Zionism=Racism

  • HotCoach

    Posts: 247

    Apr 21, 2009 3:23 AM GMT
    Not talking Israels here just Zionist. Explain to me why taking Palestinian land and forcing them into subjugation isn't racism. Wasn't the taking of native american lands racism?
    Realize this is not a "gay" subject but it is one of if not the most difficult problems of our time.
    Blame the Brits!


  • Bunjamon

    Posts: 3161

    Apr 21, 2009 3:34 AM GMT
    NYT Article on the subject. I feel like this is the event that incited this debate: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/21/world/21geneva.html?hpw

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 21, 2009 4:59 AM GMT
    That is already discussed in this forum:
    US boycotting Iran starring.....at UN racism meeting

    As for the history, see:
    "Palestine" is the Latin/European name for Eretz Yisrael, the Jewish homeland
    - and Arab denials of the existence of "Palestine".


    And should anyone wish to discuss the peace process, we have this RJ forum:
    In search of a solution to the Arab-Israeli conflict: UNSCR 242, Oslo and Camp David/Taba
    (Or: I support the Clinton COMPROMISE parameters. Do you?!)



    Zionism is the belief that Jews have a right to self-determination in their ancient homeland, where Jews have lived - continuously - for over 3300 years.

    Anti-Zionism is the racist belief that Jews, alone amongst the peoples of the world, have no right to self-determination. Anti-Zionism is thus inherently anti-semitic and racist.


    It's curious that the term "anti-semitism" (meaning Jew-hatred) took root as a scientific-sounding euphemism during the enlightenment when it became unfashionable to hate Jews just because they were Jews.

    As "anti-semitism" also became passe, a new euphemism was necessary and the political-sounding "anti-Zionist" was invented.

    Note how thin the transformation was:

    Jews poison wells --> Zionists poison wells
    Jews control the banks --> Zionists control the banks
    Jews control the media --> Zionists control the media


    In pursuit of their hate, "anti-Zionists" like Ahmadinejad deny the Holocaust; and, as we've shamefully seen even amongst our own brothers on RJ, some will perpetrate the ultimate anti-semitic (anti-Jewish) act of attempting to deny that Jews are Jews:
    Judaism is the religion of the Jewish people.
    (Judaism is a religion, Jews are an ethnic group)

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 21, 2009 6:00 AM GMT
    jprichva> I'm really surprised at you, Samer.

    Really? You're surprised? Haven't you been paying attention to the constant stream of drivelelous propaganda and lies-for-the-cause posted by Samer? Seriously, this is is a guy who one day will admit that Jews are an ethnic group... and the next day will spam a paragraph denying that.


    samerphx> Zionist=racism is not anti-Semitic. Because Zionist can be found in many religions and ethnicities.

    Ridiculous. Anti-ZionisM is not anti-ZionisT.

    As I said above, Zionism is the belief that Jews - like other peoples in the world - have a right to self-determination in their ancient homeland. Anti-Zionism isn't something against people who believe that (regardless of religion or ethnicity) but against the idea, which is to say that "anti-Zionists" believe that Jews are not entitled to self-determination. This is why we have seen racists like Samer and drfishman argue that Jews aren't really Jews.


    Samer> not all Jews are Semites, because there are many people converted to Judaism and call themselves Jews.

    As has been repeatedly discussed (did you "forget", again?) there were very few converts and virutally all converted in order to marry someone. drfishman himself told us the rate of conversion was 0.5% and then used bad science/math to argue that 25% of Jews are not at all Jewish.

    In reality the math is much simpler: after 1 generation, the off-spring are (genetically) 50% Jewish. After 2, 75%. After 5, 97%.

    Of course, by modern definitions, it is LANGUAGES not people who are "Semitic". But here is a perfect example of racist Samer trying to argue that Jews aren't really Jews (note that this is a perversion of the "one drop rule", as if anyone who has "one drop" of non-Jewish "blood" - even if 200 generations ago, is therefore not really Jewish.

    Incidentally, if Samer wishes to use the Biblical Anthropological meaning of "Semitic" (descendants of Noah's son Shem) then note that the Philistines and the Canaanites are Hamitic (descendants of Noah's son Ham). Ergo Samer needs to choose between his contradictory claims: either the Palestinian Arabs are "Semitic" or they are descendants of the Canaanites/Philistines and they are Hamitic.

    Samer won't say, because he likes to argue from multiple, if contradicting, premises. So one minute he'll falsely argue that the Palestinian Arabs descend from the Canaanites/Philistines and at the same time he'll argue that the Palestinian Arabs are Semites.

    What is true is that Arabic is a Semitic language.


    Samer> Zionists support war

    No, you're just lying for the cause - again.

    The Zionists accepted the 1923 partition which gave Trans-Jordan 78% of historic Palestine (then not the name of an Arab group but the Latin/European name for Eretz Yisrael, the Jewish homeland). In 1937 the Zionists accepted the Peel Commission's suggestion of a two-state solution (the Arabs rejected it and were amids a 3 year period of violence and terrorism). In 1947, the Zionists accepted the UN partition compromise which saw the Jewish "half" (the 22% of western or cis-Jordanian Palestine) divided again roughly half-and-half (with 80% of the Jewish "quarter" [12%] being the Negev Desert). The Arab parties violently rejected this and immediately began attacking the Jewish community, culminating in an all-out-war upon the departure of British forces. An Arab war with the stated racist purpose of ethnically cleansing the region of Jews, to "throw the Jews into the sea" and dreaming of a "momentous massacre".


    Samer> invade the land of another

    It was 7 Arab armies that invaded Israel the day ry neit declared independence (in accordance with the UN partition compromise resolution).


    Samer> expropriate that land by force

    Repeating your lies doesn't make it true.
    Land was PURCHASED.

    In fact, Palestinian Arabs know this and thus one of the first laws enacted by the PA was to make the sale of land to Jews a capital offense (punishable by deatth).

    Samer> force out its indigenous residents

    Arabs are not "indigenous" to this area nor were they forced out. During the course of the Arab-instigated war some 700,000 Arabs chose to flee (with a minority being expelled due to military necessity).

    No Arab war to destroy Israel and "throw the Jews into the sea" --> no Arab refugees fleeing.

    You are not the victims of Zionism but of your own racism, xenophobia and hate leading to horrible choices - and consequences - decade after decade.


    Samer> create a racist brutal apartheid structure system.

    Israeli Arabs are full citizens with equal protection under the law. They (including women) vote and not only serve in the Knesset (parliament) but also as ministers in the ruling government coalition. They serve in the foreign office, including as ambassadors. They serve in the judiciary, included as justices on the High (supreme) Court - the only such court in the mideast where an Arab citizen can sue his government, live to tell about it and win/lose the case based only on its legal merits.

    Israeli Arabs even serve in the Israel Defence Forces, attaining ranks as high as general, helping to defend their country.


    Samer> how come the Palestinians refugees can't return

    Because there is no such thing under international law as the so-called "right of return". Just as Sudeten Germans can't "return" to the Czech Republic and tens of millions of other refugees in Europe, the Indian sub-continent and the far east couldn't "return".

    The Geneva Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees says that refugees should be made citizens in their new country (and, of course, their descendants aren't refugees but should be citizens in the country in which they - and their parents and now grand-parents - were born).

    Samer is against this because he wants to use the refugees and their descendants as pawns by which to demographically over-run Israel. He doesn't care how many more generations will be condemned to refugee camps.

    Do we really need to rehash all this? You still can't honestly address any of this, can't defend or support your lies, in the other handful of topics in which you spammed them.

    What lies will Samer push next...?
    (Note that he will defend his previous lies with new lies....)
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 21, 2009 7:46 AM GMT
    Once again both sides are hypocritically horrified by the other side, and more than willing to hurl the term racism at the other side while acting hurt that the other side would dare call them racist.

    Honestly, I don't see why people are see keen to interject the racist term into a conversation because it ultimately dooms the conversation into issues of whose black and white, or whose good or bad -- and most conversations are rarely that clear cut when it comes to the topic.

    I don't think that Zionism is inherently racist: it has many failings, and has outlived it's usefulness -- as one of many 19th century European ism's -- but would not say it's racist -- and one of those main failings is as Jprchva notes that it really doesn't have anything to say about Palestinians. And this has always been one of it's failings in that it never has really addressed the issues of what to do with the Palestinians, or the non-Jewish people who were living in Palestine/Isreal -- there have been many proposals from integration, and attempted conversion, to outright expulsion and there are still those who would like the see the Arab citizens of Isreal expelled -- and Netanyahu has never, and still does not, say that he agrees to a two state solution or an independant Palestinian state.

    Neither are the Arabs inherintly racist, anymore than the Jews that is, and the relations with Jews have been largely peaceful or at least better than those between Europeans and Jews for much of their mutual history. To accuse the Arabs of allying themselves with Hitler is not fair, and smacks of racism itself. There were Arabs who certainly had political ties and interest in Hitler, but hardly for anti-semitic purposes, the Arabs are semites as well, but more from the aspect as a possible way of ridding themselves of the British and French colonizers. Certainly there were many more Europeans, other than Germans, who were more than complicit and happy to participate in the destruction of European Jewry than anything the Arabs may have had to do with it -- and Arab Jews were largely quite happy with their status until the formation of Israel and even then most were allowed to immigrate there, and did not suffer the fate of European Jews. In Iran many stayed put until the 1979 revolution, and there are still many Iranian Jews in the US who identify themselves as much 'Persian' as Jewish. Certainly much of the Arab world has bought into Holocaust denials, but this is more a product of the events following WWII than having to do with anything that occurred during the war itself.

    Basically Zionism is Jewish nationalism that grew out of the Jewish experience in Europe and the belief, probably rightly so considering later events that there was no Jewish future in Europe. And it developed along with much of the middle European nationalisms that developed in the late 19th century -- particularly German nationalism. As such it isn't racist, but as with all nationalisms it doesn't tend to take any other nationalism into account, and hence much of its issues with Arabs, and Arab/Palestinian nationalism that developed at a similar if slightly later time and which has had a different focal point and philosophy -- it should be noted that Zionism was a European Jewish phenomenon and there was no nationalistic development within Sephardic Judaism.

    I guess what annoys me for the most part is that I see both sides engaging in the same rhetoric and hypocrisy, and accusing the other side of almost the exact same things -- and you don't get 60 years of conflict with mistakes and poor behaviour on one side; it takes two sides to prolong a conflict this long -- that goes for you as well Jprchva.

    Jprchva, you are quite willing to wail about anti-semitism as if it's a continuation of what existed in Europe, and it isn't -- that largely died with the end of large scale European Jewry. Arab anti-semitism as it is now has to do with the immigration of European Jews to Palestine, and the founding of a Jewish state, and without that emmigration from Europe it probably wouldn't exist as it does now -- in a sense Arab anti-semitism is the result/response of the Zionist experiment in the Middle East, and if Zionism hadn't developed, a definite possibility, you wouldn't have the current issues.

    Jprchva, you've said before that you do have opposition to Israel, but what does that mean? And what is your analysis of Zionism, honest analysis that is of what it is and what it means, and how has that made the current Middle east, and are you really willing to give it a critical examination rather than just throwing around the label of anti-semitism which gets old after a while -- you can only call wolf so many times, particularly when the current Isreali position is not one of weakness, but rather one of strength that has nothing to do with past Jewry.

    So what does it mean to oppose Isreal, and how are particularly non-Jews supposed to oppose Isreal, and that may not always be pretty, and certainly they have right to oppose the country and its policies as do those who support the country and its policies. But there has to be some distinction between anti-Israel or anti-Israeli, and anti-semitic and all the racial baggage that comes with that territory, and I'd like you to illucidate what that difference is rather than merely attacking as your Jewish bias is already evident which reduces your credibility from the start -- note I don't include Caesarea in this because his credibility I already find quite shot, and same with a number of the Arab posters as well, though thy are often less dogmatic than Caesarea.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 21, 2009 10:42 AM GMT
    I think the problem is that no-one can really pin down what Zionism is.

    1) If Zionism is the right of Jews to live in Israel; that's not racist.

    2) If Zionism is the 'right' of Jews to live in Israel at the expense of the Palestinians - that is racist.

    A nice comparison is the Australian 'colour bar' until the seventies, that only allowed whites to emigrate to Australia. That was racist.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 21, 2009 1:38 PM GMT
    Lost_And_Found saidI think the problem is that no-one can really pin down what Zionism is.

    1) If Zionism is the right of Jews to live in Israel; that's not racist.

    2) If Zionism is the 'right' of Jews to live in Israel at the expense of the Palestinians - that is racist.

    A nice comparison is the Australian 'colour bar' until the seventies, that only allowed whites to emigrate to Australia. That was racist.


    I'm sure #1 is the majority of the zionists, but yes there are extremists in everything. And #2 IS racist just like jihadism is.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 21, 2009 1:54 PM GMT
    wrerick> Netanyahu has never, and still does not, say that he agrees to a two state solution or an independant Palestinian state.

    Nonetheless he implemented the Wye River Memorandum back in 1996, including Israeli withdrawals from territories ceded to the PA (as part of a future Palestinian Arab state). More recently, the coalition reached between Likud & Labor is based on continued implemenation of existing agreements (Oslo) which include the stablishment of a Palestinian Arab state.


    WR> Arabs... relations with Jews have been largely peaceful or at least better than those between Europeans and Jews for much of their mutual history.

    The Jewish experience in Arab/Muslim countries, over 1300 years of history, was overall similar to that of Jews in Europe with the exception of the Holocaust (which many of them deny).


    WR> Arab anti-semitism as it is now has to do with the immigration of European Jews to Palestine, and the founding of a Jewish state

    http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=c8eea81f-4540-419e-ad72-ff8ef6ec59c9
    Benny Morris> Palestinian leaders and preachers, guided by history and religion, have traditionally seen the Jews as an inferior race whose proper place was as an abased minority in a Muslim polity; and the present situation, with an Arab minority under Jewish rule, is regarded as a perversion of nature and divine will. As Sheik Sulayman al-Taji, a leading Palestinian notable, declared in a poem in 1913: "Jews, sons of clinking gold ... are the weakest of all peoples and the least of them."


    WR> There were Arabs who certainly had political ties and interest in Hitler, but hardly for anti-semitic purposes

    The Mufti of Jerusalem, the head of the Arab High Committee, spent the war as hitler's guest in Berlin and pleaded with him to bring the "Final Solution" to Mandate Palestine.

    http://tellthechildrenthetruth.com/gallery
    || the Fuhrer would on his own give the Arab world the assurance that its hour of liberation had arrived. Germany's objective would then be solely the destruction of the Jewish element residing in the Arab sphere under the protection of British power. In that hour the Mufti would be the most authoritative spokesman for the Arab world. It would then be his task to set off the Arab operations, which he had secretly prepared.


    http://www.palestinefacts.org/pf_mandate_grand_mufti.php
    || According to documentation from the Nuremberg and Eichmann trials, the Nazi Germany SS helped finance al-Husseini's efforts in the 1936-39 revolt in Palestine. Adolf Eichmann actually visited Palestine and met with al-Husseini at that time and subsequently maintained regular contact with him later in Berlin.

    || In 1940, al-Husseini requested the Axis powers to acknowledge the Arab right: "...to settle the question of Jewish elements in Palestine and other Arab countries in accordance with the national and racial interests of the Arabs and along the lines similar to those used to solve the Jewish question in Germany and Italy."

    || While in Baghdad... al-Husseini aided the pro-Nazi revolt of 1941. He then spent the rest of World War II as Hitler's special guest in Berlin, advocating the extermination of Jews in radio broadcasts back to the Middle East and recruiting Balkan Muslims for infamous SS "mountain divisions" that tried to wipe out Jewish communities throughout the region.

    || At the Nuremberg Trials, Eichmann's deputy Dieter Wisliceny (subsequently executed as a war criminal) testified: "The Mufti was one of the initiators of the systematic extermination of European Jewry and had been a collaborator and adviser of Eichmann and Himmler in the execution of this plan. ... He was one of Eichmann's best friends and had constantly incited him to accelerate the extermination measures. I heard him say, accompanied by Eichmann, he had visited incognito the gas chamber of Auschwitz."

    || With the collapse of Nazi Germany in 1945, the Mufti moved to Egypt where he was received as a national hero. After the war al-Husseini was indicted by Yugoslavia for war crimes, but escaped prosecution. The Mufti was never tried because the Allies were afraid of the storm in the Arab world if the hero of Arab nationalism was treated as a war criminal.


    WR> the Arabs are semite

    In modern usage, the word "Semitic" refers to LANGUAGE groups, not people.
    Arabic is a Semitic language.


    WR> Zionism was a European Jewish phenomenon and there was no nationalistic development within Sephardic Judaism

    Nachum Sokolov, who became President of the Zionist World Congress in 1906, famously remarked of Sepharadi Jews: "We became Zionists, you were born Zionists". That was the inspiration for a recent book: You Were Born Zionists: the Sephardim in Eretz Israel in Zionism and the Hebrew Revival During the Ottoman Empire, by Yizhak Bezalel (Ben-Zvi Institute, 2007)


    WR> one of [Zionism's] main failings is... that it really doesn't have anything to say about Palestinians

    http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=c8eea81f-4540-419e-ad72-ff8ef6ec59c9
    Benny Morris> It is worth noting, at this point, a major asymmetry in the evolution of the Jewish national movement and the Palestinian national movement. The Zionists, too, at first sought sovereignty over the whole of the land. As one early Zionist, Ze'ev Dubnow, put it in October 1882, the first year of Zionist settlement in Palestine: "The ultimate goal ... is, in time, to take over the Land of Israel and to restore to the Jews the political independence they have been deprived of for these two thousand years... The Jews will yet arise and, arms in hand (if need be), declare that they are the masters of their ancient homeland." But over the decades the Zionists came to recognize that the land was inhabited by hundreds of thousands of Arabs who devised their own collective identity and began to resist the Jewish influx. Following the start of the Arab Revolt, the Zionist movement formally accepted--in 1937, in response to the Peel Commission recommendations--the principle of partition, meaning a division of Palestine between its two communities. And in 1947, the movement accepted both the principle of partition and the specific United Nations General Assembly Resolution 181, which, positing the establishment of two states, awarded the Zionists some 55 percent of Palestine (most of it in the Negev desert) and the Palestinian Arabs some 40 percent.

    Benny Morris> The shift in Zionist ideology from an ideologically pristine demand for all of Palestine to a sober acceptance of partition was not paralleled in the development of the Palestinian national movement. This asymmetry has underpinned the conflict since the 1930s.

  • dglater

    Posts: 255

    Apr 21, 2009 2:16 PM GMT
    anther thread? really? couldn't you just post something in the 4 already exciting threads?

    Zionism is not racism, it has nothing to do with the Palestinians, its the believe of a Jewish country, just like there are over 50 Muslim countries, its the believe to have a Jewish country.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 21, 2009 2:25 PM GMT
    awwwwwwww gawwwwwwwdddddddddddd not another one!!!!!!! can we ask to have this deleted or combined with the several others that i've noticed
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 21, 2009 5:02 PM GMT
    I think we should keep them in the news and events section, or everyone'll go mad.

    raising_gay_flag_82113550_std.jpg

    News and Events is the place to change the World.

    (Or, you know, chat about changing the world in the middle of the night).
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 21, 2009 5:21 PM GMT
    hitler's book "Mein Kampf" has been a best seller in the Arab/Muslim world for decades and still is.

    Neither was the "blood libel" foreign outside of Europe:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Damascus_affair
    || Massacres of Jews by Muslims were recorded in Aleppo (1850, 1875), Damascus (1840, 1848, 1890), Beirut (1862, 1874), Dayr al-Qamar (1847), Jerusalem (1847), Cairo (1844, 1890, 1901-02), Mansura (1877), Alexandria (1870, 1882, 1901-07), Port Said (1903, 1908 ), Damanhur (1871, 1873, 1877, 1891), Istanbul (1870, 1874), Buyukdere (1864), Kuzguncuk (1866), Eyub (1868 ), Edirne (1872), Izmir (1872, 1874) - these are just key cases.

    I'll stress for wrerick's sake that all of these were long before the establishment of Israel, even before the Mandate and Balfour Declaration. Nor was this new in the 19th century, with a long list of cases in the centuries before that.

  • dglater

    Posts: 255

    Apr 21, 2009 8:59 PM GMT
    samper... should i post what arabs write about jews when they protest? do you think the pics you posted, or that i can post is constructive in any shape of form?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 22, 2009 1:32 AM GMT
    Samer is just showing us, again, how drunk he is on his own kool-aid.
    As usual he confuses the exception as the rule.
    Which is why he's spammed the same 3 pictures he did a year ago.

    This racist would mislead the innocent reader and have him judge the entire nation of Israel based on graffiti? Never mind that JDL (who signed that graffiti), at the height of its popularity more than 15 years ago, could only muster 1 (out of 120) seats in the Knesset? Less then 1% of the vote! Since then it was banned from the Israeli political system.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 22, 2009 1:48 PM GMT
    Looks like Samer had an extra helping of kool aid for dinner last night.
    What on earth do people of "Jewish descent in the Germany military" have to do with Zionism or Israel?


    samerphx> [source] is run by Zionist

    Poor Samer, still doesn't understand that just because he claims a source is "Zionist" doesn't make what it says wrong. Indeed, it is precisely because he can't show that what it said is wrong that he turns to an ad hominem against the source itself.

    Consider that any source that doesn't say what Samer wants to believe is thus automatically wrong. (After all, don't the Jews, I mean Zionists, control not just the banks and media, but the internet, too?)

    Of course plenty of other sources confirm what that source said, that the Palestinian Arab Mufti of Jerusalem allied himself with hitler, spent much of the war in Berlin, and begged him to bring the "Final Solution" to Mandate Palestine.

    mufti.jpg

    2-mufti2_jpg_jpg_jpg.jpg

    Grossmufti-inspecting-ss-recruits.jpg

    mufti_inspecting2.jpg

    It's interesting to note how Samer has nothing of substance to say about my previous post other than to cry about one source being "Zionist".

    Samer, perhaps you wish to try again?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 25, 2009 9:36 PM GMT
    We can not generalize and say that Arabs were supportive of Nazi germany, and if some were in favor of germany, it has nothing to do with the holocaust and the jews.
    same as saying that jews were supportive of Nazi germany if we simply know the fact that jews did serve in the nazi army.
    "The common public notion is that no one of Jewish descent would have ever been allowed to serve in the Nazi regime and, if discovered, would be immediately deported to a forced labor or extermination/concentration camp. This was not the case. What is even more startling is that Adolf Hitler was aware of this and for a while allowed them to serve."
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 26, 2009 1:51 AM GMT
    DF> We can not generalize
    SP> I am trying to explain that

    This is hilarious coming from propagandists who routinely present an exception and generalize a "rule" from it.

    Just above Samer was caught doing so, presenting JDL graffiti as if it was common and as representative of Israel... despite the fact that at the height of its popularity Kach/JDL only received 1% of the popular vote - and then it was banned from Israeli politics for being a racist party. As usual, when we take an honest look at the data (rather than selectively focusing on an exception) we see it shows the exact opposite of what they attempt to misrepresent.


    DF> We can not generalize and say that Arabs were supportive of Nazi germany, and if some were in favor of germany, it has nothing to do with the holocaust and the jews

    I made no such generalization - which is why (as usual) they don't bother quoting what I did say and just present their straw man non-argument.

    It's really just a weak attempt at damage control since the last non-argument was that I used a "bad" source (it didn't agree with them) but as we can see, they still can't argue against the truth of what that source said (and other sources confirm).


    Now let's look at what I DID say:

    The Palestinian Arab Mufti of Jerusalem allied himself with hitler, spent much of the war in Berlin, and begged him to bring the "Final Solution" to Mandate Palestine.

    See? No generalization at all.
    They were just hearing the voices in their heads, applying their modus operandi even when I didn't.

    Is this comparable to some random people of Jewish descent doing anything?
    Of course not. The Mufti was also the head of the Arab Higher Committee - the political body which represented the Arabs of Mandate Palestine.

    The dishonest exercise our resident propagandists are engaging in is like saying that we should disregard what George Bush said and did as President because John Doe (an American!) disagreed with him and thus all we can say is that America is divided.


    Let's further deconstruct the contradictions and lies:

    DF> "The common public notion is that no one of Jewish descent...."

    Look how DF is arguing from multiple and contradicting premises.
    According to him "Jewish" isn't an ethnicity just a religion.
    So how can one be of "Jewish descent"?
    DF has been arguing, ad nauseum, that either one is Jewish or not.
    These people had converted to Christianity, so what's the big deal?
    Oh, they were still Jewish by ethnicity!!


    DF> "Adolf Hitler was aware of this and for a while allowed them to serve."

    So what? He also allowed, for a while, gay people to serve. Even the head of the Sturmabteilung, Ernst Rohm, was openly gay. And then he was executed and we all know the rest of the story (in both cases). Looks like you-know-who was just trying to pass another exception as a rule.


    SP> Mufti of Jerusalem doesn't represent all the Palestinian people. He consider himself Ottoman nationality.

    That's rich. He was the leader of the Arabs of Mandate Palestine. The funniest thing again is the contradiction. DF was just arguing that that Mufti formed the AHC to oppose the Ottomans. Obviously both DF's and SP's claims can't both be right, but you won't see them disagreeing or debating with each other (each will accept the lies of the other - for the cause). Worse yet, they are both wrong - and again futily trying to lie for damage control pruposes.

    Edward Said> Hajj Amin al-Husayni represented the Palestinian Arab national consensus, had the backing of the Palestinian political parties that functioned in Palestine, and was recognized in some form by Arab governments as the voice of the Palestinian people.

    Indeed, you can still see Husseini's policy's in today's politics:

    || [he] defined all competing nationalist views and actions as treasonous. [...] Patronizing a Jewish doctor, employing a Jewish worker or being employed by a Jew—all became illegitimate. Thus, Husseini's uncompromising maximalist positions, alongside his camp's unwillingness to tolerate the views of its opponents, paradoxically ended up expanding the definition of traitor and collaborator.

    We've already seen Samer attempt to dismiss non-maximalist Palestinian Arabs as "traitors" and in the territories Hamas has executed opponents by torturing them to death and throwing people off tall buildings.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 30, 2009 2:01 PM GMT
    Samer> Look like caesarea is saying Palestinians are bunch of NAZI?

    Only an idiot and a liar-for-the-cause like you would attempt to misrepresent what I said in such a way.

    Samer> I think

    Doubtful. You regurgitate.


    Samer> After being lied to by the British and the French that they would be promised independence if they fought against the Ottomans

    The Arabs, excluding the Shariff Hussein band in the Hejaz, fought with the Ottomans and against the British and French. The promises made to Hussein were kept.


    Samer> execpt one dude

    This "one dude" happened to be the leader the Arab Higher Committee, the organization that represented the Arabs of Mandate Palestine.


    Samer> Not all Palestinians support Grand Mufti of Jerusalem

    Of course the Jews in Mandate Palestine didn't support him, but he did have a wide base of support from the Arabs in Palestine. Were any of them critical of his personal friendship with hitler or the war crimes for which he was wanted?

  • Webster666

    Posts: 9217

    May 01, 2009 2:18 AM GMT
    Oh, lord, here we go again.
    Why do we have to have this same argument every other month ?
    And, no matter how much we argue about it, we'll never agree.

    Zionism, Shmionism.
    Like it or not, Israel is here to stay.
    Get used to it.

    35d98uc.jpg
  • coolarmydude

    Posts: 9190

    May 01, 2009 2:33 AM GMT
    YO! CHIZZAD!!!!! I NEED HELP!!!


    fire_extinguishers_modelCO2.jpg


    61nFrOYpe9L._SL500_AA280_.jpg
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 01, 2009 5:06 AM GMT
    Queers Undermining Israeli Terror (QUIT) seeks to trade on its nominal-gay identity to convince other gay people that Israel is a bad country - while paying no attention to the life-threatening discrimination against gay people in the PA and neighboring countries.


    Samer> "Israel decriminalised homosexuality in 1988 and has since passed several laws recognising gay rights"

    Exactly. Furthermore:

    || Israeli court rulings in recent years have granted inheritance rights to gay couples and recognised same-sex marriages performed abroad.

    Israel also recognizes common-law gay marriages.

    || Last week [Feb. 2008], Israel's attorney general ruled same-sex couples could adopt.

    ProgressiveIsrael.jpg
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 01, 2009 12:23 PM GMT
    Hasn't everything that could possibly be said on this topic already been said?
    These threads show us how foolish it is to hope there will ever be peace, much less brotherhood, in the Middle East.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 01, 2009 3:04 PM GMT

    Samerphx> Homosexual in the West Bank is legal and I am not sure about Gaza because it rule by Hamas.

    Killing homosexuals in the West Bank (and especially Gaza) is just as "legal", which is why gay people in the disputed territories seek refuge in... Israel.

    Note that both of the Palestinian LGBT organizations which Samer listed are located not in the PA but in Israel.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 01, 2009 11:09 PM GMT
    As usual, Samer blatantly lies by presenting exceptions as the rule.

    One could just as well show a clip of Rev. Phelps - but that isn't representative.
    (Wow; Samer's tactics are the same as the homophobes in clips like "The Gay Agenda".)


    Samer> Homosexual is legal (welcome) in the West Bank and there is no law that protect or defend homosexual, because Palestine is not even independent yet.

    Ridiculous. The PA has laws (e.g. the death penalty for selling land to Jews), but none which protect gay rights and homosexuals have been incarcerated even in the so-called "West Bank".

    I'm not even going to provide a link because there are so many.
    Let Google do it for you:
    http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=homosexuality+in+the+palestinian+territories&aq=f&oq=

    Once again we see that you can't trust anything Samer says.
    He'll say anything, even blatantly lie, for the cause.


    Samer> Israel is not that perfect either. Go to Jerusalem or anywhere in Israel. There always violence.

    No one said Israel was perfect, but there is very little violence directed at gay people in Israel. Much of the violence in Israel is perpetrated by the terrorists that are your heroes.


    Samer> Gay in the United States have more rights than Gay in Israel

    False. As already noted (by your own article!), Israel recognizes gay marriages performed abroad and also in-state common-law marriages (which in Israel only require a couple to be living together and functioning as a household, no 7 year requirement as in other countries). Gays in Israel get pensions and fringe benefits, can adopt, etc.

    Obviously one can argue the point, but I'd say that Israel is in the top-10 countries in the world in which to live if you're gay.

    PA is probably in the bottom 10%, especially Gaza (where Hamas isn't so much fighting for "freedom" but for the right to impose its own oppressive hegemony - which is more tyranical than the PA was, which was more tyranical than Israeli rule was).


  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 02, 2009 4:25 AM GMT
    Once again we see Samer arguing from contradicting premises:

    samerphx> Homosexual in the West Bank is legal

    Can he cite any laws??

    samerphx> in the West Bank and there is no law that protect or defend homosexual, because Palestine is not even independent yet.

    That, of course, was total BS blathered to avoid having to cite a law to support what he had just said. But then the argument goes circular:

    samer> "Male homosexuality is illegal in Gaza, with laws dating to the British Criminal Code Ordinance of 1936. However, it is reported to be legal in the West Bank."

    Samer is quoting Wikipedia - which he claims is not reputable.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_rights_in_Palestine

    But let's take a look at the very next sentence in his soruce (which he is selectively cherry-picking):

    || Palestine has no civil right laws that protect LGBT people from discrimination or harassment.

    || a handful of LGBT-organizations have arisen to aid LGBT Arabs and Palestinians, all of which are headquartered in Israel

    Remember those organizations which Samer mentioned but neglected to say that they were in Israel (which he - to incite hate - falsely claims is "violent" toward homosexuals)? His source exposes him on this, too:

    || Some LGBT Palestinians have fled, legally or illegally, mostly to Israel's urban centers, like Tel Aviv

    Samer, why aren't the Palestinian LGBT organizations based in Ramallah or Nablus?