also note that I'm not excusing those actions, merely noting that they don't really tie into your rationale that such activity is "proof" of your argument.)

This doesn't sound so different from the white Apartheid regime of South Africa and their relocation of blacks into "homelands" in order to deprive them of citizenship in their own country.

Faulty comparison. Israel has repeatedly offered various peace deals (although the degree to which such offers have been "generous", etc, can be debated) which included the creation of an independent Palestinian state. I don't seem to recall similar proposals in South Africa.

Israelis look more or less like we do

If your only interaction with "Israelis" is by watching the top government officials on TV. A slight MAJORITY of Israelis are from Arabic and Spanish countries. European Jews have been the political elite since the creation of the state, but this is likely to change in the next twenty years, just like US officials (like citizenship) are no longer limited to white Christian landowning males. Proportionally, Israel's citizenry- and government- are much more racially diverse than America. (The Senate, for instance, has NO black or Hispanic members- despite the fact that they constitute almost 25% of the US population.)

More figures: http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0878575.html

Not only would he lose the Jewish vote in a hertbeat

All 2% of the population :rolleyes:

he would immediately be decried as an anti-semite. Criticizing Israel has always been a touchy subject because of this.

And not helped by the fact that plenty of anti-Semites try to shield themselves from criticism by saying they're only anti-Zionists- often without being challenged or rebuked by ACTUAL anti-Zionists for their hatred and dishonesty.

Fifth, one must understand that terrorist bombings (I do NOT support terrorists, by the way) are done out of a feeling of hopelessness.

To a certain extent, but that isn't sufficient explain terrorism away. It's not just hopelessness, it's also ideology- being trained from an early age that your enemies aren't really human, aren't really "like you", that you and your family will be rewarded either in the present or afterlife for killing them, that you have a religious entitlement to "all" the land, etc... Furthermore, there have been documented cases of privileged people becoming terrorists- the 9/11 hijackers, for instance.

Palestinians (as well as most of the arab and muslim world) see Israel as the imperialist arm of America gradually creeping its way into the Middle East attempting to destroy them and their way of life.

Right, because Israel's clearly repeatedly demonstrated interest in invading the rest of the Middle East and destroying its neighbors.

... Oh wait, I got that backwards. :rolleyes:

Palestinians feel that the international community will not take them seriously (most of Western Europe actually does take them seriously, but America's veto power nullifies this) and they must therefore take their liberation into their own hands.

Bombing civilians doesn't "liberate" anyone. Has the Palestinians' situation improved or deteriorated since the beginning of the Intifada?

Keep in mind, however, that the war between Israel and Palestine has resulted in nearly four times more Palestinian deaths than Israeli deaths, and yet all we hear about on good ol' CNN is innocent Israelis being killed.

I can't comment on that; I tend to bypass most American media (not having regular access to a TV for the past year tends to limit my options, too). I think it's also worth noting that American media tends to like "clean and easy" victims- how many times do you hear about Israeli settlers being killed?

Also, let's not kid ourselves. Whenever casualties are mentioned, it's usually in the context of maybe three sentences being spent on "that other Mid-east mess" for the entirety of the news report. Assuming US media DOES report Israeli casualties more than Palestinian ones, the detail and coverage tends to be so minimal as to greatly reduce any potential sympathy.

Overall, there have been losses and atrocities on both sides, and I'm not entirely sure what can be done about it. Palestine has the support of many members of the security council, but as long as the US continues to veto in support of Israel there will never be a resolution. The US must look over these disagreements more objectively, and not in terms of the loss of votes or image.

See, I look at it a little differently. I think both sides are comitting atrocities, and a big part of the problem is they both have supporters that basically stand behind them NO MATTER WHAT- the US for Israel, the security council for Palestine. You yourself just said both sides are doing wrong. So how is the optimal goal to get the US to side with the Palestinians, fucking Israel over?

I would prefer to have ALL parties try and be more "objective"- and to pressure the involved sides to negotiate a cease-fire and settlement.

Perhaps if Egypt's President Sadat wasn't assinnated there would have been a resolution.

Wrong leader. There was peace with Egypt IN SPITE of his assassination. Perhaps if Israel's RABIN had lived, things would be different today.

I can definately see that nothing will happen as long as Sharon is in power and the U.S. refuses to deal with Yassar Arafat. The man commands great respect from the Palestinian people!

So what? Arafat has also rejected repeated offers of a state in return for ending terrorism AND annulling the right of return. He won't deal, because he's obsessed with being the hero of the Palestinians- when what they need is a pragmatist willing to negotiate.

Many Palestinians have died under Sharon's watch- but their blood is equally, if not more, on Arafat's hands, too. (I'd include Bush in that triad, as well.)

Arafat can't be negotiated with. Which works out well, since neither Bush nor Sharon would probably even try in the first place.

How the fuck can you compare Israel to Nazi Germany. That is shameful. Absolutely shameful.

Wanna know how it works? I'll tell you how it works.

Jesus is crucified
Jews get blamed
Jews are thrown out of nearly European country except Spain
Mass pogroms
Spain kicks Jews out
Mass pogroms
Mass pogroms
Nazi Germany
6 million Jews die
Remaining Jews decide not to sit on their asses and wait for the Messiah to come and instead of letting their religion die out, build it up again
1948- Israel is formed in the place that Jews originally owned, then were conquered, and now own again
1967- Israel, a 19 yr old country is attacked by all of it's bordering countries because they stole "Arab" land (note: compare the size of Israel to the rest of "Arab" land)
Israel wins
"Palestinians" are formed (note: before, the term Palestinian didn't even exist)
Palestinians want West Bank
Instead of trying to cooperate peacefully, Palestinians blow themselves up killing hundreds of Israelis and Palestinian terrorist groups are formed
Not three days can go by without a terrorist attack
Ehud Barak has peace conference with Arafat
In ensuing months, Ehud Barak offers Arafat everything the Palestinians have been demanding (most of the West Bank, receive and resettle refugees, control over Muslim and Christian Quarters of Jerusalem, and U.N. control over the Temple Mount)
Arafat declines this offer
More terrorist attacks
More bloodshed
Ariel Sharon tries to target these terrorists (Unfortunately Palestinian terrorists hide themselves in residential areas)
Ariel Sharon is now a war criminal for trying to protect his country

When the US was attacked by terrorists what did we (try) to do? We went after them. We wanted them dead. But Israel can't go after terrorists that attack the country? I'm sorry. I don't get it.

Arafat is a terrorist, and like it or not, Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East. How DARE you compare it to Nazi Germany. I am horrified.

Indiru,

While I too, have a problem with comparing Israel to Nazi Germany, your "timeline" is significantly inaccurate and skewed, to the point that I don't even know where to begin as far as critiquing it.

Indiru,

While I too, have a problem with comparing Israel to Nazi Germany, your "timeline" is significantly inaccurate and skewed, to the point that I don't even know where to begin as far as critiquing it.

Despite that, Israel was attacked on four different occassions by Arab armies. Luckily they had American tech to back them up and kicked back the hordes. However now both sides (Israel/Palestine) need to sit down and really talk without suicide bombings and rocket attacks into residential areas. Israel needs to again put down its pride and again offer a genuine deal and Palestine needs to accept it. To me both sides are caught up in this never ending cycle of violence and maybe they need it. What would be their identities if Israel didn't have militants trying to destroy them or the Palestinians with a repressive Jewish state needing a holy war to deal with? If there was peace in the Balkins with all the hatred in THAT part of the world than there is no reason why something cannot be accomplished in Israel.

That's incorrect.

Jews were not always hated by Christians; in fact, Christians paid for little attention to Jews after Christ's death because they were spreading his message, his Word, and their faith.

Even today, most Christians are not anti-semetic; when it comes down to anti-semitism, it's all about a secular force - like Hitler - who wanted to wipe out the Jewish race to purify the German one.

Not quite true. For example during the 1st Crusade when the Europeans took Jerusalem, Jews were not allowed back into the city until the Moslems retook the city and allowed them back in. The portrait of the Jews in old Christian history was less than sympathetic and what Hitler tried was not unique.