The Butchery of all the Jews Was a Reasonable Arab Reply to the Creation of israel

[Skeptic]

Just making sure the "War was a reasonable reply by the Arabs for the creation of israel" thread by "A Unique Person" gets its proper title.

As everybody at the time--most of all the Arabs--knew, and the Arabs openly and repeatedly said, the goal of the war against israel when it was created was its destruction and the butchery of all the jews there.

Whenever the Arabs DID manage to catch Jews in that war, that's precisely what they did--as the massacre of the jews of Gush Etzion shows.

Just that there is no misunderstanding about AUP's real position about what is reasonable to do when dealing with jews one doesn't like.

At least he (finally!) openly admits it.

[Tmy]

Butchery of the Jews... Are you talking about the holocaust? O wait that was the European massacre of the Jews, which ironically led to the creation of Isreal.

I have a question (which I know is going to come out the wrong way but here goes) Did the euros carve out Isreal out of sympathy, or was it to a way to move the Jews out of Europe , or both?

Yes, Skeptic, all the Jews in the world are shining beacons of fairness and selflessness, and those dirty arabs are evil to the last child.

:rolleyes:

[The Fool]

Originally posted by Lost Sailor
Yes, Skeptic, all the Jews in the world are shining beacons of fairness and selflessness, and those dirty arabs are evil to the last child.

:rolleyes:
bingo.....As long as there are enough people who can keep one eye firmly shut when looking at this issue, it is doomed to go on forever.

[Tricky]

Beware of threads that use hot button words like "butchery" in the title.

I wouldn't think very much of a thread titled "US Butchery in Iraq kills thousands of innocents". Sounds like someone with an axe to grind.

[renata]

Two things especially bother me
1. Arabs did not REALLY mean it. Well, they sure acted like it. Indeed, claiming this was just florid speech appears to me like someone is patronizing Arabs- those silly savages with their boasts. I am sorry, if someone says they will butcher me and my family, I believe them, and take appropriate actions.

2. Most Jews did not WANT to go the a desert, with malaria, no civilization and hostile natives. They had good lives in Western Europe. There were driven from Russia, from Europe, from everywhere. The ones that stayed in Europe- well, there was that little Holocaust thing- it was overdone, of course as Jews used that blip in history (its not like it as unique or anything, not like Jews were tortured, and not only Jews were killed by Nazis, after all- let's be fair) for monetary gain. Jews could not go anywhere, no country would accept them. They should have done the honorable thing and just committed suicide en masse, saving the world all those headaches.

[Tony]

Originally posted by Lost Sailor
Yes, Skeptic, all the Jews in the world are shining beacons of fairness and selflessness, and those dirty arabs are evil to the last child.

:rolleyes:

The Israelis are superior because they have a secular democracy in which freedoms are guaranteed.

[Baker]

Originally posted by Lost Sailor
Yes, Skeptic, all the Jews in the world are shining beacons of fairness and selflessness, and those dirty arabs are evil to the last child.

:rolleyes:

You mean the Arab nations and their dictatorship governments that lack very few human rights.
Compared to Israel the only Democracy in the Middle East?
If you don’t agree with Skeptic then at least give what you believe is the correct side of the story.

[Baker]

Originally posted by Tmy
Butchery of the Jews... Are you talking about the holocaust? O wait that was the European massacre of the Jews, which ironically led to the creation of Isreal.

I have a question (which I know is going to come out the wrong way but here goes) Did the euros carve out Isreal out of sympathy, or was it to a way to move the Jews out of Europe , or both?

Oh, the old Jews faked or exaggerate the holocaust to create Israel conspiracy theory.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by renata
Two things especially bother me
1. Arabs did not REALLY mean it. Well, they sure acted like it. Indeed, claiming this was just florid speech appears to me like someone is patronizing Arabs- those silly savages with their boasts. I am sorry, if someone says they will butcher me and my family, I believe them, and take appropriate actions.



Why did they say they would attack? Why did Israel expect them to attack?



2. Most Jews did not WANT to go the a desert, with malaria, no civilization and hostile natives. They had good lives in Western Europe. There were driven from Russia, from Europe, from everywhere. The ones that stayed in Europe- well, there was that little Holocaust thing- it was overdone, of course as Jews used that blip in history (its not like it as unique or anything, not like Jews were tortured, and not only Jews were killed by Nazis, after all- let's be fair) for monetary gain. Jews could not go anywhere, no country would accept them. They should have done the honorable thing and just committed suicide en masse, saving the world all those headaches.

I never said I had come up with a solution to what was to be done about the plight of the Jews. I was just asking, what would you expect the Arabs to do to what was perceived to be an invasion? Clearly, resistance was expected.

[armageddonman]

Originally posted by Tony


The Israelis are superior because they have a secular democracy in which freedoms are guaranteed.


Israel is not a secular country. What makes you think so? It doesn't even have a constitution.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Baker


Oh, the old Jews faked or exaggerate the holocaust to create Israel conspiracy theory.

Not what he claimed.

[Tony]

Originally posted by armageddonman



Israel is not a secular country.

I never said it was a secular country, I said Israel is a secular democracy.

But if it isnt a secular democracy, what is it then? Because it isnt a theocratic state.

What makes you think so?

Ive read it about it numerous times.

[armageddonman]

Originally posted by Tony
But if it isnt a secular democracy, what is it then? Because it isnt a theocratic state.


Are you sure? Israel defines itself as beeing a jewish nation. That makes it hardly secular. And it seperates the non-jewish inhabitants.

If Israel is a democracy why doesn't it have a constitution?

[Tony]

Originally posted by armageddonman



Are you sure? Israel defines itself as beeing a jewish nation. That makes it hardly secular. And it seperates the non-jewish inhabitants.



Can you provide some info? id like to read up on this.

If Israel is a democracy why doesn't it have a constitution?

Having a constitution isnt required to have a democracy, or a republic, or any type of government.

[armageddonman]

Originally posted by Tony
[B]

Can you provide some info? id like to read up on this.


http://www.mfa.gov.il/mfa/go.asp?MFAH00hb0




Having a constitution isnt required to have a democracy, or a republic, or any type of government.


If Israel doesn't have a constitution what is the democracy based on?

[Tony]

Originally posted by armageddonman


If Israel doesn't have a constitution what is the democracy based on?

I dunno, mabey tradition or precedent? I do think the lack of a constitution is dangerous and leaves the government open to coups.

[armageddonman]

Originally posted by Tony


I dunno, mabey tradition or precedent? I do think the lack of a constitution is dangerous and leaves the government open to coups.

Nevertheless you state that Israelis are superior due to having a secular democracy. How can you make such claims if you don't even know if Israel really has a secular democracy?

added: secular democracy

[CWL]

Originally posted by armageddonman



It doesn't even have a constitution.

Interesting. Perhaps you would care to elaborate? Before you do though, please consider the following.

A "constitution" is the system of laws and conventions by which a state governs itself. It is is the fundamental laws of a country - the "law of laws". A distinction is often made between a formal constitution, which may be a venerable document formally drawn up that can only be modified only through specific procedures (the Swedish constitution for instance can only be changed by two separate decisions of the Riksdag - i.e. the Swedish parliament - set apart by a national election) and a material constitution, a body of dispositions providing for the organization and functioning of the state.

Perhaps you mean to say that Israel has no formal constitution? My point being that each state per definition has some form of constitution.

[armageddonman]

Originally posted by CWL
Perhaps you mean to say that Israel has no formal constitution? My point being that each state per definition has some form of constitution.

I was referring to the lack of a formal constitution.

Israel has nevertheless laws which are something as an equivalent to a constitution.

The interesting question would be of course, why Israel doesn't have a constitution.

[armageddonman]

How democratic is Israel? Interesting link:

http://www.ahavat-israel.com/ahavat/protest/democracy.asp

[iain]

Originally posted by armageddonman
If Israel doesn't have a constitution what is the democracy based on? Ahem. The UK does not have a written constitution. Whilst there is an argument that it should do, I don't see any real signs of the UK being less democratic that other countries with written constitutions.

[armageddonman]

Originally posted by iain
Ahem. The UK does not have a written constitution. Whilst there is an argument that it should do, I don't see any real signs of the UK being less democratic that other countries with written constitutions.

Ahem. The UK are a parlamentary monarchy. Surely democratic but not the same form of government as Israel.

[iain]

Originally posted by armageddonman


Ahem. The UK are a parlamentary monarchy. Surely democratic but not the same form of government as Israel. The UK is a representative democracy with a figurehead monarch, similar to several other European countries.

But your original question was If Israel is a democracy why doesn't it have a constitution?

You also said Israel is not a secular country. What makes you think so? It doesn't even have a constitution.

Both of these statements implied to me that you feel a constitution to be a requirement for a secular democracy. I'm just pointing out that this is not true.

Whether Israel is a democracy or not I have no idea.

Edited to add in this context, I assume we are both taking constitution to mean written constitution.

[armageddonman]

Of course I mean written constitution.
Concerning Israel I (and many others, do a google search including "israel" and "constitution") have the strong feeling that one of the main reasons for Israel not having a written constitution is the commitment to secular and democratic ideas that would have to be written down in such a constitution. Israel was founded specifically as jewish sate and as such is at the moment not a secular one. There are many examples to prove this, for example, secular weddings do not exist in Israel as should if it was a truly secular state.

[CWL]

Originally posted by iain
Edited to add in this context, I assume we are both taking constitution to mean written constitution. [/B]

Have a look at my latest post (http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&postid=434585&highlight=formal+constitution#post434585) above and the reply thereto.

[iain]

Originally posted by armageddonman
Of course I mean written constitution. No problem. I just realised that I had been imprecise and wanted to make sure we were talking about the same thing.

Concerning Israel I (and many others, do a google search including "israel" and "constitution") have the strong feeling that one of the main reasons for Israel not having a written constitution is the commitment to secular and democratic ideas that would have to be written down in such a constitution. Israel was founded specifically as jewish sate and as such is at the moment not a secular one. There are many examples to prove this, for example, secular weddings do not exist in Israel as should if it was a truly secular state. Fair point; I'm not saying you're wrong.

[Tmy]

Originally posted by Baker


Oh, the old Jews faked or exaggerate the holocaust to create Israel conspiracy theory.

Uhhh I said no such thing. Can we ever have a discussion about Israel without it turning into "you're an anti-semite" "your a zionist" tennis match.


As for Israel being secular, just look at the flag.

[CWL]

Originally posted by Tmy
As for Israel being secular, just look at the flag.

Well, the flag is only one indication - and not a very strong one at that.

If we take Sweden as an example, the flag is - like many other Europan nations (such as e.g. Denmark, Norway, Finland, Iceland) based on a Christian cross:

http://www.worldatlas.com/webimage/flags/countrys/zzzflags/sesmall.gif

The Church of Sweden was until recently the purveyor of the formal state religion and each Swedish citizen was born a member of it (although it was a rather simple procedure to leave). The Swedish formal Head of State (the Monarch) is required by the Swedish Constitution to be of the "pure evangelic faith" on which the Church of Sweden is based.

Despite all of this, I would argue that Sweden is a very secular country indeed - it is in fact one of the most secularized countries in the world. I would for instance argue that Sweden is much more secularized than the US in the sense that it is unthinkable for the Swedish prime minister or another member of the Swedish government to give references to God in a formal speech.

[armageddonman]

Originally posted by Tmy
As for Israel being secular, just look at the flag.

A better indication would be THE DECLARATION OF THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE STATE OF ISRAEL (http://www.mfa.gov.il/mfa/go.asp?MFAH00hb0).


Quote:

"ACCORDINGLY WE, MEMBERS OF THE PEOPLE'S COUNCIL, REPRESENTATIVES OF THE JEWISH COMMUNITY OF ERETZ-ISRAEL AND OF THE ZIONIST MOVEMENT, ARE HERE ASSEMBLED ON THE DAY OF THE TERMINATION OF THE BRITISH MANDATE OVER ERETZ-ISRAEL AND, BY VIRTUE OF OUR NATURAL AND HISTORIC RIGHT AND ON THE STRENGTH OF THE RESOLUTION OF THE UNITED NATIONS GENERAL ASSEMBLY, HEREBY DECLARE THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A JEWISH STATE IN ERETZ-ISRAEL, TO BE KNOWN AS THE STATE OF ISRAEL."

[Tmy]

Yeah but how old is the Sweedish flag, and waht was Sweden like when they chose the flag.

I realize a simple flag does not tell the whole story, but to call Israel is secular? Come on!

[CWL]

Originally posted by Tmy
Yeah but how old is the Sweedish flag, and waht was Sweden like when they chose the flag.
It probably dates back to the 15th century, and yes Sweden was pretty darn Christian at the time.

I realize a simple flag does not tell the whole story, but to call Israel is secular? Come on!
I never did. I simply pointed out that the flag is merely a weak indication. Your point that the Israeli flag was chosen at a later stage than the Swedish flag is a good one. However, I would argue that Sweden was not a secular state in the 1940's to the same extent as it is now. The same could (in theory) apply for Israel.

The same line of argument goes for the declaration quoted by armageddonman. Like I pointed out, Sweden still has a rule in its Constitution saying that the King must be a Christian (in reality of the Church of Sweden). The declaration as such does not make Israel a non secular state.

The proposition that secular weddings do not exist in Israel is IMO a more interesting indication that Israel is not a secular state. Are there any more examples like this?

[Tmy]

How does immigration work in Israel? If you are a converted Jew (not Jewish by ethnicity) do you have favorable status? How does one become an Israeli citizen?

[armageddonman]

Originally posted by Tmy
How does immigration work in Israel? If you are a converted Jew (not Jewish by ethnicity) do you have favorable status? How does one become an Israeli citizen?

Try a google search.
For example:

http://www.cyberhaven.com/starchild/israel.html

[Tmy]

Thanks arm,

Looks like a converted Jew is treated the same as an ethnic jew. I guess that would be another example of non-secular-ish-ness (new word I made up).

I wonder If you were a convert, but no longer practicing, would that be kosher with immigration? (Bu Bump Bump)

Thank you thank you, I will be performing at the Laugh Factory this weekend.

[Jedi Knight]

Originally posted by The Fool

bingo.....As long as there are enough people who can keep one eye firmly shut when looking at this issue, it is doomed to go on forever.

No, it would go nuclear before going on forever.

JK

[hgc]

Tmy:
How does immigration work in Israel? If you are a converted Jew (not Jewish by ethnicity) do you have favorable status? How does one become an Israeli citizen?
There is much controversy over this in Israel. Currently only conversions carried out by an orthodox rabbi are considered valid (for the purposes of automatic "right of return"). Secular forces want to break the orthodox monopoly on conversion validity.

[Supercharts]

http://www.aynrand.org/israel/israel_sept_2002.pdf

[Ben Shniper]

Originally posted by a_unique_person


Why did they say they would attack? Why did Israel expect them to attack?

I never said I had come up with a solution to what was to be done about the plight of the Jews. I was just asking, what would you expect the Arabs to do to what was perceived to be an invasion? Clearly, resistance was expected.

Expected, but not justified.

We expected Saddam to harm his own people to try to stop the American invasion. Expected him to abuse and possibly kill POWs. We were dissapointed to see this happen.

We may also expect Arab nations to hold a grudge for 60 years.

Saudi Arabia,Syria, Libya, Iraq, and the majority of the Arab League have been in a state of war with Israel for 60 years now. Why? What has Israel been doing besides existing? Does Israel deserve that continuing treatment, the terrorism, the refusals of peace treaties? For 60 years?

Why do we tolerate this behavior from the Arab world? Israel offered the PA a state, and the PA refused and declared war. Expected. But not justified.

-Ben

[Ben Shniper]

Originally posted by Tricky
Beware of threads that use hot button words like "butchery" in the title.


From:
http://www.tzemach.org/fyi/docs/beres/liquid.htm



Nor should it be presumed that Jews outside of Israel are immune to Islamic hatreds or that Israelis are hated merely because they are "occupiers." Israelis are despised because they are Jews. Period! In the words of a recent article published in AL-AHRAM: "The first thing that we have to make clear is that no distinction must be made between the Jew and the Israeli....The Jew is a Jew, through the millennia....in spurning all moral values, devouring the living and drinking his blood for the sake of a few coins. The Jew, the Merchant of Venice, does not differ from the killers of Deir Yasin or the killers of the camps. They are equal examples of human degradation. Let us therefore put aside such distinctions (Jews and Israelis) and talk only about JEWS."

In a current Egyptian textbook of "Arab Islamic History" (a textbook in a country "at peace" with Israel) new teachers are informed as follows: "The Jews are always the same, every time and everywhere. They will not live save in darkness. They contrive their evils clandestinely. They fight only when they are hidden, because they are cowards....The Prophet enlightened us about the right way to treat them, and succeeded finally in crushing the plots they had planned. We today must follow this way and purify Palestine from their filth."


Please tell me why you think "the butchery of Jews" is off topic in a discussion of the Arab attempts to destroy Israel.

-Ben

[Skeptic]

Originally posted by Ben Shniper


From:
http://www.tzemach.org/fyi/docs/beres/liquid.htm


Please tell me why you think "the butchery of Jews" is off topic in a discussion of the Arab attempts to destroy Israel.

-Ben

Oh, they don't REALLY mean it. Just ask AUP...

[DanishDynamite]

Ben Shniper: Please tell me why you think "the butchery of Jews" is off topic in a discussion of the Arab attempts to destroy Israel. It is off-topic because it is inflammatory. It is pure JK, where every word is loaded. Instead of "killing", words such as butchery, massacre, bloodbath, etc are used. Inflammatory. Look it up.

[Baker]

Originally posted by DanishDynamite
Ben Shniper: It is off-topic because it is inflammatory. It is pure JK, where every word is loaded. Instead of "killing", words such as butchery, massacre, bloodbath, etc are used. Inflammatory. Look it up.

So what do you think the three invasions from the Arab’s was for just the sport of it?
They said before each invasion that there intent was to wipe out the Jews in Arabic land.

[DanishDynamite]

Baker:So what do you think the three invasions from the Arab’s was for just the sport of it?
They said before each invasion that there intent was to wipe out the Jews in Arabic land. Fine, then quote them. And what does this have to do with butchery?

[Baker]

Originally posted by DanishDynamite
Baker: Fine, then quote them. And what does this have to do with butchery?

It means butchery isn’t quite off the mark as you realize.

[DanishDynamite]

Originally posted by Baker


It means butchery isn’t quite off the mark as you realize. It is totally off the mark. "Butchery" is a loaded term, inflammatory. It adds nothing except emotion and judgement to the term "killing" or "wipe out".

(FYI, according to Merriam-Webster, "butchery" means:

- cruel and ruthless slaughter of human beings)

[Baker]

Originally posted by DanishDynamite
It is totally off the mark. "Butchery" is a loaded term, inflammatory. It adds nothing except emotion and judgement to the term "killing" or "wipe out".

(FYI, according to Merriam-Webster, "butchery" means:

- cruel and ruthless slaughter of human beings)

Perhaps I’m not following you are you saying he is using a shock tactic to gain support for his view on the matter?

[DanishDynamite]

I'm saying that inflammatory words have no place in reasoned debate. They are the refuge of the weaker party.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by DanishDynamite
I'm saying that inflammatory words have no place in reasoned debate. They are the refuge of the weaker party.

This whole thread was an attempt to derail the thread that I started under a similar name.

[Skeptic]

Originally posted by DanishDynamite
Baker: Fine, then quote them. And what does this have to do with butchery?

What does "wiping the jews out in arab lands" has to do with butchering them?

Guess.

Perhaps the rallying cry of the arabs in the war--"Itbah al-Yahud", butcher the jews--might give you a hint.

You say it's "inflammatory" because you cannot bring yourself to believe that they meant it literally. But they did, and still do.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Skeptic


What does "wiping the jews out in arab lands" has to do with butchering them?

Guess.

Perhaps the rallying cry of the arabs in the war--"Itbah al-Yahud", butcher the jews--might give you a hint.

You say it's "inflammatory" because you cannot bring yourself to believe that they meant it literally. But they did, and still do.

Still do? The USA seems to have the middle east on a string at the moment. Prior to that, the existence of Israel appears to be a given anyway. Saudi has already proposed deals to formalise the recognition of Israel by the Arab world.

Why would any Arab nation, without nukes, attack Israel, which has nukes, anyway. It would be the Arabs that would be butchered.

[Baker]

Originally posted by a_unique_person


Still do? The USA seems to have the middle east on a string at the moment. Prior to that, the existence of Israel appears to be a given anyway. Saudi has already proposed deals to formalise the recognition of Israel by the Arab world.

Why would any Arab nation, without nukes, attack Israel, which has nukes, anyway. It would be the Arabs that would be butchered.

No instead, they support suicide bombers.