[ For example, Noam Chomsky is a traitor to his religion and his country.

Noam Chomsky is a secular Jew and a citizen of the United States and its intellengentsia. How exaclty can he be a traitor to a religon to which he does not subscribe or to a country to which he does not belong (assuming Israel here)? As you yourself have highly touted the merits of both American democracy and *Israel, free and open discussion does not qualify someone as a traitor simply because some may find it disagreeable.

*edit added

Good point about his citizenship. I completely missed that point until you brought it up.

It does point out, htough, that at least for some people, being Jewish alone is reason enough that they are "supposed" to support Israel. And my main beef with the realtionship between the US and Israel is that people are expected to support Israel no matter what (especially Jews) without regard to whether that support is in the best interest of the US.

Now, I do believe that the best intersts of the US and Israel often do coincide, but they do not always, and in disagreeing with Israel does not make someone anti-semitic anymore than disagreeing with India makes a person anti-Hindu or dsagreeing with Saudi Arabia makes a person anti-Muslim.

President Obama is trying to make a point now that fighting terrorism is not the same as fighting Islam. An attack on terrorists is not an attack on Muslims. Well, I could make the smae point. A critcism of Israel does not only mean that a person is not necessarily anti-seitic, but it does not mean a person is anti-Israeli.

Despite it constantly being in the news, I don't think America has much interest in the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. Americas chief interest in maintaining Israel as an allie is to prevent a Pan-Arab state and to prevent "cultural nationalism" from ever getting a foothold in the Mideast. As with so many things America involves itself with, disruption, rather than resolution is the primary goal.

One thing that I find very interesting is how upset people who support the Palestinians (not necessarily bonobo) get over these "hateful" political tracts that I post from Israelis who feel these people - self-hating Jews - are hurting their country.

They are not calling for violence or throwing them out of Israel, but they are angry, sarcastic and full of spite. That seems to be pretty common in every Democratic country when talking about an opposition party, and one would think that all the Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld/Republican/Tony Blair haters would understand that feeling that emotion does not necessarily make one a devil.

The Palestinians slaughter suspected traitors and their families and videotape it to scare the poulation into submission, but their supporters do not even bother to mention that.

By the way, Chomsky is a traitor to America, not Israel, but most of them are not crazy about him either.

President Obama is trying to make a point now that fighting terrorism is not the same as fighting Islam. An attack on terrorists is not an attack on Muslims. Well, I could make the smae point. A critcism of Israel does not only mean that a person is not necessarily anti-seitic, but it does not mean a person is anti-Israeli.

There are millions and millions of Muslims that are not doing anything but living their lives and not fighting anyone, so Obama should really not have to point out something so obvious. However, he needs to counter the lies and propoganda of the Islamic terrorists.

Yes, there are people who are against Israel, for other reasons than being anti-Semetic, but a really large number of people who are against them, either hate Jews or have been swayed by the lies and propoganda of the Islamic terrorists and do not have a clue about how brainwashed they are.

I would guess that they are the ones who really get upset and defensive about the premise of this thread.

No, actually your premise is the problem with the premise of this thread. It is the same old tiresome and bullying tautologies that if you disagree with Israel you are either anti-semitic, stupid, brainwashed and equated to perpetrators of the Holocaust, or if you are Jewish and disagree you are self-hating, brainwashed, devoid of common sense, traitor and abetter of crimes against other Jewish people.

Simple really: if ANYONE deviates from the prescribed party line of unconditional support for Israel, they are condemned.

THAT is why this thread is useless.

From your first post:

"It has been fashionable for the left wingers to despise Israel and Israelis for many years, but the truth is that it all stems from the same hatred of Jews that has been around for centuries, but in a brand new package. Some folks are too stupid to realize what they are buying into and others are very aware of how much easier it is to spread their hate this way. It is totally PC to hate Israelis and one does not have to admit to being the Jew hating Nazi that they really are."

WHAT, ME WORRY?

Who, Us? Us beautiful people? Us liberals?

By Steven Plaut [Permission to Reprint]

[Effects by Masada2000.org]

Hey what do you want from us?

We are the good people. We are the liberals. We are the progressive American Jews. We love puppies and peace and justice for all and equality.

We are the people who struggle for social justice. We operate social action committees at our temples. We battle against prejudice. We promote gay marriages. We recycle.

We are the ones who teach that all of Judaism is the Ethics of the Prophets, and that the Ethics of the Prophets are basically Tikkun Olam, and that Tikkun Olam is the promotion of the liberal political agenda. hel_l, we even call ourselves those who practice Liberal Judaism. For Liberal Jews, Judaism is essentially affirmative action for black folks. It is income redistribution and welfare rights. It is feeding the homeless derelicts and addicts. It is AIDS walks. It means ensuring a true Jewish education by opposing school vouchers and demanding that all Jews send their children to public schools, except in really bad neighborhoods where they can go to Quaker or Unitarian schools.

We are progressive people. We do not get hung up on "kitchen Judaism". We seek out the essence of Judaism, which is social justice. We join the Bnai Brith and the ADL and the AJC and other groups because they promote our enlightened liberal agenda.

Naturally we love Israel and admire her courage. Of course we do not approve of everything <A href="

http://masada2000.org/clinton.html">Israel does and disagree with her policies. We think that Bill Clinton (click photo) and Jimmy Carter had the right idea.

Those Israelis are too chauvinistic. Too obstinate. Too closed-minded. Not like us. They have a Holocaust Complex, a ghetto mindset. Not like us.

We are beautiful people. Moral people. We read the New York Times. We have been demanding for decades that the path to peace is for Israel to recognize the Palestinians and negotiate with them. After all, we are liberals. We understand Palestinian suffering. Palestinians are just people. Like us. They love their

children and families, and want a good life. Why can't the Israelis be like us and understand this?

Obviously there is no military solution to the Palestinian conflict. Two states for two peoples. Get those dam_n settlers to leave. They embarrass us.

We insisted years before the 1993 Oslo Peace Accords that the only path to peace is mutual recognition. Israel has to turn over Palestinian lands to a Palestinian state. Just ask Bill Clinton and David Saperstein. Only then can mutual respect emerge. We have insisted so for years. But for so long, those closed-minded obstinate Israelis refused to accept our counsel. Probably because of those horrid medieval Orthodox people, their backwards ways and their abuse of the political system. hel_l, they will not even accept marriages and conversions performed by our Liberal Reform and Reconstructionist Rabbis!! They are trying to return Israel to the Middle Ages and need to be stopped!!

But we tried to teach the Israelis enlightenment. We demanded that they solve their problems with the Arabs through compromise. Peace before Land and Land for Peace. We were the true inspiration for Oslo. The Oslo promoters were just taking OUR advice!!

When the Oslo people imposed the Peace Process on Israel, when they imported Yasir Arafat and the PLO into the occupied territories, we cheered. At long last, those backward Israelis had accepted our learned counsel and enlightened wisdom. No longer need we blush and hide from our liberal gentile friends. Our mission had been accomplished.

But Oslo did not produce peace and our advice and counsel did not produce tranquility. Instead, Oslo produced a

bloodbath and the adoption of our sage advice turned Israel into the Valley of the Shadow of Death. Who could have known? What do you want from us?

So get off of our backs. Of course we are not going to come visit Israel now, and we are not going to let our kids visit Israel either. Your dam_n country has become too dam_n dangerous for us. What are you, nuts? Risk our lives now? For what?

Who the hel_l told you guys to put yourselves at risk by following OUR advice? What the hel_l did WE know? After all, YOU guys live with the savages. You are supposed to know better. Leave us the hel_l out of it. When the terrorism ends, maybe we will come to visit.

Meanwhile we have more important things on our agenda. Affirmative action preferences for Cherokees and lesbians. Stopping school choice. Gay marriage.

Let's talk again in a few years. After you guys put your house in order!

.

Return to Masada2000.org Homepage Menu

UG, you may find your lampooning amusing- but what I really see it doing is make a caricature out of you.

It does point out, htough, that at least for some people, being Jewish alone is reason enough that they are "supposed" to support Israel.

Precisely. Perhaps the real self-hating jews are the Zionists?

Zionism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Zionism is an international political movement that originally supported the reestablishment of a homeland for the Jewish People in the historic Land of Israel (Hebrew: Eretz Yisra'el, "the Land of Israel"), later called Palestine, and continues primarily as support for the modern state of Israel.[1]

Zionism is partly based on strong historical ties and religious traditions linking the Jewish people to the Land of Israel, where the concept of Jewish nationhood first evolved somewhere between 1200 BCE and the late Second Temple era (i.e. up to 70 CE).[2][3] The modern movement was mainly founded by secular Jews, beginning largely as a response by European Jewry to antisemitism across Europe.[4] It is a branch of the broader phenomenon of modern nationalism.[5] At first one of several Jewish political movements offering alternative responses to the position of Jews in Europe, Zionism grew rapidly and, after the Holocaust, became the dominant Jewish political movement.

The political movement was formally established by the Austro-Hungarian journalist Theodor Herzl in the late 19th century following the publication of "Der Judenstaat".[6] The movement seeks to encourage Jewish migration to the Promised Land and was eventually successful in establishing Israel in 1948, as the homeland for the Jewish people. Its proponents regard its aim as self-determination for the Jewish people.[7]

About 40% of the world's Jews now live in Israel.[8]

The word "Zionism" itself is derived from the word Zion (Hebrew: ציון, Tzi-yon‎). This name originally referred to Mount Zion, a mountain near Jerusalem, and to the Fortress of Zion on it. Later, under King David, the term "Zion" became a synecdoche referring to the entire city of Jerusalem and the Land of Israel. In many Biblical verses, the Israelites were called the people, sons or daughters of Zion.

"Zionism" was coined as a term for Jewish nationalism by Austrian Jewish publisher Nathan Birnbaum, founder of the first nationalist Jewish students' movement Kadimah, in his journal Selbstemanzipation (Self Emancipation) in 1890. (Birnbaum eventually turned against political Zionism and became the first secretary-general of the Haredi movement Agudat Israel.)[9]

Zionism can be distinguished from Territorialism, a Jewish nationalist movement willing to contemplate a Jewish homeland anywhere. During the early history of Zionism, a number of proposals were made for settling Jews outside Europe, but ultimately all of these were rejected or failed. The debate over these proposals helped to define the nature and focus of the Zionist movement.

There was also a movement which advocated autonomism, Jewish autonomy within Eastern Europe.

Zionism was particularly motivated by the desire to escape the heavy persecution of Jews in Europe.

Zionism means that the Jews wanted to return to their homeland - which they have done - and almost everyone recognizes their right to excist now. Mostly Nazis and the KKK use "Zionism" as an insult, so I'm not sure what you are getting at here.

Do you think that the Jews should be expelled from Israel at this late date? Mostly, only the Palestinians and a few nuts are still thinking along these lines.

Certain individuals and groups have used the term "Zionism" as a pejorative to justify attacks on Jews. According to historians Walter Laqueur, Howard Sachar, Jack Fischel and others, apologists for antisemitism sometimes also use the label "Zionist" as a euphemism for Jews in general.[10][11][12][13][14]

UG, you may find your lampooning amusing- but what I really see it doing is make a caricature out of you.

I really find it unfair that moderators are allowed to taunt posters that they don't agree with or "get personal" when I get thrown off for the exact same thing, but, the truth is that I find practically everything that you post to be the ultimate caricature of politically correct stereotypical thinking, so maybe it takes one to know one.

Zionism means that the Jews wanted to return to their homeland - which they have done - and almost everyone recognizes their right to excist now. Mostly Nazis and the KKK use "Zionism" as an insult, so I'm not sure what you are getting at here.

Do you think that the Jews should be expelled from Israel at this late date? Mostly, only the Palestinians and a few nuts are still thinking along these lines.

Certain individuals and groups have used the term "Zionism" as a pejorative to justify attacks on Jews. According to historians Walter Laqueur, Howard Sachar, Jack Fischel and others, apologists for antisemitism sometimes also use the label "Zionist" as a euphemism for Jews in general.[10][11][12][13][14]

You are certainly right that "Zionism" has become somewhat of a negative catch phrase, a substitute religious derogatory term. When it is not acceptable to use "Jewish" in a derogatory way, it might be acceptable to use "Zionism" in the that way.

On the other side of the spectrum, "jihadist" has also become almost a curse word. "Jihad" means "struggle," and according to the Koran, the most important "jihad" is the inner struggle, the struggle for man to overcome his or her base tendancies.  But that term has been hijacked by the extremists who use is as a reason for their pursuit of violence.

Whether for right or wrong reasons, "Zionism" now has a connotation of Jewish settlers ejecting Palestinians from their land and denying them of their basic human rights, a connotation of military might makes right. You can argue whether this is deserved or not, but the fact is that this is now the general perception of the connotation of the word.

Using the term Zionism in a negative way seems to be in vogue with the pinheads who think that the "Jewish Illuminati" secretly run the world and eat Christian children and the nuts who claim there was no Holocaust.

There are only a small number of Jewish settlers, so it might be smarter to stick to calling them that.

It is the same old tiresome and bullying tautologies that if you disagree with Israel you are either anti-semitic, stupid, brainwashed and equated to perpetrators of the Holocaust, or if you are Jewish and disagree you are self-hating, brainwashed, devoid of common sense, traitor and abetter of crimes against other Jewish people.

Every hard-core anti-Semite I have ever met has used this convoluted argument to trick people into swallowing their lies without questioning them. Many people question Israel's policies without changing sides, without hating Jews and without supporting terrorists. It is too bad that some people not only believe this backwards propaganda, but go around passing it on.

It is the same old tiresome and bullying tautologies that if you disagree with Israel you are either anti-semitic, stupid, brainwashed and equated to perpetrators of the Holocaust, or if you are Jewish and disagree you are self-hating, brainwashed, devoid of common sense, traitor and abetter of crimes against other Jewish people.

Every hard-core anti-Semite I have ever met has used this convoluted argument to trick people into swallowing their lies without questioning them. Many people question Israel's policies without changing sides, without hating Jews and without supporting terrorists. It is too bad that some people not only believe this backwards propaganda, but go around passing it on.

I don't quite understand your post.  When you write "Many people question Israel's policies without changing sides, without hating Jews and without supporting terrorists," are you stating that this is the "backwards propoganda,"  or are you making this a separate and valid statement?

Every hard-core anti-Semite I have ever met has used this convoluted argument to trick people into swallowing their lies without questioning them. It is too bad that some people not only believe this backwards propaganda, but go around passing it on. Many people question Israel's policies without changing sides, without hating Jews and without supporting terrorists.

Is this more clear?

It is the same old tiresome and bullying tautologies that if you disagree with Israel you are either anti-semitic, stupid, brainwashed and equated to perpetrators of the Holocaust, or if you are Jewish and disagree you are self-hating, brainwashed, devoid of common sense, traitor and abetter of crimes against other Jewish people.

Every hard-core anti-Semite I have ever met has used this convoluted argument to trick people into swallowing their lies without questioning them. Many people question Israel's policies without changing sides, without hating Jews and without supporting terrorists. It is too bad that some people not only believe this backwards propaganda, but go around passing it on.

What lies have I posted here, what beliefs have I put forth, except to comment on your own words and problematic accusations? At this point, you have no clue what I think or believe about Jews, history, the political situation, and the issue from a multiple of angles. In fact, the only thing you know, is what I have said here about your nowhere thread and close-ended discussion that ends up calling anyone who dares to question you or anything an anti-semite. There is no discussion here, except to question and reiterate your own reasoning. You must be the "harcore anti-semite" of which you speak.

Thanks for proving my point beautifully, lol.

edit added to mollify the mods

Every hard-core anti-Semite I have ever met has used this convoluted argument to trick people into swallowing their lies without questioning them. It is too bad that some people not only believe this backwards propaganda, but go around passing it on. Many people question Israel's policies without changing sides, without hating Jews and without supporting terrorists.

Is this more clear?

Not particularly. 

This is not a flame or anything.  I am just trying to understand. It seems like you are using the quoted statement and saying that quote is the "backwards propoganda." And that would imply, like the title of this thread, that questioning Israeli policy is hating Jews and supporting terrorists.

But then again, I certainly may be interpreting this incorrectly.

Actually UG you were "kicked off" for not being able to participate in a thread without resorting to namecalling, ridiculing, mocking & insulting anyone who didn't/doesn't agree with your political stance. And I see the exact same thing occuring now. So unless you need another break then plese tone it down.

I see somebody is trying to tag this topic.

This presents a problem in that the tags will be searchable to people without the prerequisite 500 posts to participate. Hence they will try to click on the topic link but be given a message saying that they lack access.

For that reason it has been asked by Admin not to tag any topics in Bedlam, including Out of the Box.

Actually, I have gone way out of my way not to insult anyone, so there would be no excuse to throw me off. Are you going to do it anyway?

I did not say that Kat was anything. I did point out that the rheteric (argument) she is using is very common for exactly the kind of people that this thread is about, and that is a fact. I have actually seen it recommended as an argument in anti-Semitic material and it is a very common one. That does not mean that I am calling her an anti-Semite.

I do not think she is a Nazi. I do not think that sabaijai is a Nazi, or I love to teach or any of the other moderators who have taken a personal interest in this thread, but I very much do think that all of them are very defensive about the title of this thread and and very much want it not to be true, because it challenges their own left-wing views. That is why I think is an important topic, but not enough to get banned for.

Since I am the OP of this thread and it is very obvious that we -at least I - am not going to be allowed to discuss it honestly, why don't you just get rid of it? Thai Visa is well known for not allowing freedom of speech, and in many ways I agree with that on the main forum, but why open a special section that is supposed to allow it, and then drive off "controversial" posters by very selective enforcement of the rules? I've never heard of anyone else getting suspended for putting a smiley by an English mistake - even on the regular forum.

I will stay out of this section from now on because this has happened to me me twice - on two different PC topics - and see no reason at all to waste any more time in Outside the Box.

I see somebody is trying to tag this topic.

This presents a problem in that the tags will be searchable to people without the prerequisite 500 posts to participate. Hence they will try to click on the topic link but be given a message saying that they lack access.

For that reason it has been asked by Admin not to tag any topics in Bedlam, including Out of the Box.

That was me.  Sorry!

No worries, we should have notified you all earlier.

I believe sbk just posted a general notice about it now.

UG you made a claim about why you were suspended last time. I only cleared up the reason as what you stated was wrong.

If you chose not to post in future then that's your business but if you do try to rememeber that everyone has the right to respond to the content of those post. At the moment you seem to think that you should be free to post your opinions but at the same time denying others their right to the same or try to lable them & their reasons as you have tried to do int he quote below.

I do not think she is a Nazi. I do not think that sabaijai is a Nazi, or I love to teach or any of the other moderators who have taken a personal interest in this thread, but I very much do think that all of them are very defensive about the title of this thread and and very much want it not to be true, because it challenges their own left-wing views. That is why I think is an important topic, but not enough to get banned for.

You wont agree though cause you have seen to view yourself as a victim on this. Up to you but FYI, this section has never been without moderation but I have never before this & your last topic had to enforce any here. THAT shouldtell you something about how you are coming across but wont

I did point out that the rheteric (argument) she is using is very common for exactly the kind of people that this thread is about, and that is a fact.

Is the thread about you, because all I did was summarize the wording of your posts and sources.

This discussion is like walking through a carnival funhouse of funny mirrors.

At the moment you seem to think that you should be free to post your opinions but at the same time denying others their right to the same or try to lable them & their reasons as you have tried to do int he quote below.

I do not think she is a Nazi. I do not think that sabaijai is a Nazi, or I love to teach or any of the other moderators who have taken a personal interest in this thread, but I very much do think that all of them are very defensive about the title of this thread and and very much want it not to be true, because it challenges their own left-wing views. That is why I think is an important topic, but not enough to get banned for.

You wont agree though cause you have seem to view yourself as a victim on this. Up to you but FYI, this section has never been without moderation but I have never before this & your last topic had to enforce any here. THAT shouldtell you something about how you are coming across but wont

I can not deny others the "right" to post their opinions, because I do not have a delete button or a suspend button and they can always answer back.

I am totally unaware that it is against the rules to "try to lable [other posters] & their reasons" (unless it is an obvious insult) and have no idea how I could carry on a debate with such strange rules, but I still don't think that it is one.

I have tried reasoning on here before and was thrown off anyway. I will just stay in the main area where the rules are more clear to me and maybe I will be left in peace. Please delete this thread if possible.

The thread remains, others may wish to participate or comment. If you chose to not carry on, it is your choice.

I have tried reasoning on here before and was thrown off anyway.

Oh c'mon George, get real...... I have had 'differences of opinion' with Kat, can't remember one occasion where there was even a suggestion of a personal slur or insult in either direction ( well, I can remember one, but we sorted that out via PM, actually she did)

My best guess is that you have never had to argue a case that you don't believe in, many years ago, I was on the school debating team, we were given a subject and then told if we were for or against it, and then they dropped the flags.

One great lesson I learned from that experience is that you are not always right and other peoples opinions may be righter than yours....... it's probably the best lesson I have ever learned.

Call me a hypocrite, but I hate hatred. I cannot hate haters; I have to love them. Most of all, I consistently hate and abhor and rail against killings of human beings. By Muslims, Jews, Buddhists, nonbelievers, and most especially, by my fellow Christians. I condemn the suicide bombings, the collateral damage to innocent civilians, the intentional targeting of civilian areas, the threats to use nuclear warfare, etc. I condemn violent Zionism, violent Jihads, violent Crusades. That does not make me a Jew hater.

Instead of a chorus of "Kumbayah," led by Jimmy Carter, I suggest we join in a chorus of "Jesus loves the little children."

UG, to make myself more clear: if you must resort to copying and pasting Rush-Limbaugh style work ad nauseum from the internet rather than posting your own reasoned views without personal remarks, it doesn't say much about you as a participant in discussion, in my opinion- and the reason I don't reply to those cut'n'pastes is the same- they're not your work, and if I wanted to read that sort of thing I'd go out and search for it on my own. Personally speaking, I think you could do better than that- you're certainly surrounded by enough good source material.

Or, if you'd prefer, I'll simply ignore your threads until you start namecalling and taunting again. Either way, further attempts to use my moderator status as a way of playing the victim will not be tolerated any more than other comments on moderation.

UG here is a reminder of the rules of the forum (including this section) I have pulled out the ones I feel are relevant to your attitude on this & the other closed topic but as you didn't heed my request to keep it civil & wont be posting here again I suppose it is moot ;

Please respect fellow members!

2) Excessive, aggressive posts against other members, moderators and admin; or flaming will not be tolerated. 'Flaming' is best defined as posting or responding to a message in a way clearly intended to incite useless arguments, rants, and/or for launching personal attacks, insulting, being hateful, useless criticism, name calling,

Do not post inflammatory messages on the forum, or any attempt to disrupt discussions to upset its participants. The word, or its derivative, "trolling", is used to describe such messages or the act of posting them.

3) Religious or racial slurs,