Jump to content
Frequently asked questions... Read more... ×

Why is antisemitism so rampant in Islamic communities?

244 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

On 7/2/2019 at 7:35 PM, BeautyNumber2 said:

Says the dumb bitch crying about people occupying land when your flop Palestinian faves stole Jewish land to begin with. Just because Arabs murdered, pillaged, and raped for centuries to keep the land they stole doesn’t make it theirs. You’re just mad the Grand Mufti got caught working with Hitler to organize the Final solution to kill Jews in Europe so the UN responded.

 

Israel wasn’t created from nothing and it wasn’t created from Palestinian land. Palestine didn’t even own the land they walked on, it was the British who owned the mandate of Palestine after the Ottoman Empire was dismantled so come correct. Palestine wasn’t even a nation before WWI and it wasn’t after one WWII so get over it. Yal act like Palestine was birthed since the dawn of man as a Muslim state when Israel existed centuries before Islam was ever founded as a warmongering religion, fact. Lying trash. Don’t make me use my minor in History, you won’t like it.

 

You do know that Islam was created in the 7th century, right? A millennia after people in the Middle East already practiced Zoroastrian, Judaism, indigenous faiths, and later Christianity. The historically accurate maps of Israel existing over 1200 years before Islam was even founded disprove your entire diatribe against Israel. You’re mad, fuming that Palestinians finally got what was coming to them. They are now a landless, nationless joke. The Palestinians are just a loose collection of tribes, gangs, Arab nationalists, and terrorist organizations that have to lie, murder, bomb, hijack, doctor photos, and meticulously edit videos to stay relevant. And that’s the legacy of the Palestinian people. Israel’s crown is intact, so enjoy the West Bank while you still can.

:jonny5:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Florges said:

In Russia and Eastern Europe. Palestine was peaceful under Ottoman rule :cm: 

No... even in the Middle East. read some books 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem comes from Israel.

 

Zionists (people who support the often illegal actions of Israel in the Israel/Palestine conflict) tell anti-zionists that they are being anti-semitic, so have themselves conflated Zionism with Judaism. Furthermore, Israel is basically an apartheid state in favour of Jews over Muslims.

 

So: many critics of Israel are from the Middle East, and many Middle Easterners are Muslims. Instead of responding to these critiques, Zionists conflate them with anti-Semitism. They say: if you criticise Israel, you are criticising Judaism.

 

In response, many people say 'fine'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 7/2/2019 at 5:35 PM, BeautyNumber2 said:

Says the dumb bitch crying about people occupying land when your flop Palestinian faves stole Jewish land to begin with.

I'm pretty sure the 'an eye for an eye' (two wrongs make a right) proverb which you're drawing from here comes from the Qur'an. It's actually said about The Children of Israel, who were at that time "just a loose collection of tribes" as you like to say.

 

I'm not quoting your whole post because, not only is it extremely ignorant of actual facts, it's really vile. You really have a chip on your shoulder about the existence of people on that land that don't fit the homogenous standards ethnically/culturally/religiously which colonialists have taught you, and you've accepted uncritically.

 

Even mistakenly believing what you've posted is unproblematic, if you take a step back and re-read your post as if it were written by a non-Jew about Jews, what would you think about what you're reading?

 

Hopefully with your very impressive history minor, you'd realise that kind of sentiment about nations of people have been held- and acted upon- before. And that did not work out for the very people you purport to 'defend'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Haburo said:

The problem comes from Israel.

 

Zionists (people who support the often illegal actions of Israel in the Israel/Palestine conflict) tell anti-zionists that they are being anti-semitic, so have themselves conflated Zionism with Judaism. Furthermore, Israel is basically an apartheid state in favour of Jews over Muslims.

 

So: many critics of Israel are from the Middle East, and many Middle Easterners are Muslims. Instead of responding to these critiques, Zionists conflate them with anti-Semitism. They say: if you criticise Israel, you are criticising Judaism.

 

In response, many people say 'fine'.

Wait. Don’t forget they are also responsible for all the antisemitism that happened in Muslim countries before Zionism was even a thing. Like in the 1805. Or 1828. 1839. 1840. 18641867. 1869. All this from a simple Google search about an era without internet. All this before Zionism was created. Point proven? 

 

Plus, no one had to tell the Middle East that being anti-Zionist was linked with being an antisemite. They discovered it just fine by themselves when they expelled almost a million Jews during and after Israel’s independence. Non-Israeli jews. Arab Jews. So much for anti-Zionism and antisemitism not being linked. 

 

Away with your missinformation, rat. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
11 hours ago, JoshBTW said:

Wait. Don’t forget they are also responsible for all the antisemitism that happened in Muslim countries before Zionism was even a thing.

I don't think I said they are responsible for all the antisemitism ever. I think I said that zionists conflate critiques of zionism with antisemitism, just like you conflated my response with saying that Jews are somehow responsible for all antisemitism they face from Muslims. Which any idiot can see is not what I am saying.

 

11 hours ago, JoshBTW said:

Like in the 1805. Or 1828. 1839. 1840. 18641867. 1869. All this from a simple Google search about an era without internet. All this before Zionism was created.

You really clearly do not understand what Zionism is or when it was 'created'. I'll do my best to help you through this confusion now. Firstly, I can't believe I have to make this explicitly clear but, Zionism predates the internet. Secondly, a lot of people think that Zionism doesn't predate Herzl's Der Judenstaat. This is incorrect. Zionism is not an idea that popped into Herzl's head after the Dreyfus trial. I don't even think Zionists believe that to be the case. The Return to Zion predates the organisation and establishment of any single one of the Zionist movements, including the Hovevei Zion and the first aliyah. It began, as is documented in the Torah and old testament of the Bible, with Cyrus' Decree in 538BCE. That is he birth of the idea and the beginning of Jews physically acting upon the 'return to Zion' promised after the Babylonian Captivity. The fact that it is so inseparably tangled with the core beliefs of Judaism and, obviously, its religious texts, doesn't help the problem. Anytime a political movement is linked to a religious belief, extremism follows and the separation of the political and the religious cannot be achieved. So, with this in mind, it might not even be many Zionists' fault that they are saying anti-Zionists are antisemites. They can't untangle their problematic political situation from their religion.

 

Also, like I said earlier, I am not saying that there cannot be instances of antisemitism that are not linked to Zionism. Just as you would accept that there are obviously instances of antisemitism that are not linked to Islam. I'm just saying that Zionism is linked to contemporary instances of antisemitism from "Islamic communities" (i.e. the Middle East neighbours). If you don't think that Israel for (an uncontroversial) example, committing population genocide through denying Palestinians passports or their children born outside the country citizenship of Palestine unless they can make it back to the country within 4 years(?) THROUGH Jordan and on a Jordanian passport, has anything to do with antisemitism in the region then you are out of your mind.

 

11 hours ago, JoshBTW said:

Plus, no one had to tell the Middle East that being anti-Zionist was linked with being an antisemite. They discovered it just fine by themselves when they expelled almost a million Jews during and after Israel’s independence.

Ah yes, an article (not study!) posted on the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs... a beacon of impartial truth and honesty and not at all a propaganda machine with the SELF-CONFESSED goal of protecting Israeli security(!) No matter, because it actually proves my point. I don't know why you would post that. It certainly does not help your argument. So, thanks.

 

The 'expulsion' of Jews from Arab countries is a political move, started by Justice for Jews From Arab Countries, in a misled attempt to falsely justify Israel's creation of Palestinian refugees by comparing it to the displacement of Jewish refugees from Arab countries. Many Middle Eastern Jews, especially in Israel, would be angered by your characterisation of Jews from Arab lands as "expelled" refugees because many left their homes illegally prior to 1948- which is not the same as expulsion. It's migration.

 

Many of anti-Jewish laws referenced in the link you provided were actually poorly-worded anti-Zionist laws enacted, for example in Iraq during the 1948 Iraq/Israel war, by a British puppet-government using the Palestine issue to distract Iraqis from previous calls for independence from Britain. So here, anti-Zionism and antisemitism is again linked by Zionists (the British government) themselves.

 

Esther Meir-Glitzenstein is an historian who provides evidence for her assertion that Jewish Agency officials knew their actions against Palestine would worsen conditions for Jews in the Middle East, but continued anyway so they could 'rescue' those Jews when they chose to leave the Arab countries you are talking about. This is direct evidence in favour of the link between Zionism and antisemitism from Muslim-majority countries in the region.

 

The myth, started by Zionists, that Muslims and Jews are polar opposites and destined to be enemies until the end of time is a political tool and does not actually reflect how followers of either religion can interact with each other. It does not even capture how Muslims and Jews have interacted with each other in the past. Bernard Lewis is an historian who documents the FACT that, for TWO MILLENNIA, Jews lived in Arab countries and co-existed with Muslims in peace. Israel is the factor that changed that, and made it more difficult for Jews (who were being pulled towards, as well as pushed towards) Israel. Not just TO Israel, but BY Israel.

 

Celebrated Jewish historian Salo Baron described the kind of account you just presented as lachrymose and inaccurate. So maybe you should reconsider which one of us is proportion misinformation.

 

11 hours ago, JoshBTW said:

So much for anti-Zionism and antisemitism not being linked.

I didn't say they weren't linked. I said they were linked. By Zionists. I think you're confused.

 

11 hours ago, JoshBTW said:

Away with your missinformation, rat. 

I think it's really disgusting that you would call me a rat, which is a really horrendous anti-Semitic trope perpetuated not only in Nazi propaganda but still to this day. Jews like me are tired of being depicted as sub-human vermin by those who try to shape history in favour of their missled political beliefs. Shame on you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Haburo said:

I don't think I said they are responsible for all the antisemitism ever. I think I said that zionists conflate critiques of zionism with antisemitism, just like you conflated my response with saying that Jews are somehow responsible for all antisemitism they face from Muslims. Which any idiot can see is not what I am saying.

Title of thread: Why is antisemitism so rampant in Islamic communities?

Your response: The problem comes from Israel.

In your own words. You didn't bother to say there/were other sources. Pretty transparent.

 

4 hours ago, Haburo said:

You really clearly do not understand what Zionism is or when it was 'created'. I'll do my best to help you through this confusion now. Firstly, I can't believe I have to make this explicitly clear but, Zionism predates the internet.

Umm duh. The internet was created in 1983.

 

4 hours ago, Haburo said:

Secondly, a lot of people think that Zionism doesn't predate Herzl's Der Judenstaat. This is incorrect. Zionism is not an idea that popped into Herzl's head after the Dreyfus trial. I don't even think Zionists believe that to be the case. The Return to Zion predates the organisation and establishment of any single one of the Zionist movements, including the Hovevei Zion and the first aliyah.

The examples I gave of the antisemitic trend in muslim majority countries predates the first aliyah and half of them predate hovevei zion. And I'll touch on Zionism before hovevei zion in a bit.

 

4 hours ago, Haburo said:

It began, as is documented in the Torah and old testament of the Bible, with Cyrus' Decree in 538BCE. That is he birth of the idea and the beginning of Jews physically acting upon the 'return to Zion' promised after the Babylonian Captivity. The fact that it is so inseparably tangled with the core beliefs of Judaism and, obviously, its religious texts, doesn't help the problem. Anytime a political movement is linked to a religious belief, extremism follows and the separation of the political and the religious cannot be achieved.

Are you trying to prove judaism and zionism are linked since the creation of zionist mentality before it was political? Cause you're making a good job doing it. Which is ironic given you criticize zionists for doing that. Anyway, back to your claims:

 

There's a big difference between the return to Zion mentality in judaism and modern Zionism. The return to Zion mentality is just that, the land of present time Israel being the spiritual homeland of the jew's and therefore their feelings of wanting to return. Modern Zionism's is based on this mentality, yes, and pushed by the antisemitism in Europe (and here's the difference) to base a political movement to fund a jewish state in what is modern day Israel and biblically jewish land. 

 

Now, there are a few points to make regarding that. I'll focus on this: If jewish people and muslims coexisted in peace as you claim, then jewish people returning to their homeland without any organized intentions to make a country couldn't make way to antisemitic behavior. And there were major antisemitic events before zionism was political as I showed before. So yes, Israel's independence fueled antisemitism in muslim countries (Which is in itself antisemitic given those people weren't Israeli) however it clearly existed before it. So no, zionsim wasn't the source of antisemitism in muslim countries.

 

4 hours ago, Haburo said:

So, with this in mind, it might not even be many Zionists' fault that they are saying anti-Zionists are antisemites. They can't untangle their problematic political situation from their religion.

No one can untangle the political situation from religion because they are linked, as you just proved.

 

4 hours ago, Haburo said:

Also, like I said earlier, I am not saying that there cannot be instances of antisemitism that are not linked to Zionism. Just as you would accept that there are obviously instances of antisemitism that are not linked to Islam. I'm just saying that Zionism is linked to contemporary instances of antisemitism from "Islamic communities" (i.e. the Middle East neighbours).

We're not talking about instances of antisemitism not linked to zionism. We're talking about zionism clearly not being the source of antisemitism in pre-modern-zionism muslim countries.

 

4 hours ago, Haburo said:

If you don't think that Israel for (an uncontroversial) example, committing population genocide through denying Palestinians passports or their children born outside the country citizenship of Palestine unless they can make it back to the country within 4 years(?) THROUGH Jordan and on a Jordanian passport, has anything to do with antisemitism in the region then you are out of your mind.

One of the things that bothers me the most about your side of the argument is they way they throw the word genocide around (specially when there are real genocides happening in the world but everyone seems to focus on imagining one where they can blame Israel). Israel has cruel policies as do many other countries, yes. That a genocide does not make, in my eyes. It is the mass extermination of a whole group of people, an attempt to wipe them out of existence.

 

4 hours ago, Haburo said:

Ah yes, an article (not study!) posted on the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs... a beacon of impartial truth and honesty and not at all a propaganda machine with the SELF-CONFESSED goal of protecting Israeli security(!) No matter, because it actually proves my point. I don't know why you would post that. It certainly does not help your argument. So, thanks.

 

The 'expulsion' of Jews from Arab countries is a political move, started by Justice for Jews From Arab Countries, in a misled attempt to falsely justify Israel's creation of Palestinian refugees by comparing it to the displacement of Jewish refugees from Arab countries. Many Middle Eastern Jews, especially in Israel, would be angered by your characterisation of Jews from Arab lands as "expelled" refugees because many left their homes illegally prior to 1948- which is not the same as expulsion. It's migration.

Many middle eastern jews would be angered by your characterization of jews from arab lands as migrants when they were clearly being mistreated before and after the creation of modern zionism and Israel's independence, and flee for their lives in many cases after those two things.

 

What is it that you're claiming, though? That it didn't happen? That they didn't experience antisemitic violence before and after Israel's creation? Are you denying there was an antisemitic sentiment in muslim countries after modern zionism's creation?

 

4 hours ago, Haburo said:

Many of anti-Jewish laws referenced in the link you provided were actually poorly-worded anti-Zionist laws enacted, for example in Iraq during the 1948 Iraq/Israel war, by a British puppet-government using the Palestine issue to distract Iraqis from previous calls for independence from Britain. So here, anti-Zionism and antisemitism is again linked by Zionists (the British government) themselves.

One example doesn't define a trend. The british did horrible things. Blaming them for the antisemitism in all muslim countries is a bit too much if you ask me. So I guess either you claim that or your argument doesn't hold up.

 

And that's only you talking about the laws. What about the countless pogroms that happened in that period in those same countries. Does that not speak of a trend to you?

 

4 hours ago, Haburo said:

Esther Meir-Glitzenstein is an historian who provides evidence for her assertion that Jewish Agency officials knew their actions against Palestine would worsen conditions for Jews in the Middle East, but continued anyway so they could 'rescue' those Jews when they chose to leave the Arab countries you are talking about. This is direct evidence in favour of the link between Zionism and antisemitism from Muslim-majority countries in the region.

That's an ugly way to twist the fact that they knew the creation of Israel would make conditions worse for jews in muslim countries (Even though they are not Israelis, but somehow you blame anti-zionism for antisemitism when those conditions got worse??). You make it sound as if the worsening of those conditions was a driving force for the creation of Israel, when in reality it was just a sad but expected effect (which is rooted in muslim antisemitism, because again: Those jews were not Israelis, they belonged to those countries and felt part of them. You of all people must understand that, (assuming you're a non Israeli jew) you're jewish yet you don't feel Israeli).

 

4 hours ago, Haburo said:

The myth, started by Zionists, that Muslims and Jews are polar opposites and destined to be enemies until the end of time is a political tool and does not actually reflect how followers of either religion can interact with each other. It does not even capture how Muslims and Jews have interacted with each other in the past. Bernard Lewis is an historian who documents the FACT that, for TWO MILLENNIA, Jews lived in Arab countries and co-existed with Muslims in peace.

No one said they're meant to be enemies. In fact, I'll remind you that Israel accepted the UN partition plan and the creation of an arab state. Yet palestinians didn't. Israel as time and time again met Palestinians on the table to negotiate peace (as they successfully did with Egypt). They even unilaterally withdrew from Gaza as a starting point for peace - instead they got a islamic terrorist organization to take power and use all resources for their sworn goal of destroying Israel, leading to the blockade by Israel and Egypt. 

 

It's a very complicated conflict and blaming everything on zionism is ridiculous!

 

4 hours ago, Haburo said:

Israel is the factor that changed that, and made it more difficult for Jews (who were being pulled towards, as well as pushed towards) Israel. Not just TO Israel, but BY Israel.

Yes, Israel's declaration of independence made conditions worse but like I said they weren't good before. Even in the best of times during those two millennia, they lived as second class citizens. They would be envious of Israeli arabs' conditions many people claim are second class citizens. But then again those were different times, so yes, they lived relatively well hundred of years ago if you compare it to Europe. However, that's not really useful in 1800s, 1900s context. Fact of the matter is that their conditions were not good in the 1800s and they got much worse in the 1900s.

 

4 hours ago, Haburo said:

Celebrated Jewish historian Salo Baron described the kind of account you just presented as lachrymose and inaccurate. So maybe you should reconsider which one of us is proportion misinformation.

He was free to have his opinion. I'll have mine. Not that I disagree with highlighting the successes of jewish people integrating and paint a more positive picture to affect the future, but we shouldn't use that as an excuse to brand things as inaccurate and grease history to blame one side of a conflict.

 

4 hours ago, Haburo said:

I didn't say they weren't linked. I said they were linked. By Zionists. I think you're confused.

I think you're the one confused because it seems to me you made a clear link between zionism's roots and judaism, therefore linking antisemitism and anti-zionism here:

 

Quote

The fact that it is so inseparably tangled with the core beliefs of Judaism

But then again, you don't have to convince me :flower:

 

4 hours ago, Haburo said:

I think it's really disgusting that you would call me a rat, which is a really horrendous anti-Semitic trope perpetuated not only in Nazi propaganda but still to this day. Jews like me are tired of being depicted as sub-human vermin by those who try to shape history in favour of their missled political beliefs. Shame on you.

You get a cookie for making it seem as if I knew you're jewish, and 3 victim points for pointing out you're jewish in a victim manner. How very lachrymose of you. Baron would be disappointed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, JoshBTW said:

Title of thread: Why is antisemitism so rampant in Islamic communities?

Your response: The problem comes from Israel.

In your own words. You didn't bother to say there/were other sources. Pretty transparent.

Is, not was. In Islamic communities, not in general.

 

3 minutes ago, JoshBTW said:

The examples I gave of the antisemitic trend in muslim majority countries predates the first aliyah and half of them predate hovevei zion. And I'll touch on Zionism before hovevei zion in a bit.

Yeah, I know.

3 minutes ago, JoshBTW said:

Are you trying to prove judaism and zionism are linked since the creation of zionist mentality before it was political? Cause you're making a good job doing it. Which is ironic given you criticize zionists for doing that. Anyway, back to your claims:

Zionism and Judaism are linked. Of course they are? One is literally based on/"justified by" the other.

 

I don't criticise Zionists for claiming Zionism and Judaism are linked. I criticise Zionists for claiming every anti-Zionist critique is anti-Semitic.

 

This couldn't be clearer. It's surprising you're not getting it.

3 minutes ago, JoshBTW said:

There's a big difference between the return to Zion mentality in judaism and modern Zionism. The return to Zion mentality is just that, the land of present time Israel being the spiritual homeland of the jew's and therefore their feelings of wanting to return. Modern Zionism's is based on this mentality, yes, and pushed by the antisemitism in Europe (and here's the difference) to base a political movement to fund a jewish state in what is modern day Israel and biblically jewish land. 

All of this is fine with me.

3 minutes ago, JoshBTW said:

Now, there are a few points to make regarding that. I'll focus on this: If jewish people and muslims coexisted in peace as you claim, then jewish people returning to their homeland without any organized intentions to make a country couldn't make way to antisemitic behavior.

I didn't say this. You are saying this, not me. This is a strange thing to say.

3 minutes ago, JoshBTW said:

And there were major antisemitic events before zionism was political as I showed before.

Fine with me. I'm not saying antisemitism didn't exist before the establishment and organisation of Zionist movements.

3 minutes ago, JoshBTW said:

So yes, Israel's independence fueled antisemitism in muslim countries

This is a huge oversimplification of the point I made. Please refer back to that post if that is unclear.

3 minutes ago, JoshBTW said:

(Which is in itself antisemitic given those people weren't Israeli)

Wrong. Political violence/aggression/tensions and Sectarian violence/aggression/tensions are two separate and distinct things. Though they sometimes happen together, that's not always the case. Anti-Zionist laws are distinct from anti-Jewish laws. The former was just often misinterpreted to permit the latter. They're not the same thing.

3 minutes ago, JoshBTW said:

however it clearly existed before it. So no, zionsim wasn't the source of antisemitism in muslim countries.

You're still responding to someone saying that antisemitism didn't exist before the establishment and organisation of Zionist movements. I'm not saying that.

 

I'm saying that present-day Zionists telling present-day anti-Zionists that their secular anti-Zionist critiques are anti-Semitic is the problem.

3 minutes ago, JoshBTW said:

No one can untangle the political situation from religion because they are linked, as you just proved.

I'm not trying to untangle anything from anything else. Secular anti-Zionist critiques are just that, secular. When the UN says that Israel is repeatedly breaking international law by misnaming occupied territory as 'settled territory', it is not saying that because it hates Jews. It is saying that because that is happening.

3 minutes ago, JoshBTW said:

We're not talking about instances of antisemitism not linked to zionism.

That's what I was saying about the examples you cited. If you accept that those instances were linked to Zionism, you probably agree with me.

3 minutes ago, JoshBTW said:

We're talking about zionism clearly not being the source of antisemitism in pre-modern-zionism muslim countries.

 

One of the things that bothers me the most about your side of the argument is they way they throw the word genocide around (specially when there are real genocides happening in the world but everyone seems to focus on imagining one where they can blame Israel). Israel has cruel policies as do many other countries, yes. That a genocide does not make, in my eyes. It is the mass extermination of a whole group of people, an attempt to wipe them out of existence.

If this is your definition of genocide, then you agree that this is happening now to Palestinians at the hands of Israel. Google "silent transfer" policies of Israel.

3 minutes ago, JoshBTW said:

Many middle eastern jews would be angered by your characterization of jews from arab lands as migrants when they were clearly being mistreated before and after the creation of modern zionism and Israel's independence, and flee for their lives in many cases after those two things.

Migrants are people who choose to leave one country for another. That's what happened.

 

Refugees are people who are involuntarily displaced from one country without another. That's not what happened.

3 minutes ago, JoshBTW said:

What is it that you're claiming, though?

Zionists telling anti-Zionists that their secular anti-Zionist critiques are anti-Semitic is the problem.

3 minutes ago, JoshBTW said:

That it didn't happen? That they didn't experience antisemitic violence before and after Israel's creation?

No. I've already addressed this.

3 minutes ago, JoshBTW said:

Are you denying there was an antisemitic sentiment in muslim countries after modern zionism's creation?

No. I've already addressed this.

3 minutes ago, JoshBTW said:

One example doesn't define a trend. The british did horrible things. Blaming them for the antisemitism in all muslim countries is a bit too much if you ask me.

I didn't say this. You are saying this, not me. This is a strange thing to say.

3 minutes ago, JoshBTW said:

So I guess either you claim that or your argument doesn't hold up.

 

And that's only you talking about the laws. What about the countless pogroms that happened in that period in those same countries. Does that not speak of a trend to you?

I can't address this properly unless you expand with some examples or evidence, preferably not from a Zionist propagandist. I'm not sure whether it's on topic, but maybe you could link it to this discussion if it's really something you want to get into.

3 minutes ago, JoshBTW said:

That's an ugly way to twist the fact that they knew the creation of Israel would make conditions worse for jews in muslim countries (Even though they are not Israelis, but somehow you blame anti-zionism for antisemitism when those conditions got worse??).

It sounds like you think only Israelis can be Zionists. That's not true. You don't even have to be Jewish to be a Zionist e.g. Donald Trump is a Christian American Zionist. There are Zionists in countries other than Israel.

 

I also don't think it's right for you to criticise me for twisting something I am not twisting, and then going on to twist the statement that the Israeli government's policies made conditions worse for Jews in Arab countries into the false statement that the creation of Israel made conditions worse for Jews in Arab countries. Israel could have been created in a way that didn't alienate, subjugate, oppress and ultimately erase (and I'm being generous here, not mentioning the countless human rights atrocities) Palestinians.

 

By the way, it's important to note that I'm not just talking about Muslim Palestinians. I am talking about Palestinians.

3 minutes ago, JoshBTW said:

You make it sound as if the worsening of those conditions was a driving force for the creation of Israel,

I didn't say this. You are saying this, not me. This is a strange thing to say.

3 minutes ago, JoshBTW said:

when in reality it was just a sad but expected effect

I am saying this. That was the expected effect of policies enacted by the Israeli government. Here, you agree with me.

3 minutes ago, JoshBTW said:

(which is rooted in muslim antisemitism, because again: Those jews were not Israelis, they belonged to those countries and felt part of them. You of all people must understand that, (assuming you're a non Israeli jew) you're jewish yet you don't feel Israeli).

Being Zionist =/= being Israeli. I've already addressed this.

3 minutes ago, JoshBTW said:

No one said they're meant to be enemies.

I'm not even going to bother citing sources for this. The short answer is that this is incorrect. Moving on.

3 minutes ago, JoshBTW said:

In fact, I'll remind you that Israel accepted the UN partition plan and the creation of an arab state. Yet palestinians didn't. Israel as time and time again met Palestinians on the table to negotiate peace (as they successfully did with Egypt).

This is fine (I'm not going to get into why they did this, because this isn't the discussion we're having. If you're confused about why this assertion doesn't bother me, look it up).

3 minutes ago, JoshBTW said:

They even unilaterally withdrew from Gaza as a starting point for peace - instead they got a islamic terrorist organization to take power and use all resources for their sworn goal of destroying Israel, leading to the blockade by Israel and Egypt. 

 

It's a very complicated conflict and blaming everything on zionism is ridiculous!

I don't think I'm blaming anything on Zionism. I think I'm saying that Zionists telling anti-Zionists that their secular anti-Zionist critiques are anti-Semitic is the problem. Not all Zionists do this. Not all Zionists are Israeli. Not all Zionists are Jewish. Zionism is much bigger than the practice common to some Zionists which I am critiquing.

3 minutes ago, JoshBTW said:

Yes, Israel's declaration of independence made conditions worse but like I said they weren't good before. Even in the best of times during those two millennia, they lived as second class citizens. They would be envious of Israeli arabs' conditions many people claim are second class citizens. But then again those were different times, so yes, they lived relatively well hundred of years ago if you compare it to Europe. However, that's not really useful in 1800s, 1900s context. Fact of the matter is that their conditions were not good in the 1800s and they got much worse in the 1900s.

I think if you're going to talk about history to give context to this discussion, you shouldn't just cherry pick the history that supports your own argument. Especially when we're talking about what are essentially historical concepts, seeing as the foundation of Zionism is reclamation. It doesn't make sense to ignore from whom they're reclaiming 'their land'. Despite the fact that, according to the Torah, there is actually no justification for the establishment of Israel until the arrival of the messiah... but that's besides the point. We either consider historical context or we don't.

3 minutes ago, JoshBTW said:

He was free to have his opinion. I'll have mine. Not that I disagree with highlighting the successes of jewish people integrating and paint a more positive picture to affect the future, but we shouldn't use that as an excuse to brand things as inaccurate and grease history to blame one side of a conflict.

 

I think you're the one confused because it seems to me you made a clear link between zionism's roots and judaism, therefore linking antisemitism and anti-zionism here:

 

But then again, you don't have to convince me :flower:

Zionism and Judaism are linked. That does not automatically make critiques of Zionism critiques of Judaism.

 

For example:

  1. Justin says that people who live in Malibu should be blonde.
  2. Britney (who is blonde) bases her decision off this to move to Malibu.
  3. Beyoncé, a neighbour of Britney's, says that Britney shouldn't live in Malibu.
  4. Beyoncé bases this decision on Britney walking around barefoot and littering cheap hair extensions all over town.

Is Beyoncé criticising Justin's assertion? No. Is Beyoncé criticising Justin? No! Beyoncé isn't anti-Justin. Beyoncé is anti-Britney. It might even be the case that Beyoncé isn't anti-Britney, and Beyoncé is just anti-barefoot and anti-littering. Maybe if Britney were to put away her hillbilly toes and pay for better extensions, Beyoncé wouldn't mind Britney living in Malibu.

 

Do you see the difference?

 

Zionism is based on Judaism, in the same way that Britney's decision is based on what Justin said. Opposing Zionism does not entail opposing Judaism because, although linked, they are not the same thing.

3 minutes ago, JoshBTW said:

You get a cookie for making it seem as if I knew you're jewish, and 3 victim points for pointing out you're jewish in a victim manner. How very lachrymose of you. Baron would be disappointed.

Isn't it frustrating when someone conflates your critique of a political position with antisemitism? :flower:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

the same people who blame antisemitism on Israel are the same people who complain when someone says all muslims are terrorists

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/2/2019 at 5:35 PM, BeautyNumber2 said:

Says the dumb bitch crying about people occupying land when your flop Palestinian faves stole Jewish land to begin with. Just because Arabs murdered, pillaged, and raped for centuries to keep the land they stole doesn’t make it theirs. You’re just mad the Grand Mufti got caught working with Hitler to organize the Final solution to kill Jews in Europe so the UN responded.

 

Israel wasn’t created from nothing and it wasn’t created from Palestinian land. Palestine didn’t even own the land they walked on, it was the British who owned the mandate of Palestine after the Ottoman Empire was dismantled so come correct. Palestine wasn’t even a nation before WWI and it wasn’t after one WWII so get over it. Yal act like Palestine was birthed since the dawn of man as a Muslim state when Israel existed centuries before Islam was ever founded as a warmongering religion, fact. Lying trash. Don’t make me use my minor in History, you won’t like it.

 

You do know that Islam was created in the 7th century, right? A millennia after people in the Middle East already practiced Zoroastrian, Judaism, indigenous faiths, and later Christianity. The historically accurate maps of Israel existing over 1200 years before Islam was even founded disprove your entire diatribe against Israel. You’re mad, fuming that Palestinians finally got what was coming to them. They are now a landless, nationless joke. The Palestinians are just a loose collection of tribes, gangs, Arab nationalists, and terrorist organizations that have to lie, murder, bomb, hijack, doctor photos, and meticulously edit videos to stay relevant. And that’s the legacy of the Palestinian people. Israel’s crown is intact, so enjoy the West Bank while you still can.

Oh my god, someone on ATRL that talks sense. Finally!

 

Anti-Semitism isn't because of Israel. Anti-Semitism has been a trope of Islam as long as Islam has been around. Islam is based on conquest and domination. It was invented in the medieval era, and that's where it's remained.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/29/2019 at 3:19 PM, Horizon Flame said:

It’s not just a religion, it’s also an ethnicity. 

 

On 6/29/2019 at 3:25 PM, Judas Bertha said:

i see. so basically, its racism (even tho its not a race)?

 

On 6/29/2019 at 3:19 PM, Horizon Flame said:

It’s not just a religion, it’s also an ethnicity. 

How is Jewish an ethnicity when there are arab jews, latin jews, black ethiopian jews and others there were like multiple ethnic tribes lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/2/2019 at 9:35 AM, BeautyNumber2 said:

Says the dumb bitch crying about people occupying land when your flop Palestinian faves stole Jewish land to begin with. Just because Arabs murdered, pillaged, and raped for centuries to keep the land they stole doesn’t make it theirs. You’re just mad the Grand Mufti got caught working with Hitler to organize the Final solution to kill Jews in Europe so the UN responded.

 

Israel wasn’t created from nothing and it wasn’t created from Palestinian land. Palestine didn’t even own the land they walked on, it was the British who owned the mandate of Palestine after the Ottoman Empire was dismantled so come correct. Palestine wasn’t even a nation before WWI and it wasn’t after one WWII so get over it. Yal act like Palestine was birthed since the dawn of man as a Muslim state when Israel existed centuries before Islam was ever founded as a warmongering religion, fact. Lying trash. Don’t make me use my minor in History, you won’t like it.

 

You do know that Islam was created in the 7th century, right? A millennia after people in the Middle East already practiced Zoroastrian, Judaism, indigenous faiths, and later Christianity. The historically accurate maps of Israel existing over 1200 years before Islam was even founded disprove your entire diatribe against Israel. You’re mad, fuming that Palestinians finally got what was coming to them. They are now a landless, nationless joke. The Palestinians are just a loose collection of tribes, gangs, Arab nationalists, and terrorist organizations that have to lie, murder, bomb, hijack, doctor photos, and meticulously edit videos to stay relevant. And that’s the legacy of the Palestinian people. Israel’s crown is intact, so enjoy the West Bank while you still can.

OOP!!! LOL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, FreeXone said:

 

 

How is Jewish an ethnicity when there are arab jews, latin jews, black ethiopian jews and others there were like multiple ethnic tribes lol.

Honey, you can do DNA tests for Jewish ethnicity. Latin Jews, black Jews, and others would show up in DNA tests as having Jewish DNA.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, FreeXone said:

How is Jewish an ethnicity when there are arab jews, latin jews, black ethiopian jews and others there were like multiple ethnic tribes lol.

Because they all came from the same place, even if their ancestors mixed with goyim in the diaspora.

PS: use 'mizrahi' instead of 'arab' to refer to those people because they're not arabs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ProudLBS said:

Because they all came from the same place, even if their ancestors mixed with goyim in the diaspora.

PS: use 'mizrahi' instead of 'arab' to refer to those people because they're not arabs

But can you really lump them all together in 2019 ethnically. A european jewish person will be judged differently than a ethiopian one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/7/2019 at 6:02 PM, Haburo said:

Is, not was.

What does this even mean? That you recognize that before modern zionism there was antisemitism in muslim countries? I don't get what the was is referring to. If it means what I understood then yes, antisemitism is rampant in islamic communities at the moment and was rampant before zionism as well. Both are correlated, zionism just made their already antisemitic behavior worse.

 

On 7/7/2019 at 6:02 PM, Haburo said:

I don't criticise Zionists for claiming Zionism and Judaism are linked. I criticise Zionists for claiming every anti-Zionist critique is anti-Semitic.

You clearly did,

 

Quote

so have themselves conflated Zionism with Judaism

but I guess that was a mistake, now I get the more logical point you're trying to make. More on that later.

 

On 7/7/2019 at 6:02 PM, Haburo said:

There's a big difference between the return to Zion mentality in judaism and modern Zionism. The return to Zion mentality is just that, the land of present time Israel being the spiritual homeland of the jew's and therefore their feelings of wanting to return. Modern Zionism's is based on this mentality, yes, and pushed by the antisemitism in Europe (and here's the difference) to base a political movement to fund a jewish state in what is modern day Israel and biblically jewish land. 

 All of this is fine with me.

Quote

Now, there are a few points to make regarding that. I'll focus on this: If jewish people and muslims coexisted in peace as you claim, then jewish people returning to their homeland without any organized intentions to make a country couldn't make way to antisemitic behavior.

 

I didn't say this. You are saying this, not me. This is a strange thing to say.

Ok so we've agreed on the definition of let's call it the return to zion thought that predated modern zionism. What was the point you were trying to make by saying that that movement predated modern zionism? Were you implying that this was the cause of the examples of antisemitic behavior I gave? Because I don't get how would that idea (And it was just an idea, pre-modern-zionism aliyah was almost non existent) would be the cause of antisemitism.

 

I guess I just don't get why you brought that up in the first place.

 

Quote

So yes, Israel's independence fueled antisemitism in muslim countries

This is a huge oversimplification of the point I made. Please refer back to that post if that is unclear.

Please do explain to me in what scenario would 5 arab countries and the Palestinian population go to war with a newly created jewish state in the middle of the muslim world. Because what I understand from your comment is that there was a way to avoid the conflict and still make Israel a reality. I mean, it is the conflict and its effects on Palestinians you are saying is the source of antisemitism, isn't it? The whole arab world was invested in being against Israel's independence, whether actively through war or not, and that was only a mirror to the antisemitic behavior of the population in those countries (before and after Israel). 

 

Quote

Wrong. Political violence/aggression/tensions and Sectarian violence/aggression/tensions are two separate and distinct things. Though they sometimes happen together, that's not always the case. Anti-Zionist laws are distinct from anti-Jewish laws. The former was just often misinterpreted to permit the latter. They're not the same thing.

Antisemitic behavior grew post Israel. They are correlated. Examples of this later. Is this your big argument? That antisemitism in the 1900s in arab countries isn't related to the creation of Israel and zionism? But I thought you were blaming Israel for muslim antisemitism in your first post. How can Israel be to blame for most antisemitism in the muslim world when antisemitism there is sectarian violence?

 

Misinterpreted my ass. You're making excuses for their govs.

 

Quote

I'm saying that present-day Zionists telling present-day anti-Zionists that their secular anti-Zionist critiques are anti-Semitic is the problem.

True you can criticize a political movement without hating the population it comes from or is directly linked to. I have plenty of things to criticize about zionism and Israel's current government. It just so happens to be the case that most critics of zionism are antisemitic, and many times these people try to wash their antisemitic roots as antizionist, and push the line of what is what. Next thing you know calling for the destruction of Israel is just a critique of zionism.

 

Quote

When the UN says that Israel is repeatedly breaking international law by misnaming occupied territory as 'settled territory', it is not saying that because it hates Jews. It is saying that because that is happening.

Oh I've got plenty to say about the UNHRW and their weird focus on Israel. In what world does Israel get more resolutions against them that all other countries in the world combined? Literally more than three times the amount of Syria. Venezuela got 0 up to 2016, haven't looked into the years after.

 

UN resolutions should be taken into account, but let's not put the UN in a pedestal.

 

Quote

We're not talking about instances of antisemitism not linked to zionism.

That's what I was saying about the examples you cited. If you accept that those instances were linked to Zionism, you probably agree with me.

No. The point I was making was this:

Quote

We're talking about zionism clearly not being the source of antisemitism in pre-modern-zionism muslim countries.

Those weren't instances only, they were a clear trend in pre-zionism muslim countries. The argument here is that antisemitic trends existed in muslim countries before Israel. Israel's creation was just fuel to the hate that was already there.
 

Quote

If this is your definition of genocide, then you agree that this is happening now to Palestinians at the hands of Israel. Google "silent transfer" policies of Israel.

It's ridiculous to clam the silent transfer policies to be a genocide! Do I agree with those policies? No. Do I think Israel's current government is taking actions that they shouldn't regarding the west bank? Yes. Do I understand why Israelis voted in a right wing gov? Also yes. One side isn't going to solve this alone, and so far Israel's been the more willing side. When Palestinian's leaders get serious about a solution and a compromise (specially considering their position is very different from what it was in 1948) maybe we can have a more moderate gov in the Israeli side to work with as well.

 

Let's do some numbers. I'll take a very exaggerated figure from a website with the name intifada in it for the Palestinian numbers, and take the most conservative numbers for other examples.

 

In 2018, 300 Palestinians were killed by Israel.

50,000 Kurds killed by Iraq.

In a year at least 200,000 Bengali people were raped and killed during 1971 by Pakistanis.

In three years at least 140,000 (almost 50,000 per year in absolute figures) indigenous people were killed in Guatemala.

In three months 1.3 million jews were killed during the holocaust.

 

Calling the Israeli-Palestinian conflict a genocide is insulting and disgusting. Yes there are innocent people dying. Yes Islamists don't mind using civilians as martyrs. No, it's not a genocide.

 

Quote

Refugees are people who are involuntarily displaced from one country without another. That's not what happened.

Sure, many conflicts have people displacing other people out of what they consider their territory. No one's forcing Venezuelans out of their country. No one's expelling Syrians. Yet they're refugees. You don't need to be expelled from your country to be a refugee.They're escaping the conditions they live in (just like arab jews did in the 1900s).

 

That is what happened.

 

In fact, among the examples of antisemitism rising in muslim countries after Israel's independence there was a country that wasn't immediately affected by that trend, Algeria. Further proof that jews weren't just migrating because of that old return to zion movement being given a way in modern zionism. They were escaping antisemitism getting worse by the creation of the jewish state. Since they didn't face a steep rise of antisemitism in Algeria opposed to other muslim countries, they didn't leave. Clear as water.

 

Another good example of this was the Farhud. Right after it happened jewish people made it out to be an isolated event of antisemitism, fueled by their Iraqi national identity. They weren't willing to move, and most of those that did came back hoping their lives would return to normal. And they mostly did. However, after the death sentence of Shafiq Ades it was clear to them that conditions would only get worse as a result of antisemitism being fueled by Israel's creation. Thing that happened and gave way to most jewish people in Iraq fleeing the country.

 

Quote

Zionists telling anti-Zionists that their secular anti-Zionist critiques are anti-Semitic is the problem.

Extreme anti-Israel and antisemitic people trying to pass as moderate critics of zionism is the problem.

 

Quote

I can't address this properly unless you expand with some examples or evidence, preferably not from a Zionist propagandist. I'm not sure whether it's on topic, but maybe you could link it to this discussion if it's really something you want to get into.

Now, let's see how the creation of Israel (and not only their policies afterwards) led to antisemitism in muslim countries.

 

The death sentence of business man Shafiq Ades a few years after the Farhud.

1948 Anti-Jewish riots in Oujda and Jerada.

1948 Anti-Jewish riots in Tripolitania.

1947 Aden riots in Yemen.

1947 anti-Jewish riots in Aleppo.

 

 

Quote

It sounds like you think only Israelis can be Zionists. That's not true. You don't even have to be Jewish to be a Zionist e.g. Donald Trump is a Christian American Zionist. There are Zionists in countries other than Israel.

Nope. Never implied this. Why did you get that idea?

 

Quote

and then going on to twist the statement that the Israeli government's policies made conditions worse for Jews in Arab countries into the false statement that the creation of Israel made conditions worse for Jews in Arab countries

Israel's creation made conditions worse for jews in arab countries. Here's a bit on the intentions and/or predictions of muslim countries' leaders if Israel were to be created:

 

Heykal Pasha, Egyptian delegate to the UN 5 days before the resolution that led to Israel's independence:

Quote

The United Nations . . . should not lose sight of the fact that the proposed solution might endanger a million Jews living in the Moslem countries. Partition of Palestine might create in those countries an anti-Semitism even more difficult to root out than the anti-Semitism which the Allies were trying to eradicate in Germany. . . If the United Nations decides to partition Palestine, it might be responsible for the massacre of a large number of Jews.

It wasn't Israel's policies after its creation that led him to say this. It was the creation of a jewish state in the middle of muslim countries. And he was right!

 

Another one of his:

Quote

Jewish blood will necessarily be shed elsewhere in the Arab world… to place in certain and serious danger a million Jews

Let's see more examples. Jamal al-Husayni co-founder and chairman of the Palestine Arab Party:

Quote

The blood will flow like rivers in the Middle East

This was back when they thought they would win the war. I mean, it was 5 countries and a big arab population inside Israel itself against a newly formed country. We both know exactly who's blood he's talking about.

 

Iraq's then-prime minister promised:

Quote

“We will smash the country with our guns, and destroy and obliterate every place the Jews will seek shelter in.”

Every place. In his own words. Jews, not Israelis. Not Palestinan jews. Jews. Another one from him:

Quote

Severe measures should be taken against all Jews in Arab countries

Abdul Rahman Hassan Azzam, the Secretary-General of the Arab League from 1945 to 1952:

Quote

this will be a war of extermination and momentous massacre which will be spoken of like the Tartar massacre or the Crusader wars

Hmm. Exterminate all the jews. As a consequence of Israel's creation.

 

 

Quote

Israel could have been created in a way that didn't alienate, subjugate, oppress and ultimately erase (and I'm being generous here, not mentioning the countless human rights atrocities) Palestinians.

Sure, that was called arab states and Palestinians not declaring a war and agreeing to sit to negotiate before multiple wars! Hell, it's called ****ing cut your losses and move forward with a peace treaty after even more wars. Nothing is ever enough, now they've got what they grew, a far right gov not willing to negotiate.

 

Quote

You make it sound as if the worsening of those conditions was a driving force for the creation of Israel,

I didn't say this. You are saying this, not me. This is a strange thing to say.

Thought you were talking about the creation of Israel. Can't say I agree with all policies of the Israeli gov, can't say I disagree with all. Be specific, I'll tell you what I agree with and think was worth fueling the fire for.

 

Quote

No one said they're meant to be enemies.

I'm not even going to bother citing sources for this. The short answer is that this is incorrect. Moving on.

I can speak for myself. Want to make a point? Go ahead. Short answer isn't enough.

 

Quote

It doesn't make sense to ignore from whom they're reclaiming 'their land'. 

Agreed. But it's a bit hard to get someone that doesn't want to come to the table to negotiate. The unilateral withdrawal from Gaza was a great chance to move forward, still proposals and actions kept falling to deaf ears when it comes to the conflict.

 

Quote

Zionism is based on Judaism. Opposing Zionism does not entail opposing Judaism because, although linked, they are not the same thing.

Nah. This is a fine line and a very grey area. Given their intrinsic link there's a very fine line to what is opposing zionism without being antisemitic and otherwise. You're selling this too black and white.

 

I get your point, and I agree Israel shouldn't be given a free pass based on that. However, many people use that excuse to purposefully ignore the other side's responsibility in this and sell this idea to the masses. This is a personal example, but I had an Austrian friend tell me that given that Israel is the more developed country they should be responsible for the welfare of the other side, even when the other side isn't only not willing to sit and talk but is purposefully trying to destroy Israel (the other side being Hamas in this case). 

 

You can disagree, but this isn't an isolated example in my eyes. It's a mentality that pro-palestinians are trying to sell. Put all the blame on Israel. Sell rioting as peaceful protest. Mask extreme islamic values as western liberalism. Sell a goal to destroy Israel as violent resistance.

 

Quote

Isn't it frustrating when someone conflates your critique of a political position with antisemitism? :flower:

Not more frustrating than people masquerading their antisemitism as a political position. :flower:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/7/2019 at 4:02 PM, Haburo said:

Is, not was. In Islamic communities, not in general.

 

Yeah, I know.

Zionism and Judaism are linked. Of course they are? One is literally based on/"justified by" the other.

 

I don't criticise Zionists for claiming Zionism and Judaism are linked. I criticise Zionists for claiming every anti-Zionist critique is anti-Semitic.

 

This couldn't be clearer. It's surprising you're not getting it.

All of this is fine with me.

I didn't say this. You are saying this, not me. This is a strange thing to say.

Fine with me. I'm not saying antisemitism didn't exist before the establishment and organisation of Zionist movements.

This is a huge oversimplification of the point I made. Please refer back to that post if that is unclear.

Wrong. Political violence/aggression/tensions and Sectarian violence/aggression/tensions are two separate and distinct things. Though they sometimes happen together, that's not always the case. Anti-Zionist laws are distinct from anti-Jewish laws. The former was just often misinterpreted to permit the latter. They're not the same thing.

You're still responding to someone saying that antisemitism didn't exist before the establishment and organisation of Zionist movements. I'm not saying that.

 

I'm saying that present-day Zionists telling present-day anti-Zionists that their secular anti-Zionist critiques are anti-Semitic is the problem.

I'm not trying to untangle anything from anything else. Secular anti-Zionist critiques are just that, secular. When the UN says that Israel is repeatedly breaking international law by misnaming occupied territory as 'settled territory', it is not saying that because it hates Jews. It is saying that because that is happening.

That's what I was saying about the examples you cited. If you accept that those instances were linked to Zionism, you probably agree with me.

If this is your definition of genocide, then you agree that this is happening now to Palestinians at the hands of Israel. Google "silent transfer" policies of Israel.

Migrants are people who choose to leave one country for another. That's what happened.

 

Refugees are people who are involuntarily displaced from one country without another. That's not what happened.

Zionists telling anti-Zionists that their secular anti-Zionist critiques are anti-Semitic is the problem.

No. I've already addressed this.

No. I've already addressed this.

I didn't say this. You are saying this, not me. This is a strange thing to say.

I can't address this properly unless you expand with some examples or evidence, preferably not from a Zionist propagandist. I'm not sure whether it's on topic, but maybe you could link it to this discussion if it's really something you want to get into.

It sounds like you think only Israelis can be Zionists. That's not true. You don't even have to be Jewish to be a Zionist e.g. Donald Trump is a Christian American Zionist. There are Zionists in countries other than Israel.

 

I also don't think it's right for you to criticise me for twisting something I am not twisting, and then going on to twist the statement that the Israeli government's policies made conditions worse for Jews in Arab countries into the false statement that the creation of Israel made conditions worse for Jews in Arab countries. Israel could have been created in a way that didn't alienate, subjugate, oppress and ultimately erase (and I'm being generous here, not mentioning the countless human rights atrocities) Palestinians.

 

By the way, it's important to note that I'm not just talking about Muslim Palestinians. I am talking about Palestinians.

I didn't say this. You are saying this, not me. This is a strange thing to say.

I am saying this. That was the expected effect of policies enacted by the Israeli government. Here, you agree with me.

Being Zionist =/= being Israeli. I've already addressed this.

I'm not even going to bother citing sources for this. The short answer is that this is incorrect. Moving on.

This is fine (I'm not going to get into why they did this, because this isn't the discussion we're having. If you're confused about why this assertion doesn't bother me, look it up).

I don't think I'm blaming anything on Zionism. I think I'm saying that Zionists telling anti-Zionists that their secular anti-Zionist critiques are anti-Semitic is the problem. Not all Zionists do this. Not all Zionists are Israeli. Not all Zionists are Jewish. Zionism is much bigger than the practice common to some Zionists which I am critiquing.

I think if you're going to talk about history to give context to this discussion, you shouldn't just cherry pick the history that supports your own argument. Especially when we're talking about what are essentially historical concepts, seeing as the foundation of Zionism is reclamation. It doesn't make sense to ignore from whom they're reclaiming 'their land'. Despite the fact that, according to the Torah, there is actually no justification for the establishment of Israel until the arrival of the messiah... but that's besides the point. We either consider historical context or we don't.

Zionism and Judaism are linked. That does not automatically make critiques of Zionism critiques of Judaism.

 

For example:

  1. Justin says that people who live in Malibu should be blonde.
  2. Britney (who is blonde) bases her decision off this to move to Malibu.
  3. Beyoncé, a neighbour of Britney's, says that Britney shouldn't live in Malibu.
  4. Beyoncé bases this decision on Britney walking around barefoot and littering cheap hair extensions all over town.

Is Beyoncé criticising Justin's assertion? No. Is Beyoncé criticising Justin? No! Beyoncé isn't anti-Justin. Beyoncé is anti-Britney. It might even be the case that Beyoncé isn't anti-Britney, and Beyoncé is just anti-barefoot and anti-littering. Maybe if Britney were to put away her hillbilly toes and pay for better extensions, Beyoncé wouldn't mind Britney living in Malibu.

 

Do you see the difference?

 

Zionism is based on Judaism, in the same way that Britney's decision is based on what Justin said. Opposing Zionism does not entail opposing Judaism because, although linked, they are not the same thing.

Isn't it frustrating when someone conflates your critique of a political position with antisemitism? :flower:

:mandown:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/8/2019 at 5:34 PM, JoshBTW said:

What does this even mean? That you recognize that before modern zionism there was antisemitism in muslim countries?

What a weird thing to say. Of course there was antisemitism in Muslim-majority countries (and any countries containing Jews) before 'modern Zionism'.

On 7/8/2019 at 5:34 PM, JoshBTW said:

I don't get what the was is referring to. If it means what I understood then yes, antisemitism is rampant in islamic communities at the moment and was rampant before zionism as well. Both are correlated, zionism just made their already antisemitic behavior worse.

Why are you fighting with me if you think this :ahh:

On 7/8/2019 at 5:34 PM, JoshBTW said:

You clearly did,

Quote where I said that.

On 7/8/2019 at 5:34 PM, JoshBTW said:

but I guess that was a mistake, now I get the more logical point you're trying to make. More on that later.

 

Ok so we've agreed on the definition of let's call it the return to zion thought that predated modern zionism. What was the point you were trying to make by saying that that movement predated modern zionism? Were you implying that this was the cause of the examples of antisemitic behavior I gave? Because I don't get how would that idea (And it was just an idea, pre-modern-zionism aliyah was almost non existent) would be the cause of antisemitism.

That your "pre-Zionism" examples weren't actually that.

On 7/8/2019 at 5:34 PM, JoshBTW said:

I guess I just don't get why you brought that up in the first place.

 

Please do explain to me in what scenario would 5 arab countries and the Palestinian population go to war with a newly created jewish state in the middle of the muslim world. Because what I understand from your comment is that there was a way to avoid the conflict and still make Israel a reality. I mean, it is the conflict and its effects on Palestinians you are saying is the source of antisemitism, isn't it? The whole arab world was invested in being against Israel's independence, whether actively through war or not, and that was only a mirror to the antisemitic behavior of the population in those countries (before and after Israel). 

I know you can't seriously think that Israel, by its existence alone, is what is causing the problems and not the countless human rights abuses and violations of international law they commit. Israel actively invading other territories (see: Galen Heights, for example) is hardly endearing them to their neighbours. Maybe if they, I don't know, weren't active proponents of actual ethnic cleansing then they would be met with more welcome by the ethnicities they have been trying to cleanse. You seem like a smart person. I am sure that you can see the policies of Israel are a really big problem here.

 

In direct response to the bolded, it's unlikely that the formation of any new country on (let's say:) occupied territory will be without conflict. But that the conflict is still ongoing after all of this time is really strange. It sounds as if you think this is because Israel is made up of Jews. I don't: I think it's because Israel is (let's say:) behaving badly. It's also really strange that Israel is facing so much hostility from neighbouring countries. It sounds as if you think this is because Israel's neighbouring countries are Muslim-majority countries, who are anti-Semitic 'just because'. I don't: I think it's because Israel (let's say:) creates periodic refugee crises for these countries to deal with and often (let's say:) interferes with their territory and sovereignty.

 

You may read the above paragraph and think 'really strange comparative to what'. An example of another 'newly formed country' is Northern Ireland, also formed in the 20th century. Northern Ireland was plagued by a famous sectarian/political (just like Israel/Palestine) conflict in the 70s, but since 1996 has had peace within its boarders and at no point faced the animosity of its neighbouring countries that Israel faces. You may think that is because they are not Jews, and people (or Muslims?) are anti-Semitic. I don't: I think it is to do with how the country was set up- as distinct from Israel.

 

I am going to talk a bit now about the Israeli political system, which you bring up at a later point. I'll try to avoid repeating myself later.

 

In Northern Ireland, there is a power-sharing government with devolved powers to decide regional matters, where each side of the traditional religious/political split is represented equally and each side is given a veto to protect itself from harmful practices. There are also free and fair elections, unlike in Israel where only one in seven Palestinians can vote because they have registered as Israeli citizens (with over half of all Palestinians being denationalised and expelled from their homes; therefore disenfranchised). Interestingly, the third of all Palestinians living in West Bank and Gaza under Israeli military rule cannot vote- but the Israelis occupying the same area can. So, you end up with a government which anybody can see passes policies to exclude the Muslim (and other) peoples it claims sovereignty over. That is a bit of a problem and, I think anyone can see, might exacerbate conflict and hostility. Quite significantly.

 

With parallel examples in mind, it should be quite clear to see that Israel's actions- not just its existence- are a problem.

On 7/8/2019 at 5:34 PM, JoshBTW said:

Antisemitic behavior grew post Israel. They are correlated. Examples of this later. Is this your big argument?

Maybe you're right and it is just a coincidence that the barbaric and racist policies of a new state happen to correlate with an increase in hostility towards THE BASIS OF those policies from the people they are adversely affecting.

 

I don't think so.

On 7/8/2019 at 5:34 PM, JoshBTW said:

That antisemitism in the 1900s in arab countries isn't related to the creation of Israel and zionism? But I thought you were blaming Israel for muslim antisemitism in your first post. How can Israel be to blame for most antisemitism in the muslim world when antisemitism there is sectarian violence?

I don't understand what you're saying here. I think there could be some words missing between "when antisemitism" and "there is sectarian violence".

 

The point I think you are trying to make(?) I have already addressed. That political and sectarian violence sometimes happen together, does not change the fact that they are not the same thing. I think you applied this argument above, when you alluded to the growth in anti-Semitic behaviour (a claim that is wayyyy too general to be correct) post-Israel is not causal evidence, merely correlative.

On 7/8/2019 at 5:34 PM, JoshBTW said:

Misinterpreted my ass. You're making excuses for their govs.

I'm definitely not making excuses for their governments. I do not support those laws. I am explaining why the application of those flawed laws resulted in the behaviour you are discussing at length. I'm also explaining that the laws and the behaviour they accidentally and, yes, wrongfully encouraged.

On 7/8/2019 at 5:34 PM, JoshBTW said:

It just so happens to be the case that most critics of zionism are antisemitic,

I don't think so. I also don't think you can make such a strong claim without backing it up. You're stating your inadequately supported opinion as fact.

On 7/8/2019 at 5:34 PM, JoshBTW said:

and many times these people try to wash their antisemitic roots as antizionist, and push the line of what is what. Next thing you know calling for the destruction of Israel is just a critique of zionism.

Calling for the destruction of Israel (to be clear: not something I would do) is not calling for the destruction of Jews. Just so we're clear on the difference between anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism. From this point, it seems to be something you're confusing.

On 7/8/2019 at 5:34 PM, JoshBTW said:

Oh I've got plenty to say about the UNHRW and their weird focus on Israel. In what world does Israel get more resolutions against them that all other countries in the world combined? Literally more than three times the amount of Syria. Venezuela got 0 up to 2016, haven't looked into the years after.

The reason that they are receiving so much attention is because a certain Israeli ally with a veto is so powerful and influential that Israeli abuses are allowed to continue. If the resolutions were implemented and not ignored by the certain Israeli ally, there wouldn't need to be so many of them.

 

I don't think the UN is anti-Semitic. I think they are anti-violations of international law. That is kind of the point of the UN. I hope you would agree with me, instead of endorsing what is effectively a conspiracy theory.

 

With that in mind, I would ask you the same question: why does Israel get so much attention from the UN? Maybe, just maybe, it's because they're violating international law.

On 7/8/2019 at 5:34 PM, JoshBTW said:

UN resolutions should be taken into account, but let's not put the UN in a pedestal.

I don't think I did. I think they could be way more active. It sounds like we agree on that.

On 7/8/2019 at 5:34 PM, JoshBTW said:

No. The point I was making was this:

Those weren't instances only, they were a clear trend in pre-zionism muslim countries. The argument here is that antisemitic trends existed in muslim countries before Israel. Israel's creation was just fuel to the hate that was already there.

I think I can agree with the bolded, but I think it's naïve to stop the conversation at Israel's creation. Their behaviour is the problem. If they were a good country (tempted to say 'civilised'), they wouldn't face the kind of backlash (anti-Zionist or anti-Semitic) that they currently do. The UN would have nothing to regulate.

On 7/8/2019 at 5:34 PM, JoshBTW said:

It's ridiculous to clam the silent transfer policies to be a genocide!

I'm not claiming anything. That's what's happening.

 

You said that genocide is "the mass extermination of a whole group of people, an attempt to wipe them out of existence". That is happening.

 

It is called 'population genocide'.

On 7/8/2019 at 5:34 PM, JoshBTW said:

Do I agree with those policies? No. Do I think Israel's current government is taking actions that they shouldn't regarding the west bank? Yes. Do I understand why Israelis voted in a right wing gov? Also yes. One side isn't going to solve this alone, and so far Israel's been the more willing side.

Think about why!

On 7/8/2019 at 5:34 PM, JoshBTW said:

When Palestinian's leaders get serious about a solution and a compromise (specially considering their position is very different from what it was in 1948) maybe we can have a more moderate gov in the Israeli side to work with as well.

This won't happen under the current system. I'm not even going to touch on the current government, or the kind of leadership that Israelis are actually demanding. The system doesn't work because not everybody has a vote (as I explained earlier). I hope I do not have to explain how silent transfer policies worsen this problem. If we look at Northern Ireland, they have PR-STV. Something like that, if everybody in Israel were allowed to vote, would probably be a fairer representation in elections than is currently offered. The Israeli government doesn't want to change to a more inclusive system. For obvious reasons.

 

Especially when we consider how the 'unity government' idea was received. Something that even the Americans would have been happy to agree to.

On 7/8/2019 at 5:34 PM, JoshBTW said:

Let's do some numbers. I'll take a very exaggerated figure from a website with the name intifada in it for the Palestinian numbers, and take the most conservative numbers for other examples.

 

In 2018, 300 Palestinians were killed by Israel.

50,000 Kurds killed by Iraq.

In a year at least 200,000 Bengali people were raped and killed during 1971 by Pakistanis.

In three years at least 140,000 (almost 50,000 per year in absolute figures) indigenous people were killed in Guatemala.

In three months 1.3 million jews were killed during the holocaust.

 

Calling the Israeli-Palestinian conflict a genocide is insulting and disgusting.

I made it really clear that I was not talking about violence. If you genuinely weren't able to understand that, that is one thing. If you did understand what I was staying and still pursued this narrative, shame on you! Let's leave this here.

On 7/8/2019 at 5:34 PM, JoshBTW said:

Yes there are innocent people dying. Yes Islamists don't mind using civilians as martyrs. No, it's not a genocide.

You are talking as if the IDF don't routinely shoot tens of peaceful protesters, including not only innocents and children, but medics. Let me not.

 

On 7/8/2019 at 5:34 PM, JoshBTW said:

Sure, many conflicts have people displacing other people out of what they consider their territory. No one's forcing Venezuelans out of their country. No one's expelling Syrians. Yet they're refugees. You don't need to be expelled from your country to be a refugee.They're escaping the conditions they live in (just like arab jews did in the 1900s).

 

That is what happened.

Refugees are people who are involuntarily displaced from one country without another. That's not what happened.

On 7/8/2019 at 5:34 PM, JoshBTW said:

In fact, among the examples of antisemitism rising in muslim countries after Israel's independence there was a country that wasn't immediately affected by that trend, Algeria. Further proof that jews weren't just migrating because of that old return to zion movement being given a way in modern zionism. They were escaping antisemitism getting worse by the creation of the jewish state. Since they didn't face a steep rise of antisemitism in Algeria opposed to other muslim countries, they didn't leave. Clear as water.

This example really does not help your argument in the way that you think it does.

On 7/8/2019 at 5:34 PM, JoshBTW said:

Another good example of this was the Farhud. Right after it happened jewish people made it out to be an isolated event of antisemitism, fueled by their Iraqi national identity. They weren't willing to move, and most of those that did came back hoping their lives would return to normal. And they mostly did. However, after the death sentence of Shafiq Ades it was clear to them that conditions would only get worse as a result of antisemitism being fueled by Israel's creation. Thing that happened and gave way to most jewish people in Iraq fleeing the country.

Are you describing these migrants as refugees?

On 7/8/2019 at 5:34 PM, JoshBTW said:

I don't know if you're aware, but this article doesn't even imply that Sarsour is anti-Semitic. There is literally nothing in this article supporting this view, so I don't think it helps your argument in the way that you think that it does. It actually contains link to evidence against your argument.

 

It does, however, link to this Breitbart article, where vocal Islamophobe compares Sarsour to Hitler because of her anti-Zionist views. So, you've actually posted evidence in favour of my argument. Not yours.

On 7/8/2019 at 5:34 PM, JoshBTW said:

I don't know whether this link is working properly, but it links me to page 10 of this thread. I don't know if you're trying to say that this is an anti-Israel discussion. But, in case you are, I am not saying I am anti-Israel. I am saying I am anti-human rights violations. Anyway.

On 7/8/2019 at 5:34 PM, JoshBTW said:

Again, I'm not sure whether you are aware of this but the article does not allege that Congresswoman Tlaib is anti-Semitic. Anywhere. It contests the historical accuracy of her statement. It doesn't say that that statement is anti-Semitic.

On 7/8/2019 at 5:34 PM, JoshBTW said:

people trying to pass

This feels like groundhog day. I will just quote the actual article in favour for repeating myself:

Unlike Ilhan Omar, Rashida Tlaib’s public comments thus far have not risen to the level of explicit antisemitism. She does openly support BDS. But her intimate relationship to figures who do express antisemitic sentiments deserves scrutiny.

This article neither alleges that Congresswoman Tlaib is anti-Semitic, nor that she is secretly anti-Semitic and 'passing' as anti-Zionist. It would have been more helpful for you, in using this article, to talk about Congresswoman Omar, who is accused of being anti-Semitic here.

On 7/8/2019 at 5:34 PM, JoshBTW said:

as moderate critics

“Every member of our movement matters to us — including our incredible Jewish and LGBTQ members. We are deeply sorry for the harm we have caused, but we see you, we love you, and we are fighting with you.”

This doesn't sound like antisemitism to me.

On 7/8/2019 at 5:34 PM, JoshBTW said:

of zionism is the problem.

This is a (pretty comprehensive) critique of Israeli policy (not Judaism) in light of a political (not religious) movement. Maybe you could point me to some examples of antisemitism in his article.

On 7/8/2019 at 5:34 PM, JoshBTW said:

Now, let's see how the creation of Israel (and not only their policies afterwards) led to antisemitism in muslim countries.

 

The death sentence of business man Shafiq Ades a few years after the Farhud.

1948 Anti-Jewish riots in Oujda and Jerada.

1948 Anti-Jewish riots in Tripolitania.

1947 Aden riots in Yemen.

1947 anti-Jewish riots in Aleppo.

I don't think I said that it was only their policies afterwards. You keep attributing things to me that I am not actually saying. It is a bit weird.

 

Also, more generally, it is really strange that you are drawing such a stark distinction between the policies a country implements and that country's formation. It is like you are kind of unclear about what Israel's formation actually looked like.

 

Again, you're providing examples of antisemitism to disprove a point I'm not making. Antisemitism predates Israel (/the policies of Israel if you are holding onto them being completely separate). We agree on that.

On 7/8/2019 at 5:34 PM, JoshBTW said:

Nope. Never implied this. Why did you get that idea?

Because the laws we are discussing here were in response to anti-Zionist sentiments. The laws are anti-Zionist.

On 7/8/2019 at 5:34 PM, JoshBTW said:

Israel's creation made conditions worse for jews in arab countries. Here's a bit on the intentions and/or predictions of muslim countries' leaders if Israel were to be created:

 

Heykal Pasha, Egyptian delegate to the UN 5 days before the resolution that led to Israel's independence:

It wasn't Israel's policies after its creation that led him to say this. It was the creation of a jewish state in the middle of muslim countries. And he was right!

Partition of Palestine is a policy based on UN Special Committee for Palestine recommendations.

On 7/8/2019 at 5:34 PM, JoshBTW said:

Another one of his:

Let's see more examples. Jamal al-Husayni co-founder and chairman of the Palestine Arab Party:

This was back when they thought they would win the war. I mean, it was 5 countries and a big arab population inside Israel itself against a newly formed country. We both know exactly who's blood he's talking about.

I don't get why you bothered with these ones. They don't help your argument. Nobody is shocked that a pro-Palestine leader during wartime is going to say these things. They're almost off-topic.

On 7/8/2019 at 5:34 PM, JoshBTW said:

Iraq's then-prime minister promised:

Every place. In his own words. Jews, not Israelis. Not Palestinan jews. Jews. Another one from him:

Abdul Rahman Hassan Azzam, the Secretary-General of the Arab League from 1945 to 1952:

Hmm. Exterminate all the jews. As a consequence of Israel's creation.

As a consequence of the partition of Palestine*

On 7/8/2019 at 5:34 PM, JoshBTW said:

Sure, that was called arab states and Palestinians not declaring a war and agreeing to sit to negotiate before multiple wars! Hell, it's called ****ing cut your losses and move forward with a peace treaty after even more wars. Nothing is ever enough, now they've got what they grew, a far right gov not willing to negotiate.

Okay so it sounds like you agree with me on the fact that policies enacted by Israel during its formation are the cause of a lot of these tensions. The part following the first comma sounds like your opinion, so I'm not going to contest that here.

On 7/8/2019 at 5:34 PM, JoshBTW said:

Thought you were talking about the creation of Israel. Can't say I agree with all policies of the Israeli gov, can't say I disagree with all. Be specific, I'll tell you what I agree with and think was worth fueling the fire for.

 

I can speak for myself. Want to make a point? Go ahead. Short answer isn't enough.

 

Agreed. But it's a bit hard to get someone that doesn't want to come to the table to negotiate. The unilateral withdrawal from Gaza was a great chance to move forward, still proposals and actions kept falling to deaf ears when it comes to the conflict.

I have spent too long on this reply, so I am just going to opt-out of these points because they feel like asides to our discussion rather than our focus. If that is a problem for you, or something you'd like to talk about more, I'm happy to respond to PMs. I just want to get this stupid reply posted.

On 7/8/2019 at 5:34 PM, JoshBTW said:

Nah. This is a fine line and a very grey area. Given their intrinsic link there's a very fine line to what is opposing zionism without being antisemitic and otherwise. You're selling this too black and white.

I disagree with this. I think I've covered why.

On 7/8/2019 at 5:34 PM, JoshBTW said:

I get your point, and I agree Israel shouldn't be given a free pass based on that. However, many people use that excuse to purposefully ignore the other side's responsibility in this and sell this idea to the masses. This is a personal example, but I had an Austrian friend tell me that given that Israel is the more developed country they should be responsible for the welfare of the other side, even when the other side isn't only not willing to sit and talk but is purposefully trying to destroy Israel (the other side being Hamas in this case). 

 

You can disagree, but this isn't an isolated example in my eyes. It's a mentality that pro-palestinians are trying to sell. Put all the blame on Israel. Sell rioting as peaceful protest. Mask extreme islamic values as western liberalism. Sell a goal to destroy Israel as violent resistance.

I think you and I both agree that the Israel/Palestine conflict on a whole is muddy, and I see the point you're making with this example. However, I don't think that instances of unjustified violence or aggression from the Palestinian side nullifies the fact that, for example, the IDF have opened fire on peaceful protest. I don't have a goal to destroy anyone or anything though.

On 7/8/2019 at 5:34 PM, JoshBTW said:

Not more frustrating than people masquerading their antisemitism as a political position. :flower:

I think you know that's not what I'm doing :flower:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

those long ass posts had me screaming :dies: 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites