[quote]thethirdruffian wrote:
[quote]EvenIfItsSushi wrote:
[quote]pat wrote:
Ug, I wish Biden were president.[/quote]
Cause a Jewish man would ‘do the right thing’ and stand by Israel? Not sure how long this idea will hold. Jewish people are fast drifting away from supporting Zionism these days.[/quote]
Biden is Jewish? Someone tell his Priest!
I apologise. Factual error here my bad. He is indeed a Christian.
[quote]EvenIfItsSushi wrote:
[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
Perhaps EvenIfItsSushi Calls Spain “Al-Aldalus” or at least “The Caliphate of Cordoba.”
If so, then he is at least intellectually consistent in the "once-conquered-by-Islam, always “Dar-al-Islam” and can call Judea and Samaria the “West Bank” if he wishes, no matter how brief the invasion of Jordan and resulting expulsion of the native Jewish peoples.
If does not call Spain “Al-Aldalus,” and he imposes a double standard on Jewish people, well, then, we all know what he is.
[/quote]
This is comedy. Where do you get this stuff?[/quote]
Your posts. They’re a gold mine.
So, back to the point. Do you call Spain “Al-Aldalus” also?
Or do you reserve Arabic nomenclature for areas of Israel?
[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
[quote]EvenIfItsSushi wrote:
[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
Perhaps EvenIfItsSushi Calls Spain “Al-Aldalus” or at least “The Caliphate of Cordoba.”
If so, then he is at least intellectually consistent in the "once-conquered-by-Islam, always “Dar-al-Islam” and can call Judea and Samaria the “West Bank” if he wishes, no matter how brief the invasion of Jordan and resulting expulsion of the native Jewish peoples.
If does not call Spain “Al-Aldalus,” and he imposes a double standard on Jewish people, well, then, we all know what he is.
[/quote]
This is comedy. Where do you get this stuff?[/quote]
Your posts. They’re a gold mine.
So, back to the point. Do you call Spain “Al-Aldalus” also?
Or do you reserve Arabic nomenclature for areas of Israel?
[/quote]
Of course I don’t. I call Spain Spain.
The West Bank is not part of Israel. It is part of Palestine. Hence I call it the West Bank. Only right-wing Zionists call it Judea and Samaria.
Maybe you can answer me. What is the difference between Zionism and racial/religious nationalism? And how is Zionism not racist?
lol
ITT:
Sushi: yourz a bunch of racistz
TTR & JB: Talk about a bunch of interesting history and factual information
Sushi: But dah racism!!! DAH RACISM!
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
lol
ITT:
Sushi: What is the difference between Zionism and racism?
TTR & JB: Talk utter rubbish and evade question.
Sushi: What is the difference between Zionism and racism?[/quote]
Fixed that for you 
[quote]EvenIfItsSushi wrote:
Fixed that for you :)[/quote]
You can delude yourself all you want. There isn’t anyone here who doesn’t see through your shit.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]EvenIfItsSushi wrote:
Fixed that for you :)[/quote]
You can delude yourself all you want. There isn’t anyone here who doesn’t see through your shit.
[/quote]
What do you see?
Also can you answer my question?
[quote]EvenIfItsSushi wrote:
Sushi: What is the difference between Zionism and racism?[/quote]
[/quote]
But, as to the point of “is the law of return” racist:
Jewish is not a race. Case in point, Drake. He’s black, by the way. Converts also count. For example, an Apache who converts to Judaism could immigrate to Israel. I happen to known such a man very well. He won’t go, however, in that he’d have to leave behind his impressive firearm collection. Anyway, race is not the issue.
But more to the point, the Law of Return is just another example of “Lex sanguinis,” which is probably the oldest form of permitted immigration — i.e., if you are from that country’s ethnic group, you can come home and become a citizen.
Most of the countries in the world that permit immigration follow Lex sanguinis in some form or fashion, and include: Armenia, Bulgaria, Croatia, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Greece, Haiti, Hungary, India, Ireland, Iran, Italy, Kiribati, Liberia, Lithuania, Philippines, Poland, Rwanda, Serbia, Slovakia, South Korea, Switzerland, Tunisia, Turkey, and the Ukraine.
So I guess you stay up late at night condemning Ireland and Poland as well as Israel for lex sanguinis? If not, well, that’s . . . . interesting.
[quote]thethirdruffian wrote:
[quote]EvenIfItsSushi wrote:
Sushi: What is the difference between Zionism and racism?[/quote]
But, as to the point of “is the law of return” racist:
Jewish is not a race. Case in point, Drake. He’s black, by the way. Converts also count. For example, an Apache who converts to Judaism could immigrate to Israel. I happen to known such a man very well. He won’t go, however, in that he’d have to leave behind his impressive firearm collection. Anyway, race is not the issue.
But more to the point, the Law of Return is just another example of “Lex sanguinis,” which is probably the oldest form of permitted immigration — i.e., if you are from that country’s ethnic group, you can come home and become a citizen.
Most of the countries in the world that permit immigration follow Lex sanguinis in some form or fashion, and include: Armenia, Bulgaria, Croatia, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Greece, Haiti, Hungary, India, Ireland, Iran, Italy, Kiribati, Liberia, Lithuania, Philippines, Poland, Rwanda, Serbia, Slovakia, South Korea, Switzerland, Tunisia, Turkey, and the Ukraine.
So I guess you stay up late at night condemning Ireland and Poland as well as Israel for lex sanguinis? If not, well, that’s . . . . interesting.[/quote]
EDITED quoting only.
Well this is one aspect (a minor part of it). I certainly don’t agree with what you say though. Israel has only existed for ~60 years. Until recently not many Israelis have migrated away - so logically not that many can be returning. Essentially the Israeli version of “right of return” is deliberately miss-worded. It should be “right to immigrate”.
The main aspect of Zionist racism is the elephant in the room. The way the Israeli right treats and regards the Palestinians.
P.S. Do you think that Jewish is an ethnic group? Your point 2 says no. Your point 3 says yes… You seem confused here.
[quote]EvenIfItsSushi wrote:
Jewish is an ethnic group? Your point 2 says no. Your point 3 says yes… You seem confused here.[/quote]
Race (point 2) does not equate with ethnicity (point 3).
So, I guess you will spend the night complaining about basically every other country’s immigration laws, right?
[quote]thethirdruffian wrote:
[quote]EvenIfItsSushi wrote:
Jewish is an ethnic group? Your point 2 says no. Your point 3 says yes… You seem confused here.[/quote]
Race (point 2) does not equate with ethnicity (point 3).
So, I guess you will spend the night complaining about basically every other country’s immigration laws, right?
[/quote]
Did you read any of my post other than the last sentence? Or is that the only bit you could hold in you head at any one time? You have in no way answered my question.
How is Zionism different to racially based nationalism? Or any other form of racism?
Marxian systems theory aside…
Iran conducts airstrikes against ISIS targets in Iraq. This is an interesting development.
[quote]EvenIfItsSushi wrote:
[quote]thethirdruffian wrote:
[quote]EvenIfItsSushi wrote:
Jewish is an ethnic group? Your point 2 says no. Your point 3 says yes… You seem confused here.[/quote]
Race (point 2) does not equate with ethnicity (point 3).
So, I guess you will spend the night complaining about basically every other country’s immigration laws, right?
[/quote]
Did you read any of my post other than the last sentence? Or is that the only bit you could hold in you head at any one time? You have in no way answered my question.
How is Zionism different to racially based nationalism? Or any other form of racism?[/quote]
TTR is many things, but stupid is not one.
The problem with your post is it presupposes so many objectively false statements that it’s nearly impossible to answer without writing a book.
The “racism” issue has been clearly dismissed as a fallacy, in that there is no “race” involved. The closest genetic relatives of Ashkenazi (and Sephardic and Mizrahim) Jewish people are Arabs ---- that is, the what you are calling “Palestinians.”
Now, in reality, if you ask an Israeli Arab, a Syrian Arab, any Egyptian (Arab or Berber or whatnot), they will tell you there is no such thing as a “Palestinian.”
The Arab population of the area (excepting Bedouins) are generally recent immigrants from what-is-now Jordon and Syria who came to Judea, Samaria, and Gaza during the 1800s, attracted by work projects by various Zionist and pre-Zionist groups.
Certainly some lived in Jerusalem, as Jerusalem was a mixed city of Jews, Arabs (mixed Christian and Muslim) until the Muslim pogrom of 1929 whereupon the Muslims (with help of the local constabulary) decided to kill the Jewish population and Christian populations. This wanton murder resulted in “Arab East Jerusalem.”
But back to “Palestinians” that you claim are being treated unfairly.
Obviously, “Palestinian” does not include the Arab citizens of Israel who are quite happy being Israeli, have the highest standard of living and education of any Arab population in the World, and have the same (actually greater) protections under Israeli law.
So, I guess you mean the Arabs that did not want Israel to exist and take an oath to kill every Jew are “Palestinians.”
You see, going back in history a bit, when the Ottoman Empire was imploding and spinning off various satellite states it had invaded over many hundreds of years, there came the question of Israel. Again, this was a mixed area.
Because the Muslim Arabs did not play nice with others (example: 1929 pogrom), a decision was made for a two state solution. The Jewish citizens of the area were game.
But certain of the Arabs would not stand for a separate Jewish state. They attacked, killed, and did all sorts of bad things for 70 years or so, eventually resulting in the borders you see today.
Israel is more than game to letting the Arabs have a separate state, provided the separate state is not just going to invade Israel when it has a change.
The Arabs refuse to have a separate state, and basically demand all the Jews in Israel die.
In short, Israel is bordered by a genocidal group of people and, while you can quibble about doing better, Israel has been more restrained than any country in the history of the world when dealing with complete nutjobs who want us dead. If Mexico was lobbing artillery shells into the USA, I guarantee you the USA would invade or bomb back.
Is it “racist” to not let your neighbor kill you? I don’t think so.
So, in sum, your question made no sense. Israel is not a racist state. All peoples in Israel have the same rights, and, indeed, are freer than in most countries in the world, with ample minority protections. The immigration policy is not materially different from most country’s immigration policies. And Israel has been extremely restrained in dealing with a neighboring population that espouses (and puts into action) religion-fueled genocidal nonsense, which no other country would tolerate.
[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
[quote]EvenIfItsSushi wrote:
[quote]thethirdruffian wrote:
[quote]EvenIfItsSushi wrote:
Jewish is an ethnic group? Your point 2 says no. Your point 3 says yes… You seem confused here.[/quote]
Race (point 2) does not equate with ethnicity (point 3).
So, I guess you will spend the night complaining about basically every other country’s immigration laws, right?
[/quote]
Did you read any of my post other than the last sentence? Or is that the only bit you could hold in you head at any one time? You have in no way answered my question.
How is Zionism different to racially based nationalism? Or any other form of racism?[/quote]
TTR is many things, but stupid is not one.
The problem with your post is it presupposes so many objectively false statements that it’s nearly impossible to answer without writing a book.
The “racism” issue has been clearly dismissed as a fallacy, in that there is no “race” involved. The closest genetic relatives of Ashkenazi (and Sephardic and Mizrahim) Jewish people are Arabs ---- that is, the what you are calling “Palestinians.”
Now, in reality, if you ask an Israeli Arab, a Syrian Arab, any Egyptian (Arab or Berber or whatnot), they will tell you there is no such thing as a “Palestinian.”
The Arab population of the area (excepting Bedouins) are generally recent immigrants from what-is-now Jordon and Syria who came to Judea, Samaria, and Gaza during the 1800s, attracted by work projects by various Zionist and pre-Zionist groups.
Certainly some lived in Jerusalem, as Jerusalem was a mixed city of Jews, Arabs (mixed Christian and Muslim) until the Muslim pogrom of 1929 whereupon the Muslims (with help of the local constabulary) decided to kill the Jewish population and Christian populations. This wanton murder resulted in “Arab East Jerusalem.”
But back to “Palestinians” that you claim are being treated unfairly.
Obviously, “Palestinian” does not include the Arab citizens of Israel who are quite happy being Israeli, have the highest standard of living and education of any Arab population in the World, and have the same (actually greater) protections under Israeli law.
So, I guess you mean the Arabs that did not want Israel to exist and take an oath to kill every Jew are “Palestinians.”
You see, going back in history a bit, when the Ottoman Empire was imploding and spinning off various satellite states it had invaded over many hundreds of years, there came the question of Israel. Again, this was a mixed area.
Because the Muslim Arabs did not play nice with others (example: 1929 pogrom), a decision was made for a two state solution. The Jewish citizens of the area were game.
But certain of the Arabs would not stand for a separate Jewish state. They attacked, killed, and did all sorts of bad things for 70 years or so, eventually resulting in the borders you see today.
Israel is more than game to letting the Arabs have a separate state, provided the separate state is not just going to invade Israel when it has a change.
The Arabs refuse to have a separate state, and basically demand all the Jews in Israel die.
In short, Israel is bordered by a genocidal group of people and, while you can quibble about doing better, Israel has been more restrained than any country in the history of the world when dealing with complete nutjobs who want us dead. If Mexico was lobbing artillery shells into the USA, I guarantee you the USA would invade or bomb back.
Is it “racist” to not let your neighbor kill you? I don’t think so.
So, in sum, your question made no sense. Israel is not a racist state. All peoples in Israel have the same rights, and, indeed, are freer than in most countries in the world, with ample minority protections. The immigration policy is not materially different from most country’s immigration policies. And Israel has been extremely restrained in dealing with a neighboring population that espouses (and puts into action) religion-fueled genocidal nonsense, which no other country would tolerate.[/quote]
I know you are Israeli… But do you really believe this?
[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
If Mexico was lobbing artillery shells into the USA, I guarantee you the USA would invade or bomb back.
[/quote]
We would have unequivocally fucked them up and set back their “civilization” a couple hundred years.
We dropped bombs on Japan that laid the worst devastation the world had seen from a single act at that point in time…
Anyone that thinks we wouldn’t respond excessively more heavy handed than Israel does, to even less provocation from a bordering nation, and then write songs about how much we totally devastated their entire way of life is delusional.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
If Mexico was lobbing artillery shells into the USA, I guarantee you the USA would invade or bomb back.
[/quote]
We would have unequivocally fucked them up and set back their “civilization” a couple hundred years.
We dropped bombs on Japan that laid the worst devastation the world had seen from a single act at that point in time…
Anyone that thinks we wouldn’t respond excessively more heavy handed than Israel does, to even less provocation from a bordering nation, and then write songs about how much we totally devastated their entire way of life is delusional. [/quote]
Lol, no kidding.
Pearl Harbor: Utterly destroy Japan’s presence in the Pacific and drop two A bombs for good measure.
9/11: 10+ years occupying Afghanistan & Iraq.
So ya, go ahead Mexico, I like churros as much as the next guy…
[quote]EvenIfItsSushi wrote:
[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
[quote]EvenIfItsSushi wrote:
[quote]thethirdruffian wrote:
[quote]EvenIfItsSushi wrote:
Jewish is an ethnic group? Your point 2 says no. Your point 3 says yes… You seem confused here.[/quote]
Race (point 2) does not equate with ethnicity (point 3).
So, I guess you will spend the night complaining about basically every other country’s immigration laws, right?
[/quote]
Did you read any of my post other than the last sentence? Or is that the only bit you could hold in you head at any one time? You have in no way answered my question.
How is Zionism different to racially based nationalism? Or any other form of racism?[/quote]
TTR is many things, but stupid is not one.
The problem with your post is it presupposes so many objectively false statements that it’s nearly impossible to answer without writing a book.
The “racism” issue has been clearly dismissed as a fallacy, in that there is no “race” involved. The closest genetic relatives of Ashkenazi (and Sephardic and Mizrahim) Jewish people are Arabs ---- that is, the what you are calling “Palestinians.”
Now, in reality, if you ask an Israeli Arab, a Syrian Arab, any Egyptian (Arab or Berber or whatnot), they will tell you there is no such thing as a “Palestinian.”
The Arab population of the area (excepting Bedouins) are generally recent immigrants from what-is-now Jordon and Syria who came to Judea, Samaria, and Gaza during the 1800s, attracted by work projects by various Zionist and pre-Zionist groups.
Certainly some lived in Jerusalem, as Jerusalem was a mixed city of Jews, Arabs (mixed Christian and Muslim) until the Muslim pogrom of 1929 whereupon the Muslims (with help of the local constabulary) decided to kill the Jewish population and Christian populations. This wanton murder resulted in “Arab East Jerusalem.”
But back to “Palestinians” that you claim are being treated unfairly.
Obviously, “Palestinian” does not include the Arab citizens of Israel who are quite happy being Israeli, have the highest standard of living and education of any Arab population in the World, and have the same (actually greater) protections under Israeli law.
So, I guess you mean the Arabs that did not want Israel to exist and take an oath to kill every Jew are “Palestinians.”
You see, going back in history a bit, when the Ottoman Empire was imploding and spinning off various satellite states it had invaded over many hundreds of years, there came the question of Israel. Again, this was a mixed area.
Because the Muslim Arabs did not play nice with others (example: 1929 pogrom), a decision was made for a two state solution. The Jewish citizens of the area were game.
But certain of the Arabs would not stand for a separate Jewish state. They attacked, killed, and did all sorts of bad things for 70 years or so, eventually resulting in the borders you see today.
Israel is more than game to letting the Arabs have a separate state, provided the separate state is not just going to invade Israel when it has a change.
The Arabs refuse to have a separate state, and basically demand all the Jews in Israel die.
In short, Israel is bordered by a genocidal group of people and, while you can quibble about doing better, Israel has been more restrained than any country in the history of the world when dealing with complete nutjobs who want us dead. If Mexico was lobbing artillery shells into the USA, I guarantee you the USA would invade or bomb back.
Is it “racist” to not let your neighbor kill you? I don’t think so.
So, in sum, your question made no sense. Israel is not a racist state. All peoples in Israel have the same rights, and, indeed, are freer than in most countries in the world, with ample minority protections. The immigration policy is not materially different from most country’s immigration policies. And Israel has been extremely restrained in dealing with a neighboring population that espouses (and puts into action) religion-fueled genocidal nonsense, which no other country would tolerate.[/quote]
I know you are Israeli… But do you really believe this?[/quote]
There is nothing to “believe.” Those are all objective facts (admittedly condensed down from a 1,000 page response to a single post).
Look, I get it. Facts don’t correspond to the pablum fed to you in some liberal arts school. Cognitive dissonance is a hard thing.
[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
[quote]EvenIfItsSushi wrote:
I know you are Israeli… But do you really believe this?[/quote]
There is nothing to “believe.” Those are all objective facts (admittedly condensed down from a 1,000 page response to a single post).
Look, I get it. Facts don’t correspond to the pablum fed to you in some liberal arts school. Cognitive dissonance is a hard thing.[/quote]
A lot of them are not really facts but myths propagated as part of the Zionist propaganda machine.
However, my question was not related to history but to the state of Zionism and Israel today.
Here are some specifics:
What is your opinion on the new Nation State law being proposed?
Is it true that no Israeli institution with public funding can mention the Nakba without receiving a fine and potential imprisonment of the persons involved?
What is your opinion on the increased settlement program?
These are 3 examples which might lead an impartial observer to judge that a society is racist.
[quote]EvenIfItsSushi wrote:
A lot of them are not really facts but myths propagated as part of the Zionist propaganda machine.[/quote]
Then fucking list them, and list out the “factual” occurrences then.
This is like the 3rd time someone has detailed a long post and you’ve got no come back other than “you’re racist”.
Fuck. Up your trolling game, this shit sucks.
Followed by a bunch of questions and still playing the race card when it has dick to do with anything the thread was created for.
We get it, you hate Jews. Now either contribute or go back to ihatedajewzzzz.chan.
[quote]EvenIfItsSushi wrote:
[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
[quote]EvenIfItsSushi wrote:
[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
Perhaps EvenIfItsSushi Calls Spain “Al-Aldalus” or at least “The Caliphate of Cordoba.”
If so, then he is at least intellectually consistent in the "once-conquered-by-Islam, always “Dar-al-Islam” and can call Judea and Samaria the “West Bank” if he wishes, no matter how brief the invasion of Jordan and resulting expulsion of the native Jewish peoples.
If does not call Spain “Al-Aldalus,” and he imposes a double standard on Jewish people, well, then, we all know what he is.
[/quote]
This is comedy. Where do you get this stuff?[/quote]
Your posts. They’re a gold mine.
So, back to the point. Do you call Spain “Al-Aldalus” also?
Or do you reserve Arabic nomenclature for areas of Israel?
[/quote]
Of course I don’t. I call Spain Spain.
The West Bank is not part of Israel. It is part of Palestine. Hence I call it the West Bank. Only right-wing Zionists call it Judea and Samaria.
Maybe you can answer me. What is the difference between Zionism and racial/religious nationalism? And how is Zionism not racist?[/quote]
You don’t seem to have any understanding of Zionism or Israel. Firstly, there are many different “types” for want of a better word, of “Zionism” - political Zionism, religious, revisionist etc. Most Orthodox Jews don’t refer to themselves as “Zionists” because of the religious implications. They’re what you would call “practical Zionists”, by which I mean they support the right of Israel to take practical measures to protect the people. They don’t attach any religious significance to the modern state of Israel. Some even oppose Zionism on religious grounds.
Secondly, the modern political Zionist movement was a largely left-wing, socialist movement as were the leading figures who brought about the modern state of Israel. The modern Zionist movement was supported by the left internationally up until the 70’s. It wasn’t until recent times that the left turned away from supporting Israel and began to back pan-Arab nationalists. This was due to the propaganda efforts of the pan-Arab nationalists and the radicalisation of left-wing politics that began in the late 60’s. Before that, Zionism was a favourite cause of the left who saw the outnumbered Jews as the oppressed underdog. In fact, “conservatism” in Israel only dates back to the late 70’s and the Likud Party. There was a Zionist right before that but they were a minority. The hard right was excluded from politics as were the Communists by the Israeli mainstream: socialists and labour/unionists.
