"We Don't Want No Stinkin' Aid" (Gaza)

[BPSCG]

Simply because a law is passed by a democratically elected body, does not mean the law is good or right. You need more justification than that.

Besides, I was not arguing against you. I was actually asking BPSCG if comparisons between Jews and Nazis could ever be made.

It's a fair question. The answer is yes. But only if the comparison is an apt one.

If I were to say, "Cheesejoff is like Hitler," because (let's assume) you're both men and both have mustaches and both like dogs, while that may all be true, it is not an apt comparison, because the differences between the two of you are far more important; Hitler was a genocidal maniac, and you are not.

Likewise, saying, "Israel has passed bad laws and has a democratically-elected leader, and is therefore like Nazi Germany," while true, is also not an apt comparison. By that measure, every democracy is like Nazi Germany, because every democracy has bad laws.

Couple that with the fact that comparing anyone with Hitler other than Stalin or Mao is an odious comparison, and only serves to trivialize Hitlers monstrous evil.

And couple that with the fact that Jews in particular have a understandable right to be especially offended by such a comparison, and that's the root of my objection.

Is it utterly inconceivable that Israael/Jews could not be compared, hypothetically, with Nazi Germany/Hitler? No. In just the same way that it's not utterly inconceivable that the NAACP could be compared, hypothetically, to the Ku Klux Klan. Nobody in his right mind would make that kind of comparison about the NAACP. But it happens to Israel every day.

 

[webfusion]

(Israelis being called Zion-Nazis) happens to Israel every day.

For sure.

http://www.terrorism-info.org.il/malam_multimedia/html/final/sp/as2_04/img/126br.jpg

and


From San Francisco street protests.

and

http://zombietime.com/stop_the_us_israeli_war_8_12_2006/IMG_7952.JPG

 

[Cheesejoff]

Correct. That is why I specifically referred to the reasons and the context behind the Law of Return in 1950.
See:My post # 6 on this thread...

His point was that Jews are allowed into their home country while Palestinians are not allowed into theirs (arguably). The law favours one race (if you consider Jews a race) over another. This is similiar to the apartheid system in South Africa. The holocaust should not be used to support apartheid, if anything it should be used to bring it down.

That was his argument. He used the Nazi comparison to show that democratically passed laws can be discriminatory in nature. He did not actually compare Israeli with Nazi Germany.

It's a fair question. The answer is yes. But only if the comparison is an apt one.

A reasonable position.

Likewise, saying, "Israel has passed bad laws and has a democratically-elected leader, and is therefore like Nazi Germany," while true, is also not an apt comparison. By that measure, every democracy is like Nazi Germany, because every democracy has bad laws.

That wasn't the actual comparison he made, but I agree it would not be apt.

 

[BPSCG]

That wasn't the actual comparison he made, but I agree it would not be apt.

Right. He said, "Not to mention that a well-known German gentleman with a funny small moustache was a democratically elected politician." Was he trying to suggest a moral equivalence between Olmert and Hitler? Or was he trying to suggest a moral equivalence between Israel and Nazi Germany?

Look, the only acceptable reason to compare anybody with Hitler is to demonstrate that they are not just monstrously evil, but evil on a scale that beggars belief. I took issue with George H.W. Bush in 1991 when he said Saddam Hussein was "worse than Hitler." Saddam was evil, monstrous, but he was nothing compared to Hitler, and the only thing such speech does is trivialize Hitler's atorcities. And comparing any genuine democracy, its people, or its leaders, no matter how imperfect, to Nazi Germany, is nothing short of slander. To deliberately, provocatively compare Israel to Nazi Germany, or its leaders to Hitler - do you ever wonder why they never compare Israel to the Soviet Union or its leaders to Stalin? - is nothing short of anti-semitism.

 

[Cheesejoff]

Right. He said, "Not to mention that a well-known German gentleman with a funny small moustache was a democratically elected politician." Was he trying to suggest a moral equivalence between Olmert and Hitler? Or was he trying to suggest a moral equivalence between Israel and Nazi Germany?

I interpreted his argument to mean Hitler was democratically elected, as a rebuttal to webfusion's point about Israeli law being passed by a democratic government.

To deliberately, provocatively compare Israel to Nazi Germany, or its leaders to Hitler - do you ever wonder why they never compare Israel to the Soviet Union or its leaders to Stalin? - is nothing short of anti-semitism.

I don't know why they don't compare Israel to the Soviet Union. Wouldn't anti-semitic people actually think favourably of the Nazis? Why would they use Hitler as more derogatory than Stalin?

 

[webfusion]

His point was that Jews are allowed into their home country while Palestinians are not allowed into theirs (arguably).

Palestinians don't have a country.

The original post #4 of JJM_777 speaks of three things:

1.Somehow Israel grants a "right of return" for any Jew born anywhere...

And
2. denies the right of any Palestinian to return to the West Bank or Gaza, even if born there and officially listed as a refugee.

Plus the added special bonus slur ---
3. Apartheid rules.


1. When I clarified that the unique Law of Return was not merely granted "somehow" and then provided both the context and linked to a reference of the actual Law, the response given by JJM_777 was to call my attention to the similarites between Israel's Knesset as the Law of the Land, and Adolph Hitler's rise to power.

Screw that.


2. The next statement says that no palestinians are allowed back to their homes in Gaza and West Bank, even if they were born there and listed "officially" as a refugee.

I disagreed, by pointing out that Thousands of palestinians annually come and go, routinely. and adding the caveat they have to conform to the laws of the (Israeli) Authorities, however.

In the negotiations between Arafat and Barak at Camp David, there was an offer to bring hundreds of thousands of palestinian refugees back into Israel, and even allow more hundreds of thousands to enter Gaza and West Bank.
This was rejected (as was the rest of the whole deal at that time) because it did not permit every single palestinian in the world to "come home" --- an absolute demand that is repeated today in the Saudi Plan.


If the palestinians want a country, let 'em figure out the underlying nature of it, and what their relations with the jews will be. In the meantime, a solid wall, and IDF actions to kill those who deserve killing, and arrests of those who deserve arrest, will just have to suffice, and no effort needs to be expended by Israel to facilitate the entry of additional hostile populations into the region.


3. I asked for evidence that Israel is an Apartheid State.
I'm still waiting for JJM to step up to the plate and take a swing at that.

 

[E.J.Armstrong]

Oh, good, another anti-semite on the forum. Jews = Hitler. Israel = Nazi Germany. Lovely.

Funny, people won't say the "n" word, because it's widely considered to be the most offensive slur in the English language. But drawing filthy moral equivalences between Hitler and people he tried to exterminate is perfectly acceptable. No reason to get offended about that. They're just Jews, after all.

You are a complete disgrace to this site.

What is it about someone stating facts that makes you apologists for unacceptable laws label people anti-semite. It appears to me lacking any intellectual arguments and faced with a reasonable facts about the behaviour of the Israeli government you resort to disreputable tactic number N+1 - calling people anti-semite?

I am afraid it is you who looks the fool.

 

[JJM 777]

Oh, good, another anti-semite on the forum.

This issue has been addressed by others already, but again: I kindly ask BPSCG to show where and when I have recommended treating Jews less well than other people? (This is what "anti-Semitism" means.)

What was 'apt' about the comparison? JJM indicated that the laws of Israel "do not matter for anything" (he offered that in Hebrew, for some reason, without a translation) and then proceeded to hint to us that the laws of the State of Israel are basically equivalent to nazism.

Cheesejoff has already corrected this hopefully accidental misunderstanding:

I interpreted his argument to mean Hitler was democratically elected, as a rebuttal to webfusion's point about Israeli law being passed by a democratic government.

The Hebrew phrase was: "That makes no difference", in response to descriptions of how democratically laws are made in Israel. If there is reason for critical discussion about a law, you cannot whitewash the issue by describing how saintly procedures have been used to create the law. We shall discuss laws as they are, no matter how they were created.

JJM_777, I'm in total agreement with Silly Green Monkey -- how dare you take a quote of mine, and truncate it in order to make it adhere to your strawman!

I don't remember you commenting all my points either, such as why African refugees are imprisoned infinitely in Israel, while in the civilized West refugees are given a basic income, housing and some kind of a life in the society.

I'm still trying to figure out why you ended up spending 3 days in confinement

They try to battle against the continuous immigration of illegal workers. But they can seldom "prove" immediately (or ever) that someone is entering the country with such motives. All they can do is keep some rulebook of what indicators makes a person routinely a suspect to be stopped at the border.

Or is it your claim that ALL palestinians on EVERY flight were detained and prohibited from entry?[/b]

No, but the 4 million exiled Palestinians generally have no right to enter or visit their homelands. If a few of them are granted a visa, it is an exception and not the general rule.

You snipped the most pertinent part of the quote, that you think Israel should have agreements with terrorists. Do you trust terrorists to keep their bargains?

This leads to the impossibility of how you describe a "terrorist". US army is naturally not a terrorist organization, despite what it has done to the civilians of Hiroshima, North Korea, Vietnam, and now Iraq. (A country that possesses atomic mass destruction weapons, whose only designed purpose is mass-murdering innocent civilians.) If Hamas has been evil, the others are no saints either.

But looking at Northern Ireland: it is possible to end the hostilities, but not by ignoring and boycotting a party or a nation.

3. I asked for evidence that Israel is an Apartheid State.

Religious and racial discrimination is present at various political issues, such as issuing building permits in Jerusalem, etc.

Jew? Here is your building permit. Arab? Denied. Bedouin? Denied. Christian? Delayed and then probably denied.

There is also a multitude of laws defining that someone or something must be "Jewish" or "Judaistic". Most recently Shin Beyt has been considering whether it should take the role of "preventive action" against anyone or anything that might compromise "the Jewish nature of the state of Israel" -- even if these said actions would be legal, such as political activism etc.

 

[WildCat]

Not to mention that a well-known German gentleman with a funny small moustache was a democratically elected politician.

JJM 777 cannot be referring to Hitler in this post, because Hitler was never democratically elected.

 

[ZeeGerman]

JJM 777 cannot be referring to Hitler in this post, because Hitler was never democratically elected.

Not to derail this thread, but given the results of the Reichtagswahlen 1932I, 1932II and 1933, could you clarify what you mean here, because I don't follow.

Zee

 

[webfusion]

No, but the 4 million exiled Palestinians generally have no right to enter or visit their homelands. If a few of them are granted a visa, it is an exception and not the general rule.

OK, then your original statement is wrong, when you declared that "Israel denies the right of any Palestinian to return to the West Bank or Gaza which I replied to, saying that thousands (not a "few") annually are given permission, on a case-by-case basis.

You decided that this wasn't a sufficient rebuttal -- and told me
"Come on, you must know that you are misrepresenting reality here.

and proceeded to give the song-and-dance of how you got hooked at the airport (you did fit the profile of young, single, broke Scandanavians which Israel tries to prevent from arriving to work illegally).

(BTW ---- How did you arrive at 4-million "exiled"? Why not 12 million? 76-million?
Pick any random number...)

I don't remember you commenting all my points either, such as why African refugees are imprisoned indefinitely in Israel, while in the civilized West refugees are given a basic income, housing and some kind of a life in the society.

Changing the entire meaning of what someone writes by quoting back and eliminating a key portion of their words, is not the same as just ignoring a statement or not commenting/replying about it.

For your information and edification, JJM, Israel has indeed absorbed African refugees and there's open public discussion about how to provide for more of them to enter. So, I consider your bringing up African refugees to be a non-sequitur. Your adding that into this discussion is an insult to our intelligence.
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1182409639658&pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull

This leads to the impossibility of how you describe a "terrorist".

Here, this is how I describe a terrorist:

• Precision IAF strike has killed three Islamic Jihadists: Ziad Ghanem, Riad Ghanem and Mohammad al-Ra'i.

Good riddance.


Now, on to your claim of "Apartheid rules" ------

Religious and racial discrimination is present at various political issues, such as issuing building permits in Jerusalem, etc.

That's it? That's your basis for calling Israel an Apartheid State?
Look, son, you're not even playing with a full deck here.

 

[WildCat]

Not to derail this thread, but given the results of the Reichtagswahlen 1932I, 1932II and 1933, could you clarify what you mean here, because I don't follow.

Zee

Hitler was appointed Chancellor by Hindenburg, he was never elected.

 

[MaGZ]

Pro-Israel?

Somehow Israel grants a "right of return" for any Jew born anywhere. And denies the right of any Palestinian to return to the West Bank or Gaza, even if born there and officially listed as a refugee.

Apartheid rules.

President Carter also thinks so.

 

[MaGZ]

Frankly, your post has nothing to do with the topic, but in any case, why don't the Palestinians just pick up and move to Siberia or the Sahara desert and claim their football field-sized plot of land that you've allocated them in your "A Better World Through Forced Relocation, Property Confiscation, and Forced Sterilization" program? After all, isn't one stinking desert as good as the next?

Why don’t the Zionist Jews just pick up and move to Uganda or Madagascar?

Wasn’t that the original Zionist plan?

 

[MaGZ]

JJM 777 cannot be referring to Hitler in this post, because Hitler was never democratically elected.

Democratically elected or not, it really doesn’t matter. He only used the series on national elections to further his aims. Hitler never made any claims in believing in democracy.

 

[MaGZ]

OK, then your original statement is wrong, when you declared that "Israel denies the right of any Palestinian to return to the West Bank or Gaza which I replied to, saying that thousands (not a "few") annually are given permission, on a case-by-case basis.

You decided that this wasn't a sufficient rebuttal -- and told me
"Come on, you must know that you are misrepresenting reality here.

and proceeded to give the song-and-dance of how you got hooked at the airport (you did fit the profile of young, single, broke Scandanavians which Israel tries to prevent from arriving to work illegally).

(BTW ---- How did you arrive at 4-million "exiled"? Why not 12 million? 76-million?
Pick any random number...)



Changing the entire meaning of what someone writes by quoting back and eliminating a key portion of their words, is not the same as just ignoring a statement or not commenting/replying about it.

For your information and edification, JJM, Israel has indeed absorbed African refugees and there's open public discussion about how to provide for more of them to enter. So, I consider your bringing up African refugees to be a non-sequitur. Your adding that into this discussion is an insult to our intelligence.
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1182409639658&pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull




Here, this is how I describe a terrorist:

• Precision IAF strike has killed three Islamic Jihadists: Ziad Ghanem, Riad Ghanem and Mohammad al-Ra'i.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasite/images/iht_daily/D300607/gazacar248_reu.jpg

Good riddance.

How many innocent bystanders were killed in the attack to get three ‘terrorists'? I put the word in quotes. People fighting for their freedom are not terrorists.

Why not arrest the three and put them on trial if they are guilty of some offense? The Israelis are cowards; they kill from afar. When they go into the refugee camps they use Palestinian women and children as shields to protect themselves.

The big brave Israeli soldier is a myth.

 

[webfusion]

Did MagZ actually say something useful? ( I have him on ignore )

 

[Schneibster]

Nope. And you owe me one. I looked.

 

[webfusion]

Nope. And you owe me one. I looked.

Fair enough.

 

[JJM 777]

thousands (not a "few") annually are given permission, on a case-by-case basis.

And you still wonder why Israel is hated by Arabs? What business has Israel in the daily lives of another nation? This has been the basic problem for the last 50 years.

How did you arrive at 4-million "exiled"?

Change it to "living in exile" then. The statistics vary about the number of Palestinians with a refugee status. In any case, a considerable group of people.

Here, this is how I describe a terrorist:

Freedom fighters? Israeli or American soldiers could be decribed in the same manner, with similar photos and success stories.

That's your basis for calling Israel an Apartheid State?

The root of "apartheid" is strictly defining humans as members of a racial or regilious group, and then discriminating between these.