Just for fun, let's take out the words "Zionist,"and "Zionist Jews" and replace it with "Mexicans."

Here it is, without any other change but the name of the particular group of people... drum roll please...

Does it sound any worse now? Quit demonizing groups of people. THIS is what is taking us down the road to perdition.

__________________
www.theradioprogram.com

I am not demonizing groups of people. They are demonizing themselves with the things they do. I don't make them that way. They make themselves that way.

It is like a thief that is caught stealing. The thief accuses the eye witness of racial hatred for having seen him steal. Lordy!

I am not a racist for observing what the Jews do. The Jews are what they are because that is the way they are. I had nothing to do with it.

Don't call me a racist for knowing what is going on.

__________________
Hi, I like communications. I like intelligent and amusing people. We might disagree, but that's okay. Just don't be boring.

Flawed analogy. A Zionist is a Zionist because of a particular belief, not a racial trait. It would be more appropriate to describe a Zionist a political or political/religious group.

__________________
"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident." - Schopenhauer

Let's go back to the beginning of the formation of the state of Israel and take a closer look.

On the following link you'll see a brief overview of the origin of the state of Israel and also the fact that Arabs there were not happy with the United Nation's partition plan and voted to reject it.

http://www.palestinefacts.org/pf_ind...ce_un_role.php

Also, if you'll note the populations at the time, the Arabs were a clear majority. The majority isn't always right, but common sense will tell you that challenging the majority will result in conflict whether they are right or wrong. To believe that the Jews would have a peaceful welcome in Palestine was wishful thinking on the part of the U.N. This does not justify violent actions on the part of the Arabs, but again, the laws of cause and effect cannot be ignored. The Arabs are unequivocally wrong to pursue violence as a means of retaliation, but it is clear that their rights were violated first.

In the late 40's, the Palestinian people were overruled and their wishes were ignored by the U.N. To put oneself in their shoes, did the citizens in Palestine vote to elect any of the U.N. leaders who made this decision? Do you believe that a group such as the U.N. or any other political group has to right to make decisions that affect the lives of people if these same people are not allowed to vote them into (or out of) representative positions? Do you believe this is a fair way to decide issues? And if so, would you allow another political body which you or no one else in the U.S. voted for to come in and forcibly relocate you or force you to share land when it was against your desire to do so? I think a lot of people wouldn't like this. I know I wouldn't. I would feel like my rights had been violated.

The Palestinians warned the world that they would resist with violence if the U.N. plan was enacted, and that is exactly what they did. Were they morally wrong in choosing to initiate violence? Absolutely. However, were the Jewish people wrong to pursue the creation of a state in an area of people who did not desire the presence of such a state, who voted against it, and who had it forced upon them by a political body they did not elect? I definitely think so, and this becomes the cause. For the Jewish people to pursue such a plan and enter an area like this, surrounded by the followers of a religion of violence like Islam, just to in essence "reclaim" land that was allegedly granted to them by God is either incredibly arrogant or incredibly short-sighted.

The real reason the Arabs resisted was not because of hatred of the Jews, but because they saw the encroachment as a repeat of the creation of the Crusader states. Castles built by Europeans in the holy land still stand as daily reminders of the holocaust that demolished an early, prosperous Islamic civilization. Some cultures have very long memories (unlike the short attention span of Americans). Two of the three main divisions of the PLO are named after battles fought during the Crusades. What the Jewish people have really done is blunder into a thousand year war between the Christian West and the Islamic world, and now the Muslims are focused on them.

__________________
"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident." - Schopenhauer

It's going to descend into a nuclear holocaust if we stay over there. What we should do is try to convince the Zionists to do the right thing and leave. A minority of Jews could stay if they wished, and instead of foreign aid to Israel, we could use that money to house whichever Jews wanted to come to the U.S. But, with all the blood on both sides, I don't see how to end the conflict without dissolving the state of Israel.

Do you believe god gave that land to the Jews? Do you believe they are the chosen race, above all others in the eyes of god? Why do the Jews get their own homeland and no other religious/ethnic group? And why do they have to have that particular piece of land? Explain those things to me.

__________________
"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident." - Schopenhauer

So are "Christian" anti-Semites. I'm Christian. I support Israel's right to exist in peace. At the same time, I wouldn't give foreign aid to any nation in the Middle East- loans are a different matter- but I wouldn't give any foreign aid per se. I oppose nearly all American interventionism. Ultimately, it makes all nations more dangerous to live in, including Israel.

__________________
"I am a Tory Anarchist. I should like every one to go about doing just as he pleased- short of altering any of the things to which I have grown accustomed." (Max Beerbohm)

But do you support the way the state of Israel was created, by U.N. mandate as above? And do you support their "right" to that particular land because of your religious beliefs?

__________________
"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident." - Schopenhauer

*points*

Look ma, anti-semites and Democrats.

Well, I generally dislike the U.N. (and don't think the United States should be in it), but I think that Britain had already sealed the region's fate with its actions.

No, my views on Arab-Israeli relations have nothing to do with my religion. I support Israel's right to the land because, first, Jews needed somewhere to go after the Holocaust and second, the bottom line is that they are there now. My personal sympathies, therefore, lean towards Israel, but I don't think that the United States should intervene in the area.

__________________
"I am a Tory Anarchist. I should like every one to go about doing just as he pleased- short of altering any of the things to which I have grown accustomed." (Max Beerbohm)

I would disagree with the premise. I don't think the Jews are constantly in danger of being wiped out. The Holocaust was horrible, yes, but it was carried out during a war, a world war following a massive world wide depression in which the country in question had its economy destroyed and had extreme fanatics elected to office as a result. Obviously, if you remove the conditions surrounding it, it's just not going to happen otherwise. Secondly, while you say it's not due to your religious beliefs, would you admit that the reason they are in that particular land is because of someone's religious beliefs, i.e. zionism.

Well, I know we agree on neutrality, but I'm not sure if a compromise will ever work in that region. Yes, in one sense, you must "work with what you have" but there has been a lot of blood spilled on both sides. That tends to cloud judgment. That's why I ultimately think it's best to separate the two groups by a WIDE distance. And while I understand the hell that a lot of Jews went through during WW2, I don't think the Arabs in the area were treated fairly. I don't like having a body of people decide a property issue that nobody in the disputed area voted to elect to office. I just don't see how that's fair.

__________________
"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident." - Schopenhauer