jews vs zionists

[ranxer]

i find the arguements of jews vs zionists vs the world thing interesting.. i really must read up on it some more(!).. i don't have enough jewish friends to ask right now.. so.. can anyone tell me if these ten questions are just inflamatory or is there something to this??
from www.jewsnotzionists.org/tenquestions.htm

1.IS IT TRUE that in 1941 and again in 1942, the German Gestapo offered all European Jews transit to Spain, if they would relinquish all their property in Germany and Occupied France; on condition that:
a) none of the deportees travel from Spain to Palestine; and
b) all the deportees be transported from Spain to the USA or British colonies, and there to remain; with entry visas to be arranged by the Jews living there; and
c) $1000.00 ransom for each family to be furnished by the Agency, payable upon the arrival of the family at the Spanish border at the rate of 1000 families daily.

2.IS IT TRUE that the Zionist leaders in Switzerland and Turkey received this offer with the clear understanding that the exclusion of Palestine as a destination for the deportees was based on an agreement between the Gestapo and the Mufti.

3.IS IT TRUE that the answer of the Zionist leaders was negative, with the following comments:
a) ONLY Palestine would be considered as a destination for the deportees.
b) The European Jews must accede to suffering and death greater in measure than the other nations, in order that the victorious allies agree to a "Jewish State" at the end of the war.
c) No ransom will be paid

4.IS IT TRUE that this response to the Gestapo's offer was made with the full knowledge that the alternative to this offer was the gas chamber.

5.IS IT TRUE that in 1944, at the time of the Hungarian deportations, a similar offer was made, whereby all Hungarian Jewry could be saved.

6.IS IT TRUE that the same Zionist hierarchy again refused this offer (after the gas chambers had already taken a toll of millions).

7.IS IT TRUE that during the height of the killings in the war, 270 Members of the British Parliament proposed to evacuate 500,000 Jews from Europe, and resettle them in British colonies, as a part of diplomatic negotiations with Germany.

8.IS IT TRUE that this offer was rejected by the Zionist leaders with the observation "Only to Palestine!"

9.IS IT TRUE that the British government granted visas to 300 rabbis and their families to the Colony of Mauritius, with passage for the evacuees through Turkey. The "Jewish Agency" leaders sabotaged this plan with the observation that the plan was disloyal to Palestine, and the 300 rabbis and their families should be gassed.

10.IS IT TRUE that during the course of the negotiations mentioned above, Chaim Weitzman, the first "Jewish statesman" stated: "The most valuable part of the Jewish nation is already in Palestine, and those Jews living outside Palestine are not too important". Weitzman's cohort, Greenbaum, amplified this statement with the observation "One cow in Palestine is worth more than all the Jews in Europe".

and my own questions from recent reading...
is it true that yahweh banished the jews from the holy land until the return of the messaih? such that if jews say that the promised land is theirs by the word of god they are talking about a future promise, such that that insistance now is sacreligious???!! i.e. jews in isreal by holy right is sacreligious until the messaih?!
secular in isreal fine from what these folks say but being there by right of the word of god that is yet to come how does that work?
i'm learning there is a big difference between a jews and a 'zionists'. and a jew(is that derogetory to say jew?) in isreal vs a jew somewhere else. :/ and I am not antisemitic i'm curious..

then there's the baptists and others that claim to support isreal as a god given right adding to the confusion .. i'd like to understand more about it but havnt done a lot of homework on these issues yet.. ive been putting off having an opinion on isreal for a long time

[The_Rorschach]

I don't generally ascribe to wide range conspiracies, with the exception of the world banking coop -which is not related to the Jews at all, and really amounts to nothing more than a cornered market strategy implimented on a grand scale. For the most part conspiracies simply aren't practical, neither are they statistically probable. I mean, shadow governments? Zionists plots? Stupidity. MK Ultra? Roswell? Ludicrous!

They are fun rabbit trails to run down, but not to be taken seriously.

[UtterParadox]

Ummm... If the Zionist nation kept insisting on Palestine, then why were Jews turned away from it after the Holocaust ended? Or should I not ask that?

And Rorschach, I've read the original Ron Patton "Project Monarch" documents. Quite involving... Granted, I was reading the MSTed version at the time.

[The_Rorschach]

See thats just it though. . .It's always involving, exhaustively so. It holds the same sense of desperation as the scientists who try using impossibly long periods of time to justify how only left handed amino acids managed to group together in large enough numbers to naturally produce DNA. Patton tries to tie everything in the world together from Mystery Babylon to Majestic Twelve by means of six degrees with Kevin Bacon.

I can only wonder what the Widow's son would think of all his ramblings

[KevinTheOmnivore]

Oh boy, you have NO idea the can you just opened buddy.....

EDIT: Is it true that Jews, be them Zionists or not, should make concessions and appease the desires of the mother f'n Gestapo....!?

[KevinTheOmnivore]

Originally Posted by UtterParadox

Ummm... If the Zionist nation kept insisting on Palestine, then why were Jews turned away from it after the Holocaust ended? Or should I not ask that?

That had more to do with the British than Palestine or the Zionist Congress, me thinks. Not certain...

[ranxer]

alright, well ive got lots more research to do before i make any conclusions about these issues..

i get the feeling that zionists are nearly as scary as nazi's but i would like to be wrong, any group that follows the concept of expansion against resistance then brutality on that resistance should be harshly questioned and sanctioned. (including this practice by the US with our corporations)
is it true that isreal is breaking 60 some odd UN resolutions?
and that iraq was only breaking 17 or so? sheesh.

then there's the mussad, yipes!
has anyone heard where the documents that david kelly allegedly committed suicide over came from? the news talks about his statements that the documents were 'sexed' up but they Never talk about by who? or where docs came from.

[Abcdxxxx]

Ranxer -

Jews do not use the term Yahweh. The religion is made up of diverse groups who all practice it in individual ways. There are small groups of Jews, mainly certain sects of the ultra-religious hasidim, that believe the Messiah must arrive before Israel can exist. Then again they also refrain from walking down a flight of stairs unless someone is walking up them at the same time, if you catch my drift.

Zionism is simply a term like nationalism. If a Jew harbors secret ideals to take over the world, he may embrace this brand of nationalism for his cause, but it's not Zionism it's idiocy. Oppression and genocide do not have anything to do with the ideals of the Zionist movement. There were and are Marxist Zionists, Socialist Zionists, Communist Zionists, Peacenik Zionists, Right wing sicko Zionists, and so on. The word Zionist has become a lazy way to refer to Jews, often in a negative tone.

[ranxer]

yea, i was way too general..
i guess i am wondering though, is there is a generality that a zionist would be more supportive of a holy isreal held against all odds and a non-zionist would not? and i mean today, not 50 years ago. is that way off or just too general?

[Abcdxxxx]

Originally Posted by ranxer

a zionist would be more supportive of a holy isreal held against all odds and a non-zionist would not?

What does "a holy israel held against all odds" mean? Would a "non-zionist" be someone who doesn't support a Jewish state? Then yes, Zionists would be more supportive of Israel, holy or not. Where does that leave supporters of Israel that do not consider themselves Zionists?
See, it's just a term. To demonize or label people with it or suggest a hidden meaning surrounding the word isn't a great idea.

Again, the term Zionism is a general term, but people rarely critisize the movement without meaning it to be a dig on a specific target. It would be like saying Activism makes you an anarchist. They're two seperate idealism that are not one in the same. They can have different meanings to different people.

[mburbank]

I have to agree with that.

"Zionism" is a word with a meaning, like "science" and "Liberal" that people with an ax to grind work dilligently to dillute and/or permanently taint.

[ranxer]

k thanks, that's reasonable ..ill be resisting the temptation to bash 'zionists' like fish in a barrel.. its quite a mess over there in isreal, i wish i understood it better.

i don't see anything wrong with a jewish state but a 'holy right' to a jewish state defended by state of the art weaponry cannot be a good thing, isreal is the planets' largest gated community and i don't see how it will ever be left alone where it is.

[Abcdxxxx]

Originally Posted by ranxer

i don't see anything wrong with a jewish state but a 'holy right' to a jewish state defended by state of the art weaponry cannot be a good thing, isreal is the planets' largest gated community and i don't see how it will ever be left alone where it is.

Israel isn't all that religious. Someone declaring their "holy right" is just language. Perhap it's the most passionate and poetic argument you will here from Jews, but it's not the only one.

"State of the art weaponry" is a fact of life in this day and age. Most autonomous nations have a military and hold the right to self defense, regardless of their religious fervor. Israel is no different. To hold it to another standard because it is a Jewish State is biased. It's a nation that relies on military tools on a daily basis, due to it's existance within close proximity to daily attacks from enemies who publicly wish to eradicate the entire population of Israel. Self defense has never been in the name of the Torah, or the "holy rights" of Jews.... just their right as a soveriegn country.