Mycroft
High Priest of Ed
- Joined
- Sep 10, 2003
- Messages
- 20,501
Are you claiming it's just about religion? Can you think of any other factors that come into play?
-
Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more
General Israel/Palestine discussion thread
- Thread starter LashL
- Start date
- Status
Are you claiming it's just about religion? Can you think of any other factors that come into play?
you are right, its also about the population numbers game and politics.
if the Law of Return was purely and simply about protecting Jews and their relatives & descendants from persecution, they would allow in Jews who believe in Jesus and Orthodox converts who used a Rabbi or Synagogue not supported by the Rabbinate.
Last edited:
Mycroft
High Priest of Ed
- Joined
- Sep 10, 2003
- Messages
- 20,501
Funny you should mention that, I just started a non-Israeli discussion thread about at least one Middle Eastern country that plays a game with controlling population size.
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=205774
The problem with the "moral equivalence" is that it fails.
Hamas openly declares the holocaust never happened and teaches its children that. The government of Israel does not *officially recognize* the Armenian genocide -- just like the USA does not, and like 99% of all governments in the world do not officially recognize 99% of all massacres that ever occured. No equivalence.
Similarly with Jewish vs. Arab terrorism. Both engaged in terrorism. But as I showed in this thread, in the entire history of the conflict, 60+ years, the Jews engaged in less terrorist attacks than the Arabs, or the Palestinians, engaged in (on average) per week -- and (occassionally) per day -- during the height of the Intifada. No equivalence.
I would like to add one more thing. Why do most nations in the world commemorate the holocaust? (Apart from most Arab/Muslim nations, of course, but then again, we apparently cannot hold such primitive folks to civilized standards, at least that's the conclusion I reach from the total lack of concern about this from the gang which is so angry at Israel and the USA for not officially recognizing the Armenian holocaust.) Is it due to evil zionist machinations? No; it is because the holocaust had been, since the Nuremberg trials of 1945/6, the epitome of evil: the intended total wiping out, to the last baby, of anybody of a group of people, anywhere in the world, in pre-systematic, pre-planned, technicaly and beurocratically arranged mass murder. The sad history of the world had seen many massacres and genocides, but such a monstrosity was something new. So naturally it received more attention than other genocides and massacres -- which is not for a minute to deny other genocides or massacres occured.
But note how, in the perverted mind of the usual gang of Israel-haters, the fact that the Jews were wronged in a way previously unimaginable, puts the moral onus on Israel -- NOT, God forbid, on the perpetrators, the Germans -- to commemorate every massacre anywhere officially or else be accused by them of getting "special treatment" because most other nations commemorate the holocaust, so it's "not fair" that there are some massacres Israel does *not* officially commemorate (as opposed to *deny*, which it never did).
Hamas openly declares the holocaust never happened and teaches its children that. The government of Israel does not *officially recognize* the Armenian genocide -- just like the USA does not, and like 99% of all governments in the world do not officially recognize 99% of all massacres that ever occured. No equivalence.
Similarly with Jewish vs. Arab terrorism. Both engaged in terrorism. But as I showed in this thread, in the entire history of the conflict, 60+ years, the Jews engaged in less terrorist attacks than the Arabs, or the Palestinians, engaged in (on average) per week -- and (occassionally) per day -- during the height of the Intifada. No equivalence.
I would like to add one more thing. Why do most nations in the world commemorate the holocaust? (Apart from most Arab/Muslim nations, of course, but then again, we apparently cannot hold such primitive folks to civilized standards, at least that's the conclusion I reach from the total lack of concern about this from the gang which is so angry at Israel and the USA for not officially recognizing the Armenian holocaust.) Is it due to evil zionist machinations? No; it is because the holocaust had been, since the Nuremberg trials of 1945/6, the epitome of evil: the intended total wiping out, to the last baby, of anybody of a group of people, anywhere in the world, in pre-systematic, pre-planned, technicaly and beurocratically arranged mass murder. The sad history of the world had seen many massacres and genocides, but such a monstrosity was something new. So naturally it received more attention than other genocides and massacres -- which is not for a minute to deny other genocides or massacres occured.
But note how, in the perverted mind of the usual gang of Israel-haters, the fact that the Jews were wronged in a way previously unimaginable, puts the moral onus on Israel -- NOT, God forbid, on the perpetrators, the Germans -- to commemorate every massacre anywhere officially or else be accused by them of getting "special treatment" because most other nations commemorate the holocaust, so it's "not fair" that there are some massacres Israel does *not* officially commemorate (as opposed to *deny*, which it never did).
Mycroft
High Priest of Ed
- Joined
- Sep 10, 2003
- Messages
- 20,501
The bigots want to play this sick game. It's like "Six steps to Kevin Bacon" only the point isn't to link other actors to Kevin Bacon, it's to link every crime imaginable to Israel. This week it's linking Israel to the Armenian Genocide, and never mind that was between the Turks and the Armenians, and that Israel wasn't even a nation yet. Does anyone even think to condemn Turkey? No, that's not the point! This crew doesn't care about whoever did the crime, it's only about linking it to Israel somehow!
Sword_Of_Truth
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- May 8, 2006
- Messages
- 11,494
Ya gotta love Hamas's thinking.
There's no way that anyone ever tried to kill all the jews, it was all made up.
Which is why we have to kill all the jews.
Which is why we have to kill all the jews.
I imagine this makes sense if you're a violent sociopathic fanatic.
Virus
Philosopher
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2006
- Messages
- 6,875
Holocaust denial often goes hand-in-hand with support.
Look at the spiritual head of the Muslim Brotherhood, Al Qaradawi, combine both into one:
Historians have found close links with statements like this to the propaganda the Nazis were promoting in the Arab world on their radio stations. They promoted the idea of Hitler as a divine agent sent to punish the Jews.
angrysoba
Philosophile
angrysoba
Philosophile
Well, you would know.
42 out of 50 states officially recognize the Armenian Genocide.
Several Presidents have recognized the Armenian Genocide in their speeches.
ftfy.
For those who asked for evidence that the "Nakba law" does not criminalize commemorating the Nakba, but merely withdraws state funding from those institutions who publicly declare they consider the state's founding to be a disaster (why such institutions would want state money is another mystery), even going to "Nakba day" on wikipedia tells us just that:
So, in short, no criminalization; the law merely means the state doesn't give money to institutes which consider Israel's founding a disaster. At most one can say that Yisrael Beyteynu wanted to criminalize such behavior and the Knesset rejected this. What's more, the law also targets those who "incite racism" or "deny the state's democratic character": in other words, Kach & co. and the far right as well as the far left.
Now as a matter of fact, I think the law is rather stupid and far too broad -- what counts as "incitement"? But it took me exactly 30 seconds, searching for "Nakba law", to find all the evidence I wanted that there is no criminalization of any institution commemorating the Nakba. What's more (checking the original Hebrew of the Knesset's protocol from that date), individuals are not mentioned at all in this law.
But what I want to know is this. If it took me 30 seconds of trivial googling -- looking for "Nakba law" and checking the first site (Wikipedia) that turned up -- to find out there is no "criminalization" involved, why did Thunder and others rant about how the law "criminalizes the Nakba"? Why didn't they do a 30-second check before smearing Israel with something that simply isn't true?
So, in short, no criminalization; the law merely means the state doesn't give money to institutes which consider Israel's founding a disaster. At most one can say that Yisrael Beyteynu wanted to criminalize such behavior and the Knesset rejected this. What's more, the law also targets those who "incite racism" or "deny the state's democratic character": in other words, Kach & co. and the far right as well as the far left.
Now as a matter of fact, I think the law is rather stupid and far too broad -- what counts as "incitement"? But it took me exactly 30 seconds, searching for "Nakba law", to find all the evidence I wanted that there is no criminalization of any institution commemorating the Nakba. What's more (checking the original Hebrew of the Knesset's protocol from that date), individuals are not mentioned at all in this law.
But what I want to know is this. If it took me 30 seconds of trivial googling -- looking for "Nakba law" and checking the first site (Wikipedia) that turned up -- to find out there is no "criminalization" involved, why did Thunder and others rant about how the law "criminalizes the Nakba"? Why didn't they do a 30-second check before smearing Israel with something that simply isn't true?
changed the draft of the bill to withold government funding from Arab towns and state-funded organizations or public institutes that participate in "activity that involves the negation of the existence of the State of Israel as the state of the Jewish people; the negation of the state's democratic character, support for armed struggle or terror acts by an enemy or a terror organization against the State of Israel; incitement to racism, violence and terror and dishonoring the national flag or the national symbol",
...oh, I see. so if someone in an Arab town burns an Isreali flag or some other official Israeli govt. symbol, that town loses all govt. funding?
are they NOT taxpayers? how can a town lose its rightfully earned and deserved govt. funding due to an expression of displeasure with govt. policy???
and why does this ONLY effect Arab towns?
Israeli racism...at its best. I commend Skeptic for exposing it.
...oh, I see. so if someone in an Arab town burns an Isreali flag or some other official Israeli govt. symbol, that town loses all govt. funding?
are they NOT taxpayers? how can a town lose its rightfully earned and deserved govt. funding due to an expression of displeasure with govt. policy???
and why does this ONLY effect Arab towns?
Israeli racism...at its best. I commend Skeptic for exposing it.
Last edited:
DC
Banned
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2008
- Messages
- 23,064
state of the Jewish people? Not Israeli people? why would a non Jewish Israeli ever accept that?
and dishonoring the national flag or the national symbol? is that a restriction of free speech? And a Jewish group of Israeliis is allowed to dishonoring the national flag or the national symbol?
In general, for the same reason that people who come from, say, Morocco and are Moroccans accept that France is the state of the French people, and -- for instance -- might give precedence in citizenship to those who grandparents came from France and not those whose grandparents came from Morocco.
And, once more, this is simply besides the point. The law asks nobody to accept anything. The law simply says that if you do not accept some important point about the state -- denying it's a Jewish state or denying it's a democratic state or calling for armed struggle against it or considering its very founding a disaster -- then you will not get money from the state.
It would be -- if it was a criminal offense to do so (perhaps there are other laws who criminalize that, but we're speaking about this law.) Again, the only penalty here -- which is not a criminal penalty -- is that the minister of finance might defund an institution which officially has ceremonies burning the flag.
It is legal (so far as I know) to open a factory called "Israeli Flag Burning Inc.", and do nothing in that factory but prepare fuel-soaked Israeli flags and then burn them. All this law says is that you just won't get government money to do so. Or rather might not if the minister of finance cuts funding.
Yes they are -- as are Arabs. But the Jews will risk getting their funding cut just as much as the Arabs is they so do. At least according to this law. If there is some other law that does in fact criminalize such actions, then, yes, I assure you it applies equally to Jews and Arabs.
Last edited:
oh, so if an Arab town decides to remember the Nakba, they lose all govt. funding. that's fine...as long as they get back ALL of their **** ing taxes!!!
no, YOU said Arab towns. You didn't say Israeli towns. Its your quote.
"Israeli Cabinet ministers changed the draft of the bill to withold government funding from Arab towns and state-funded organizations or public institutes"
why are Arab Israelis being treated different than Jewish Israelis?
racism anyone?
Last edited:
Wrong.
The law says very specifically that the most funding that can be reduced is three times the cost [to the government] of the official event in question. True, Wikipedia doesn't mention how much funding can be reduced, but the law itself and Hebrew-language comments about it do.
Wrong.
Again, this is the writers' commentary, on Wikipedia, that funding will be witheld from "Arab towns". I checked: the actual law says nothing about "Arab towns" in particular but speaks of all "government funded organizations", Jewish or Arab or for that matter Rastafarians.
Wikipedia's inaccurate commentary anyone?
Really, why don't you yourself take some care -- five minutes on google -- to actually find some basic facts about this law before going online, publicly, speaking obvious falsehoods about it, and what's more, then using those falsehoods to build up your white-hot anger at "Israeli racism"?
I mean, look what happened here. You started with the claim that the law "criminalizes" the Nakba. I noted that even a 30-second google search shows that isn't true -- that Wikipedia says at most institutions who do so will lose funding.
Did you apologize for your mistake? Did you withdraw your claim? Well, of course not: sure as clockwork, you latched precisely onto the two claims in the Wikipedia article that are inaccurate (amount of funding to be lost isn't mentioned on wikipedia, "Arab towns" a commentator's remark, not part of the law) as "evidence" for your new-and-improrved "Israel is evil" attack -- the false claim that the law "treats Arabs differnetly" of threatens anybody with "loss of all funding".
Everything you said about this law is false. What's more, it's obvious you care nothing about the facts about the law, and did absolutely no checking about this law yourself; and when someone did provide you with evidence your original claim was utterly false, you just latched, helter-skelter, on the inaccuracies in the evidence provided, to whip up yet another false "Israel is evil" claim, without a thought about withdrawing your original claim or apologizing for it.
Shame on you.
Last edited:
maybe you should avoid posting erroneous information.
its not my fault that I am reacting to the supposed racism that was reported in YOUR post.
don't want folks to get pissed off at the racism exposed in your posts? don't post things that show racism.
Gee.
I thought that before someone makes serious accusations -- such as a new Israeli law "criminalizes the Nakba", "Arab towns are treated differently due to racism", "they might lose all funding" -- it is the responsibilty of the person making the accusation to make sure they are basing them on accurate information.
I thought it isn't enough to know nothing at all about the law you are so angry about except what wikipedia said about it, and what's more, to not even use the wikipedia quote fairly, but clearly to go through it with a comb to look for something, anything, in what wikpedia said that might be puffed up into an "Israel is evil" accusation out of whole cloth.
Anyway, in short, you made three false claims here.
1). That the law criminalizes the Nakba.
2). That the law treats Arab towns differently.
3). That Arab towns might lose all funding if they break the law.
Do you admit these are false claims?
Do you apologize for making them?
- Status