Helen Thomas resigns over remarks

[Skeptic]

There's a name for "strong, uninformed, negative opinions about the Jews".

 

[DC]

Wasn't arguing this, was arguing the point that Jews are somehow new to the area (even when in your post you contradict yourself) and don't have a claim over the 'locals' (whomever those are?).


Not in the post I was referring to. Not talking about Skeptic's overall statements either. I've specifically stated what I was referring to.

you correctly point out there were jews the whole time in the region, thats true indeed, but they had no own nation there.

but then you question the existence of the people living there.
what coming now? there were only jews there and other than that the land was empty?

 

[GrouchoMarxist]

yeah poor Jews ar always the bad guy and nobody likes you, thats why you are the only people ever the international Community decided to create a nation for on a place that long time ago was their home , against will of the the local people, and since then that Nation gets every thinkable support from many many countries in the International community.
are we likely to do that again? say for the Kurds for example? or the Republic of Lakotah?

Quoted in loving memory of DC's stolen sobriety​

 

[Soapy Sam]

Imagine how different the world would be, had a "Jewish Homeland" been established in Saudi Arabia.

 

[DC]

Quoted in loving memory of DC's stolen sobriety​

what does that mean?

 

[Last of the Fraggles]

The "second order" of racism here is not that people necessarily support the "destroy Israel" conclusion, but that they consider the question a legitimate one at all, one to be "objectively" discussed. That it is somehow legitimate to say that Jews, and only Jews, must prove they have the right to live, or to a country, at all, is disgusting.

Again, people make this jump from Israel to Jews as if somehow they are the same thing and should be regarded as so.

I support the right of Jews to live their lives freely wherever they wish to without oppression. I don't necessarily think that means there is a right to a Jewish state especially if that right is obtained at the expense of the rights of others.

Should being a distinct religion/race entitle you to a state? I think there is a legitimate question there. Do the Mormons have a right to an independent nation within the USA if they want it? Did the Taliban Afghanistan have the right to exist without interference from the US and others?

The right to a nation state is a privilege accorded to all nations by the international community and with it comes responsibilities. I don't think Jews deserve a nation any more or less than anyone else, at the same time I can defend Israel's right to exist as a nation but I struggle with the concept of it being a 'Jewish state' and I see a stong argument that its existence should not be at the expense of the Palestinians.

 

[Last of the Fraggles]

Jewish isn't just a religion, it's an ethnicity. Israel was created to be a place of refuge for the Jewish disapora, who as you may have noticed tend to have hard times among other groups. That's why it's important for it to be a "Jewish state".

You know, hundreds of thousands of Israelis ended up in Israel because the countries they were living in for centuries decided to get rid of their Jewish Problem. You want to send hundreds of thousands of Jews back to Iraq and Morocco?

I struggle with the concept that Jews as a race are uniquely (i'm struggling for the word here as 'incapable' doesn't seem to carry the connotations I am looking for but I can't think of a better one so) incapable of co-existing with other races to the point where they need their own special nation state with 'preferential' status.

The people of Israel need to find a way to peacefully co-exist with its neighbours and the neighbours need to find a way to accept that. As an outside observer with no skin in the game it appears that israel acts like a dick to its neighbours and the international community in general - safe in the knowledge that its friend the US will back it up.

I don't see why Israel should be a special case. If Israel wants to be a respected member of the international community then it should act like one.

None of this is an excuse for anti-semitism, the Holocaust or anything else. That's also dickish behaviour that needs to be dealt with.

 

[Last of the Fraggles]

There are numerous ethnic minorities who emigrated to and from, or simply are, in various countries in this world, sometimes causing mischief, intentionally or otherwise: say, White people in North America, Mexicans in Arizona, Muslims in Holland, Hindus in Pakistan, Albanians in Italy, Africans in Spain, British in Zimbabwe, Arabs in Israel, Turks in Germany, Gypsies in Poland, Republicans in Berkeley, and so on and so forth, practically ad infinitum. I am sure that, had I checked, I could find dozens of such cases easily.

Does Skeptic Ginger think that all such groups should go "back where they came from" -- if only it is practical -- so that the ideal racially- or ideologically-pure countries could be erected in the countries that they left?

Or does she (he?) think that only the Jews should be so deported and expelled, if only it were "practical"?

What, exactly, is the difference between Skeptic Ginger's position and Hamas', both calling for a destruction of Israel and the deportation of the Jews -- except for the mere disagreement about whether it would be practical or not?

Of the examples you gave can you clearly mark those in which the group in question have established (or have been granted) a separate nation state, with a government, armed forces and representation at the UN?

I think that's an important distinction.

 

[Ivor the Engineer]

Given that the current state of Israel would eventually be destroyed by those states around it without the backing of powerful countries such as the USA, I can only imagine that there are some strategic advantages in maintaining the current existence of Israel. Any suggestions for what these advantages may be? What use is the current state of Israel to these other countries?

If it happens in my lifetime it will be interesting to see what happens if China and India become the superpowers they look like they’re heading towards becoming. What is the current Chinese and Indian thinking on Israel?

 

[Pardalis]

So you admit Israel was wrong then, when they advocated removing all Palestinians to refugee camps including one giant camp in Gaza.

Off topic. We're talking about Helen Thomas' remark.

"Want" has nothing to do with it. Thomas's point of view is based on the fact the land which is now the country of Israel was confiscated from the Palestinians who lived there when the UN leadership decided to atone for the Nazis at the expense of the powerless Palestinians.

The Palestinians never owned the land they were standing on. They weren't even called "Palestinians" back then.

OTOH, what might have been a more reasoned solution than Thomas'?

There is no "solution" because there is no problem to begin with. Israel is a sovereign state. Period.

Israel has a right to be there, it's been there for 70 years, and its Jewish inhabitants aren't going anywhere.

You got that?

First, fairly split the county into two states

No, Israel stays right as it is. If you want to make Gaza and the West Bank into a state, you go right ahead, if they can manage to pull themselves up once and for all, but don't touch Israel.

And that's not likely to happen as long as each side continues to indoctrinate their children.

At least on the Israeli side, the state media isn't demonizing the Palestinians in their kids shows.

I wasn't aware any immigrants to the US other than the first colonialists 300+ years ago invaded and took over a section of land to make their own country out of it.

You completely missed the point.

Asking any people, anywhere, to be removed from where they live is an abhorrent idea.

Do you understand?

 

[bigjelmapro]

you correctly point out there were jews the whole time in the region, thats true indeed, but they had no own nation there.

Breakup of a former empire pretty much cleared the field for nation building

but then you question the existence of the people living there.
what coming now? there were only jews there and other than that the land was empty?

Never claimed that. As above, it was a race of who could build nations and wars are undoubtedly unavoidable as there are plenty of examples to provide. Cannot think of an example though comparable to Israel's creation. Can you?

 

[Pardalis]

The "second order" of racism here is not that people necessarily support the "destroy Israel" conclusion, but that they consider the question a legitimate one at all, one to be "objectively" discussed.

This reminds me of an alleged prominent Muslim "moderate" (Tariq Ramadan) who gave a conference here a few months ago, his position on the beating of women is that there should be a moritorium on it, instead of just rejecting it, you know, because it's just plain and simple unnacceptable, as any true moderate and rational person would do.

The same thing here with Skeptigirl. I can't understand why she just doesn't reject Thomas' idea, see it for what it is.

 

[bigjelmapro]

Given that the current state of Israel would eventually be destroyed by those states around it without the backing of powerful countries such as the USA, I can only imagine that there are some strategic advantages in maintaining the current existence of Israel. Any suggestions for what these advantages may be? What use is the current state of Israel to these other countries?

Would eventually? If this destruction didn't occur in the beginning 20 years of Israel's existence without solid US support, economic or militarily, what makes you think that this eventuality will occur in these more modern times?

As for the advantages, which sector would you want to delve into? Military defense? Private? Quite a number to just name here. As with the question below, google is your friend.

If it happens in my lifetime it will be interesting to see what happens if China and India become the superpowers they look like they’re heading towards becoming. What is the current Chinese and Indian thinking on Israel?

India's relationship with Israel is comparable, and in some instances, supercede in the positives compared to the US-Israel relationship. With China, its more on a defense military contracts and bi-lateral trade level.

All of this, is quite an obvious derailment of this op

 

[DC]

Breakup of a former empire pretty much cleared the field for nation building


Never claimed that. As above, it was a race of who could build nations and wars are undoubtedly unavoidable as there are plenty of examples to provide. Cannot think of an example though comparable to Israel's creation. Can you?

and still, the people there and their neighbors didnt support the creation of Israel on the land they belived to be theirs.

 

[DC]

The Palestinians never owned the land they were standing on. They weren't even called "Palestinians" back then.

but they are there now? and are called Palestinians now?

 

[Pardalis]

but they are there now? and are called Palestinians now?

Yes, but Skeptigirl keeps talking about how things were in 1947 (or rather how she thinks how things were back then).

ETA: If Thomas had said the Israeli West Banks settlements are illegal and the settlers should be sent back to where they came from (Israel), she would have had a good point and no quarry from me, but that's not what she said, is it?

 

[Skeptic]

You completely missed the point.

Asking any people, anywhere, to be removed from where they live is an abhorrent idea.

Except when they're Jews, Paradalis, except when they're Jews...

 

[Ivor the Engineer]

<snip>

The Palestinians never owned the land they were standing on. They weren't even called "Palestinians" back then.

<snip>

Why do Israelis own the land they are standing on? It seems to me that it is only because other more powerful countries care to grant them ownership over the other groups who contest it that Israel exists in its current state.

There's nothing fair or deserving about Jewish people having their own state, just as there's nothing fair or deserving about the non-Jewish people around them not having their own state(s). It's just what is - at the moment.

I expect the behaviour of all parties in this dispute to continue to degenerate until one of them kills enough of the others to prove they were right and the others were wrong.

 

[Pardalis]

Why do Israelis own the land they are standing on?

Ask the UN.

There's nothing fair or deserving about Jewish people having their own state,

You can say that about most countries in the world.

 

[DC]

Yes, but Skeptigirl keeps talking about how things were in 1947 (or rather how she thinks how things were back then).

ETA: If Thomas had said the Israeli West Banks settlements are illegal and the settlers should be sent back to where they came from (Israel), she would have had a good point and no quarry from me, but that's not what she said, is it?

I think in Helen's mind. its essentialy the same.
she propably sees Israel as illegal and the Israelis should go back to where they came from.

but its indeed not what she said. and i still dont defend what she said.
its disgusting.