A Zionist visitor

You can check Kahanism on Wikipedia.

Occupation of Palestine and existence of Israel are not the same thing. Most of the Zionists consider the occupation status of the West Bank and Gaza to be an unfortunate consequence of the conflict, and wish this occupation to end. The occupation is a consequence of the conflict, not it’s cause. To end the occupation, the conflict must be ended.

However, if you consider the mere existence of Israel an act of occupation, then it is another story. There are people, who deny the Jewish people the right for independence, for their own state in their national Homeland. And yet, they passionately advocate and even demand this right for other groups, including the Palestinian. A consider such people hypocrites, bigots, and anti-Semites. That’s what I think about people who oppose the existence of Israel (aka anti-Zionists).

I must admit I have a difficulty following your line of thought here.

This statement only shows that “everything” that you read about Israel came from very dubious sources.

Dude, Israel had nothing to to with the Cold war, Afghanistan, Iraq/Afghanistan or Pakistan. We have our share of problems in Palestine.

You know, that place on the map, which Romans called Palestine, we, the Jews, call the Land of Israel. It is the birthplace of the Jewish people, our homeland. The Zionists intended to re-establish the Jewish independence in this land. Not necessarily over all of it. The more, the better, of course, but Zionists were willing to compromise on several occasions agreeing to have only part of it and leave the other part for the Arab state. However, as the Arabs rejected the compromises and refused to recognize the Jewish independence in ANY part of the land continuing the armed struggle, the time went by and Israel used it to improve its territorial standing. BTW, the compromise offer is still on the table.

And another point, the way these maps are drawn shows author’s bias and lack of commitment to truth.

Thank you for the pittance.

What would be your opinion if native Americans try to establish an independent state in their homeland?

You kick someone out of their home, establish yourself there and call them terrorists when they try and take what was stolen from them? All this because a few centuries ago your forefathers lived there.

Please take a look at the bottom line here and tell me if it was enough reason to kill hundreds of young kids? Or is it what you are suggesting as Israel’s idea of a compromise?

Pardon? You as an Ashkenazi and other Khazars around 95% of whole Jewish population have no historical or genetical connection to "The Land of Israel".

Re: A Zionist visitor

Interesting. You're probably not the first zionist here, and i dont for one minute suspect you're stumbling across here was really all that an accident as you claim, especially considering since the gaza massacre, there has been a concerted and obvious effort of media warfare on behalf of the Israeli gov, and you folks have simliar lines flooding everywhere. But nevertheless, welcome aboard and enjoy your stay.

Re: A Zionist visitor

^hey Ma Mooli...good to see you, I wish everyone was here like Lajawab, AQ, armughal, teaser and few others.

First of all you Zionist apartheid supporter, you should accept that you lied when you said that Palestinians are not accepting two station solution

Now

Why?

[quote]

Zionism is not racism, it is a national-liberation movement of the Jewish people.
[/quote]

If you don't believe in Hebrew/Jewish myth then how come you be a Zionist while Zionism be a national liberation movement of the "Jewish" people?

You Khazar occupiers and usurpers should leave the Semitic lands. That's the most just solution of this problem.

Re: A Zionist visitor

its fair to say zionism has never been misrepresented to us.

and after following this thread i have learnt that neither i nor anyone else can offer any solutions to the palestinian issue because yuj, majuj's purpose on this planet is not to make peace.

I am confused. The Jews by all accounts of history and scripture come from Egypt. Not from Palestine.

[quote]
Zionism did not die with creation of Israel, but was partially realized. Why partially? Because establishment of a state takes a little more than a simple declaration. The state should also be recognized by its neighbors and live in peace with them. It is hardly a normal situation, when a state has armistice lines instead of national borders. It was the situation with Israel from the moment of its creation till 1979, when the first piece of the national border was established (with Egypt). And mind you, this situation was not Israel's fault or intention.
[/quote]

Agreed.

[quote]
As you know any good idea can be perverted and driven to absurd. The right-wing extremists among Zionists is a case to the point. But saying that you hate Zionists, because of them is like saying that you hate Muslims because of Taliban, or you hate socialists because of Stalin.
[/quote]

Illogical. To hate jews because of Zionism is the correct analogy. Zionists include the settlers, actually the Zionism is part of state practice is it not?

[quote]
Since settlements seems to be quite a big issue, I should say that only a very small part of Israelis or Zionists support the settlement movement out of truly ideological conviction. A large part is simply against it, but for the majority of those who do not object it or even support it the reason boils down to a simple formula "if they don't wish to compromise, why should we?".
[/quote]

Actually it is an official goverment policy. These days the Israeli courts backed by the government and the police have been forcefully evicting people from their homes because they are Palestinian. Kinda like Germanyhey in 1930. Evicting people from their homes based on their ethnicity.

[quote]
Taking the homes of Palestinians and converting them into settlements was never a part of Zionist ideology, modern or otherwise. There are, however, other things, which are not a part of any ideology, but rather a part of the conflict realities. There are, for example, demolitions of houses of terrorists or houses used to launch a terrorist attack (as a deterrence measure). Or, there has been a slogan "We will respond to every terrorist act with establishment of a new settlement". Palestinians usually respond with another attack, to which Israel responds with another settlement, to which Palestinians respond with an attack, to which Israel responds... You get the picture.
[/QUOTE]

Stick to the subject matter. Its zionism not terrorism, unless you equate the two as being the same.

[note] Try to avoid personal attacks [/note]

You are welcome.

I would not dismiss this claim out of hand as something totally without merit. Bare in mind though, “Native Americans” are not a people. It is a collective term of many racially related, but different small tribes - much like “Blacks” for example.

As I’ve mentioned many times, no one had to be kicked out. Naqkba was not a direct result of creation of Israel or Zionism, it was a direct results of Arab’s rejection of the UN resolution 181 and launching a war of expulsion against the Jews in 1947-48, a war that was lost with the well-known consequences.

You know, the Jewish civilians and children were also killed in this conflict. During the second Intifada more then 1,000 Israelis were killed, most of them civilians. Is Palestinian liberation a sufficiently righteous cause to justify killing children?
There are no clean wars. Whenever, a war starts, civilians will die. It is axiomatic. No matter whether one thinks it is a just war, a holy war, etc. The only way to avoid it is not having wars.

Ashkenazi and other Jews have a direct link to the Land of Israel. This link is an integral and an essential part of out identity and it has been kept within us for generations.
Khazars, on the other hand, were a Turkic people, who were pagans most of the time, but briefly (for about a 100 years) adopted some form of Judaism as their official religion. It is still a matter of debate among historians whether all of them converted or just the nobility. Anyway, the Khazar state was destroyed and Khazars disappeared as a people from the face of the earth in 10th century, more than a 1000 years ago.
The whole "Khazar story" is nothing but an anti-Zionist myth.

Well, you are mistaken. That's all I can say.

Your own Arthur Koelster who died a controversial death wrote in his book The Thirteen Tribes that Ashkenazi tribes are of Khazar origin and thus have no connection to Hebrew ancestry and Palestine, and Arthur is not the first one to say this, there are many other intellectuals and historians who believed the same.

Anyway, in the light of Ariel Sharon's quote** "Everybody has to move, run and grab as many hilltops as they can to enlarge the settlements because everything we take now will stay ours . . . Everything we don't grab will go to them."** – Ariel Sharon, Israeli Foreign Minister, addressing a meeting of militants from the Tsomet Party, Agence France Presse, November 15, 1998", how much land do you want to "grab" to establish your state, can you indicate may be by drawing a map and posting here?

First, I'm a Zionist supporter, not an apartheid supporter. Zionism does not advocate apartheid in any way or form. Calling Israel an apartheid state is a complete distortion of reality. Near 20% of Israeli citizens are Arabs and they enjoy a full set of civil rights like all other citizens. We live together and work together. I have Arab colleagues among the University staff, I teach Arab students and Jewish students in the same classes. And you dear to compare this situation to South Africa and apartheid?!

Now, regarding the two states solution, the best offer we had so far was like this. One state is an Arab states, which should be ethnically cleansed of all Jews (West Bank and Gaza); the second state is an Arab state were Jews are allowed to live (Israel). BTW, this is to the point of racism and apartheid.

That offer came from Fatah. Hamas, on the other hand, refuses to recognize Israel in any borders, with any status, in principle. Their official policy is that they will never make a peace agreement with Israel under any conditions, and will not recognize any such a peace agreement made by other Palestinian groups.

I don't need myths. I have history. I know people tend to confuse between the two (You?).

Boy, people, you just love that Khazar myth, don't you?

How about an alternative proposition? Sounds about as attractive to me as yours. Maybe the Arab occupiers and usurpers of the Jewish land should go back to the Arabian peninsula, where they've come from. Isn't it even more just solution to this problem?

Koestler wrote a fantasy book. He never insisted that his book was a scientific study. It was a pure speculative fiction. His hypothesis was long ago refuted by historians, since it had very little support by factual evidence.
The true history of Ashkenazis is also well documented can be verified. Most of them came to Europe via Northen Africa and Spain at the wave of the Arab conquest. Some arrived even earlier with the remnants of the Roman Empire.

Obviously, each side tries to grab as much as possible (and prevent grabbing by the other side) to improve its negotiation positions for final settlement. It is not a secret that each side would ideally like to have everything for themselves. But that's were the compromise comes in - no side will get everything they want. What will be the final agreement is a matter of negotiations, but meanwhile each side tries to establish "facts on the ground".
If you ask me what should be the final settlement in my opinion, I can tell you. But it will be only my humble opinion.

Peace AlexB

Nice to meet you. I have been reading your thread, and I believe you are here to disagree with us as much as possible. Is this true? Be careful because if you disagree with me you will prove me right.

Now a more serious question. Those Arabs are they followers of the Jewish faith? Also, they enjoy a full set of civil rights, but is that full set the same as your own?

Also, being an atheist do you realise that Muslims are obliged to consider those people who believe in one God as their brothers in monotheism, yes, by calling yourself atheist we are not going to warm to you nor does it represent any sense of impartiality... you are but a person who represents yourself. You have disowned yourself to any affiliation. It is but your word against everybody elses.

That is that we assume you are telling the truth about yourself. Com'on you are believer and that is all we need to know don't be embarrased of your faith, it is not pious to be like that.

By all accounts of history Jews originated with the Semitic Hebrew tribes residing in Palestine, mostly nomadic, who later settled down an consolidated into a single nations.
The Egyptian exodus is a biblical myth, not history. But even according to this myth, Jews first went from Palestine to Egypt, escaping from famine. Then, they got enslaved, and then Moses brought them back to Palestine.

Yes, Zionists include settlers. Muslims include Taliban, socialists include Stalinists. However, not all socialists are Stalinists, not all Muslims are Taliban, and not all Zionists are settlers. Set and subset. Solid logic.

And yes, Zionism is a part of the state ideology. At least, I hope so.

Pardon my French, but this is BS. Nobody is evicted from their homes based on their ethnicity. Not in Israel, anyway. People might get evicted for other reasons, valid ones, and later claim that they were evicted because of their ethnicity. But again, that's just BS.

You've probably misunderstood me. I was talking about the methods a state uses dealing with violent insurgency. I'm also talking about a vicious circle of mutual retaliation policy. These things are not related to Zionism and happen everywhere, including in Pakistan.

Re: A Zionist visitor

AlexB

You are dismissing everything against Zionism recorded by divine scriptures or historian just by calling it "myth", I don't think that anyone can carry on discussing with you like that.

I'm leaving you some quotes from an article written by King Hussain's Grand father for you to ponder over.

...................."Our case is quite simple: For nearly 2,000 years Palestine has been almost 100 per cent Arab. It is still preponderantly Arab today, in spite of enormous Jewish immigration. But if this immigration continues we shall soon be outnumbered — a minority in our home.
Palestine is a small and very poor country, about the size of your state of Vermont. Its Arab population is only about 1,200,000. Already we have had forced on us, against our will, some 600,000 Zionist Jews. We are threatened with many hundreds of thousands more.
Our position is so simple and natural that we are amazed it should even be questioned. It is exactly the same position you in America take in regard to the unhappy European Jews. You are sorry for them, but you do not want them in your country.

We do not want them in ours, either. Not because they are Jews, but because they are foreigners. We would not want hundreds of thousands of foreigners in our country, be they Englishmen or Norwegians or Brazilians or whatever.

Think for a moment: In the last 25 years we have had one third of our entire population forced upon us. In America that would be the equivalent of 45,000,000 complete strangers admitted to your country, over your violent protest, since 1921. How would you have reacted to that?".......................

.....................
I was puzzled for a long time about the odd belief which apparently persists in America that Palestine has somehow “always been a Jewish land.” Recently an American I talked to cleared up this mystery. He pointed out that the only things most Americans know about Palestine are what they read in the Bible. It was a Jewish land in those days, they reason, and they assume it has always remained so.
Nothing could be farther from the truth. It is absurd to reach so far back into the mists of history to argue about who should have Palestine today, and I apologise for it. Yet the Jews do this, and I must reply to their “historic claim.” I wonder if the world has ever seen a stranger sight than a group of people seriously pretending to claim a land because their ancestors lived there some 2,000 years ago!
If you suggest that I am biased, I invite you to read any sound history of the period and verify the facts.

Such fragmentary records as we have indicate that the Jews were wandering nomads from Iraq who moved to southern Turkey, came south to Palestine, stayed there a short time, and then passed to Egypt, where they remained about 400 years. About 1300 BC (according to your calendar) they left Egypt and gradually conquered most — but not all — of the inhabitants of Palestine.

It is significant that the Philistines — not the Jews — gave their name to the country: “Palestine” is merely the Greek form of “Philistia.”
Only once, during the empire of David and Solomon, did the Jews ever control nearly — but not all — the land which is today Palestine. This empire lasted only 70 years, ending in 926 BC. Only 250 years later the Kingdom of Judah had shrunk to a small province around Jerusalem, barely a quarter of modern Palestine.

In 63 BC the Jews were conquered by Roman Pompey, and never again had even the vestige of independence. The Roman Emperor Hadrian finally wiped them out about 135 AD. He utterly destroyed Jerusalem, rebuilt under another name, and for hundreds of years no Jew was permitted to enter it. A handful of Jews remained in Palestine but the vast majority were killed or scattered to other countries, in the Diaspora, or the Great Dispersion. From that time Palestine ceased to be a Jewish country, in any conceivable sense.

This was 1,815 years ago, and yet the Jews solemnly pretend they still own Palestine! If such fantasy were allowed, how the map of the world would dance about!
Italians might claim England, which the Romans held so long. England might claim France, “homeland” of the conquering Normans. And the French Normans might claim Norway, where their ancestors originated. And incidentally, we Arabs might claim Spain, which we held for 700 years.
Many Mexicans might claim Spain, “homeland” of their forefathers. They might even claim Texas, which was Mexican until 100 years ago. And suppose the American Indians claimed the “homeland” of which they were the sole, native, and ancient occupants until only some 450 years ago!
I am not being facetious. All these claims are just as valid — or just as fantastic — as the Jewish “historic connection” with Palestine. Most are more valid.

In any event, the great Moslem expansion about 650 AD finally settled things. It dominated Palestine completely. From that day on, Palestine was solidly Arabic in population, language, and religion. When British armies entered the country during the last war, they found 500,000 Arabs and only 65,000 Jews.
If solid, uninterrupted Arab occupation for nearly 1,300 years does not make a country “Arab”, what does?

The Jews say, and rightly, that Palestine is the home of their religion. It is likewise the birthplace of Christianity, but would any Christian nation claim it on that account? In passing, let me say that the Christian Arabs—and there are many hundreds of thousands of them in the Arab World—are in absolute agreement with all other Arabs in opposing the Zionist invasion of Palestine.
May I also point out that Jerusalem is, after Mecca and Medina, the holiest place in Islam. In fact, in the early days of our religion, Moslems prayed toward Jerusalem instead of Mecca.
The Jewish “religious claim” to Palestine is as absurd as the “historic claim.” The Holy Places, sacred to three great religions, must be open to all, the monopoly of none. Let us not confuse religion and politics.".........

Peace, and nice to meet you too.

Well, disagreeing was not my purpose. As I've mentioned, I found this forum accidentally and after reading a little bit, I was shocked by the level of anti-Zionist bias expressed here. I mean I saw a variety of opinions here, but everybody seemed to agree about hating Zionists. I could think of only 2 reasons for it - malice or misunderstanding. I assumed the second and decided to join for the sake of improving mutual understanding.

Since my identity and beliefs are so much different from most people on this forum, I've decided to identify myself the way I did. I did not want to be accused of hiding my true identity or pretending to be something I was not. ...I got accused of it anyway, but well... C'est la vie.

No, they are not followers of the Jewish faith. In this case, they would be considered Jews, not Arabs. They are mostly Muslims. About 10% of the Israeli Arabs are Christians. And yes, the same rights. Their situation is not ideal, of course. After all, their state and their people are at war with each other. It brings some trust and loyalty issues which lead to certain level of tension. But, in terms of the civil rights it is the same set as I have.

As I've wrote above, I don't want a special or a better treatment because of my affiliation. Definitely, I'm not going to pretend to be something I am not to get one. This would be dishonest.

I do have certain convictions. It would be foolish to deny this. I believe in freedom of religion. I believe people should treat each other first of all as human beings, based on certain universal moral values. I believe that people are free to believe whatever make them happy. No subjective belief is better than any other. However, nobody has the right to impose their religious beliefs on others. I don't care whether people are Muslims, Christians, Judaists, Bahai, Hindu, or Wiccan as long they go by the rule "live and let live" and don't try to impose their religious rules and beliefs on others. Be first of all human, and only then Muslim, Christian, Judaist, Bahai, Hindu, Buddhist, Pagan, or whatever.

In this sense you can call me a believer. But I don't believe in gods, demons, ghosts, vampires, invisible pink unicorns and other mythical creatures.