American Jews abandoning Israel

[Thunder]

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1162733.html

or so a right-wing Jew would say, after reading this article.

according to a poll by the AJC, a very good majority of American Jews say American-Israeli relations are very good, and 55% support Obama's handling of relations with Israel.

this is very good news. it shows American Jews have not been swayed by right-wing fear mongering, hate, and lies.

Once again, I am proud to be a Jewish-American.

[Dorian Gray]

But you're not Israeli-American. You have no reason to agree with or support everything Israel does. And disliking something Israel does doesn't equal hate.

[Cain]

Are you suggesting Jews are or should be concerned about Israel? You seem to be saying "right-wing Jews" have a "dual loyalty," to the United States and Israel, which is not only anti-Semitic but crazy.

[The Fool]

Are you suggesting Jews are or should be concerned about Israel? You seem to be saying "right-wing Jews" have a "dual loyalty," to the United States and Israel, which is not only anti-Semitic but crazy.
sigh....its hardly anti-semitic to see that there are a number of US jews who see Israels interests as more important than US interests. We have a number of them here on this forum...

[Cain]

How dare you? Good day, sir.
I. said. good day!

[Pardalis]

Once again, I am proud to be a Jewish-American.

Meh, I'm sure tomorrow you'll find another article that'll make you change your mind, again.

[cornsail]

One of my Jewish-American friends considers Israel her "homeland". I don't see anything wrong with having dual loyalties.

[Skeptic]

Oh, it's OK when it's, say, an Italian-American calling Italy his homeland. It's only the Jews who must abandon all support for the Jewish state, in fear of what would the goyim would say about "dual loyalty".

[plumjam]

Oh, it's OK when it's, say, an Italian-American calling Italy his homeland. It's only the Jews who must abandon all support for the Jewish state, in fear of what would the goyim would say about "dual loyalty".

Not a great comparison.
What are Italians currently doing to displace, suppress, frustrate and kill a competing nearby ethnicity?

[cornsail]

America does a lot of nasty things, but that doesn't mean I can't have a sense of loyalty to my country. It's not like that means you support everything they do.

[Cain]

Oh, it's OK when it's, say, an Italian-American calling Italy his homeland. It's only the Jews who must abandon all support for the Jewish state, in fear of what would the goyim would say about "dual loyalty".

And Catholics never get this either. It's ridiculous. It's ridiculous in the most insanely ********** up way: it's... rediculous.

[Puppycow]

Did you see the comments under the article?

Good grief. :(

[Skeptic]

Not a great comparison.
What are Italians currently doing to displace, suppress, frustrate and kill a competing nearby ethnicity?

If you want someone whose goal is to "displace and kill" a nearby ethnicity, you need look no further than Hamas' or Fatah's charter. Or, say, the speeches of Assad and Hizbullah and Ahmadejinad and Nasser and about two million (it seems) other terrorist organizations.

Ever heard of the "Staged Plan" for Israel's destruction? First getting a small Palestinian state and then using it as a military base to get the rest? Well, that's both the PLO and Hamas' official goal, and supporting a Palestinian state means support of that goal.

(Not to mention less crucial issues such as the PA being a kleptocracy, the treatment of women, gays, Christians, and other minorities there, etc.)

So I would certainly understand if the Palestinians living in America would be abandoning their connection to their co-nationalists, not wishing to be associated with a group whose official goal is genocide, but, strangely, they don't.


But I admit Israel is "frustrating" the Palestinians. Israel actually didn't disappear yet, which is highly frustrating to them.

[Thunder]

Are you suggesting Jews are or should be concerned about Israel? You seem to be saying "right-wing Jews" have a "dual loyalty," to the United States and Israel, which is not only anti-Semitic but crazy.

there is nothing anti-Semitic about asking Jewish-Americans if a certain foreign policy, or a certain politician, is "good for the Jews".

[Thunder]

Oh, it's OK when it's, say, an Italian-American calling Italy his homeland. It's only the Jews who must abandon all support for the Jewish state, in fear of what would the GOYIM would say about "dual loyalty".

um.....Italian Americans have roots in Italy....after 2-3 generations.

Most Jewish-Americans MAY have some roots in Israel....after 2,000 years.

slight...difference.

p.s....I hate it when Jews use the word "goy". It is no different than the N word...or "kike".

but anyways, I am proud of Jewish Americans for seeing that Obama is actually giving Israel what it needs..which is "tough love". We have been enabling its counter-productive behavior for waaaay too long.

[cornsail]

um.....Italian Americans have roots in Italy....after 2-3 generations.

Most Jewish-Americans MAY have some roots in Israel....after 2,000 years.

slight...difference.

Another difference is that Israel claims to be the homeland of the Jews and directs its policies accordingly. Many Jews identify with Israel for reasons other than ancestry. But again, I don't see why that's a bad thing (the latter... state policy favoring Jews is more iffy). Btw, you can identify with a country and not support all or most of its actions.

[mikeyx]

Not a great comparison.
What are Italians currently doing to displace, suppress, frustrate and kill a competing nearby ethnicity?

I miss the khanate, where are you now, Ghengis?

[pchams]

Anyone who would use the word "Goyim" is not worth debating, or supporting for that matter.

[Thunder]

Anyone who would use the word "Goyim" is not worth debating, or supporting for that matter.

pretty much. i wouldn't debate someone who called Jewish people "kikes", so why should I debate anyone who calls non-Jews "goys"?

perhaps I should not.

but, as to the OP, only a right-wing extremist believes that a true Jew must support the settlements in the West Bank.

and only a right-wing extremist believes that American or other Diaspora communities reject the settlements simply to placate Gentiles, in fear of being labeled "dual-loyal" or "Israel-firsters".

I am against the settlements because they are illegal, immoral, and undemocratic. I don't give a rat's ass what Gentiles think about them, as many millions of Christians love them to death.

[Skeptic]

Another point, plumjam: surely you know the Catholics are all part of a conspiracy to take over the world for the Pope, so unlike, say, British-Americans, Italian-Americans should renounced double loyalty?

(Hey, if you can use lies to prove your point, so can I).

[Pardalis]

But I admit Israel is "frustrating" the Palestinians. Israel actually didn't disappear yet, which is highly frustrating to them.

That's why they need to remind themselves every year of their frustration with the Nakba.

[Skeptic]

um.....Italian Americans have roots in Italy....after 2-3 generations.

Most Jewish-Americans MAY have some roots in Israel....after 2,000 years.

slight...difference.

It's not a matter of biology, but of belong to the Jewish nation, which prayed every day "next year in Jerusalem".

[Foolmewunz]

pretty much. i wouldn't debate someone who called Jewish people "kikes", so why should I debate anyone who calls non-Jews "goys"?

perhaps I should not.



A little overboard? Do you speak Yiddish? I was always told that there's no other actual word for gentile in Yiddish and that Goy/Goyim is the term. I also grew up hearing the word used in a far from offensive sense. Yes, I know Jews who put a little poison on their tongue when they use it, but I also know gentiles who manage to spit the word "Jew" out of their mouth as though it tastes bitter, but "Jew" isn't an offensive term unless the user makes it so.

When did the sense that "goy" is offensive come about?
(Important: This is not one of those "it's only a word" arguments. I really have not encountered anyone who thinks the term is as offensive as, say, "kike" or "spick" or the infamous n-word.)

[Puppycow]

p.s....I hate it when Jews use the word "goy". It is no different than the N word...or "kike".

Anyone who would use the word "Goyim" is not worth debating, or supporting for that matter.

A little overboard? Do you speak Yiddish? I was always told that there's no other actual word for gentile in Yiddish and that Goy/Goyim is the term. I also grew up hearing the word used in a far from offensive sense. Yes, I know Jews who put a little poison on their tongue when they use it, but I also know gentiles who manage to spit the word "Jew" out of their mouth as though it tastes bitter, but "Jew" isn't an offensive term unless the user makes it so.

When did the sense that "goy" is offensive come about?
(Important: This is not one of those "it's only a word" arguments. I really have not encountered anyone who thinks the term is as offensive as, say, "kike" or "spick" or the infamous n-word.)

Seems too PC to me too. I never thought it was a term of abuse.
I've heard people claim that the Japanese word for foreigner (gaijin) is a pejorative. It's not. At least not per se.
"Kike" OTOH is obviously a pejorative.

[The Fallen Serpent]

In the context of a primary or decently mixed Yiddish environment Goy/Goyim is not offensive. Completely anecdotal, so proper salt taking here, in my experience in a primary English environment using Goy/Goyim is intended to be discriminatory. Just how the N word is a completely innocent term in the proper language context but is usually offensive or an attempt at destroying the offensivenss of the word in English.

I have been jokingly referred to as goy, in the sense that people of my generation use offensive language within their inner circles for each other. I have been disparingly referred to as goy, mostly by my relatives or relatives of my friends who were downright bigotted folk. I have rarely been called goy in a more innocent context, usually by an older people who spoke half in yiddish.

Bigotted words often have a very specific meaning when they are full words rather than derivations of full words. I can call a spade a spade but if I call an american who is black a spade I'd have difficulty arguing it was not out of bigotry, or any random jew a money grubber though I can call people who are greedy money grubbers.

With bigotted slurs, context is everything. I have german heritage and even started taking language classes in high school. If I started referring to Jews as Juden (giving it a y sound) that would sound very bigotted in an English setting. Even though that is the word in German. Even if I often spoke in German with my family members. It does not even matter that my German heritage is ashkenazi.

Also, I personally do not think Americans who are jews identifying Israel as their homeland is an issue, even when they are not of recent israeli heritage. Thinking that does not necessarily mean placing Israel above the US, and even so that is not an unjust stance to take for an American citizen. I am very critical of Israel and think they need a set of focus in their approach to achieve peace and prosperity. I find some of the policies and actions bigotted. I still think it is the most free country in the region and that the surrounding countries would do well to take up what is positive about Israel and abandon their own bigotted policies that are often just as bad or worse. The issue of Israel is important to the US. They are an ally in a region in which we are heavily invested in, financially and militarily. Their actions sometimes reflect upon us and shape our own policies in the region. Americans thinking about the Israeli situation is a positive in my mind, even if many of us having conflicting views and opinions. Hardline supporters of Israel are not traitors to the US and hardline critics are not anti-semites. Or at least not definitely so.

ETA: As for "kike" it is not so obviously a pejorative in the sense you are saying as it still has a valid use and meaning beyond the pejorative. In the context of how it is usually used today by non-Jews, yes. In what it means and the origin of how it came about, not so much. Evidence suggests the terms started out as a term between Jews for one another, primarily from East European immigrants in the US. It is now very rare due to the bigotted ursuption of the word, but some communities still use it in that context. More commonly I see younger generation Jews use it in the same context that black people will use the n-word.

[Eddie Dane]

Another difference is that Israel claims to be the homeland of the Jews and directs its policies accordingly. Many Jews identify with Israel for reasons other than ancestry. But again, I don't see why that's a bad thing (the latter... state policy favoring Jews is more iffy). Btw, you can identify with a country and not support all or most of its actions.

Many countries have policies that cultivate a connection to the "homeland".
Turkey still calls up Turks from the Netherlands and Germany for army service. (You can get out of it by sending some money to the Turkish government).
Morocco has a deal with the Dutch concerning which names are allowed for Dutch-Moroccans. This is a thorny issue as the Moroccan policy on naming babies is aimed at repressing certain names associated with Moroccan's Berber population and is thus an instrument of repression.
Dutch-Moroccans are not allowed to cancel their Moroccan nationality, it is simply illegal to do so. They are thus forced to have dual citizenship.

[The Fallen Serpent]

Good point Eddie. The situation of Isreali supposedly for speaking for a specific people anywhere in the world is not unique even today. The issues definitely become thorny and complex. Dual loyalties is not necessarily a problem. Obviously it becomes an issue if the two nations go to war. Fear of dual loyalty led to the US internment of japanese Americans during WWII. It is not uncommon for a country with a national ethnic identity to call upon its ethnic constituents throughout the world when marching to war. A common practice during the heavily nationalistic first half of the 20th century. During the Iraq-Iranian war Saddam thought he could garner support in the ethnically arab area of Iran. This proved false but it is not a unique mindset to Israel.

I worked with someone who was a Dutch-Moroccan (Moroccan-Dutch?) that is a US citizen by way of marriage. He lives in the US yet visits Holland (he considers it his homeland, not Morocco) on a near yearly basis depending on his finances. Multiple citizenship is a thorny and confusing situation in the US. Is it clear by Dutch law if he has then renounced his Dutch and Moroccan citizenship? I suppose I could just ask how his individual situation turned out if I see him again.

[bigjelmapro]

Could perhaps include how Israelis feel (wide political spectrum) rather than make yet another disinformation thread Parky, erm, Thunder:

Post poll: Obama still in single digits (http://www.jpost.com/Israel/Article.aspx?id=171849)

Obama had appeared to receive much better numbers in a Dialog poll published last Friday in Haaretz. Both the English and Hebrew editions of Haaretz led with the headline, “Poll: Most Israelis see Obama as fair, friendly toward Israel.”

The English edition elaborated near a picture of Obama that “69% say Obama is fair and friendly.”

The English edition of the newspaper contained no graphics distributing the actual numbers, either online or in print. The newspaper’s Hebrew edition, however, included a graphic indicating that just 18% of respondents considered Obama “friendly” toward Israel, 3 percentage points fewer than the 21% who called the US president “hostile” to the Jewish state. Ten percent did not know, and 51% defined Obama’s approach to Israel using the Hebrew word “inyani,” which can be translated as matter-of-fact or businesslike but not as fair.

The Post reported on Monday that Haaretz’s pollster, Tel Aviv University Prof. Camil Fuchs, called the way the results of the poll were presented “misleading.”

Haaretz English Edition editor Charlotte Halle responded that “Haaretz published a fair and accurate representation of the survey conducted by Prof. Camil Fuchs at the request of Haaretz. Any attempt to claim otherwise by another newspaper is false.”

So 'misleading', just as this thread's op is misleading. Thunder has this innate ability to obfuscate the situation, as does Haaretz, and polls for that matter to state something that its not. In addition to this, to run with the assumption that Leftists apparently all support the Obama's approach to this very conflict, which is a false premise to begin with. But I don't see this as any different compared to the other threads Thunder has started to pit the left-wing against the right-wing in a slew of disinformation ploys.

Perhaps one can frame the situation more adequately. Perhaps the inclusion of Obama's support by American Jews dropped from 78% in 2008 elections to the 59% now (albeit this is overall support).

Or include a Feb 2010 poll as seen here (http://www.theisraelproject.org/atf/cf/%7B84dc5887-741e-4056-8d91-a389164bc94e%7D/FEBRUARY_2010_NATIONAL_POLL.PDF). Make not of the bipartisan nature of the poll.

There's certainly a need to present more information rather than yet another Haaretz article that acts irresponsibly as a propaganda outlet rather than a balanced media outlet.

[bigjelmapro]

In regards to Eddie Dane's post. I highly doubt that there's a strong correlation to the trivial cases of Dutch Moroccans naming their children Dutch names, Dutch Turks filling the ranks in the Turkish army, and that of American Jewish support of solving an ongoing ME conflict.

I don't really want to minimize how this Turkish/Moroccan issues, but are you seriously trying to imply that there's a strong correlation to that of this ME conflict?

[DC]

In regards to Eddie Dane's post. I highly doubt that there's a strong correlation to the trivial cases of Dutch Moroccans naming their children Dutch names, Dutch Turks filling the ranks in the Turkish army, and that of American Jewish support of solving an ongoing ME conflict.

I don't really want to minimize how this Turkish/Moroccan issues, but are you seriously trying to imply that there's a strong correlation to that of this ME conflict?

the turks for example still have the kurds "problem"

[Skeptic]

There's certainly a need to present more information rather than yet another Haaretz article that acts irresponsibly as a propaganda outlet rather than a balanced media outlet.

But Ha'aretz is, de facto, a propaganda outlet...

[DC]

But Ha'aretz is, de facto, a propaganda outlet...

sure it must be, it contradicts your oppinion.

[Skeptic]

Look. We all have dual, and triple, and quadruple, loyalties. As citizens, as human beings, as parents or children or uncles or aunts, as soccer fans. Sometimes the loyalties conflict -- say, do I take my family to the beach or to a soccer game of my favorite team, which they will not enjoy as much? Which wins -- loyalty to family or to team?

There is nothing inherently special in having dual loyalty to the Jewish state and to the USA. It depends on what level and to what degree. A Moroccan-born French citizen has dual loyalties. If he puts a Moroccan flag out the window on Morocco's independence day is doing nothing wrong. Neither is, say, lobbying for a French policy that's favorable to Morocco. But spying for Morocco isn't.

So what's the difference? Why are Jews special in any way here? The same is true for them. (Except for the belief that Israel is terribly evil -- the sort of bigotry believed by those who accuse the Jews of "dual loyalty", much like those who accused Italian-Americans of "dual loyalty" were very likely to also think there's a Catholic conspiracy to rule the world.)

[Darth Rotor]

... there's a Catholic conspiracy to rule the world.)
Actually, if you replace the term "conspiracy" with "plan" you'd be pretty accurate in terms of the ultimate objective of the Catholic Church. It's desire is to spread Christianity to all nations, with Christianity in the RCC's view being "that which acknowledges the Pope as Christs' vicar on Earth" and all of that.

Not so much a conspiracy as an openly stated objective.

If getting everyone to become a Roman Catholic won't allow the Pope to "rule the world," then we may be quibbling over details: OK, his legates won't write the traffic laws, but the political influence of the universal RCC would sure get close to "ruling," ideologically, if in no other way.

The question is, can the next Charlemagne speak and pray in Chinese?

ETA: for the OP, the "abandonment" of Israel has been a topic of discussion among American Jews for over a generation. I am mildly familiar with the issue, thanks to a couple of schoolmates of mine who returned from Israel in the 1970s, all of the shine rubbed off the Kibbutz system for them.

DR

[bigjelmapro]

the turks for example still have the kurds "problem"
Not what he brought up eh?

[DC]

Not what he brought up eh?

still a problem, especialy for Kurds i know that have to serv in the Turkish army.

[cwalner]

And Catholics never get this either. It's ridiculous. It's ridiculous in the most insanely ********** up way: it's... rediculous.

Not true. One of the criticisms of President Kennedy when he was running was that he would have a dual loyalty to the Vatican.

[Thunder]

But Ha'aretz is, de facto, a propaganda outlet...

for whom?

how would you feel if a Neo-Nazi said that the ADL is a de-facto propaganda outlet?

and by the way, I may like Israel, but I do not have dual loyalty. I am only loyal to the country I am a citizen of, and that is the USA.

[Scootch]

for whom?

how would you feel if a Neo-Nazi said that the ADL is a de-facto propaganda outlet?

and by the way, I may like Israel, but I do not have dual loyalty. I am only loyal to the country I am a citizen of, and that is the USA.

If a neo nazi said that? Well that would complete upturn my worldview, I would then ask said neo-nazi if there were some literature or a pamplet he could give me to further explain their point of view.
Wow you are right I never thought of it that way before, from the nazi's point of view they are being attacked and persecuted. I may have been completely wrong about the neo-nazi party (to be fair i was always turned off to the neo-nazi party because of the neo part-i am not a matrix fan)

[Darth Rotor]

Not true. One of the criticisms of President Kennedy when he was running was that he would have a dual loyalty to the Vatican.
If you wish to thicken this plot, notice that he supported propping up the failing regime in South Viet Nam (his pass down from Ike didn't include Viet Nam being worth the effort). Oddly enough, Diem and others in the SV ladership class tended to be ... wait for it ... Catholic and bourgeoise! :jaw-dropp Obviously, a papist plot, :cool: and Kennedy got caught in the act, which is why Oswald shot him: Oswald was a God Hating Marxist Atheist! :eye-poppi:jaw-dropp
A dyslexic,he had trouble with spelling and writing coherently. Yet Oswald read voraciously and, by age 15, claimed to be a Marxist from his reading on the topic. He wrote in his diary, "I was looking for a key to my environment, and then I discovered socialist literature. I had to dig for my books in the back dusty shelves of libraries". At 16, Oswald wrote to the Socialist Party of America, stating that he was a Marxist who had been studying socialist principles for "well over fifteen months", and asked for information about their youth league.
See, it all fits! :boggled:

(Ya know, CT crafting is a bit tougher than I thought ... )

[Skeptic]

Actually, if you replace the term "conspiracy" with "plan" you'd be pretty accurate in terms of the ultimate objective of the Catholic Church. It's desire is to spread Christianity to all nations, with Christianity in the RCC's view being "that which acknowledges the Pope as Christs' vicar on Earth" and all of that.

Ah, c'mon, that's cheating. The Jews think that when the messiah comes everybody will convert to Judaism. The Muslims that eventually everybody will acknowledge the truth of Islam. Practically every religion thinks eventually the entire world will agree with it. But in itself that's meaningless.

ETA: for the OP, the "abandonment" of Israel has been a topic of discussion among American Jews for over a generation. I am mildly familiar with the issue, thanks to a couple of schoolmates of mine who returned from Israel in the 1970s, all of the shine rubbed off the Kibbutz system for them.

It's the same sort of "reality bites" moment one gets when one actually joins the army, for example, finding out that there's more to it than walking around in shiny uniform. Waking up to milk the cows at 4:30 or so doesn't make into the advertisement brochures for some reason.

[Skeptic]

I am only loyal to the country I am a citizen of, and that is the USA.You are confusing dual loyalty with treasonous dual loyalty. An Italian-American has dual loyalty in the sense that he has loyalty to both his country and his people's homeland. That is not only legitimate, but unremarkable. It's true for everybody to one degree or another -- we all have multiple loyalties to multiple groups, from our immediate family to the planet as a whole.

What an Italian-American does not have a right to do is the right to commit treason -- to, say, spy for Italy against the USA and to claim that it is an act of loyalty, or to broadcast propaganda for Italy during a war with the USA (as Ezra Pound did, though not an Italian-American).

The problem is that some people confuse the two types of loyalty. They are so fearful somebody will accuse them of "dual loyalty" and doubt their patriotism, that they go out of their way to dump on, unfairly criticize, and on the whole be obsessed with pointing out real or imagined flaws of their homeland, with the forlorn hope that this will, somehow, make those who accuse them of "dual loyalty" satisfied.

They won't. Those who accuse American Jews of being "doubly loyal" for being sympathetic to Israel will not be satisfied because the motive for their accusation is hatred of Jews because they are Jews, not anything illegitimate American Jews did. This is much the same situation as those who accused Italian-Americans of being "doubly loyal" to the pope over the USA were simply haters of Italians, and couldn't care less if the man they accuse of such "double loyalty" was actually excommunicated or never went to church.

They Jew-haters will just find some other excuse to hate, and they will simply add contempt at Jews to their reason to hate Jews. They will sneer, justifiably I must say, at the lack of spine and groveling by those Jews who bend over backwards to be "good Jews" they have no rational reason to hate; at the naifs who actually took the excuse du jour for Jew-hatred as if it had anything to do with the real reason for their hatred.

We've seen this before, numerous times. Remember the Jews who, in the 1920s, went out of their way to show they are good Jews, that is, part of the then-fashionable communist movement, and not in any way related to those silly, outdated, dark-coat-wearing, superstition-believing "bad" Jews? Now, surely, these "good Jews" said to themselves, we will not be hated.

Bad idea: as could be expected, the only result was that the "good Jews" were, if anything, hated all the more -- and there was the additional excuse, the "Jews are all commies" one.

Examples could be multiplied.

[Cain]

Not true. One of the criticisms of President Kennedy when he was running was that he would have a dual loyalty to the Vatican.

False. Dual loyalty criticisms apply only to Jews supporting Israel.

[cornsail]

Many countries have policies that cultivate a connection to the "homeland".
Turkey still calls up Turks from the Netherlands and Germany for army service. (You can get out of it by sending some money to the Turkish government).

This is quite different from what I'm talking about. Israeli policies extend to Jews who have no connection with the country.

What you're describing sounds like policies directed at people who emigrate from Turkey.

[cwalner]

False. Dual loyalty criticisms apply only to Jews supporting Israel.

and (hypothetical) Kenyans

[Darth Rotor]

Ah, c'mon, that's cheating. The Jews think that when the messiah comes everybody will convert to Judaism. The Muslims that eventually everybody will acknowledge the truth of Islam. Practically every religion thinks eventually the entire world will agree with it. But in itself that's meaningless.
FWIW, and I admit to a touch of thread drift here, the Muslims and the Christians have figured out how to spread their religion far better than their Abrahamic uncles in this matter, for better and worse. Put another way, the Muslims and Christians are a lot closer to their goal, using predominantly mundane means to get everyone on board.

Then again, within each big religion is enough quarreling and squabbling to ensure they'll never agree ... :D

[Skeptic]

Judaism used to be a proselyting religion. It stopped for various complicated reasons ca. 150 AD.

[ProbeX]

In the context of a primary or decently mixed Yiddish environment Goy/Goyim is not offensive. Completely anecdotal, so proper salt taking here, in my experience in a primary English environment using Goy/Goyim is intended to be discriminatory. Just how the N word is a completely innocent term in the proper language context but is usually offensive or an attempt at destroying the offensivenss of the word in English.

Much of the Black population in America finds offense in the use of the N word by anyone, including themselves, despite the stereotype that most or all Blacks use it.

As for the term Goy/Goyim, it can be used factually or derogatorily. Like someone else said, it depends on how it's used and/or the spirit in which it's used.

[Darth Rotor]

Judaism used to be a proselyting religion. It stopped for various complicated reasons ca. 150 AD.
Just to ask, wasn't there a conversion in the region just north of the black sea in the 600-800 AD period? :confused:

Or was that a different style of a religion spreading?

DR

[Skeptic]

It's not clear what, if any, historical basis the story about the Jewish Khazarite kingdom has in fact.

The Khazars, if they in fact ever converted to Judaism as legend has it, probably did it for political reasons -- not wishing to affiliate themselves with either of the two warring factions (Islam and Christianity) then fighting in the area (I can just see the head adviser: "Sire, why don't we convert to Judaism? Nobody will have a reason to hate us THEN!").

But it wasn't due to Jews sending proselytes there. Conversion, even in theory mass conversion, is allowed in Judaism; but the Jews do not actively encourage it.

[Skeptic]

Goy or Goyim (the plural) is one of those words which can be used either in a derogatory or a neutral way.

In biblical Hebrew, or in the Jewish prayer book, the term simply means "other nations" or "non-Jews", and has no derogatory connotations.

In Yiddish, however, the word is derogatory, meaning (roughly) someone who'se stupid or ignorant, as in Goysche kopf -- "a gentile's head" -- that is, stupid.

However, today, the word is so commonly used and well-known that today it's almost invariably used tongue-in-cheek, not intended as an insult, at least not a serious one.

So while it would be impolite to call a non-Jew a goy to his face, a Jew using the term to refer to a non-Jews today is probably using it as an ironic reminder to other Jews of how their actions look from the outside, not meaning it as some sort of insult to non-Jews.

E.g., when a commentator in a well-known Hebrew paper called the Madoff affair using the Yiddish expression a shande [shame] for the goyim, the point was "will make Jews in general look bad", not any commentary on non-Jews as such.

[bigjelmapro]

still a problem, especialy for Kurds i know that have to serv in the Turkish army.
Still not talking about Kurds serving in the Turkish army, but I admire your persistance in the deflection...

[DC]

Still not talking about Kurds serving in the Turkish army, but I admire your persistance in the deflection...

paranoid you are..... deflection my a..

[Thunder]

does anyone here agree, that Jewish-Americans who do not support the settements, do so not out of honest belief, but in order to defeat possible charges of "dual-loyalty"?

[Eddie Dane]

In regards to Eddie Dane's post. I highly doubt that there's a strong correlation to the trivial cases of Dutch Moroccans naming their children Dutch names, Dutch Turks filling the ranks in the Turkish army, and that of American Jewish support of solving an ongoing ME conflict.

I don't really want to minimize how this Turkish/Moroccan issues, but are you seriously trying to imply that there's a strong correlation to that of this ME conflict?

My only point was that many states cultivate ties to the "homeland".
Israel tries to get support from it's diaspora, sometimes through emotional blackmail.
To underscore my point that Israel is not unique in this regard, I named some examples that I'm familiar with and that that show that some countries cultivate ties in ways that much more extreme than Israel's policies.

That's all. I'm actually completely confused about what you read into my post and what you're challenging me about.

Probably my mistake to begin with. I posted from work and I don't read or write very carefully when I'm in a hurry.



Sidenote:
Regarding my Moroccan example: The Moroccan policy on names does not exist to stop Dutch-Moroccans from giving their kids Dutch names.
It started because the Moroccan government does not want it's Berber population to give their kids Berber names, thus undercutting Berber nationalism. The policy comes from the Arab "ruling class".
Now that it is implemented, the Moroccans are probably happy that it works for Dutch names too.

[bigjelmapro]

My only point was that many states cultivate ties to the "homeland".
Israel tries to get support from it's diaspora, sometimes through emotional blackmail.
To underscore my point that Israel is not unique in this regard, I named some examples that I'm familiar with and that that show that some countries cultivate ties in ways that much more extreme than Israel's policies.

Wouldn't call it blackmail. There do exist elements within Israel that invoke an emotional response of its diaspora living overseas by various means, but calling this blackmail is quite a stretch. That would require some sort of leverage, which personally, I don't presume one's religious affiliation to be one of them.


That's all. I'm actually completely confused about what you read into my post and what you're challenging me about.

Not really challenging you, just confused (likewise) of how this strongly correlates with with the current state of affairs with Israel. I do understand your position and how you're going about it. Your emotive and sensitivity to what I said, not really. I assume that you interpreted what I wrote as judgmental, which I can assure you, it isn't.

[bigjelmapro]

sure it must be, it contradicts your oppinion.
Nah, still propaganda, especially if its of the disinformation kind. So not really an opinion whatsoever, as talked about in this thread regarding Haaretz:

http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=5837187&postcount=25

[bigjelmapro]

paranoid you are..... deflection my a..
:) Paranoia, nice one. How else are you going to dress up a deflection?

[Thunder]

Italy is the clear homeland..of Italians.

Ireland is the clear homeland..of the Irish.

Germany is the clear homeland..of the Germans.

Is Israel the clear homeland..of all Jews? No it is not. It is only a spiritual and cultural homeland. But it is not the place of origin of all Jews.

[DC]

Nah, still propaganda, especially if its of the disinformation kind. So not really an opinion whatsoever, as talked about in this thread regarding Haaretz:

http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=5837187&postcount=25

yes i think i had a to high oppinion of Haaretz.

[DC]

:) Paranoia, nice one. How else are you going to dress up a deflection?

deflection was not my intention.

[Eddie Dane]

yes i think i had a to high oppinion of Haaretz.

Same here.

The guardian also took a nosedive in my personal opinion.

[Skeptic]

My only point was that many states cultivate ties to the "homeland".
Israel tries to get support from it's diaspora, sometimes through emotional blackmail.

The Israelies dealing with the world's Jewry couldn't, and still can't, make up their mind on whether to present Israel as a strong, tough nation, so that the diaspora Jews will be proud of it and give money -- or as a poor, crippled nation on the edge of collapse, so they'll be sorry of it and give money.

Levi Eshkol, Israel's PM in the 1960s, noted that Israel should do both at once present itself as Shimshon der nebechdicker -- "poor Samson".

An Israeli satirist noted that the logical result of such a policy would be a "give to Israel" brochure that shows a thin and hungry, yet strong and tall, Israeli steel worker, whose weak right hand holds with enormous force the white-hot charity box.

[Skeptic]

Wouldn't call it blackmail.

Neither did Eddie Dane -- "emotional blackmail" is a figure of speech, the sort of thing your wife uses to get you to go out to see a movie when you're tired, not literally blackmail...

[Skeptic]

Same here.

The guardian also took a nosedive in my personal opinion.

(Sigh)

As usual, the Jews act as "canaries in a coalmine" here too: when some paper start going for the "zionism is evil / poor, poor Hamas" sort of articles, you know it's no longer actually cares about reporting reality but merely about blabbering the party line.

It starts with the Jews, but pretty soon it moves on to all other fields the paper covers, from social events to the arts to editorials discussing monetary policy to whatever.

Eventually, or at least sometimes, people figure out that it's not just the Jews who are described in a way that bares no relationship to reality, but everyone and everything else, as well.

[bigjelmapro]

Neither did Eddie Dane -- "emotional blackmail" is a figure of speech, the sort of thing your wife uses to get you to go out to see a movie when you're tired, not literally blackmail...
I know the term quite well and is not necessarily applicable in this situation.

[brantc]

The Israelies dealing with the world's Jewry couldn't, and still can't, make up their mind on whether to present Israel as a strong, tough nation, so that the diaspora Jews will be proud of it and give money -- or as a poor, crippled nation on the edge of collapse, so they'll be sorry of it and give money.

Levi Eshkol, Israel's PM in the 1960s, noted that Israel should do both at once present itself as Shimshon der nebechdicker -- "poor Samson".

An Israeli satirist noted that the logical result of such a policy would be a "give to Israel" brochure that shows a thin and hungry, yet strong and tall, Israeli steel worker, whose weak right hand holds with enormous force the white-hot charity box.


How could you claim loyalty to a country who's leaders say stuff like this??


I would say thats treason since its clear that Israel is using America for its own nefarious schemes with strong arm tactics.
Maybe its just taking over American politics......


"Every time we do something you tell me America will do this and will do that . . . I want to tell you something very clear: Don't worry about American pressure on Israel. We, the Jewish people, control America, and the Americans know it." - Israeli Prime Minister, Ariel Sharon, October 3, 2001


"Our race is the Master Race. We Jews are divine gods on this planet. We are as different from the inferior races as they are from insects. In fact, compared to our race, other races are beasts and animals, cattlce at best. Other races are considered as human excrement. Our destiny is to rule over the inferior races. Our earthly kingdom will be ruled by our leader with a rod of iron. The masses will lick our feet and serve us as our slaves." - Menachem Begin, Israeli Prime Minister to New Statesman magazine on June 25, 1982

[Darth Rotor]

It's not clear what, if any, historical basis the story about the Jewish Khazarite kingdom has in fact.

The Khazars, if they in fact ever converted to Judaism as legend has it, probably did it for political reasons -- not wishing to affiliate themselves with either of the two warring factions (Islam and Christianity) then fighting in the area (I can just see the head adviser: "Sire, why don't we convert to Judaism? Nobody will have a reason to hate us THEN!").

But it wasn't due to Jews sending proselytes there. Conversion, even in theory mass conversion, is allowed in Judaism; but the Jews do not actively encourage it.
As I look at the geography, and a recent bit of E in the JREF that there have been Jews in Persia and in Georgia (the one next to Black Sea) for a very long time, it does not seem strange to me that at some point, as trade interactions came and went, a particular chieftan took a shine to the monotheistic approach of the Jews and adopted it.

But you made me laugh with the "half way" deal vis a vis Islamic and Christian influence in the area. Very funny, and it looks like the Islam's spread subsumed most of whatever had spread previously. Thanks for poking my brain enough to take a peak at the Wiki summary of their history, of which not much is known.

Interesting to note that Cyril (IIRC, St Cyril) did not document Judaism among the Khazars. I think he would have mentioned it ...

DR

[Thunder]

"Our race is the Master Race. We Jews are divine gods on this planet. We are as different from the inferior races as they are from insects. In fact, compared to our race, other races are beasts and animals, cattlce at best. Other races are considered as human excrement. Our destiny is to rule over the inferior races. Our earthly kingdom will be ruled by our leader with a rod of iron. The masses will lick our feet and serve us as our slaves." - Menachem Begin, Israeli Prime Minister to New Statesman magazine on June 25, 1982

sorry....but I call BS.

[Darth Rotor]

sorry....but I call BS.
That's two of us ...

[bigjelmapro]

"Every time we do something you tell me America will do this and will do that . . . I want to tell you something very clear: Don't worry about American pressure on Israel. We, the Jewish people, control America, and the Americans know it." - Israeli Prime Minister, Ariel Sharon, October 3, 2001
....

These quotes have been covered ad nauseum, but for some reason keep getting brought up, as disinformation usually goes, over the net.

Covers most of the fantasy quotes: http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_context=7&x_issue=21&x_article=373