So much for the vacation in Bali ...!

RE: Debunking Auntie Semitic

But if the deed to the house were in your name, you'd be justified in kicking me out. Now, answer the question. Didn't the land belong the Jews in the first place according to the Bible?

RE: Debunking Auntie Semitic

>But if the deed to the house were in your name, you'd be

>justified in kicking me out. Now, answer the question.

>Didn't the land belong the Jews in the first place according

>to the Bible?

Well, of course, in this case the deed to land was not in my name, I just took it in "trusteeship" from someone else who was not a bona fide purchaser for value and himself did not have authority to transfer title.

As for the Bible, two answers: (1) if we are going to do everything according to the Bible, that's going to put this site out of business because fornicators like you and I will have to stop; and (2) I don't recognize any link between the jews of antiquity and the blue-eyed, bonde-haired western European wannabes and Eastern European jews who populate the zionist colony in Palestine.

RE: Debunking Rabbi Trisexual and other On-Line Zionists

Gosh, who ever said Israel was a "secular paradise?" I think if you were to search these threads, I think it's only Auntie Semitic who ever uses that term to describe Israel.

Israel is certainly no paradise. It is also not a fully secular country, as I explained in an earlier posting on this thread, because jurisdiction over family law matters are still in the hands of the various religious communities (for the Jews in Israel, that's the Orthodox rabbinate). That situation creates a great deal of resentment among the vast majority of Israelis, who are not observant and certainly not Orthodox. That doesn't obviate the fact that Israeli society is by and large secular. Furthermore, there is strong political pressure to end the Orthodox monopoly on family law matters, and to institute civil law equivalents for those who don't wish to be married by an Orthodox rabbi, for example. Politics being politics, this has been a very difficult issue in Israel, but sooner or later I believe the Orthodox monopoly will be terminated and family law matters in Israel will be governed by the civil law.

Compared to the Arab countries, though, like Al-Armpit, where Auntie Semitic hails from, Israel undoubtedly looks like a secular paradise, with a free press, free elections, real political parties (way too many of them!), a mostly secular lifestyle, freedom for GLBT people to be who they are without legal discrimination, etc., etc., etc. Is there room for improvement in Israel? Obviously. Does it compare favorably to every single one of the Arab countries? Astronomically. If even a single Arab country had the degree of freedom and the type of secular society that Israel has, it would be a huge advance in the region. The Palestinians could achieve that if they wanted it, because they have the best basic foundation on which to build such a society (an industrious, well-educated population) but, going back to my earlier posting, for some reason that Auntie Semitic can't explain either they're mired in their revenge obsessions and not moving forward at all. That certainly isn't Israel's fault.

BTW, responding to another point made here, other countries and peoples have experienced occupations, in some cases over a period of decades, and over the course of time the occupations came to an end and the countries regained their sovereignty. As I recall, in none of those countries was there constant armed insurrection against the occupying power, or suicide terrorist attacks in the streets of the cities of the occupying power. If there had been, Germany would still be under quadripartite occupation, as would Austria, and Japan would still be under American control. But those countries took another path, and regained their sovereignty and independence. It would be nice to think that the Palestinians could learn something from those experiences, but since the Palestinians aren't ignorant people they must know about them and have chosen to ignore them instead. What they hope to get out of ignoring those lessons and experiences, other than desiring some kind of national suicide, is beyond my ken. What the Palestinians are doing now certainly isn't working for them, but thanks to intrangisent and hate-filled people like Auntie Semitic, they just seem to be locked into this routine, and the horror and misery go on and on and on. . .

but... what of my relatives, who have lived in Yerushalayim (you sort like to call it al-Quds) since before the Romans destroyed the Mikdash and left us with nothing but the Kotel (the plaza in front of which your poor downtrodden Palestinians used as a repository for donkey feces during the Jordanian OCCUPATION)? some of us have neither a Brooklyn nor a Warsaw to return to.

head's up: not all Jews are ashkenazim; some of us never had to make aliyah--we never left.

driving in Yerushalayim on Shabbat

... is no problem save in specific (and clearly marked) areas.

avoid the neighbourhoods like Meah She'arim and you shan't have problems.

even there, it is about respect, no? would one want someone to drive past the mosque on friday blaring music while the devoted attempt to pray?

(i imagine the response would involve more than just shouts of Allahu Akhbar!)

Am Yisrael is much more than either a race or religion. we're a people, a nation.

>Am Yisrael is much more than either a race or religion. we're

>a people, a nation.

... a people or a nation occupying someone else's land!

RE: driving in Yerushalayim on Shabbat

>... is no problem save in specific (and clearly marked)

>areas.

>avoid the neighbourhoods like Meah She'arim and you shan't

>have problems.

>even there, it is about respect, no? would

Buddy, read the article, the reporter was not on a closed street, but on a street that some orthodox wanted closed, and for that she was stoned in your secular paradise! In the secular societies that I am familiar with we don't close down streets in front of chuches every Sunday. Keep trying though, somebody might be convinced that your militaristic, theocratic, zionist apartheid state is really a secular paradise!

>some of us have neither a Brooklyn nor

>a Warsaw to return to.

You can stay in you want to live in a cosmopolitan and multicultural country, not one based on 19th century racist notions of Germanic nationalism.

RE: Debunking Rabbi Trisexual and other On-Line Zionists

>BTW, responding to another point made here, other countries

>and peoples have experienced occupations, in some cases over a

>period of decades, and over the course of time the occupations

>came to an end and the countries regained their sovereignty.

>As I recall, in none of those countries was there constant

>armed insurrection against the occupying power, or suicide

>terrorist attacks in the streets of the cities of the

>occupying power. If there had been, Germany would still be

>under quadripartite occupation, as would Austria, and Japan

>would still be under American control. But those countries

>took another path, and regained their sovereignty and

>independence.

I was not aware that Israelis had agreed to return to Warsaw, Berlin and Brooklyn if the Palestinans refrained from exercising their Rights under Universal Declaration and the Geneva Convention for civilian populations to resist occupation. I think if they agreed to do that, as did the Americans in Germany and Japan (and Iraq too?), the Germans in France etc, this whole mess could be brought to a rather speedy conclusion!

What's most interesting about axes responses to date is that he hasn't noticed that I actually AGREE with him: I wouldn't want to live in Israel, it's got major problems, and the Israeli government seems hell bent on destroying the faintest chance for long lasting peace.

I suppose the reason I'm still participating in this debate against someone who is clearly a raving lunatic is that while I'm very troubled by what's happening in Israel, I also accept the unbelievable complexity of the situation. Israel is a fully functioning democracy with a very free press and endless open debate amongst Israelis about how the country should move forward. At the moment the Israeli government is going in the wrong direction, in my opinion, but it's a government that can be toppled at the ballot box in a completely free election that isn't rigged by the government to produce a 95% approval vote for the dictator in power. That makes Israel unique in the whole Middle East: only Turkey could run it close for free democratic government.

Israel's actions against the Palestinians are particularly heinous when you consider that Israel was founded because so many people had done exactly the same thing to the Jews over two thousand years. The Jews needed a homeland - but that was not an open invitation to indulge in the same tactics against the Palestinians, whose land it is too.

The position of Israel in the Middle East debate is horribly complex, and idiotic bigoted simpleminded opinions like axe's do not contribute to the debate about how to move forward. Axe doesn't seem to realise that the VAST majority of Israelis are NOT orthodox and find orthodox judaism silly. The VAST majority of Israelis are free to drive around wherever they please on the sabbath, indulging in cafes and restaurants and other forms of public entertainment.

So why do they put up with the orthodox lunatic fringe? In the same way that in the bible belt Americans put up with dry counties and religious people insinuating themselves into local school boards. Let's face it, the public support for the Chief Justice of Alabama over the Ten Commandments monument doesn't give Americans like axe much to crow over when they see the orthodox Israelis using political muscle to achieve religious ends in the Jerusalem City Council. Every country makes its political compromises. In Israel they sometimes result in having cars banned on the sabbath in a few streets. In America they result in all sorts of other things, as they do in Australia. Don't attack the Israelis for making political compromises in support of a greater political end.

But above all, axe, recognise that you are now so far out on a limb that even your potential supporters are busy sawing off the branch to watch you fall helplessly into the mud below. And cheering while it happens!

how's that... if my ancestors have lived in Yerushalayim since before the Roman destruction of the Temple?

RE: Debunking Rabbi Trisexual and other On-Line Zionists

and of our rights when the Jordanians occupied Yerushalayim?

RE: driving in Yerushalayim on Shabbat

>Buddy, read the article, the reporter was not on a closed

>street, but on a street that some orthodox wanted closed, and

>for that she was stoned in your secular paradise! In the

>secular societies that I am familiar with we don't close down

>streets in front of chuches every Sunday. Keep trying though,

>somebody might be convinced that your militaristic,

>theocratic, zionist apartheid state is really a secular

>paradise!

living in Medinat Yisrael, i have no need to read any such article.

are you claiming that your corrupt, dictatorial thugocracy, fueled by radical Islam would be any better? would that be your secular paradise?

>>some of us have neither a Brooklyn nor

>>a Warsaw to return to.

>

>You can stay in you want to live in a cosmopolitan and

>multicultural country, not one based on 19th century racist

>notions of Germanic nationalism.

'Arafat is to usher in this cosmopolitan & multicultural country?

sorry, but the only thing i see from that shakey rockthrowing thug is a hate-filled society based on 20th- and 21st-Century resurrections of the drug-induced ravings of an illiterate 6th-Century lunatic.

will you take the comparisons of Jews to swine out of your textbooks in your cosmopolitan, multicultural paradise?

will your exalted nation require dhimmis to pay the Jizya and the Kharaj? will your early morning children's shows still urge children to kill themselves and as many Jews as possible--thereby somehow redeeming 'Arafat and al-Quds with their souls and blood?

will that be your state, Abu Jihad/Ad Rian/Axebahia?

>What's most interesting about axes responses to date is that

>he hasn't noticed that I actually AGREE with him: I wouldn't

>want to live in Israel, it's got major problems, and the

>Israeli government seems hell bent on destroying the faintest

>chance for long lasting peace.

We agree on that, and I commend you for your position. Where we disagree is whether a state founded as a "Jewish" state by its quasi-constitution, and which practices expropriation on the basis of religion/race (without compensation) and in which you can't fly El Al on Saturday or drive in the Old City of erusalem can properly be called "secular". I say no, you say yes. We disagree.

RE: driving in Yerushalayim on Shabbat

>are you claiming that your corrupt, dictatorial thugocracy,

>fueled by radical Islam would be any better? would that be

>your secular paradise?

No, but the tactics of successive Israeli governments has had the effect of radicalizing the Palestinians such that given the relative birth rates as between Israelis and Palestinians between the Jordan River and the Med Sea, that may well be the outcome. Destroying the Palestinian secularists whose goal was a single cosmopolitan, multicultural state of the kind the world fought for in South Africa at the fall of apartheid, and is championed in the Mitchell Plan for Northern Ireland has been the stupidest policy of Israel if they want peace not pieces of land. The question is why apartheid is wrong in Ireland and South Africa but right in Palestine. You, my friend, are on the wrong side of history. Wake up, and smell the gefilte fish!

maybe a useful distinction could be made:

arguments can be made both for & against calling the State of Israel a secular state, but would you agree that the population of that state is by & large secular?

>'Arafat is to usher in this cosmopolitan & multicultural

>country?

Yes, that's what he has fought for, and that's why the Mossad created Islamic Jihad to destabalize him. You are paying for your hubris!

RE: driving in Yerushalayim on Shabbat

>No, but the tactics of successive Israeli governments...

so... the Israeli government is responsible for a Palestinian choosing to take a rock and throw it, thereby killing a baby out for an icecream with her grandmother?

the government is also responsible for someone strapping a bomb filled with arsenic-laced nails (to impede blood clotting & cause more deaths) and then blowing him/herself up along with a busload of people?

that's an interesting argument. when radical, idiotic israelis plot to injure arabs, they are arrested, tried, and punished... yet, if an arab does it, he had no choice & isn't liable?

>maybe a useful distinction could be made:

>arguments can be made both for & against calling the State of

>Israel a secular state, but would you agree that the

>population of that state is by & large secular?

I don't see how I could say that of a state that defines itself as "Jewish". I think the distinction you attempt to draw ended for all practical purposes with the electipon of Menachen Begin in the 1970s.

i see... so the palestinian islamic jihad is not connected in any way with the egyptian islamic jihad nor with the society of muslim brothers?

RE: driving in Yerushalayim on Shabbat

>so... the Israeli government is responsible for a Palestinian

>choosing to take a rock and throw it, thereby killing a baby

>out for an icecream with her grandmother?

End the illegal occupation or arm them equally and have a fair fight to the finish. However, if you give one side modern weapons and the other side nothing, don't be surprised if the civilian occupied population chooses to defend their right to resist occupation under the Universal Declaration by any means necessary. I find your brand of moral outrage particularly hard to digest. Do you find the conventional military asymmety (not to mention WMD) to be morally ambiguous?

RE: driving in Yerushalayim on Shabbat

so, that civilian population is right to target infants and unarmed people in that sacrosanct resistance of occupation?

where exactly in international law do you find the espousal of murdering infants & unarmed civilians?

where do you find any definition of "resisting occupation" that includes such tactics?

>i see... so the palestinian islamic jihad is not connected in

>any way with the egyptian islamic jihad nor with the society

>of muslim brothers?

If you are saying tha Israel did not encourage both Hezbollah and Islamic Jihad then you are engaging in fantasy or willful blindness. I suggest you read the Jerusalem Post, Haaretz or Tikkun from time to time. Don't get me wrong these Israeli policies are just as stupid as the U.S. previous support for Bin Ladin and the Mujahadeen.