An Eye Opening Look At Israel's Ugly History

a reply to: duesprimusvictorimmortali

Here you go, I did not write this list but it is upheld by the U.S. Department of State:

What is considered Antisemitic:

Identifying Antisemitic Activity


AMCHA Initiative employs the definition of antisemitic activity, “Defining Antisemitism,”adopted by the U.S. Department of State, under the Global Anti-Semitism Review Act of 2004. Included in the definition, and explicitly recognized by the U.S. State Department as forms of antisemitism, are BEHAVIOR, rhetoric or imagery that:

Uses symbols and images Associated with historical antisemitism, by making “mendacious, dehumanizing, demonizing, or stereotypical allegations about Jews as such, or the power of Jews as a collective-especially but not exclusively, the myth about a world Jewish conspiracy or of Jews controlling the media, ECONOMY, governments, or other societal institutions.”

Accuses Jews and Israel of inventing or exaggerating the Holocaust

Demonizes Israel by using “the symbols and images associated with classic antisemitism to characterize Israel or Israelis,” e.g. claims that Israelis are evil or blood-thirsty and deliberately murder children, or Jews control the world

Draws comparisons of Jews to Nazis.

Delegitimizes Israel by suggesting that Israel is an illegitimate state and does not belong in the FAMILY of nations.

Denies the Jewish people their right to self-determination, by denying Israel the right to exist or promoting the elimination of Israel as a Jewish state.

Applies double standards to Israel, “by requiring of it a BEHAVIOR not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation,” eg. by claiming that Israel is the worst human rights violator in the world, while ignoring the countries in the world which have far worse human rights records than Israel.

Condones or expresses support for TERRORISM against Israel or Jews, by calling for, aiding or justifying the killing or harming of Jews.

In addition, AMCHA Initiative has added two categories, which are consistent with U.S. Department of State’s definition of antisemitism, although not explicitly stated within it. These include behavior, rhetoric or imagery that:

Promotes boycott, divestment, sanctions against Israel. Virtually all recent campaigns to boycott, sanction, and divest from Israel (BDS) were established in response to the political call issued by 171 Palestinian NonGovernmental Organizations, July 9, 2005. The first and primary signatory of the Palestinian BDS Call was the Council of National and Islamic Forces in Palestine, which, according to the Anti-Defamation League, was founded by Yasser Arafat at the start of the Second Intifada in 2000 for the purpose of “organizing a unified effort among major Palestinian factions to oppose Israel and coordinate terror attacks.” The Council includes among its constituent organizations Hamas, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) and PFLP –

Pax

AMCHA Initiative

a reply to: buster2010

a reply to: paxnatus

i asked if you knew what semitic meant not what you define as antisemitic.


səˈmitik/
adjective
1.
relating to or denoting a family of languages that includes Hebrew, Arabic, and Aramaic and certain ancient languages such as Phoenician and Akkadian, constituting the main subgroup of the Afro-Asiatic family.
2.
relating to the peoples who speak the Semitic languages, especially Hebrew and Arabic.

do you agree on this definition?

originally posted by: buster2010
Yes because international law said they had to but they still are breaking the law by keeping all the land they stole since 48.

Well you know when you win the war, you.......wait for it...................................WIN


You can use your logic with America and about 100 plus other countries too. The bottom line is France and the Brits created that whole area in 1920, so all these points are moot. BTW, they didn't need to give anything back, and no one would of done a damn thing. The UN is useless, and if we didn't back the UN, and pay for it all, and fight 90% of their fights there would be no UN. It would be hard to fine a border that wasn't created by war, so what is your point, other than you hate Israel...

Personally I care little about that whole area, the whole region is screwed up, and if you really wanted to pick a bad guy it would be Saudi, but that is another debate. I spent 3 years of my life in that region and all the countries are extremist, and Israel happens to be one of them, but at least they are not as bad as the others.....

originally posted by: Quetzalcoatl14


Once one is actually IN A WAR, you can strike various military targets such as missile sites or what have you. It's kinda like if you punch me in the face and start a fight I am allowed to strike you back wherever I choose. The laws on self-defense for nations don't allow the INITIAL attack unilaterally or preemptively.

So, for example, you can't strike the missile/SAM sites of another country or entity unless they have started a conflict with you. Once they have, then you can strike those sites.

originally posted by: MALBOSIA

originally posted by: Quetzalcoatl14

originally posted by: buster2010

originally posted by: hxc408
a reply to: buster2010
I already corrected my mistake in an earlier post. Way to go.

And shut up about the law already, they are a sovereign state.

And you are still wrong. The Israeli's still started that war. They are part of the UN at least they claim this when it benefits them so they are still bound by international law. Just because you are ignorant of the history of that terrorist state you are supporting doesn't mean I have to shut up.

Exactly. UN Charter law applies to all countries. They cannot strike any other country unilaterally or preemptively, but only in response to actually attack. For example, it was illegal under international law for Israel to strike in Syria last year a convoy of suspected weapons that Israel claimed were destined for Lebanon or Israel's enemies. Preemptive strikes are prohibited.

That is right. Look how many Americans died in Vietnam keeping true to that. They knew where the SAMS were. They knew they were being pointed at American forces but they were still not allowed to strike them till they were launched.

The law is the law.

sounds like "you have to pass it to see what's in it" (ok pelosi, i'm not interested in what is in anything you pass)

right, so israel started the war and kicked all their asses. which war again?

they even gave them time to try to get their sht together.

lol.

what was it, 1 on 4? 6?

now what?

north korea says that if that goofy movie is released, it is an act of war.
wouldn't massing arms on someones border, be considered an act of war?

This guy says it right albeit with a lot of F words!

Israhell is killing Palestinians like shooting rats in a barrel.

Zionist Racist Genocide!

a reply to: Hilux1996

lol!!! where'd you get this guy?

what do you think this guy does for a living? burger flipper?

probably does dishes in a pub.

yup, typical palestinian lover.

can't really say israeli hater since he seems to hate everything. lol.

a reply to: tsingtao

What is your problem with burger flippers and dish washers?

originally posted by: duesprimusvictorimmortali

here you go. zionist israel = nazi germany

Many of the Ethiopian immigrants are in fact Jewish (Yes, there are black/African Jews), and some are also illegal immigrants not citizens - not that any of this justifies the policy, it was most definitely wrong and never should have happened. Unfortunately it did happen, but at least Israel has ended this policy...
LINK

So back to my original request:

Please show me where non-Jewish Israeli citizens don't have the same rights as the Jewish Israeli citizens, as my sources say otherwise...

originally posted by: tsingtao
a reply to: Hilux1996

lol!!! where'd you get this guy?

what do you think this guy does for a living? burger flipper?

probably does dishes in a pub.

yup, typical palestinian lover.

can't really say israeli hater since he seems to hate everything. lol.

It's not a case of being a Palestinian lover. What Israel is doing to the Palestinians is a CRIME! It has been since they stole their land through Terrorist tactics and forced the people into the largest Open Air Concentration camp in the world!

As someone said recently:

Israel is a Cancer in the heart of the Middle East!

The media paints Palestine to be the aggressor, whilst Israel is simply 'defending' itself. Here is the reality:

Israel possesses more than 400 nuclear weapons. Enough to wipe the Muslim world 10 times over.

Whilst Palestine is the largest open-air prison in the world. Now, you tell me who the real threat in the Middle East is?

originally posted by: BasementWarriorKryptonite
a reply to: tsingtao

What is your problem with burger flippers and dish washers?

no problem.

a lot get angry and use profanity.

i know, i used to be one.

a reply to: spirited75

your nation is paying for Israel's occupation of Palestine?

All the billions of dollars and free weapons we give them for their "defense" make this so.

You list your address as the seventh circle of hell. How can that be true. Is the place you listed as your address the truth?

I take it you never read Dante's Inferno.

How much does your country pay, how much does it cost for Israel to occupy Palestine on a monthly basis?

How much of that money is personally yours?

Here in America they do not provide you with how much of the tax dollars you pay in is going to what terrorist nation.

You will not be able to truthfully answer any of these questions because you are talking out of your sphincter muscle.

I have answered your questions with no problem. Now will you at least attempt to debate like an adult or do you want to keep talking like a child?

a reply to: Xtrozero

Well you know when you win the war, you.......wait for it...................................WIN

Then why doesn't most of Europe belong to the allied forces after WW2?

The bottom line is France and the Brits created that whole area in 1920, so all these points are moot.

The laws about annexing land didn't start until after WW2.

It would be hard to fine a border that wasn't created by war, so what is your point, other than you hate Israel...

Just pointing out your ignorance of international law.

I spent 3 years of my life in that region and all the countries are extremist, and Israel happens to be one of them, but at least they are not as bad as the others.....

How many of the others are wiping a whole nation off the map?

originally posted by: spirited75
a reply to: buster2010

I had a thread on that a while back maybe you should read it. You may learn something.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

a reply to: CommandoJoe

Please show me where non-Jewish Israeli citizens don't have the same rights as the Jewish Israeli citizens, as my sources say otherwise...

Arab citizens of Israel

Knesset The Mossawa Center — an advocacy organization for Arabs in Israel — blames the Knesset of discrimination against Arabs, citing a 75% increase in discriminatory and racist bills submitted to the Knesset in the year 2009. According to the report, 11 bills deemed by the center to be "discriminatory and racist" were placed on the legislature's table in 2007, while 12 such bills were initiated in 2008. However, in 2009 a full 21 bills deemed discriminatory by the Mossawa Center were discussed in the Knesset. The reports categorizes as "racist" proposals such as giving academic scholarships to soldiers who served in combat units, and a bill to revoke government funding from organizations acting "against the principles of the State". The Coalition Against Racism and the Mossawa Center said that the proposed legislation seeks to de-legitimize Israel's Arab citizens by decreasing their civil rights.

Employment Of the 40 towns in Israel with the highest unemployment rates, 36 are Arab towns. According to the Central Bank of Israel statistics for 2003, salary averages for Arab workers are 29% lower than for Jewish workers. Difficulties in procuring employment have been attributed to a comparatively low level of education vis-a-vis their Jewish counterparts, insufficient employment opportunities in the vicinity of their towns, discrimination by Jewish employers, and competition with foreign workers in fields, such as construction and agriculture. Arab women have a higher unemployment rate in the work force relative to both religious and secular Jewish women. While among Arab men the employment is on par with Jewish men, 17% of Arab women are employed. This puts the Arab employment at 68% of the Israeli average. Druze and Christian Arabs have higher employment than Muslims.

When you are constantly discriminated against you don't have equal rights.

originally posted by: spirited75
a reply to: buster2010

And how much did the U.S. give them to "invest?"

And, again, how much of that was from companies run by those with dual citizenship?

It's still illegal under international law to strike first, fact. There is no getting around this dude. Once anybody says "I can preemptively strike whomever I perceive to be an clear threat," half the countries in the world could begin striking everybody else. Under your logic, and others, people would have the right to strike Israel, the United States, UK, and so on because those countries most definitely pose a clear and present danger. Any ME country could justify attacking the US because it invaded Iraq, Afghanistan, and aided rebels in Syria and Libya.

Israel a year ago struck convoys AND a military depot in Syria. Syria was hardly "massing troops" on Israel's borders. Israel, therefore, was the real threat to Syria, and actually conducted an act of war. Seriously, just based on those air strikes, Syria had the right to fully attack Israel to the hilt, because that is ACTUAL self-defense.

originally posted by: tsingtao

originally posted by: Quetzalcoatl14


Once one is actually IN A WAR, you can strike various military targets such as missile sites or what have you. It's kinda like if you punch me in the face and start a fight I am allowed to strike you back wherever I choose. The laws on self-defense for nations don't allow the INITIAL attack unilaterally or preemptively.

So, for example, you can't strike the missile/SAM sites of another country or entity unless they have started a conflict with you. Once they have, then you can strike those sites.

originally posted by: MALBOSIA

originally posted by: Quetzalcoatl14

originally posted by: buster2010

originally posted by: hxc408
a reply to: buster2010
I already corrected my mistake in an earlier post. Way to go.

And shut up about the law already, they are a sovereign state.

And you are still wrong. The Israeli's still started that war. They are part of the UN at least they claim this when it benefits them so they are still bound by international law. Just because you are ignorant of the history of that terrorist state you are supporting doesn't mean I have to shut up.

Exactly. UN Charter law applies to all countries. They cannot strike any other country unilaterally or preemptively, but only in response to actually attack. For example, it was illegal under international law for Israel to strike in Syria last year a convoy of suspected weapons that Israel claimed were destined for Lebanon or Israel's enemies. Preemptive strikes are prohibited.

That is right. Look how many Americans died in Vietnam keeping true to that. They knew where the SAMS were. They knew they were being pointed at American forces but they were still not allowed to strike them till they were launched.

The law is the law.

sounds like "you have to pass it to see what's in it" (ok pelosi, i'm not interested in what is in anything you pass)

right, so israel started the war and kicked all their asses. which war again?

they even gave them time to try to get their sht together.

lol.

what was it, 1 on 4? 6?

now what?

north korea says that if that goofy movie is released, it is an act of war.
wouldn't massing arms on someones border, be considered an act of war?

Eh you are wrong. Israel is a signatory to the UN Charter. That means it agreed to follow it. And, I believe it signed the Geneva Conventions. These preclude the taking of territory by war, even if you didn't start it.

The UN is partly useless because powerful countries like the US and Israel use logic just like yours and give their finger to international law when it serves them but ask small dictators to follow it when doing so serves the interests of the big powers. It is people and countries like you that are keeping the UN from working.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: buster2010
Yes because international law said they had to but they still are breaking the law by keeping all the land they stole since 48.

Well you know when you win the war, you.......wait for it...................................WIN


You can use your logic with America and about 100 plus other countries too. The bottom line is France and the Brits created that whole area in 1920, so all these points are moot. BTW, they didn't need to give anything back, and no one would of done a damn thing. The UN is useless, and if we didn't back the UN, and pay for it all, and fight 90% of their fights there would be no UN. It would be hard to fine a border that wasn't created by war, so what is your point, other than you hate Israel...

Personally I care little about that whole area, the whole region is screwed up, and if you really wanted to pick a bad guy it would be Saudi, but that is another debate. I spent 3 years of my life in that region and all the countries are extremist, and Israel happens to be one of them, but at least they are not as bad as the others.....

FIrst, there is a anti-semitism extant in the world, just like there is racism or bigotry of other kinds.

Much of this list I would categorize as anti-Semitic too. But seriously, the Anti-Semetic card is pulled too quick and in an often manipulative manner in the face of ANY criticism of the COUNTRY of Israel or it's government actions. Equating criticism of a government or military with bigotry is obviously ridiculous. What is not in that list necessarily anti-Semitism:

1) Applying "double-standards." I agree that Israel is not the worst human violator. However, all people that are politically and socially active should criticize any country violating human rights. I also criticize the United States, my own country, for it's endless wars, torture under Bush, and so on. I guess however then I may not be one who is singling out Israel. Israel has attacked Syria several times recently, one unprovoked. That's illegal. Just calling it like it is. You should be able to

2) The boycott criteria is fallacious as well. Again, if one really believes that a government and military are doing something wrong, then a boycott is a perfectly reasonable personal or collective action to pursue. Remember that many Jews called in the 1930's for a worldwide boycott of Germany, because of Germany's behavior. Your definition attempted to say that double standards are a sign of bias. Well, here is a clear double standard. And OBVIOUSLY one can boycott something or a country without hating or judging all Jews worldwide.

originally posted by: paxnatus
a reply to: duesprimusvictorimmortali

Here you go, I did not write this list but it is upheld by the U.S. Department of State:

What is considered Antisemitic:

Identifying Antisemitic Activity


AMCHA Initiative employs the definition of antisemitic activity, “Defining Antisemitism,”adopted by the U.S. Department of State, under the Global Anti-Semitism Review Act of 2004. Included in the definition, and explicitly recognized by the U.S. State Department as forms of antisemitism, are BEHAVIOR, rhetoric or imagery that:

Uses symbols and images Associated with historical antisemitism, by making “mendacious, dehumanizing, demonizing, or stereotypical allegations about Jews as such, or the power of Jews as a collective-especially but not exclusively, the myth about a world Jewish conspiracy or of Jews controlling the media, ECONOMY, governments, or other societal institutions.”

Accuses Jews and Israel of inventing or exaggerating the Holocaust

Demonizes Israel by using “the symbols and images associated with classic antisemitism to characterize Israel or Israelis,” e.g. claims that Israelis are evil or blood-thirsty and deliberately murder children, or Jews control the world

Draws comparisons of Jews to Nazis.

Delegitimizes Israel by suggesting that Israel is an illegitimate state and does not belong in the FAMILY of nations.

Denies the Jewish people their right to self-determination, by denying Israel the right to exist or promoting the elimination of Israel as a Jewish state.

Applies double standards to Israel, “by requiring of it a BEHAVIOR not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation,” eg. by claiming that Israel is the worst human rights violator in the world, while ignoring the countries in the world which have far worse human rights records than Israel.

Condones or expresses support for TERRORISM against Israel or Jews, by calling for, aiding or justifying the killing or harming of Jews.

In addition, AMCHA Initiative has added two categories, which are consistent with U.S. Department of State’s definition of antisemitism, although not explicitly stated within it. These include behavior, rhetoric or imagery that:

Promotes boycott, divestment, sanctions against Israel. Virtually all recent campaigns to boycott, sanction, and divest from Israel (BDS) were established in response to the political call issued by 171 Palestinian NonGovernmental Organizations, July 9, 2005. The first and primary signatory of the Palestinian BDS Call was the Council of National and Islamic Forces in Palestine, which, according to the Anti-Defamation League, was founded by Yasser Arafat at the start of the Second Intifada in 2000 for the purpose of “organizing a unified effort among major Palestinian factions to oppose Israel and coordinate terror attacks.” The Council includes among its constituent organizations Hamas, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) and PFLP –

Pax

AMCHA Initiative

a reply to: buster2010