|
FreshlyShaven posted:The Palestinians have been suffering for over 60 years under a brutal apartheid regime. Israelis have not. Your math is off, Israel occupied the the West Bank and the Gaza Strip less than 50 years ago. quote:Leaving aside whether the Mizrahim's experience is analogous to the Palestinian refugees'(for one thing, there's very little interest among the Mizrahim in returning to their ancestral homelands and some states like Iraq allow repatriation already), I would argue that anti-Zionists are generally pretty aware of the Mizrahim, their exodus/suffering and the discrimination they face in Israel. On the contrary, I find a tendency among anti-Zionists to downplay or even ignore the existence of Mizrahi Jews, let alone the fact that they're the largest ethnic group in Israel, largely because it conflicts with their preconceived stereotypes about Israeli Jews being a bunch of white Europeans who have no cause to be present in the Middle East. Not a universal one, but more common than not. Think of every "joke" about how the Jews should just go back to Europe and the ignorance it betrays of where Israeli Jews actually originated. Ultramega posted:Sorry I'm using the Holocaust as The Benchmark For All Bad Things That Have Ever Happened To Jews. Thought you were on the level? On the contrary I think that would end up being little more than a rationale to excuse to recognize the existence of Jewish victimhood.
|
# ? Jun 4, 2016 22:15 |
|
|
# ? Jun 5, 2024 03:48 |
|
post
Friendly Factory fucked around with this message at 07:35 on Jun 4, 2018 |
# ? Jun 4, 2016 23:09 |
|
The Insect Court posted:Think of every "joke" about how the Jews should just go back to Europe and the ignorance it betrays of where Israeli Jews actually originated. For a significant chunk of Israel's past, yes, European Jews were a majority. Which is important because Israel started life as an essentially European colonialist project. That Mizrahim are now a majority doesn't change the state's history. When people say 'Maybe they should go back to Europe', I think the essential point here is that when talking about Palestinians it takes some chutzpah to make suggestions about what they should do, accept or where they should go.
|
# ? Jun 4, 2016 23:43 |
|
Hong XiuQuan posted:I think the essential point here is that when talking about Palestinians it takes some chutzpah to make suggestions about what they should do, accept or where they should go.
|
# ? Jun 5, 2016 01:00 |
|
Dead Reckoning posted:I guess that's technically correct, but I think a rational person can look at the situation and say that the Palestinians' irredentist demands for a return to the status quo anti bellum are counter-productive and unrealistic. Counter-productive to what? Israel's slow ethnic cleansing of them? There is a massive international consensus that Israel needs to return to the the pre-1967 borders (with mutal land swaps, blahblahblahblah) and this constrains Israelis actions to a large degree. It would be foolish to get rid of that by going "actually, I guess we don't need human rights or anything, feel free to take all our land". That of course doesn't mention that this is a massive misinterpretation. In negotiations, Palestinians haven't been arguing for a return to the status quo. The return of refugees has been planned to be small, with most of them planned to go to a newly formed Palestinian state so that Israel can maintain it's ethnic and religious purity, while in terms of the land although it's based along the 1967 borders land swaps have been agreed in principle so that Israel gets all its big settlements in return for giving the Palestinians undeveloped land. They're specifically not negotiating for a return to the "status quo anti bellum".
|
# ? Jun 5, 2016 02:54 |
|
FreshlyShaven posted:Leaving that aside, despite the disclaimer, this comes dangerously close to victim-blaming. Maybe instead of trying to elide Israeli responsibility by blaming Palestinian leaders, you could simply acknowledge the most salient fact and let it sink in: Israel ethnically cleansed the Palestinians and has refused to make amends for it or acknowledge the basic human rights of its victims. Yes, the ethnic cleansing occurred in a time of racial tension and political violence, but that's true of almost every incidence of ethnic cleansing; ethnic cleansing rarely happens during periods of stability and prosperity. That's not what's being debated. I've argued there's a close analogy to the treatment of Palestinians and Mizrahim, and to be consistent, they're either both ethnic cleansing or neither are. quote:In the real world, Israel is not interested in making a just peace. It prefers to maintain the occupation to satisfy its right-wing zealots, avoid dealing with its housing crisis and to profit the Israeli economy at the expense of Palestinian suffering. The closest thing to a serious peace plan offered by Israel was the Oslo Accords and a) that didn't even create a Palestinian state, and b) no sooner did Israel sign the Accords than it went about sabotaging them. Netanyahu started sabotaging them. He only succeeded because Hamas (in 1996) and Fatah (in 2000) attacks radicalized Israeli politics. quote:Netanyahu has promised there will be no Palestinian state, 3/4 of Israeli Jews oppose a 2 state solution which creates a viable Palestinian-administered territory, and Labour's record is just as bad as Likud's(and likely to get worse as Herzog decides that the route to electoral victory is through hating Arabs more than Likud). So don't pretend that some reasonable peace could come about if those Palestinians were just willing to eat more poo poo and pretend to like it. The only way to peace is through international sanctions and pressure. Polls say anything, there are lots of polls saying Israelis and Palestinians both support and oppose peace. Peace does not mean 100% acquiesce to Palestinian demands, including fresh rounds of ethnic cleansing. quote:No, I'm saying an Israeli-Palestinian peace deal should focus on Israel/Palestine instead of dealing with tangential issues because given Israel's behavior, it should be obvious that Israel would use a single country's intransigence to scuttle the entire talks. The issue of Iraqi Mizrahim and compensation for their suffering should be dealt with between the government of Iraq and Israel; the Palestinians should not be held hostage over something they had nothing to do with. It's exactly what you're doing. You're elevating the rights of one group of refugees over another's, arguing one group deserves immediate compensation and the other does not. quote:For another, the Arab peace proposal is, in its outline, simple: end the occupation and find a just solution to the refugees. This is the international consensus and the bare minimum for any kind of a just peace. Israel has no excuse for not accepting it; its refusal to even entertain the idea is proof of just how little interest Israel has in ending apartheid and making peace. Not remotely true, the international consensus is not for the right of return. If it was, they would not have supported Barak and Olmert's plans which did not include more than token measures. quote:The Palestinians have been suffering for over 60 years under a brutal apartheid regime. Israelis have not. The Palestinians have already made hard concessions through their blood, their tears, their stolen lands, the daily apartheid checkpoints, the stolen billions from the Palestinian economy, etc. They've done 98 percent of the suffering; it's Israel's turn to give up its apartheid policies and make some concessions for once. This is wishful thinking, and not how international diplomacy works. There's a scenario where centrists win the Knesset and Taba is revived. There a scenario where the status quo persists and Palestinian misery worsens. There's no scenario where one of the two major US political parties permits any sanction of Israel over the next eight years.
|
# ? Jun 5, 2016 04:42 |
|
team overhead smash posted:Just to confirm then, do you accept that Mizrahim who hold the views you set out are racist scumbags whose opinions are worthless regardless of whether it might be useful to understand why they hold these racist scumbag opinions? Thanks for the paragraphs about how refugees don't deserve any sympathy. Those opinions aren't inherently racist in the sense that they're primarily motivated out of revenge, unless you also consider a good chunk of Palestinian anti-Zionism to be racist as well. The ideas are garbage, but they hold validity in the sense that they come from real emotional pain. quote:Arafat in the 2000 Camp David Summit was already willing to make concessions and accept a very limited return to Israel. The only bit Israel could possibly object to is handwavey waffle specifically designed as a fig leaf for the arabs so that the refugees can be mentioned while committing Israel to nothing. That's a thorny piece. There's a lot of talk about how Arafat was self contradictory on the point, but clearly it's a precondition for any peace deal. He accepted this at certain points but ultimately rejected it, and then went back and forth a few times like when in 2002 or so he asked to sign the deal when Sharon was shelling camps. I think you're giving far too generous a reading. If you read comments by the Saudis and other governments, they're clearly at least catering to an audience back home with a very different interpretation. quote:Also it's not really elevating one group's suffering arbitrarily over another's, but being capable of basic critical analysis and reasoning that the ethnic cleansing of Jews 70 years ago who were refugees for a short time, in some case days, but now live in relative comfort in a modern industrialised nation is not as important than a group of arabs being ethnically cleansed 70 years ago and then them and their descendent continuing to be refugees living in poverty who are oppressed, kill, jailed, tortured, etc for those 70 years up until the present day. The flaw in what you're saying is that the ethnic cleansing of Mizrahim in fact has a direct causal link to the poor treatment of Palestinian refugees you cite. For instance, Hebron is so miserable precisely because it's meant to be punitive punishment for a pogrom. Also, by your logic, the Palestinian refugee problem could have been solved by them being given citizenship by their absorbing states, so therefore you must think the fault lies with the likes of Lebanon and Syria. team overhead smash posted:Counter-productive to what? Israel's slow ethnic cleansing of them? There is a massive international consensus that Israel needs to return to the the pre-1967 borders (with mutal land swaps, blahblahblahblah) and this constrains Israelis actions to a large degree. It would be foolish to get rid of that by going "actually, I guess we don't need human rights or anything, feel free to take all our land". Let's distinguish from the PA and the broader anti-Zionist movement here. If you want to argue that BDS or Electronic Intifada are radical, armchair, non-representative groups I would agree with you. They argue for a maximalist position where any attempts at peacemaking are "collaborationist." My criticism is of those groups, and not genuine advocates for human rights like Odeh. Kim Jong Il fucked around with this message at 05:04 on Jun 5, 2016 |
# ? Jun 5, 2016 04:51 |
|
Dead Reckoning posted:I guess that's technically correct, but I think a rational person can look at the situation and say that the Palestinians' irredentist demands for a return to the status quo anti bellum are counter-productive and unrealistic. "How dare those Palestinians object to our slow confiscation of their land and segregation/ethnic cleansing!"
|
# ? Jun 5, 2016 04:56 |
|
Friendly Factory posted:Is this a thing outside Canada? I can't say I've ever heard anyone ever say this. It's not uncommon. Think of the recent controversy over the Labour MP sharing an antisemitic meme on Facebook, or Helen Thomas getting in trouble for something similar a number of years ago. And those are only explicit instances, extreme anti-Zionist rhetoric occasionally implies with differing degrees of subtlety that Jews are an alien presence in Israel and it would be desirable if they were relocated. quote:The only things I hear about Israel in this country are people saying Israel does bad things and the people who call the first group Nazis. This is, of course, a wildly unrealistic and hyperbolic representation of the state of discussion.
|
# ? Jun 5, 2016 08:45 |
|
TIC, to where do you personally believe Palestinians should be relocated, given that they are apparently not native to Palestine?
|
# ? Jun 5, 2016 09:30 |
|
Kajeesus posted:TIC, to where do you personally believe Palestinians should be relocated, given that they are apparently not native to Palestine? Not sure where on earth you're getting that, I don't think the Palestinians should go anywhere, they have a right to a state of their own. Just like Israelis have a right to a state of their own, and not be ethnically cleansed.
|
# ? Jun 5, 2016 10:23 |
|
Kim Jong Il posted:Thanks for the paragraphs about how refugees don't deserve any sympathy. Those opinions aren't inherently racist in the sense that they're primarily motivated out of revenge, unless you also consider a good chunk of Palestinian anti-Zionism to be racist as well. The ideas are garbage, but they hold validity in the sense that they come from real emotional pain. What you are explaining is, in your own words, is why "They in many cases have a direct grudge and animus against Arabs and/or Muslims." Hating and blaming an entire race/religion for the actions of a small minority which screwed over you/your parents/grandparents is, pretty much by definition, blatant racism. I have little doubt that if someone explained why hating all Jews over the actions of the Israeli government ministers is a legitimate position that zionists should try and understand you would be up in arms, making this a clear double standard. Why are you defending racism against arabs and muslims? quote:That's a thorny piece. There's a lot of talk about how Arafat was self contradictory on the point, but clearly it's a precondition for any peace deal. He accepted this at certain points but ultimately rejected it, and then went back and forth a few times like when in 2002 or so he asked to sign the deal when Sharon was shelling camps. I think you're giving far too generous a reading. If you read comments by the Saudis and other governments, they're clearly at least catering to an audience back home with a very different interpretation. Nope. No official details of Arafats peace discussions summit have been released, but two separate journalists released books after speaking to the people on both sides of negotiations which got praise from the Israeli and Palestinian sides for their accuracy. Clayton E Swisher's The Truth About Camp David states: "...Arafat has been willing to accept a limited right of return, in all liklihood within the symbolic strictures of "family reunification" entertained at Stockholm, so long as the Palestinians received recognition of that right and a viable state with palestinian sovereignty over East Jerusalem and the Haram al-Sharif/Temple Mount. With those compromises in hand, Arafat would be in a strengthened position to go to the Al Aqsa Mosque and address the entire Palestinian disaspora: "There is no reason to go live in Israel now. Come home and help us build the state we have!"(56)" (page 282) Meanwhile Charles Enderlin's Shattered Dreams: The failure of the peace process in the middle east, 1995 - 2002 states: "Never, despite the claims of certain Jewish organisations, did the Palestinian negotiators demand the return to Israel of 3,000,000 refugees. The figures discussed in the course of the talks varied from several hundred to several thousand Palestinians to be allowed to return with Israel's authorisation" (Page 324) It isn't thorny at all. Palestinians have already shown their willingness to compromise on returning refugees in the interests of ending the conflict and the Arab Peace Plan does not give any specific numbers for returning refugees and is specifically worded to allow a lot of wiggle room. The rationale you gave is simply incorrect. quote:The flaw in what you're saying is that the ethnic cleansing of Mizrahim in fact has a direct causal link to the poor treatment of Palestinian refugees you cite. For instance, Hebron is so miserable precisely because it's meant to be punitive punishment for a pogrom. Also, by your logic, the Palestinian refugee problem could have been solved by them being given citizenship by their absorbing states, so therefore you must think the fault lies with the likes of Lebanon and Syria. That's completely irrelevant to what I was saying in the part of the post I quoted. The part you quoted was in response to you stating "What you're advocating is also wildly unjust. It's simply unfair to elevate one group's suffering arbitrarily over another's." The issue is how we would want the refugee solution to be resolved and whether it is fair to treat the two groups of refugees differently, not what the cause is for the abuses the refugees suffer. Also as explained, although you didn't quote that bit, this would be a very weak causal link if it exists at all. Ben-Gurion was already planning to ethnically cleanse and oppress the Palestinians before the parition vote happened. The direction of the conflict was set before the expulsions happened. quote:Let's distinguish from the PA and the broader anti-Zionist movement here. If you want to argue that BDS or Electronic Intifada are radical, armchair, non-representative groups I would agree with you. They argue for a maximalist position where any attempts at peacemaking are "collaborationist." My criticism is of those groups, and not genuine advocates for human rights like Odeh. Sites like Electronic Intifada don't say that any attempt at peacemaking is collaborationist though. They claim that the PA is a collaborationist organisation, but in that they've got a fair point seeing as as it literally collaborates with Israel and seems to helps maintain the status quo of an occupation, no Palestinian state and a long-term simmering conflict. Jewish Academics who dislike BDS, like Norman Finkelstein, also describe the PA as collaborationist. This is not some radical maximalist position, but rather a specific claim against the actual policies of one organisation (and not peacemaking at all) which happen to be a fair analysis of that organisations actual policies.
|
# ? Jun 5, 2016 10:54 |
|
Kim Jong Il posted:That's not what's being debated. I've argued there's a close analogy to the treatment of Palestinians and Mizrahim, and to be consistent, they're either both ethnic cleansing or neither are. You're wrong, though. There's a massive difference between the expulsion of a minority population by military force, and voluntary emigration to a national home which promises a better social and economic standing, subsidies, and also pays their way. Some Mizrahi migrations were the result of ethnic cleansing, but many more weren't. (Why, it's almost as if lumping together the experiences of the Jewish populations in over 20 different countries over the course of more than four decades is dumb)
|
# ? Jun 5, 2016 15:18 |
|
The Insect Court posted:This is, of course, a wildly unrealistic and hyperbolic representation of the state of discussion. It's really not, the average whoever hears anti-israel/zionist talk and pretty immediately flies to branding anti-semite. Yardbomb fucked around with this message at 15:43 on Jun 5, 2016 |
# ? Jun 5, 2016 15:37 |
|
That's nice, now the Palestinians are "irredentist." Not wanting your land to be slowly absorbed, and your people dispersed and their identity not even acknowledged, is irredentist. e: presumably the Nez Perce were irredentist for not running away fast enough.
|
# ? Jun 5, 2016 15:38 |
|
Main Paineframe posted:You're wrong, though. There's a massive difference between the expulsion of a minority population by military force, and voluntary emigration to a national home which promises a better social and economic standing, subsidies, and also pays their way. Some Mizrahi migrations were the result of ethnic cleansing, but many more weren't. (Why, it's almost as if lumping together the experiences of the Jewish populations in over 20 different countries over the course of more than four decades is dumb) You're deliberately obfuscating. 100% of the Palestinian refugees did not leave their homes involuntarily. You're intentionally maximizing Palestinian suffering and minimalizing Mizrahi suffering to suit your rhetoric. SedanChair posted:That's nice, now the Palestinians are "irredentist." Not wanting your land to be slowly absorbed, and your people dispersed and their identity not even acknowledged, is irredentist. Not all, just the pro-ethnic cleansing BDS movement and similar radical groups not supported by mainstream Palestinian organizations.
|
# ? Jun 5, 2016 19:42 |
|
Kim Jong Il posted:Not all, just the pro-ethnic cleansing BDS movement and similar radical groups not supported by mainstream Palestinian organizations. This is indeed a grave threat, given the Palestinian's large standing army, sophisticated weapons industry, unfailing support of the world's superpower and nuclear arsenal.
|
# ? Jun 5, 2016 19:58 |
|
The Insect Court posted:It's not uncommon. Think of the recent controversy over the Labour MP sharing an antisemitic meme on Facebook, or Helen Thomas getting in trouble for something similar a number of years ago. And those are only explicit instances, extreme anti-Zionist rhetoric occasionally implies with differing degrees of subtlety that Jews are an alien presence in Israel and it would be desirable if they were relocated. The antisemitic meme in question: Your argument doesn't even have anything to do with the actual picture. Ply your poo poo somewhere else.
|
# ? Jun 5, 2016 20:06 |
|
Kim Jong Il posted:Not all, just the pro-ethnic cleansing BDS movement and similar radical groups not supported by mainstream Palestinian organizations. A cursory google revealed this https://bdsmovement.net/2013/al-haq-substantial-grounds-holding-italian-firm-pizzarotti-responsible-war-crimes-11197 Al-Haq is about as mainstream as they come when it comes to palestinian NGOs and their record of defending terrorism and organizing direct violent action against Israeli settlers is so well documented. Kim Jong Il posted:100% of the Palestinian refugees did not leave their homes involuntarily. Kim Jong Il posted:You're deliberately obfuscating. Ultramega fucked around with this message at 20:20 on Jun 5, 2016 |
# ? Jun 5, 2016 20:18 |
|
Kim Jong Il posted:You're deliberately obfuscating. 100% of the Palestinian refugees did not leave their homes involuntarily. You're intentionally maximizing Palestinian suffering and minimalizing Mizrahi suffering to suit your rhetoric. People who willingly and voluntarily choose to permanently leave their countries, with no expectation of ever coming back, typically aren't refugees and usually aren't interested in a right of return. Not too many Palestinians fall under that definition, though plenty of Mizrahi do!
|
# ? Jun 5, 2016 21:30 |
|
Ultramega posted:The antisemitic meme in question If you don't think a "joke" about ethnically cleansing Israeli Jews doesn't qualify, I don't know what conceivably could. Would you consider a sincere call to relocate them to the US antisemitic, at least? quote:Your argument doesn't even have anything to do with the actual picture. Ply your poo poo somewhere else. My argument was that anti-Zionists sometimes made comments that amounted to "send 'em back to Europe and America" and I posted two examples of exactly that. Main Paineframe posted:People who willingly and voluntarily choose to permanently leave their countries, with no expectation of ever coming back, typically aren't refugees and usually aren't interested in a right of return. Not too many Palestinians fall under that definition, though plenty of Mizrahi do! This is an utterly ignorant misrepresentation about the circumstances under which Mizrahi Jews emigrated to Israel. Did you miss the earlier post made about pogroms in Iraq? Wikipedia posted:In 1948, the country was placed under martial law, and the penalties for Zionism were increased. Courts martial were used to intimidate wealthy Jews, Jews were again dismissed from civil service, quotas were placed on university positions, Jewish businesses were boycotted (E. Black, p. 347) and Shafiq Ades (one of the most important anti-Zionist Jewish businessmen in the country) was arrested and publicly hanged for allegedly selling goods to Israel, shocking the community (Tripp, 123). A very cursory summary. Suggesting that Mizrahi merely 'voluntarily' chose to leave their home countries is as tendentiously wrong as the far right narrative that Palestinians fleeing in '48 were doing so willingly and at the urging of Arab governments.
|
# ? Jun 5, 2016 22:38 |
|
I can't believe the kind of vile imperialism this map represents. How could the Canadians be so racist and hateful???
|
# ? Jun 5, 2016 22:41 |
|
post
Friendly Factory fucked around with this message at 07:35 on Jun 4, 2018 |
# ? Jun 5, 2016 23:34 |
|
Kim Jong Il posted:You're deliberately obfuscating. 100% of the Palestinian refugees did not leave their homes involuntarily. You're intentionally maximizing Palestinian suffering and minimalizing Mizrahi suffering to suit your rhetoric. Wait, are you saying that removing the illegal Israeli settlers from the West Bank is tantamount to ethnic cleansing? Are you advocating for a one-state solution?
|
# ? Jun 6, 2016 00:19 |
|
Cugel the Clever posted:Wait, are you saying that removing the illegal Israeli settlers from the West Bank is tantamount to ethnic cleansing? Are you advocating for a one-state solution? This is his schtick. Anything short of the most retrograde ultra- conservative position is genocidal. It's the international relations version of "You're oppressing me by not letting me discriminate against gay people"
|
# ? Jun 6, 2016 00:28 |
|
Main Paineframe posted:You're wrong, though. There's a massive difference between the expulsion of a minority population by military force, and voluntary emigration to a national home which promises a better social and economic standing, subsidies, and also pays their way. Some Mizrahi migrations were the result of ethnic cleansing, but many more weren't. (Why, it's almost as if lumping together the experiences of the Jewish populations in over 20 different countries over the course of more than four decades is dumb) Gee I wonder why Jewish persons would be quick to leave a country where it looks like they are about to be targeted. Seriously? "Well they didn't wait to be actually be ethnically cleansed/ murdered, therefor..." Come on, you're probably smarter than this. The Insect Court posted:This is an utterly ignorant misrepresentation about the circumstances under which Mizrahi Jews emigrated to Israel. Did you miss the earlier post made about pogroms in Iraq? It would be like saying any early Jewish refugees from Germany who saw the writing on the wall should have been turned around (in fact many were) because technically it wasn't ethnic cleansing / genocide until year blah blah. Main Paineframe posted:People who willingly and voluntarily choose to permanently leave their countries, with no expectation of ever coming back, typically aren't refugees and usually aren't interested in a right of return. Not too many Palestinians fall under that definition, though plenty of Mizrahi do! By this logic any syrian refugee who wasn't directly targeted isn't technically a refugee. That seems disgusting but maybe I'm wrong? I have to imagine you know drat well why Jewish people left those countries and you are just being intellectually dishonest.
|
# ? Jun 6, 2016 01:12 |
|
You know she got that from Norman Finkelstein's website, right? And he put it there cause someone sent it to him and he thought it was hilarious.
|
# ? Jun 6, 2016 03:02 |
|
The Insect Court posted:This is an utterly ignorant misrepresentation about the circumstances under which Mizrahi Jews emigrated to Israel. Did you miss the earlier post made about pogroms in Iraq? Hey, I can quote Wikipedia too. quote:Iraqi-born Ran Cohen, a former member of the Knesset, said: "I have this to say: I am not a refugee. I came at the behest of Zionism, due to the pull that this land exerts, and due to the idea of redemption. Nobody is going to define me as a refugee." Yemeni-born Yisrael Yeshayahu, former Knesset speaker, Labor Party, stated: "We are not refugees. [Some of us] came to this country before the state was born. We had messianic aspirations." And Iraqi-born Shlomo Hillel, also a former speaker of the Knesset, Labor Party, claimed: "I do not regard the departure of Jews from Arab lands as that of refugees. They came here because they wanted to, as Zionists."[16]
|
# ? Jun 6, 2016 03:03 |
|
Platonicsolid posted:"You're oppressing me by not letting me discriminate against gay people" Reminiscent of Muslims who cry "Islamophobia" when you criticize the shockingly high levels of homophobia within so many Muslim populations (including Palestine).
|
# ? Jun 6, 2016 07:51 |
|
Main Paineframe posted:Hey, I can quote Wikipedia too. Yes, I can see you quoting a number of left and New Historian scholars expressing a particular perspective on Jewish emigration from Arab countries to Israel. I can also see you moving the goalposts. You're quoting sources that object to equating Palestinian refugees from Mandatory Palestine in 1948 with the Jewish exodus from countries like Iraq and Yemen and Egypt. But that's not what was being argued. quote:People who willingly and voluntarily choose to permanently leave their countries, with no expectation of ever coming back, typically aren't refugees and usually aren't interested in a right of return. You can't simply deny the historical reality of anti-Jewish violence and discrimination in the 40s and 50s or the role it played in Mizrahi immigration to Israel. Argue that it wasn't a simple historical equivalent to the expulsion of Palestinians if you like(although I don't know who you'd be arguing that against since I wouldn't disagree), but don't pretend it didn't happen by portraying Mizrahi refugees as a bunch of people who just decided all of a sudden they needed a change of scenery. Dabir posted:You know she got that from Norman Finkelstein's website, right? And he put it there cause someone sent it to him and he thought it was hilarious. Yes. Why this is supposed to be a defense, I have no idea. There are a lot of Trump voters and Tea Partiers on Facebook who love to share racist or homophobic memes that they seem to think are hilarious and 'un-PC' as well, what's your point?
|
# ? Jun 6, 2016 10:11 |
|
Ugh. Well, so this might a lot less interesting and fun than obsessing over the mizrahi exodus, again, but Bibi Netanyahu might be going down. YHWH willing he might be GOING TO PRISON. This is still a long way away but he admitted to having received one million euros from french fraudster Arnaud Mimran, only two weeks ago when faced with this accusation he claimed it was a bold faced lie, now he's claiming he received that money as a private citizen (huh?) and used it for Hasbara purposes (what? why?). http://www.timesofisrael.com/probe-ordered-into-pm-over-donation-by-accused-french-fraudster/ Reminder that Olmert got impeached and is now serving a prison sentence for receiving a 60k USD bribe. Another important reminder: Bibi has taken precautions and has installed his own lackies in important positions of power which might allow him to avoid the accusations. Meanwhile Sarah Netanyahu's trial concerning allegations of using public funds for private expenses and being abusive towards state employees is still on going, so to celebrate that occasion I present to you this photoshop I made of Sarah as Nero eating pistachio ice cream with Rome burning in the background.
|
# ? Jun 6, 2016 10:11 |
|
Secular Humanist posted:Reminiscent of Muslims who cry "Islamophobia" when you criticize the shockingly high levels of homophobia within so many Muslim populations (including Palestine). As someone who often complains about homophobia in Muslim countries, I have yet to be called Islamophobe by anyone. When does this happen?
|
# ? Jun 6, 2016 10:20 |
|
Secular Humanist posted:Reminiscent of Muslims who cry "Islamophobia" when you criticize the shockingly high levels of homophobia within so many Muslim populations (including Palestine). Those awful Palestinians and their homophobia! They deserve to be enlightened, with liberal application of the illuminating agent that is white phosphorus. That'll teach them to be progressive!
|
# ? Jun 6, 2016 11:41 |
|
Svartvit posted:As someone who often complains about homophobia in Muslim countries, I have yet to be called Islamophobe by anyone. When does this happen? It happens to new athiests like Dick Dawkins who are in fact Islamaphobic, but like to pretend that accusations of Islamaphobia are just PC culture gone mad.
|
# ? Jun 6, 2016 14:49 |
|
Can you guys just point out that Mizrahi history, regardless of your view of it, isn't any more of an excuse for apartheid and colonialism then Palestinian history is for terrorism and just let it go. Israeli supporters slink away pretty fast when you point that out because they don't have a defense to that (because that would require them to acknowledge things that are happening as opposed to things that have happened) TIC and others actually never reply to those posts so there you go, a way to eliminate the useless noise from the thread with one reply, and we can get back to the actually informative posts from people who live there
DarkCrawler fucked around with this message at 15:02 on Jun 6, 2016 |
# ? Jun 6, 2016 14:57 |
|
The Insect Court posted:Yes, I can see you quoting a number of left and New Historian scholars expressing a particular perspective on Jewish emigration from Arab countries to Israel. I can also see you moving the goalposts. You're quoting sources that object to equating Palestinian refugees from Mandatory Palestine in 1948 with the Jewish exodus from countries like Iraq and Yemen and Egypt. But that's not what was being argued. Then I guess you're blind, because what I actually quoted was a number of Mizrahi who personally emigrated from Arab countries to Israel and openly deny that they came to Israel unwillingly or as refugees. The fact that you're describing the Jewish exodus from Yemen as a refugee situation just demonstrates that you have no idea what you're talking about beyond Wikipedia summaries and canned talking points, and I don't have the time to give you detailed write-ups on twenty different countries and explain which ones were ethnic cleansing and which ones weren't. As shocking as it may be, Ashkenazi Jews weren't the only devotees of Zionism. Many Mizrahi were also believers in the Jewish state and eager to travel there, particularly once it was established. Israel also held the attraction of a new life, giving often-poor Mizrahi Jews hope that they could find prosperity there - especially since in many cases, Israel was not only guaranteeing acceptance to Jews but also paying their way and supporting them on arrival. There was also the general instability of the Arab world - waves of Jewish emigration to Israel in many countries tended to coincide with military coups, civil wars, and other times of internal instability. TROIKA CURES GREEK posted:Gee I wonder why Jewish persons would be quick to leave a country where it looks like they are about to be targeted. Seriously? "Well they didn't wait to be actually be ethnically cleansed/ murdered, therefor..." Come on, you're probably smarter than this. It would be like saying any early Jewish refugees from Germany who saw the writing on the wall should have been turned around (in fact many were) because technically it wasn't ethnic cleansing / genocide until year blah blah. Without a crystal ball, it's fairly hard to define "refugee" based on what happens in the future. Without that future knowledge, your definition here boils down to "anyone who experiences significant racism and then moves to a different country is a refugee and victim of ethnic cleansing", and that seems overly broad given that racism is fairly widespread in the world. Is Ahmed Mohamed a refugee and victim of ethnic cleansing because his family moved to Qatar due to racial profiling and Islamophobia? Do you? The "Jewish Nakba", as some call it, encompasses the Jewish populations of over twenty countries over the course of nearly a hundred years. Mass emigration of Yemenite Jews to Palestine starts in 1888, and many definitions stretch the so-called exodus out to at least 1979 in order to include Iran. Anyone who says that all (or even most) of those Jews left all (or even most) of those countries for the exact same reason is, quite frankly, full of poo poo. Some countries did engage in clear ethnic cleansing of their Jewish populations, but others didn't. Some Jews left fleeing violence and persecution, some left seeking economic opportunity, some were caught up in nationalist fervor and came for the sake of Zionism, some fled civil wars or other economic instability, and some feared crackdowns after Israel was caught recruiting local Jews to commit terror attacks. Anyone who talks about any one of those things as an absolute shared experience between all Mizrahi is full of poo poo, because the Mizrahi are a massive and diverse population with a vast variety of experiences and origins, and anyone who knows what they're talking about will refer to specifics. The only truly shared experience between all Mizrahi is the time they spent in Israel, and the racism and incompetence they found there. And even then, no one refers to the Yemenite Children Affair as the "Mizrahi Children Affair".
|
# ? Jun 6, 2016 15:08 |
|
The Insect Court posted:If you don't think a "joke" about ethnically cleansing Israeli Jews doesn't qualify, I don't know what conceivably could. Would you consider a sincere call to relocate them to the US antisemitic, at least? Why do you have such a stick up your rear end about all of this? What's more illustrative of current trends? The fact that hardons like you literally, cannot take a joke about The Jewish State™ and your and KJI's axiomatic position of "anti-israeli sentiment is de facto anti-semitism" comes off in ways you might not intend. I'm not trying to backpedal in any way by constantly bringing up the fact that the image you're crying about was a tongue-in-cheek joke, but can you at least not treat it like she posted a picture of a heap of dead holocaust victims with party hats photoshopped on them or something actually worth being outraged about? OH also, Emmanresu Tnuocca love that pic plus I hope bibi gets locked up.
|
# ? Jun 6, 2016 17:25 |
|
emanresu tnuocca posted:Meanwhile Sarah Netanyahu's trial concerning allegations of using public funds for private expenses and being abusive towards state employees is still on going, so to celebrate that occasion I present to you this photoshop I made of Sarah as Nero eating pistachio ice cream with Rome burning in the background. Ahem: quote:Pistachio, it was revealed by the proprietors of a gourmet ice cream parlor a couple of blocks from the premier’s official residence, is his favorite (presumably not made with an Iranian variety of the nut). Mrs. Netanyahu, they said, appears to prefer French vanilla. Fix it, please.
|
# ? Jun 6, 2016 18:23 |
|
Ultramega posted:Why do you have such a stick up your rear end about all of this? What's more illustrative of current trends? The fact that hardons like you literally, cannot take a joke about The Jewish State™ and your and KJI's axiomatic position of "anti-israeli sentiment is de facto anti-semitism" comes off in ways you might not intend. I'm not trying to backpedal in any way by constantly bringing up the fact that the image you're crying about was a tongue-in-cheek joke, but can you at least not treat it like she posted a picture of a heap of dead holocaust victims with party hats photoshopped on them or something actually worth being outraged about? You want the Jewish head of the Jewish State locked up? Are you perhaps related to Hitler?
|
# ? Jun 6, 2016 20:05 |
|
|
# ? Jun 5, 2024 03:48 |
|
The Jewish exodus from Iran is a particularly interesting little counterfactual to ponder, because a big part of the Iranian government's official position on the remaining Iranian Jews is "of course they're loyal Iranians, all the disloyal Zionist-inclined Jews left to join the colonial state. " It's easy to imagine a timeline where a significantly smaller proportion of Iranian Jews left around the Revolution and the far-right hardliners had an easier time stirring up the usual bullshit (including literal blood libel, which got tossed around a bit under Ahmadinejad by some of his looney-tunesest supporters).
|
# ? Jun 6, 2016 23:59 |