By a 2-to-1 margin, Americans say no to a Palestinian state. http://www.zoa.org/pressrel2004/20040123a.htm
from your article: "and oppose the racist, un-American concept of kicking people out of their homes and towns on the basis of their religion or ethnicity." which of course is exactly what zionism is. zionism is racism pure and simple. no race religion or ethnicity has a "homeland". no race is special, no race should be granted anything. the world doesnt owe the jews the rights to the "holy" land. nor is it the birthright of the palestinians. land is land, and is not to be doled out to people based on their genetic makeup or religion. i do not believe that america is the land of my people, the white anglo saxon protestants. i have no such tribalistic ties. if jews want to live here, i welcome them. i live here, but i have no exclusive ethnic claim to anything. that is what zionism is. an exclusive claim to land based on ethnicity. thats insane. jews want land x to be their land. palestinians also want land x to be theirs. since neither have a birthright to anything, because genetic code is not relevant to land ownership, then favoring one ethnicity is useless, racist and stupid. i dont care if the tutsis take over the part of land in rwanda claimed by the hutus, and they might slaughter each other over it. too bad for them. same with israelis. darwinism. a smart culture will live where they can exist in peace without irrational attachments to so-called holy lands.
Zionism is not racist in the original sense of racism, which means that Zionists think the Jewish race/ethnic group is superior to all others. Perhaps there are some who think that way, but most don't. Zionism is simply the belief that the Jewish people should have their own nation, in their ancient homeland. The reasons are not just religious. They are also political in nature. Also, in 1947 it was purely a matter of survival. Jews honestly believed (with good reason) that they would not be safe anywhere except in a nation all their own. An exclusive claim to land based on ethnicity is not insane. It is a human belief that goes back thousands of years and helps cultures define themselves. Many people and cultures develop ties to the land they live on, and it becomes part of their national identity. It's part of what makes France French, England English, Japan Japanese, and America American. Yes, even in America, the "nation of immigrants," the land has helped shape our national and regional identities. While we are not tied to the land ethnically, we have a concept of America which includes the land we live on. We can't simply pack up Louisiana or the U.S.A., move elsewhere, and try to create that same country somewhere else. The same with Israel. Ancient Israel was destroyed 2,000 years ago, but the Jews never lost that national identity concept, most likely because they were so viciously persecuted and ostracized, literally everywhere they went by anyone they encountered. For 2,000 years, they yearned to return to Jerusalem and the land of their ancestors. Now they finally have, and they are determined never to lose that again. National and religious identity may not mean much to you, but for other people, it means a lot. And it doesn't have to mean racial/ethnic/religious supremacy or "I'm better than you." The Israelis have never wanted to dominate or hurt anyone, they just want to be left alone in peace to develop their own nation. Unfortunately, the so-called "Palestinian" Arab interlopers simply will not stop until every last Jew is dead or swimming for their life out into the Mediterranean. They want to be that way, fine. But I don't think they deserve to be allowed to create a state simply as a way to destroy another state. The Israelis do also have a much better claim to the land than the Arabs, but that is a big, huge discussion. And believe it or not, religion is not the only reasoning for this.
the problem starts when people are defining themselves in tribalistic ways. jews identify with each other why? because they share the same mystical beliefs? because they are genetically similar? an ethnic goup cant just claim a land based on ethnic or religiosu reasons. just like we dont allow american indians to have america. too bad for them, we win, its their "homeland" for sure, but so what, they can live here and be a part of us if they like, or thay can go somewhere else. they have no plausible claim to the land. well, it certainly can explain most wars. of course we could. it would be pointless, but no less justified than the claims of the zionists. if we had the military power to dominate a place, and slaughter everyone who was in our way, we could take a new place and call it our own. thats what we did with america. thats the way the world works. so people should have land based on the fact that it was their ancient homeland? by that logic i really do owe the slave reparations for the wrongs of past generations we were just ridiculing on this same board. what your forefathers have done is of no relevance. the world owes nothing to the jews or anyone else. what exactly about jews entitles them to this particular land? if i was jewish would i be owed this land? what if i was an ethnic jew that converted to christianity? what if i was samoan but had converted to judaism? what exactly about the jews gives them this entitlement? why cant a palestinian claim he is jewish and live in the jewish land? would you check his geneology? maybe give him a dna test? if not, then what is special about the jews that they get the land? i am of protestant western european descent. but this is entirely irrelevant to who i am. i feel no kinship to my genetically similar brothers in northern ireland who are battling the catholics. i dont define myself by tribalism. unlike the jews, i dont feel like i am owed anything, and what the people i am related to by random birth is of no consequence. "For 2,000 years, they yearned to return to Jerusalem and the land of their ancestors." well that is pretty irrational and pointless. i have no urge to return to western europe where my ancestors are from. why would i care where people who, by random chance, had DNA similar to mine lived? if i was born black would i have some feeling that i deserved africa? "Jews never lost that national identity" right, because they are totally irrational. if canada became more american than america, i would like it better. i have no unreasonable nationalistic ties. i favor america based on merit, not irrationality. why is this somehow more significant than other ethnic conflicts that we mysteriously dont care about? its because of politics and racism. in the sudan, people enslave each other, we dont care. in rwanda, half a million were murdered 10 years ago. and yet we dont care because we have this political tie to the jews and their plight. if our views were truly based on human rights, then we would surely care more about rwanda. we gave up on somalia, we let the war lords reign and murder. we dont care. its politics and racism. we, as humans, should have outgrown tribalism. if i was jewish i could solve all my problems. it would be very simple. first i would abandon my jewish mysticism. then i would quit identifying myself with the jewish tribe, because they are mystics and never stop fighting and being murdered. then i would leave israel permantly. problem solved. when people learn that their heritage is of no consquence and live for themselves they would die alot less. i like my parents, i like my grandparents. but my kinship with them is based on merit, not genetics. i would similarly identify with my my family if i was adopted and my family was of similar character. i would similarly hate my own family if they were a pack of scoundrels. my point is that i dont feel an irrational need to group myself with others based on a random birthright or ethnicity. people who left other oppressive parts of the world to move to america were smart. a jew or a palestinian that left their "holy land" to come to america is far better off than one that maintains an irrational tie to a place. i feel no sympathy for those who fight for something useless. maybe you are irrational, but i am not. if they established a new american state in asia, i would feel exactly as american living there, if we lived by the same american system with the same american leaders and constitution. was hawaii somehow magically transformed by statehood? should we leave it to the ethnic hawaiians becasuse at one particular arbitrary point in history they owned it? but this is exactly what people claim about israel. they take some arbitrary point in history, and some people lived in a particular area, and then from there on thru the rest of history the land is theirs. nevermind who lived there before or after them. zionism is racism. no ethnic, religious or racial group owns land just because they say they do. end tribalism, we are not cavemen.
You don't care how many people get slaughtered, but Bush was justified in going into Iraq because Saddam was mistreating his people. Well, I guess being right wing means, along with not being too informed or smart, not having to be consistent either.
Talk about being uninformed... Saddam was beating the war drums, supporting terrorist organizations, harboring terrorists and was generally fueling the fires of hatred within Palestine and Israel. http://www.arabicnews.com/ansub/Daily/Day/001111/2000111102.html It was no secret, although it wasn't reported here in the U.S.. http://english.pravda.ru/world/2001/03/12/2936.html The bombers of the Trade Towers back in 1993 carried Iraqi passports. The bombers of the two U.S. Embassies in Africa were trained and supplied by the Iraqi military.
i understand if my views on the israeli/palestinain conflict appear stupid and extreme. but yunno, free speech alley!
So exactly what part of what I posted is false...?? http://cns.miis.edu/research/wmdme/isrl_moa.htm Does it matter if Israel bombed Syria recently? Look closely at the unilateral preemptive provision in this agreement regarding Israel's right to self defense. Does it sound familiar?
