danny la rouge
More like *fanny* la rouge!
So, all they provoke is appropriate anger? No inappropriate anger is provoked? All the inappropriate anger comes from nowhere?
Ken Loach and dubious "anti-semitism" claims
- Thread starter Zachor
- Start date
ok .. the zionists will not give up when there are people demanding an islamic state in palestine .. are you against that?
no i mean what morris says about ethnic cleansing .. that they should have completely cleansing israel in 48
I don't think the holocaust is really relevant. I don't think zionism is really relevant. I don't think racism is really relevant. What drives Israeli expansion is economics and the preservation of the state's future. Its a poor country surrounded by hostile states utterly reliant on immigration and US aid. The Israeli ruling class do what they have to do, that's the POV. No amount of understanding the Zionism or understanding alleged Arab anti-semitism will change this. The problems in the Middle-East are not the product of a lack of nice sentiments.
the inapproriate anger is anti semitism .. it arises .. it does not mean israel has instigated it does it? ..
does israel print the protocols of zion that circulate in arab countries? does mossad get hamas to put holocaust denial on its media? .. no ..
there is a differerence in my book between creating conditions and instigating .. pedantic? yes ..
so why do i think it is important .. cos it fits in with (as i said in my very first post) a KEY element of anti semitism .. that the jews bring their troubles in themselves ..
do we view the USA/ americans thru the sole glass of vietnam and iraq? no. do we view germany/germans thru the sole glass fo the holocaust? no. ( though many jews still do ). do we relate to turkey/turks without blaming them for the tens of thousends of kurds murdered and bombed? no. so why do we associate israeli/israelis only thru the context of their battle for land against the palestinians?
i appreciate and accept the economism .. but economism always need ideological back up .. hence what i am talking about
They should give up whatever. They have no right to call themselves Israelis. If they live in Palestine then they should call themselves Palestinians and they should join with the Palestinians to fight oppressive Palestinian regimes. Otherwise they can fuck off.
belboid
Exasperated, not angry.
I love your rampant hypocrisy, even more than your disingenuousness and hyperbole. By your idiotic logic every communist should have become jewish and moved to Palestine. fucking stupid.
danny la rouge
More like *fanny* la rouge!
Yes; "politically, a thug".no i mean what morris says about ethnic cleansing .. that they should have completely cleansing israel in 48
danny la rouge
More like *fanny* la rouge!
We're going round in circles. Yes, the inappropriate anger we're discussing is Anti-Semitism. The question is, do the actions of the Israeli state fuel it?
so here we go again .. just when i thought you were being principled .. they are there .. they are NOT going anywhere .. the sooner people stop telling people who had no where else to go after being driven out of europe africa and the middle east to 'fuck off' the better
( oh sorry they should have all gone to america one person says .. and someone else says they should have all gone back to germany lol )
danny, to instigate, is NOT to fuel, is it? that is the differrence imho
danny la rouge
More like *fanny* la rouge!
Ah, I see. So we're down to whether he chose his words well or not*? (*If reported accurately).
In that case, I'm out. Semantics is not my bag.
I don't see why the Palestinians are obliged to tolerate them. But that's just my attitude to Zionism. I think the reality is that there is no 'solution' that doesn't involve breaking the Israeli state. People can condemn Zionism to the cows come home, but it isn't just wrong headedness that produces such misery in the Gaza and the West Bank. The problems are not going to go away. They need to be brought to a head.
well i would appreciate you listen first to my arguement above .. that it does matter .. as to instigate is to start and as i have said a KEY element of anti semitism is that the jews bring their misfortune on themselves .. so it is MORE than just semantics mate
what was your solution to the millons of jewish refugees in the 1940s?
frogwoman
No amount of cajolery...
belboid
Exasperated, not angry.
a - actually does that.
b - the us et al would all still exist without the warmongering actions you refer to. israel wouldn't, and couldn't
sorry your answers donlt make any sense .. they are too brief
I don't know. I could say that there should have been an amnesty for all refugees in all countries but that's just a platitude. I'm actually quite sympathetic to Zionism, I understand the motivation well enough. I just don't think it was up to the Palestinians to provide a solution.
belboid
Exasperated, not angry.
sorry, my computers playing up and making things go rather weird, should have read
a - no one actually does that (views israel solely through their constant history of attacks upon palestinians)
b - israel only exists because of those constant attacks, it could not exist without them. the US could and would exist without the attacks on vietnam and iraq. that is a rather important difference
lol .. no i would have been a bundist ( or anarchist ) and i probably would have died .. but you just don't get it do you? the point is israel is the creation of anti semitism NOT of zionism . without anti semitism in europe israel would NOT exist and zionism would be a few nutters in the desert .. the spat over zionism v bundism ( which you did not understand ) is that the context of 1933-45 showed almost 100% that they had A logic on their side [ that europe allowed this is on our concience still .. stalinism, the capitalists who bank rolled hitler etc etc scum all of them ]
and sorry what disengenuous? oh that i set you up? and sorry what hypocrisy? i don't see that
.. i am pointing out to all those who bleed for the palestinins ( and we should ) that in 1945-48 there were several million other ( jweish) refugees who wanted need somewhere to go .. the UK torpedoed holocaust survivors / refugee boats and locked up them up in cyprus .. do you agree with that??
the point is IT IS EASY TO BLAME ISRAEL NOW for what has happenned .. but what has happenned is the consequence of other things and until that is entirely sorted we are still at first base
fair play
a) sorry i disagree entirely with this .. people boycott israel, its food, its league football teams even and it universities .. i do not see the same for other countries ( there was a campaign by kurds to boycott turkey and basques to boycott span but i do not know of anyone who did not go to spain cos of its policies in euzkadi
b)sorry i still do not get your point here or how it relates to something i have said ..
i totally disagree .. all the eivdence i know of say differrent
Two points there. The first I agree with. I do think it is too easy to blame Israel. I find myself doing it every time I read reports about the situation in Gaza. But what use is blame? Its when I look past the anger and I think that this has been going on for 60 years and there is still no end in sight that I see the whole Zionist project as a fundamental problem.
Your other point mystifies me. What needs to be sorted, how is it to be sorted and what difference will it make when it is sorted?
danny la rouge
More like *fanny* la rouge!
I see. Well, I'm back in.
Do the actions of the Israeli government cause (or start, or commence, or begin) in people who hitherto did not harbour antisemitism, antisemitism? Yes, I'd say so. Is it an appropriate reaction? No; one should not blame all of a group for the actions of some of a group.
This is what I was saying earlier in the thread; we may deplore that reaction, but it has a cause. And we shouldn't turn a blind eye.
Note: I am not saying there was no antisemitism prior to ben Gurion. Nor am I saying all antisemitism today is caused by the actions of the state of Israel. But I am saying a lot is.
Sorry, but it is.
belboid
Exasperated, not angry.
really? are you so forgetful that you forgot what you wrote minutes earlier? i guess you got so excited about writing 'you don't understand' again that everything else went out of your head. hey ho.
actually, i dont believe you are that forgetful, or that dumb, i suspect you know full well what i'm on about but have to play dumb, because otherwise you'd have to accept the very simple point.
The holocaust obviously gave a massive impetus to the creation of Israel, but it would probably have come into being anyway, because that's what the brits and the americans (and even the russians due to their own narrow self-interest) wanted
danny la rouge
More like *fanny* la rouge!
Indeed. The Holocaust was of course of importance in Israel's creation, and in its subsequent policy. But we need to remember the inter-war period, and the "population transfer" (to use the euphemism) that had got well under way. Elite Western opinion already saw the Zionist project as being civilizing progress in the region before WWII, as bringing modern values, Western values, and saw the indigenous population as backwards primitives who needed to be swept away by the march of progress, in the same way as the US West had been 'civilized'.
The Turkish/Greek population "exchange" after the Greco-Turkish War of 1919–1922 was a precedent, and simply expelling the indigenous population of Palestine was seen by elite Western opinion as perfectly legitimate.
ymu
Niall Ferguson's deep-cover sock-puppet
Huh? You don't remember Thatcher supporting Apartheid then? Never saw the Tory students with "Hang Mandela" stickers? You never heard the exact same existential rhetoric coming out of South Africa as you do Israel now?
You seem to be making it up as you go along, which isn't helping your argument.
Similar threads
