Darth Wong's Israel bashing

[HemlockGrey]

If you declare Jews a race then you can declare the concept of a nation for Jews racist.

Wha? It's a religion, a race, whatever. Regardless of what it is, how can you not call a nation that caters favorably to a single religion racist, or bigoted, or discriminatory, whatever?[/list]

[jaeger115]

And you're forgetting the incident with the USS Liberty and the Mossad agent. I read it from the WUD site which Wong has on his link page. One fucking Mossad agent refused to inform the American authorites of the terrorists' plan to blow up an American barracks in Kenya. 241 fucking Americans died in the attack, all for one selfish Mossad agent! They ought to owe us more than that, because we pay so much money to support them!

[tharkûn]

Mike you keep coming back to this question of why did the Jews go gung ho for Israel?

The fact is they didn't. Most Jews tried to establish a homeland in Poland, or didn't want to establish a homeland. Most Jews died or had their lives ripped apart. You have to remember that the Zionists were a minority within the Jewish community.

When the idea of a Jewish Nation-state first got going and even when the Brits signed on ... it was no different than anbody else. In the 1920's Turkey and Greece swapped populations to make ethnically homogenous populations. The Dreyfus affair was brought out by a strong desire by a large French faction to have an ethnically pure France. Not too long before Italy and Germany were unified under the ethnic banner.

The idea of a nation state were saturdays are when the post office doesn't run, where the national language is Hebrew, etc. are absolutely within the norm for the time period. Tolerant ethnically diverse states, like Canada and the United States are the exception, not the norm.

Quite frankly there is NOWHERE the Jews could look to establish a homeland that wouldn't evoke violence. Europeans settled Africa ... you had war. The French marginally settled Canada, they had to burn out the Mohawks. Anywhere that can absorb hundreds of thousands of Jews is GOING to illicit violence. Compared to every other country planting endeavor, violence in Palestine was minimal. Hell look at the violence needed when the Irish wanted their own country, or when yugoslavia shattered. It is utterly and completely unreasonable to expect that ANY Jewish state could be established without opposition and violence.

Palestine was one of many options. It was not even the first choice of the world Jewry. However it was the only one that worked. It is not that the Jews wanted a state in Palestine, it was that anbody who didn't was killed or endured utter terror. When WWII ends the only intact Jewish communities are in Israel, the UK (few in number), the USSR (socialist Jews only) and the US. So when WWII ended the masses of displaced Jews immigrated to the two intact centres of world Jewry ... the US and Israel. Israel was the poor man's choice (cheaper to cross the Mediterrainian).

Look back to the founding fathers of zionism were they commited to a Jewish state in Palestine? No they viewed it as a promising option among many. Look to the situation after WWII, did the survivors leave solely for Israel? No, many crossed the Atlantic just as many crossed the Mediterrainian.

Were there better choices? Perhaps. Was it decided by religion? No. You have yet to show ANY evidence suggesting that it was religiously motivated, rather you have attempted to show that it was a stupid decision and then lept to the conclusion that only religion could motivate such stupidity.

Do you have anything which is not of the form, "It was stupid to pick Palestine for ________ reason, therefore it must have been religiously motivated"?

[jaeger115]

Where did you get the idea that it was cheaper to cross the Mediterreanean?(sp)

[Darth Wong]

Tharkun, you have failed to show why Palestine was a good choice. You have failed to explain why they were so gung-ho to seize control of Jerusalem. These decisions make perfect sense in light of religious fanaticism, but no sense without it. Coyote provided numerous examples of the hostility toward Israelis in that area even before the nation was formed, and you have referenced that yourself (funny how that information mysteriously evapourates from your brain when you want to "prove" that the choice of that particular piece of geography has nothing to do with religion).

But of course, I'm the one being unreasonable, right? They just coincidentally chose that particular piece of land out of all the lands on Earth, with no religious motivation whatsoever. There's no connection at all, and anyone who notices this odd coincidence of religious history and geographical choice is just making things up, right?

[Darth Wong]

PS. As for CSS, no one but him even knows exactly what glaring error he's found in any particular argument; he admits that there's a such thing as ethnic Judaism, he admits there's such a thing as religious Judaism, he even provides numbers of how many members belong to either category, yet he gets upset at the suggestion that Judaism is an ethnicity or a race. At this point, I think he's just wanking off to the sound of his own voice.

[C.S.Strowbridge]

If you declare Jews a race then you can declare the concept of a nation for Jews racist.

Wha? It's a religion, a race, whatever. Regardless of what it is, how can you not call a nation that caters favorably to a single religion racist, or bigoted, or discriminatory, whatever?[/list]

Two points:

1.) Having a nation for a single cultural group isn't unusual.

Sort of like having a nation for Germans? It's called Germany.
Or a nation for Italians? It's called Italy.
Or a nation for idiots? It's called America. (Ok, I know that was a cheap shot. I don't care.)

2.) While Israel was set up for Jews, it is not run under Halakha. Their Supreme court said that while it is acceptable for individuals to live under Halakha, the government can not enforce it. For example, if you run a restaurant you can decide to only serve Kosher food and close on the Sabbath. Or you could serve whole roast sucking pigs on the Sabbath. Which I believe breaks 4 rules.

There are some rules that are different for non-Jews. For instance, Jews must serve in the Military. For Arabs and others it's volentary. Of course, serving in the military does grant you certain privileges.

[C.S.Strowbridge]

PS. As for CSS, no one but him even knows exactly what glaring error he's found in any particular argument; he admits that there's a such thing as ethnic Judaism, he admits there's such a thing as religious Judaism, he even provides numbers of how many members belong to either category, yet he gets upset at the suggestion that Judaism is an ethnicity or a race. At this point, I think he's just wanking off to the sound of his own voice.

Oh fuck off. Being Jewish doesn't mean you are part of a particular Race, particular Religion, or Particular nationality. That means, get ready for the fucking obvious, being Jewish isn't a Race, Religion or Nationality. For fuck sake, they don't even have a common language.

Do you understand? If not, I'll say it again.

Being Jewish doesn't mean you are white.
Being Jewish doesn't mean you follow Judaism.
Being Jewish doesn't mean you live in Israel.
Being Jewish doesn't mean you speak Hebrew.

If you hear 'Jew' and assume any of those you are being racist. Just like you would be if you heard, 'Black' and assumed:

Voted for the Democrats.
Speaks Ebonics.
Listens to rap and / or Hip-Hop.
Has a long schlong.

So, if being Jewish means none of those things, what does it mean? Simply put, being Jewish doens't mean anything other than having a common history.

So, by lumping Jews into a single Category based on Race, Religion, etc. WHICH YOU FUCKING DID is racist. But you see this argument, get as far as the first instance of Religion and your brain shuts down. 'Religion evil. Religion evil! Fap, Fap, Fap.'

You don't look deeper and think, 'Maybe there's more to their motivation than Religion. Maybe the history of the Jews also has something to do with their choice of locations.' Or maybe it had to due with the fact that at the time, the countries with the largest Jewish populations were either trying to eliminate Jewish immigration (US, UK) or were trying to eliminate Jews (Germany, Russia.)

So, you think the location for Israel was a stupid idea, and could only be explained by religion. Come up with a better location, or your argument is no better than a Creationist saying, 'Evolution isn't perfect, so Creationism wins.'

[Darth Wong]

Oh fuck off. Being Jewish doesn't mean you are part of a particular Race, particular Religion, or Particular nationality. That means, get ready for the fucking obvious, being Jewish isn't a Race, Religion or Nationality. For fuck sake, they don't even have a common language.

Oh look, it's the broken-record asshole! Taking a term with several meanings and saying that because you can't exclusively pin it down to ONE of those meanings, it has no real meaning at all!

Do you understand? If not, I'll say it again.

Being Jewish doesn't mean you are white.
Being Jewish doesn't mean you follow Judaism.
Being Jewish doesn't mean you live in Israel.
Being Jewish doesn't mean you speak Hebrew.

OK, then explain precisely what "being Jewish" means.

If you hear 'Jew' and assume any of those you are being racist. Just like you would be if you heard, 'Black' and assumed:

Voted for the Democrats.
Speaks Ebonics.
Listens to rap and / or Hip-Hop.
Has a long schlong.

Feeble attempt at race-baiting. Simply showing your asshole colours now, eh?

Sorry, but Judaism IS a religion. Deal with it.

So, if being Jewish means none of those things, what does it mean? Simply put, being Jewish doens't mean anything other than having a common history.

Wrong. Does Sammy Davis Jr. have a common history with Ariel Sharon? If so, how?

So, by lumping Jews into a single Category based on Race, Religion, etc. WHICH YOU FUCKING DID is racist.

Are you saying that Judaism does not exist as a religion? Because it does. Are you saying that Jews don't exist as an ethnic group? Because they do, and you even provided numbers for both. I guess that makes you racist too. Gee, I never knew that to simply say a race existed (as opposed to casting stereotypes or advocating discrimination) is racist. By that token, you are a racist for using the term "black" in reference to a race.

But you see this argument, get as far as the first instance of Religion and your brain shuts down. 'Religion evil. Religion evil! Fap, Fap, Fap.'

Awww, poor baby. Projecting your wanking onto others, I see.

You don't look deeper and think, 'Maybe there's more to their motivation than Religion. Maybe the history of the Jews also has something to do with their choice of locations.'

Sammy Davis Jr. has historic roots in Israel? That's amazing. Judaism has many definitions, but it is basically a tribal religion, and everyone knows it. You are attempting to create ambiguities in order to support your asinine belief that the selection of Israel had nothing to do with religion. In fact, you have refused to debate that point directly, and have chosen instead to attack the person who made that point by using the race card. Pathetic.

Or maybe it had to due with the fact that at the time, the countries with the largest Jewish populations were either trying to eliminate Jewish immigration (US, UK) or were trying to eliminate Jews (Germany, Russia.)

And so they all decided to go someplace where they would receive a warm welcome, which they didn't?

So, you think the location for Israel was a stupid idea, and could only be explained by religion. Come up with a better location

I listed several candidates earlier. Were they willing? No. Neither was Palestine, in case you hadn't fucking noticed. But the acrimony would have been lesser, and the geography easier. If you are going to make a claim that no place on Earth was suitable except for that one, the burden of proof is on you; the person making an extraordinary claim must provide the evidence.

, or your argument is no better than a Creationist saying, 'Evolution isn't perfect, so Creationism wins.'

Ah, more attempts to cast guilt by association. Are you done with the ad-hominem attacks yet? First the race card, and now creationism? You're full of shit; the burden of proof is on you to provide a better explanation for events, since I've already provided one.

I can easily explain the selection of the land and the violent desire to seize control of Jerusalem through religion; you ignore that explanation, propose another one which is pure bullshit ("history", as if millenia-old land claims are worth shit), ignore the whole Jerusalem issue completely, and launch into endless ad-hominem attacks and furious hand-waving in order to distract from this problem. Where the fuck did you learn to debate? Sesame Street?

[Peregrin Toker]

I accidentally included the - in the URL. Look again and delete the dash at the end. In addition, to instantly claim bias by an Arab human rights organization no less is indicative of extreme bias on your part. Every piece of information is fully referenced.

So you're telling me that the Israeli are purposely discriminating against the Palestinians, and that they not only are denying it, but also try to keep it under wraps???

And this means what? Does that include the West Bank, where every Palestinian who couldn't produce title lost their land and watched it become the property of Israel so they could settle it?

The Jews did not steal Arab land. In fact, by the time of WW1, most Palestinian soil was owned by landlords who lived in Syria and Egypt. The hebrews actually went out of their way to avoid purchasing land in areas where Arabs might be displaced. They sought land that was largely uncultivated, swampy, cheap and, most important, without tenants.

The Arabs who fled from the West Bank during the 1967 War were largely Jordanians who moved from one part of what they considered their country to another.

By the way, the West Bank legally belongs to Israel. See here:

http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/myths/mf10.html#k

However - to me, the Israeli's confiscation of the Palestinian land does resemble some of the Soviet Union's more objectionable policies.

Read the links. Also feel free to visit Human Rights Watch has numerous reports on the matter (I assume- so far I've seen one regarding discrimination in the school system) and Amnesty International.

There are several privately-owned Arab schools in Israel, where the Arabic schoolchildrens do not have to fear being bullied by Hebrew students.

However, this does not mean that Israeli policies towards the Palestinians are similar to apartheid.

"We do not want to create a situation like that which exists in South Africa, where the whites are the owners and rulers, and the blacks are the workers. If we do not do all kinds of work, easy and hard, skilled and unskilled, if we become merely landlords, then this will not be our homeland" - David Ben Gurion

Today, within Israel, Jews are a majority, but the Arab minority are full citizens who enjoy equal rights. Arabs are represented in the Knesset, and have served in the Cabinet, high-level foreign ministry posts (e.g., Ambassador to Finland) and on the Supreme Court. Under apartheid, black South Africans could not vote and were not citizens of the country in which they formed the overwhelming majority of the population.

However, I admit that it is not so in the territories, where the Israeli army enforces harsh martial law.

Oh because your ancestors lived there in 'ancient times' it's alright to throw seize the land of someone who's already living there with no compensation even, and subsequently turn the place into a mass ghetto except for the opulent by comparison Jewish settlements?

A mass ghetto? Excuse me! The squalid refugee camps which probably refer to only number 1.2 million - only a third of the number of palestinian refugees.

By your logic, most of the people living in modern-day Scotland should be expelled to Eire and England, because the majority of Scots are the descendants of Irish pirates and Anglo-Saxon raiders who overran Scotland during the Dark Ages. The original population of Scotland, known as the Picts, are extinct.

As I mentioned before, much of the land was bought by the Hebrews rather than taken by force - and they carefully chose land which wasn't cultivated.

http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/myths/mf2.html#e

There are discriminatory laws and practices. This is a fact. Research it goddammit- it's not hard. Need I bring up the religious ID card system, or the license plate system?

Okay, I agree with you about the religious ID card system.

So what? This makes discrimination all right huh? Why does everyone bring up this totally irrelevant point? Should we let off single murderers because there are serial killers? Fuck me dead, like I said before, being better than *shitty Middle Eastern Country* is not a huge achievement.

The discrimination against Arabs in Israel is less excessive than the discrimination against Jews in Arab nations.

This information on treatment of Jews in Arab countries says a bit about Arabic anti-judaism.

http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/myths/mf15.html#e

What the fuck is this? Because Israel was never communist that makes mass discrimination and injustice against a very large section of its population ok?

Point taken.

[Malecoda]

Every idiot who seeks to discredit that essay always assumes that it claims Palestine is morally flawless, that Palestine and all Arab nations should be treated as a monolithic group (because they're the same race; hmmmm ... what does this say about "Nixon" ...) and performs the bait-and-switch of refuting comments about Palestinians living in the race-ghetto of the occupied territories with Palestinians living outside the race-ghetto, even though the article takes pains to point out the difference (and the fact that this distinction is the loophole the Israelis use to excuse their own behaviour).

It is a rather pitiful comment on the state of reading comprehension in North America that this is the most common "rebuttal". Perhaps if they taught people how to read in school ...

Did you notice this in his first post? When refuting your claim that you can compare Israel to an Aryan state, he went on for a little bit and called it "predisposed." But you did not presume anything or say that Israel was predisposed any way or the other--you simply said "Think of an Aryan state and you get the idea" (paraphrased)--you simply compared the two. A logic trick on Nixon's part, and I think an unwitting one, pointing up the whole reding comprenshun thing.

[Vympel]

So you're telling me that the Israeli are purposely discriminating against the Palestinians, and that they not only are denying it, but also try to keep it under wraps???

The links are there for your own viewing. Make of them what you will.

The Jews did not steal Arab land. In fact, by the time of WW1, most Palestinian soil was owned by landlords who lived in Syria and Egypt. The hebrews actually went out of their way to avoid purchasing land in areas where Arabs might be displaced. They sought land that was largely uncultivated, swampy, cheap and, most important, without tenants.

What does this have to do with the West Bank? Regardless, What do you call 400,000 refugees going off to live in refugee camps? Did they just ask really nicely and they left?

The Arabs who fled from the West Bank during the 1967 War were largely Jordanians who moved from one part of what they considered their country to another.

Operative word- fled. As in they were fleeing from something. The IDF. It's also patently absurd to suggest that because someone occupies New South Wales, that's alright, because I can still go live in Queensland.

By the way, the West Bank legally belongs to Israel. See here:

http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/myths/mf10.html#k

However - to me, the Israeli's confiscation of the Palestinian land does resemble some of the Soviet Union's more objectionable policies.

That link is the kind of blatant lying and half-truths I expect from such a propaganda site. Israel's policies in the West Bank are in direct violation of the 4th Geneva Convention, which Israel voluntarily signed.

There are several privately-owned Arab schools in Israel, where the Arabic schoolchildrens do not have to fear being bullied by Hebrew students.

However, this does not mean that Israeli policies towards the Palestinians are similar to apartheid.

No it's just an example that Arab schools get crap-all funding when they need it most.

"We do not want to create a situation like that which exists in South Africa, where the whites are the owners and rulers, and the blacks are the workers. If we do not do all kinds of work, easy and hard, skilled and unskilled, if we become merely landlords, then this will not be our homeland" - David Ben Gurion

Irrelevant if what he wanted isn't what came to pass.

Today, within Israel, Jews are a majority, but the Arab minority are full citizens who enjoy equal rights. Arabs are represented in the Knesset, and have served in the Cabinet, high-level foreign ministry posts (e.g., Ambassador to Finland) and on the Supreme Court. Under apartheid, black South Africans could not vote and were not citizens of the country in which they formed the overwhelming majority of the population.

However, I admit that it is not so in the territories, where the Israeli army enforces harsh martial law.

Then we agree that it should stop?

A mass ghetto? Excuse me! The squalid refugee camps which probably refer to only number 1.2 million - only a third of the number of palestinian refugees.

Do compare the conditions of the nice Jewish settlements to the majority of the populaiton, and in particular the distribution of resources.

By your logic, most of the people living in modern-day Scotland should be expelled to Eire and England, because the majority of Scots are the descendants of Irish pirates and Anglo-Saxon raiders who overran Scotland during the Dark Ages. The original population of Scotland, known as the Picts, are extinct.

WTF are you talking about? I repeat: why does the fact that your 'ancestors' living there in 'ancient times' confer the right to seize the land of the inhabitants who are there right now? You do know that such 'historic rights' are utter bullshit, don't you?

As I mentioned before, much of the land was bought by the Hebrews rather than taken by force - and they carefully chose land which wasn't cultivated

http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/myths/mf2.html#e

What kind of fantasy land do you have to be in to assume that 400,000 people went off to refugee camps of their own free will? Believe it or not Jews didn't rock up on boats, go house to house buying land, and then got all nice and settled in. They were removed, without monetary compensation, through clearing operations such as this one:

http://www.deiryassin.org/

As for the uncultivated land claim, do you seriously expect anyone to believe that there was a lot of uncultivated land just waiting to be used in the middle of a tiny portion of the Middle East that has been populated since antiquity, and that it's presence allowed the creation of the state of Israel with little disruption?

The discrimination against Arabs in Israel is less excessive than the discrimination against Jews in Arab nations.

Which is not hard.

This information on treatment of Jews in Arab countries says a bit about Arabic anti-judaism.

http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/myths/mf15.html#e

I'm not interested in the surrounding Arab countries. Being better than those shitholes is not hard. I expect far more than that from the supposed 'only democracy in the region' and the nation that gets billions of dollars a year in military aid.

[HemlockGrey]

CSS, please stop spouting sewage. The fact is that Israel favors people who are Jewish. You could say America favors people who are American- however, you can become an American simply by living here for a few years, and America does not repress, oppress, shell, shoot at, or segregate the non-Americans from the Americans.

Futhermore, whether or not Jewish folk are a race, ethnic group, religion, whatever, does not fucking matter! At all! The fact remains that Israel is an aggressive, oppressive state, and you have offered no refutations to the fact.

[jaeger115]

CSS, have you READ the facts on Israel's discrimination against Palestinians on Mike's site? Israel gives citizenship EXCLUSIVELY to Jewish citizens and refuses these to Arab people. While Israel is busy supporting the takeover of Palestinian land, the Jewish people who live on this "claimed" land actually are better off than the impoverished Palestinian citizens who has worked their asses off trying to make a profit from this arid land! I'm amazed that the UN haven't intervented yet! So far the UN has complained about yet another breach of its rules while Israel laughs at it and rides roughshod over it! If the UN can't enforce its own laws, someone OUGHT to!

[Darth Wong]

<SARCASM>Ah, but the UN is just another part of the big Arab conspiracy against Israel, remember? That's where all of those resolutions against Israel come from, not from any genuine basis</SARCASM>

PS. You should probably clarify to say that Palestinians in the occupied territories can't get citizenship despite paying taxes to Israel and having their lives, livelihoods, and basic necessities such as water regulated by Israel, or else he will nitpick you on it. Israel knows they can't maintain their racial apartheid policies throughout their entire land and still maintain the false pretense of being a non-racist state, so they reserve their apartheid policies for the "occupied territories".

[jaeger115]

Yeah that makes sense. Thanks for reminding me.

[C.S.Strowbridge]

Oh fuck off. Being Jewish doesn't mean you are part of a particular Race, particular Religion, or Particular nationality. That means, get ready for the fucking obvious, being Jewish isn't a Race, Religion or Nationality. For fuck sake, they don't even have a common language.

Oh look, it's the broken-record asshole! Taking a term with several meanings and saying that because you can't exclusively pin it down to ONE of those meanings, it has no real meaning at all!

Oh dear god. Learn to fucking read. I've told you what it means, several times. Pull your head out of your ass when you respond.

Being Jewish merely means having a common history.

Do you understand? If not, I'll say it again.

Being Jewish doesn't mean you are white.
Being Jewish doesn't mean you follow Judaism.
Being Jewish doesn't mean you live in Israel.
Being Jewish doesn't mean you speak Hebrew.

OK, then explain precisely what "being Jewish" means

Gee, I only explained that five or so lines below.

Being Jewish merely means having a common history.

If you hear 'Jew' and assume any of those you are being racist. Just like you would be if you heard, 'Black' and assumed:

Voted for the Democrats.
Speaks Ebonics.
Listens to rap and / or Hip-Hop.
Has a long schlong.

Feeble attempt at race-baiting. Simply showing your asshole colours now, eh?

Did I say you did any of those? No I didn't. So you'd better drop the fucking victim act or people might conclude that Wong doth protest too much.

Sorry, but Judaism IS a religion. Deal with it.

Judaism ia a Religion, but being Jewish doesn't mean you follow Judaism, anymore than being Canadian means you are a Christians. In fact, more Canadians are Christians than Jews follow Judaism. In fact, IIRC, more Canadians are white than Jews who are white. Therefore, you are a white Christian.

Do you understand the problems with your logic?

So, if being Jewish means none of those things, what does it mean? Simply put, being Jewish doens't mean anything other than having a common history.

Wrong. Does Sammy Davis Jr. have a common history with Ariel Sharon? If so, how?

They have a common history the same way Humans and Chimpanzees have a common ancestor.

I think the lesson that should be learned is Jews are a very diverse group. Assigning racial, religious, etc. characteristics based on the label, 'Jew' is foolish at best. And completely racist at worst.

So, by lumping Jews into a single Category based on Race, Religion, etc. WHICH YOU FUCKING DID is racist.

Are you saying that Judaism does not exist as a religion?

WHEN DID I SAY THAT, YOU LYING FUCK!

Because it does. Are you saying that Jews don't exist as an ethnic group? Because they do,

Only if you stretch the definition of, 'Ethnic' the same way Creationists stretch religion so it will include science.

and you even provided numbers for both.

Americans:

White: 75.1%
Black: 12.3%
American Indian: 0.9%
Asian: 3.6%
Other: 5.5%

According to you I just proved, 'American' is a race.

I guess that makes you racist too. Gee, I never knew that to simply say a race existed (as opposed to casting stereotypes or advocating discrimination) is racist.

It is when that race doesn't exist.

By that token, you are a racist for using the term "black" in reference to a race.

You go girl, take out that strawman. It's the only victory you'll have against me.

But you see this argument, get as far as the first instance of Religion and your brain shuts down. 'Religion evil. Religion evil! Fap, Fap, Fap.'

Awww, poor baby. Projecting your wanking onto others, I see.

Good come back.

You don't look deeper and think, 'Maybe there's more to their motivation than Religion. Maybe the history of the Jews also has something to do with their choice of locations.'

Sammy Davis Jr. has historic roots in Israel?

Sammy Davis Jr. moved to Israel? I didn't know that. Thanks for that peice of triva.

Judaism has many definitions, but it is basically a tribal religion, and everyone knows it.

Judaism is a tribal religion, being Jewish is not. Big difference, one you refuse to accept.

You are attempting to create ambiguities in order to support your asinine belief that the selection of Israel had nothing to do with religion.

Really, I said that? Here I thought I said the choice had more reasons than just religion. I think that would imply religion had something to do with it, but not the only reason, which is what you seem to be saying.

In fact, you have refused to debate that point directly, and have chosen instead to attack the person who made that point by using the race card. Pathetic.

You made it a race issue when you called Jews a race.

Or maybe it had to due with the fact that at the time, the countries with the largest Jewish populations were either trying to eliminate Jewish immigration (US, UK) or were trying to eliminate Jews (Germany, Russia.)

And so they all decided to go someplace where they would receive a warm welcome, which they didn't?

Warmer welcome than Germany, which is where you suggested they form a country.

So, you think the location for Israel was a stupid idea, and could only be explained by religion. Come up with a better location

I listed several candidates earlier.

Including Germany.

BTW, did any of them have any historical connection to Jews? If not, it's not so much a homeland as a reservation.

Were they willing? No. Neither was Palestine, in case you hadn't fucking noticed. But the acrimony would have been lesser, and the geography easier.

And the Jews would have no connection to the land. And the hundred years of legal land purchases would be wasted.

If you are going to make a claim that no place on Earth was suitable except for that one, the burden of proof is on you; the person making an extraordinary claim must provide the evidence.

I was unaware I made that claim.

, or your argument is no better than a Creationist saying, 'Evolution isn't perfect, so Creationism wins.'

Ah, more attempts to cast guilt by association.

Nope, they're called analogies.

I can easily explain the selection of the land and the violent desire to seize control of Jerusalem through religion;

You claims that it's all about religion ignores the FACT that almost half of the Jews don't follow the religion in question.

So, first of all, you are commit a Complex Cause fallacy, you are focusing on only one part of the causes for the settlement of Israel.

You are then committing an Appeal to Motive, you are attacking the Motives and not the actions. Just like if I attacked the What Would Jesus Drive campaign for basis their decision to not drive SUVs (a decision that I support) cause they are following Jesus (a motive I don't support.)

[C.S.Strowbridge]

CSS, please stop spouting sewage. The fact is that Israel favors people who are Jewish.

Israel favours Jews the same way America favours whites.

In the, 'Occupied Territories' things are a lot different than in America. So trying to compare them is a bit of a False Analogy.

[/quote]Futhermore, whether or not Jewish folk are a race, ethnic group, religion, whatever, does not fucking matter! At all![/quote]

It matters when people start called them a race and start assigning the group characteristics when, in reality, the population is diverse.

The fact remains that Israel is an aggressive, oppressive state, and you have offered no refutations to the fact.

Actually, I have. But the debate seems to have turned away from that topic.

[Darth Wong]

Oh dear god. Learn to fucking read. I've told you what it means, several times. Pull your head out of your ass when you respond.

State your justification for your alternate definition, keeping in mind that you must explain what ties all Jews to this "common history". If someone decides to believe in Judaism, does he have this "common history" all of a sudden too?

Face it; you're just trying to attack the messenger on something, anything, in order to detract from the message.

Did I say you did any of those? No I didn't. So you'd better drop the fucking victim act or people might conclude that Wong doth protest too much.

Pot calling the kettle black, asshole; you've been screaming "RACIST! RACIST!" for the offense of simply referring to Jews as an ethnicity and religion, and you have the gall to accuse OTHERS of playing the victim card?

They have a common history the same way Humans and Chimpanzees have a common ancestor.

Justify this claim. How does a person who converts to Judaism tomorrow have a "common history" with every other Jew? How long as you going to maintain this idiotic red-herring?

I think the lesson that should be learned is Jews are a very diverse group. Assigning racial, religious, etc. characteristics based on the label, 'Jew' is foolish at best. And completely racist at worst.

By that token, it's racist to say that Africans have dark skin. No one is generalizing based on the label; Jews recognize themselves as an ethnicity, ie- Israel recognizes people as being Jewish because they can trace their ancestry, which is exactly how white supremacists define "aryan".

Are you saying that Judaism does not exist as a religion?

WHEN DID I SAY THAT, YOU LYING FUCK!

You said Judaism is not a religion, you lying fuck.

Only if you stretch the definition of, 'Ethnic' the same way Creationists stretch religion so it will include science.

More feeble strawman claims. Any group which allows automatic membership based on distant ancestry is racial. Deal with it.

You go girl, take out that strawman. It's the only victory you'll have against me.

It's easy to accuse people of using strawmen when your position is self-contradictory, CSS. You say Jews are not an ethnicity, not a religion, but your alternate explanation (common "history") is simply a sneaky way of re-defining the ancestral commonalities used for automatic membership in the club, even though that's ethnicity.

Awww, poor baby. Projecting your wanking onto others, I see.

Good come back.

Come-back to what? Are you saying that your mindless masturbatory insults were actually a valid point? Pathetic.

Sammy Davis Jr. has historic roots in Israel?

Sammy Davis Jr. moved to Israel? I didn't know that. Thanks for that peice of triva.

Be as much of a smart-assed dipshit as you want, but he disproves your bullshit argument and you know it. He has no shared history with the majority of Jews whatsoever, thus he demolishes your argument. Smart-ass remarks will not get you off the hook.

Jews are a religion and a race. You can join the club by either believing in their religion or tracing your ancestry. All of your sophistry and bullshit will not change that.

<snip more endless nitpicks, long-winded diatribes, attempts to play the race card>

Deal with the point above and stop dancing around with nitpicks, CSS. And explain how this makes it OK to maintain a policy of apartheid in the occupied territories. Several people have pointed out that you are avoiding the subject, and you doggedly press on with your red herrings and personal attacks.

[C.S.Strowbridge]

PS. You should probably clarify to say that Palestinians in the occupied territories can't get citizenship despite paying taxes to Israel and having their lives, livelihoods, and basic necessities such as water regulated by Israel, or else he will nitpick you on it. Israel knows they can't maintain their racial apartheid policies throughout their entire land and still maintain the false pretense of being a non-racist state, so they reserve their apartheid policies for the "occupied territories".

Couple of points:

1.) Where can I find more information on Palestinian taxes? Cause quite frankly, as Canadians we both pay taxes to Quebec and neither one of us got to vote in their Referendum.

2.) When the Arabs were in control of those same territories they also controlled the very lived of the Palestinians and gave them no rights either. Israel didn't oppress the Palestinians as much as they matained the Status Quo. In fact, AFAIK, employment oppurtunities for Palestinians in Israel were higher in Israel than they were in the Arab world.

3.) I like how you point out that Arabs living in Israel have the equal rights as Jews, and then turn it around as use it it attack Israel. Maybe, just maybe, Israel's treatment of Palestinians has less to do with race as you think it does. Maybe, again just maybe, it has a tiny bit to do with the fact that occasionally, Palestinians have been known, in the past, to blow up Israeli Buses and Cafes. It's just a possibility.

[Darth Wong]

Couple of points:

1.) Where can I find more information on Palestinian taxes? Cause quite frankly, as Canadians we both pay taxes to Quebec and neither one of us got to vote in their Referendum.

What the fuck are you talking about? Are you on drugs? We pay taxes to the federal government, which in turn spends money in Quebec; this is how nations work. If we moved to Quebec, we would have the right to vote in their regional referenda. Not at all like Israel, where a Palestinian can live in the same occupied territories as a Jew but have far fewer rights.

2.) When the Arabs were in control of those same territories they also controlled the very lived of the Palestinians and gave them no rights either. Israel didn't oppress the Palestinians as much as they matained the Status Quo. In fact, AFAIK, employment oppurtunities for Palestinians in Israel were higher in Israel than they were in the Arab world.

Israel has two classes of human being in the occupied territories, defined by race. Your refusal to admit that is nothing more than raw dishonesty on your part, and your attempt to introduce the red-herring of how well they would do on their own does not change the fact of OT apartheid.

3.) I like how you point out that Arabs living in Israel have the equal rights as Jews, and then turn it around as use it it attack Israel.

How do I use that fact to attack Israel? I use Israeli behaviour in the occupied territories to attack Israel! This "occupied territories, rest of Israel" shell-game is becoming such a habit for you that you don't even seem to realize you're doing it.

Maybe, just maybe, Israel's treatment of Palestinians has less to do with race as you think it does. Maybe, again just maybe, it has a tiny bit to do with the fact that occasionally, Palestinians have been known, in the past, to blow up Israeli Buses and Cafes. It's just a possibility.

Nice call, smart-ass. Now explain why they blow up whole buildings in order to get at these terrorists in the Occupied Territories (excepting Jewish settlements, of course), but they don't use the same tactics when a Palestinian living in the rest of Israel commits a terrorist act. Explain why ethnic Jews can vote in the Occupied Territories while ethnic Palestinians can't. Are you saying that every single ethnic Palestinian is held responsible for the actions of terrorists who share their ethnicity, and that this is not motivated by their race or religion? What other commonality is there, then? On what grounds do you brutalize or murder 10-year old rock-throwing kids for the actions of some other person?

[Darth Wong]

Argh. Post problem.

[C.S.Strowbridge]

Oh dear god. Learn to fucking read. I've told you what it means, several times. Pull your head out of your ass when you respond.

State your justification for your alternate definition,

Cause they're a diverse group of people. Calling them a race or a religion is not accurate. Any more than calling Torontonians a race would be accurate.

If someone decides to believe in Judaism, does he have this "common history" all of a sudden too?

Yeah, but their point of commonality would be about 2000 years ago. Keyword to remember, diversity.

Did I say you did any of those? No I didn't. So you'd better drop the fucking victim act or people might conclude that Wong doth protest too much.

Pot calling the kettle black, asshole; you've been screaming "RACIST! RACIST!" for the offense of simply referring to Jews as an ethnicity and religion, and you have the gall to accuse OTHERS of playing the victim card?

I'm not actually Jewish, so I'm not acting like I'm a victim of anything. Sorry if that was the impression you've got.

Anywho, the problem I have is when people hear the term Jew and assume anything about their Race, Religion, etc. It's not a fair assumes.

They have a common history the same way Humans and Chimpanzees have a common ancestor.

Justify this claim. How does a person who converts to Judaism tomorrow have a "common history" with every other Jew?

They all have a connection to a man called Abraham. It's not much, but that's cause Jews are a diverse group.

I think the lesson that should be learned is Jews are a very diverse group. Assigning racial, religious, etc. characteristics based on the label, 'Jew' is foolish at best. And completely racist at worst.

By that token, it's racist to say that Africans have dark skin.

Yes, it would be racist to assume Africans have dark skin, unless Egypt, Lybia, etc. just got voted out of Africa. Also it would be racist to assume Black people have the same dark skin, just like it would be racist to assume White people have the same light skin. In fact, I know some White people who are darker skinned than some Black people I know. And I'm not refering to George Hamilton and Micheal Jackson.

No one is generalizing based on the label;

You do when you say Jews = Judaism.

Jews recognize themselves as an ethnicity,

Ethnicity can mean as little as a common language. Which the Jews don't even have.

ie- Israel recognizes people as being Jewish because they can trace their ancestry, which is exactly how white supremacists define "aryan".

And if you get married to a Jew you become a Jew. That's not how white supremists view things.

Are you saying that Judaism does not exist as a religion?

WHEN DID I SAY THAT, YOU LYING FUCK!

You said Judaism is not a religion, you lying fuck.

BEING JEWISH != FOLLOWING JUDAISM!

Remember the figures I gave you, 20% are Atheists, 26% follow other religions.

Only if you stretch the definition of, 'Ethnic' the same way Creationists stretch religion so it will include science.

More feeble strawman claims. Any group which allows automatic membership based on distant ancestry is racial. Deal with it.

So being British is Racial? Racial means physical characteristics that seperate memembers of one race from another. ... So I guess the British are a seperate race, you know, with the teeth and all.

Note to all British people who read that and were offended: It was a joke. Besides, I'm obviously not offending enough people with this thread.

You go girl, take out that strawman. It's the only victory you'll have against me.

It's easy to accuse people of using strawmen when your position is self-contradictory, CSS. You say Jews are not an ethnicity, not a religion, but your alternate explanation (common "history") is simply a sneaky way of re-defining the ancestral commonalities used for automatic membership in the club, even though that's ethnicity.

Except you can't change your ethnicity, you can become Jewish.

Awww, poor baby. Projecting your wanking onto others, I see.

Good come back.

Come-back to what? Are you saying that your mindless masturbatory insults were actually a valid point? Pathetic.

Actually, yes. I believe your hatred of religion is so great (and completely valid) that you see the religious aspect to this debate and stop there. You don't dig deeper to see if there's more to it than that.

Sammy Davis Jr. has historic roots in Israel?

Sammy Davis Jr. moved to Israel? I didn't know that. Thanks for that peice of triva.

Be as much of a smart-assed dipshit as you want, but he disproves your bullshit argument and you know it. He has no shared history with the majority of Jews whatsoever, thus he demolishes your argument. Smart-ass remarks will not get you off the hook.

If you go far enough back, he does. Just like if we traced our family history back far enough we'd come up with commonalities. For instaince, AFAIK, our families are both recent immigrants to Canada. (Within a Generation or two.) Eventually, if we look back far enough, we'd have a shared history. That shared history doesn't mean we're of the same race, religion, speak the same language, share the same culture, etc.

Jews are a religion and a race. You can join the club by either believing in their religion or tracing your ancestry. All of your sophistry and bullshit will not change that.

Except you can be Jewish and be any race, and you can be Jewish and follow any Religion. That's a pretty wide definition of race and religion.

<snip more endless nitpicks, long-winded diatribes, attempts to play the race card>

That long-winded diatribe proved that your definition of Race included American. So American isn't a nationality any more, but a race. Hell, if I gave the Religious breakdown of the States I would have proven they're a Religion too. American would then be a Race and a Relgion. Ashcroft would love that.

(Note: I'm not insulting you here, I'm insulting Ashcroft.)

You definition is flawed. And just like nuclear, it doesn't matter how many people use it. It's still flawed.

Deal with the point above and stop dancing around with nitpicks, CSS. And explain how this makes it OK to maintain a policy of apartheid in the occupied territories.

Sure, first I prove there is no aparthied. Apartheid is defined as racial segregation. Since being Jewish is not a Race and Arabs (who should not be defined as a race either) are not segregated in Israel then an aparthied does not exist. No racial segregation means no aparthied. There is segregation, but it's not based on race.

Then why are the Palestinians being treated the way they are if not race? Perhaps it's Religion? Well, no. Since there are Muslims (and Christians) in Isreal, and neither Israel of Palestine follow religious laws. So that can't be it either. That is not to say Religion doesn't play a role, it does. But it can't be the defining reason.

So maybe it has to do with the hundreds of dead Jews killed in riots from 1919 to 1939. Or maybe it has something to do with the hundred of dead Jews killed in suicide bombing in less than a decade. Or maybe it has something to do with oil. Or maybe I'm just being cynical with that last one.

Ok, to sum up:

1.) Being Jewish doesn't not mean following Judaism anymore than being American means being Christian.

2.) Being Jewish isn't part of a seperate race any more than being American is part of a seperate race.

3.) When someone says they are Jewish you can't assume anything about their Race, Religion, etc. For example, I'm not Jewish, I don't know any Jews in my family. However, Religiously speaking I have more in common with Woody Allen then I do with my own fucking Parents.

4.) While the common history of the Jews can be absolutely tiny, it is stronger than Religion ties between Judaism and Atheism.

5.) Really, it would be more proper to call pre-1948 Jews a Nationality without a Nation. Now, it's more of a common culture, but there's too much variation within the, 'Jewish Culture' for that too be true as well.

6.) The location of Israel is based on many factors, Religion being one of them. Historical claims is another, and since there have always been Jews in the area, it's not a 2000 year old claim but a continuous claim. Also, by 1948, there was a significant population of Jews in the area. And most other areas with large Jewish population were less than hospitable to the Jews, so there was going to be a fight no matter what. So it's better to choose an area where they had some connection and a less trained opponent.

[C.S.Strowbridge]

Couple of points:

1.) Where can I find more information on Palestinian taxes? Cause quite frankly, as Canadians we both pay taxes to Quebec and neither one of us got to vote in their Referendum.

What the fuck are you talking about? Are you on drugs? We pay taxes to the federal government, which in turn spends money in Quebec; this is how nations work. If we moved to Quebec, we would have the right to vote in their regional referenda. Not at all like Israel, where a Palestinian can live in the same occupied territories as a Jew but have far fewer rights.

I believe I asked for details about Palestinian taxes. How are these taxes collected? What do they pay for? Etc.? At least a link so I can research them myself.

2.) When the Arabs were in control of those same territories they also controlled the very lived of the Palestinians and gave them no rights either. Israel didn't oppress the Palestinians as much as they matained the Status Quo. In fact, AFAIK, employment oppurtunities for Palestinians in Israel were higher in Israel than they were in the Arab world.

Israel has two classes of human being in the occupied territories, defined by race. Your refusal to admit that is nothing more than raw dishonesty on your part, and your attempt to introduce the red-herring of how well they would do on their own does not change the fact of OT apartheid.

Except neither Palestinians or Jews are a race. Nor do Jews or Palestinians have a single Religion.

3.) I like how you point out that Arabs living in Israel have the equal rights as Jews, and then turn it around as use it it attack Israel.

How do I use that fact to attack Israel? I use Israeli behaviour in the occupied territories to attack Israel! This "occupied territories, rest of Israel" shell-game is becoming such a habit for you that you don't even seem to realize you're doing it.

It's not a shell game, it's reality. Within Israel Arab have full rights. So, that would tend to prove the lack of rights in the OT for Arabs is not about them being Arab. It's like saying Black Felonies in the State who can't vote are barred from voting cause they are Black. Since other Blacks can vote it most have to do with something other than race.

Maybe, just maybe, Israel's treatment of Palestinians has less to do with race as you think it does. Maybe, again just maybe, it has a tiny bit to do with the fact that occasionally, Palestinians have been known, in the past, to blow up Israeli Buses and Cafes. It's just a possibility.

Nice call, smart-ass. Now explain why they blow up whole buildings in order to get at these terrorists in the Occupied Territories (excepting Jewish settlements, of course), but they don't use the same tactics when a Palestinian living in the rest of Israel commits a terrorist act.

Gee, could it be cause they don't care about protecting the lives of the people who chant Anti-Israeli slogans and want them dead. If an Arab in a mostly Arab area in Israel did something like that, the Israelis would protect Israeli citizens while arresting him. Same 'ethniticity' different results? How can this be blamed on the basis of race?

Explain why ethnic Jews can vote in the Occupied Territories while ethnic Palestinians can't.

Cause the Jews are Israel citizens.

Are you saying that every single ethnic Palestinian is held responsible for the actions of terrorists who share their ethnicity,

And the chanting, don't forget the chanting.

Palestinians, as a whole, are being punished for the actions of the people in charge. Not a few fringe Terrorists. Arafat, their nominal leader was (and may still be) a terrorist. He maintains ties with the other terrorists groups.

They are being punished for the actions of people they celebrate. Granted, not all support the terrorists, but it's safe to assume the ones throwing rocks do. Also, it would be impossible to make that call during a strike against a military target.

BTW, the term, 'ethnic Palestinian' is crap. There's no difference between Palestinians and Jordanians other than a political border. They are also a Nationality without a Nation.

On what grounds do you brutalize or murder 10-year old rock-throwing kids for the actions of some other person?

Stop bringing up age. This isn't North American where 10 year olds are collecting baseball cards and playing video games. Couple of years ago there was an army of Rebels in South-East Asia that was lead by kids younger than that.

A friend of mine had to help his dad check his car for car bombs for two years starting when he was 9. And this isn't some paranoid militia man, his friend was killed by a car bomb. (Note: Not in the Middle East.)

In the Middle East ten year olds would probably be recruited to fight. Certainly by 14 they could be soldiers.

It's a dangerous place, you can't assume some 10 year old throwing a rock is just a kid throwing a rock. First of all, there's probably dozens of others throwing rocks. Secondly, there's probably people with guns close by, or actively firing too. The Israelis do use rubber bullets and tear gas to disperse stone throwers. However, if there's a real possibility of gun fire they have to use live ammo.

[Darth Wong]

Justify this claim. How does a person who converts to Judaism tomorrow have a "common history" with every other Jew?

They all have a connection to a man called Abraham. It's not much, but that's cause Jews are a diverse group.

For the second time, shared ancestry is just a code-word for race. And it does not account for religious converts.

Yes, it would be racist to assume Africans have dark skin, unless Egypt, Lybia, etc. just got voted out of Africa.

Their skin is not dark? Odd, it looks dark. Are there Europeans with darker skin than some of the lighter-skinned Africans? Yes. Does this change the fact that Africans generally have darker skin than Europeans? No. Is it racist to point this out? No; you are over-defining racism in order to suit your purposes.

No one is generalizing based on the label;

You do when you say Jews = Judaism.

No, I say that Jews can either subscribe to the Jewish religion or belong to the Jewish race. What part of this are you too stupid to understand even after many repetitions? Your alternate definition is completely butchered by the existence of the Israeli "Law of Return" as well as the possibility of membership on purely religious grounds.

And if you get married to a Jew you become a Jew. That's not how white supremists view things.

And the Israelis are not happy about that provision being used to allow Palestinians to gain citizenship. Click here.

Moreover, the point remains that in the Occupied Territories, your ancestry determines your rights. That is racist. Deal with it.

BEING JEWISH != FOLLOWING JUDAISM!

No, that is one of two definitions of "Jewish". Why do you find this so goddamned incomprehensible? I said it before; you insist that a term with two definitions is nullified if neither definition is all-inclusive; this is simply moronic. Lots of words in the English language have more than one all-inclusive definition.

More feeble strawman claims. Any group which allows automatic membership based on distant ancestry is racial. Deal with it.

So being British is Racial?[/quote]
My wife does not get automatic British citizenship for having British ancestry. There is no British Law of Return, unlike the Israeli Jewish Law of Return, which guarantees automatic citizenship for anyone of Jewish ancestry.

Note that the German "Right of Blood" was abolished as a condition of EU membership because it was widely recognized as racist, yet people like you refuse to admit that Israel is just as racist for having its "Law of Return", particularly when Palestinians who have lived in Israeli-held "Occupited Territory" for their entire lives have no hope of citizenship, and the government even wants to close the marriage "loophole".

Racial means physical characteristics that seperate memembers of one race from another. ... So I guess the British are a seperate race, you know, with the teeth and all.

No, "racial" is an ancestral condition. Physical differences are easily blurred; for example, my eyelids have a Caucasian structure rather than an Asian structure (there's a difference), yet I don't get upset when someone says I'm of Asian descent. Race has to do with ancestry.

Except you can't change your ethnicity, you can become Jewish.

Of course, since "Jewish" can also refer to their religion. How many times do I have to say this? How does it justify racial apartheid in the Occupied Territories?

Actually, yes. I believe your hatred of religion is so great (and completely valid) that you see the religious aspect to this debate and stop there. You don't dig deeper to see if there's more to it than that.

Name one post in which I said that religion was the sole and entire cause of the problem. It is possible to say that the root cause of something is religious without necessarily denying the existence of any and all other factors. I think that Pearl Harbour was the reason the US got into WW2; only an idiot would conclude that I must think there were no other reasons if I say this.

Be as much of a smart-assed dipshit as you want, but he disproves your bullshit argument and you know it. He has no shared history with the majority of Jews whatsoever, thus he demolishes your argument. Smart-ass remarks will not get you off the hook.

If you go far enough back, he does. Just like if we traced our family history back far enough we'd come up with commonalities. For instaince, AFAIK, our families are both recent immigrants to Canada. (Within a Generation or two.) Eventually, if we look back far enough, we'd have a shared history. That shared history doesn't mean we're of the same race, religion, speak the same language, share the same culture, etc.

Tracing common ancestry infinitely back is a sophistic evasion, and you know it? Why not point out that we all descended from some self-replicating molecule billions of years ago? Races are sub-groups defined by ancestry, and the Jews are defined as such in the Israeli "Law of Return".

If you think that's racist, THEN BLAME THE FUCKING ISRAELIS, NOT ME. My whole fucking point is that Israel is racist for giving Jews special rights in the Occupied Territories, and it doesn't fucking matter how you dance around this point.

Except you can be Jewish and be any race, and you can be Jewish and follow any Religion. That's a pretty wide definition of race and religion.

What part of "term with two definitions" are you too dense to understand?

That long-winded diatribe proved that your definition of Race included American. So American isn't a nationality any more, but a race.

No it doesn't, since there is no "American" religion except for guns, and no common ancestry. Anyone born in American territory is an American citizen. But people born in Israel's Occupied Territories are not automatically Israelis.

Your endless strawman distortions are obvious and pathetic. Should I start calling you "Strawbridge?"

Sure, first I prove there is no aparthied. Apartheid is defined as racial segregation. Since being Jewish is not a Race and Arabs (who should not be defined as a race either) are not segregated in Israel then an aparthied does not exist. No racial segregation means no aparthied. There is segregation, but it's not based on race.

More shell-games. I said "occupied territories", you rebutted by replacing that with "Israel", which is your buzzword for "the geographical portions of Israeli territory in which the racial apartheid policy is not maintained for reasons of maintaining public appearances".

Then why are the Palestinians being treated the way they are if not race? Perhaps it's Religion? Well, no. Since there are Muslims (and Christians) in Isreal, and neither Israel of Palestine follow religious laws. So that can't be it either. That is not to say Religion doesn't play a role, it does. But it can't be the defining reason.

Right, so people are fighting over the "holy sites" in Jerusalem for no particular reason

So maybe it has to do with the hundreds of dead Jews killed in riots from 1919 to 1939. Or maybe it has something to do with the hundred of dead Jews killed in suicide bombing in less than a decade. Or maybe it has something to do with oil. Or maybe I'm just being cynical with that last one.

Cart before the horse; those Jews (and Arabs) were killed for something; you can't simply say that the reason for the killing was the killing.

1.) Being Jewish doesn't not mean following Judaism anymore than being American means being Christian.

It is one of two definitions.

2.) Being Jewish isn't part of a seperate race any more than being American is part of a seperate race.

Then explain the Israeli "Law of Return".

3.) When someone says they are Jewish you can't assume anything about their Race, Religion, etc. For example, I'm not Jewish, I don't know any Jews in my family. However, Religiously speaking I have more in common with Woody Allen then I do with my own fucking Parents.

You can assume that they are either Jewish by family or by religion. Your atempt to distort Boolean "OR" into "AND" is not my problem, Strawbridge.

4.) While the common history of the Jews can be absolutely tiny, it is stronger than Religion ties between Judaism and Atheism.

"Common history" being a codeword for ancestry, ie- race.

5.) Really, it would be more proper to call pre-1948 Jews a Nationality without a Nation. Now, it's more of a common culture, but there's too much variation within the, 'Jewish Culture' for that too be true as well.

A "nationality" defined by ancestry, which is yet another code-word for race.

6.) The location of Israel is based on many factors, Religion being one of them. Historical claims is another, and since there have always been Jews in the area, it's not a 2000 year old claim but a continuous claim.

Living in the area as a minority and having control of it are two different things. It is a two thousand year old land claim.

Also, by 1948, there was a significant population of Jews in the area.

Less than 10%.

And most other areas with large Jewish population were less than hospitable to the Jews, so there was going to be a fight no matter what.

Right, so you might as well choose the worst one

So it's better to choose an area where they had some connection and a less trained opponent.

And this "connection" is religious. I have challenged you repeatedly to explain Jerusalem. You ignore me. I'm fed up with your evasions.

Three words, Strawbridge: LAW OF RETURN. Explain this and then get back to me.