Jews of the Middle East

[sinjinsmythe]

<sub>I will stick with Jesus and pray for the Jews (and the Palestinians). Will you do the same?

Christian</sub>


I think this is a great idea.  Instead of arguing and going nowhere and calling each other names, as this thread seems to be , perhaps it would be better use of everyone's time if they prayed for peace in the Middle East and for the salvation of everyone involved in this endless insanity.

[Christian]

Sinjinsmythe,

Amen and amen, brother.

[Jennifer]

The difference between one situation and the other is that Palestinians are a people who can individually prove their claims to specific pieces of property.  Some still have the keys to their houses.

I'm sure there are plenty of people expelled from their homes for one reason or the other who have proof of their claims.  

with regards to the Indians, you are looking at the matter from a purely collectivist standpoint

Actually there are some Indian nations who have very good claims to pieces of land such as treaties with the US government.  There are currently some lawsuits pending although I'm sure nothing will come of it.  There are also some Mexican Americans who have proof that they owned land that was stolen from their families in Texas in the 19th century.  

But you see, neither did we want them.  Unfortunately, Arabic revolts in the early half of the century weren't enough to convince our British rulers that we were not very pleased with the handing over of our territorial property to aliens.

Regardless of whether you wanted them or not the Jews who settled in Israel survived and had they remained in Europe they would have died.  

There is no matter of precedence or order involved when wrongs are committed, regardless of where and when they happen.  Wherever a wrong is committed, the Christian is to find sorrow in its happening and joy in its just resolution.  

So how can a Christian be offended by only one case of injustice?  The world is full of injustice and fixing one instance without fixing the others just causes more injustice.  

And for the millionth time, enough with these useless comparisons between the plights of Jews and Palestinians.

You can't discuss one without the other.  There would be Palestinian problem had there not been the holocaust.  Had the nations of Europe welcomed the Jewish survivors back after the war there would be no modern state of Israel.  North America would still belong to the Native Americans had problems in Europe not led to the migration of Europeans to North America.  15 million Germans would not have been expelled from Hungary and Poland after WWII had Hitler not attacked Poland.  

after all it was the UN that created the partition when the establishment of Israel was wrong to begin with).  This is their fight and it revolves around nothing other than their own situation.

I can agree that it was wrong for the UN to create the partition.  I've done some reading on the secular zionists recently and they're impossible to defend.  I've read many Jewish objections to zionism and they're very convincing.  For example I've just read about Buber's objection to zionism.  But I can't forget that Buber, despite his objections to zionism, emigrated to Israel during the 1930's to save his life.  Regardless of whether the creation of the state of Israel was wrong (and it probably was) six million Jews now live there and their existence has to be addressed.  To make another analogy, the war against Mexico was a war of conquest as Remie correctly pointed out but we can't address the injustice against Mexicans without addressing the fact of millions of Americans now living in the conquered territories.  

But what we are arguing about here is the Palestinians and their legitimate resistance and struggle for liberation.  

They have a legitimate right to resist but that does not excuse the murder of innocents.  

And which Indian descendant?  This is the problem that makes rectifying this long past but grievous injustice difficult.  The native Indians didn't even have a notion of property rights.

There are tribes with very good claims to land stolen from them.  Also individual property ownership was forced on the Native Americans so many Indians were property owners and despite that their land was stolen.  For example, the central part of Oklahoma was taken from what is known as the Five Civilized Tribes (five tribes expelled from southern states in early 19th century) as punishment for their support of the Confederacy.  Members of these tribes owned land individually.  Descendents of the landowners often have proof that of the ownership.  

If a divorced wife, Sue, uses trickery to manipulate a corrupt court system into stealing away her infant from his father, stripping him of any custodial and visitation rights, with Bob correctly realizing that "things aren't made fair for him", does that give him the right to kidnap, say, Jennifer's infant and furthermore argue in protest that it is morally impermissible that Jennifer claim her baby back because it would be at Bob's expense, who if he loses his ill gotten gain, will find himself once again in his initial predicament, without a child and with "things still not being made fair for him".

My grandmother was stolen from her Native American mother by a white couple.  My great-grandmother was wronged but would it have been morally right to have returned my grandmother at the age of 10 to her mother?  

A theft cannot justify another theft.

But as time goes by innocent people would suffer the consequences and why is it to fair to punish them for the thefts of others?  For example, why should my grandmother have been 'punished' by losing the only home she ever knew to punish the woman who certainly was wrong is 'kidnapping' her and to compensate my great-grandmother who was wronged?  Most Israelis were not alive in 1948.  If homes are returned to the Palestinians, then where will they go?  Giving the land back will just create another injustice.  

[Aklie Semaet]

A Christian position on Palestinian liberation by H.H. Pope Shenouda III and the Greek Orthodox Patriarch of Jerusalem.

http://metimes.com/2K/issue200047/eg/pope_shenouda_iii.htm

[theodore]

A theft cannot justify another theft.

But as time goes by innocent people would suffer the consequences and why is it to fair to punish them for the thefts of others?  For example, why should my grandmother have been 'punished' by losing the only home she ever knew to punish the woman who certainly was wrong is 'kidnapping' her and to compensate my great-grandmother who was wronged?  Most Israelis were not alive in 1948.  If homes are returned to the Palestinians, then where will they go?  Giving the land back will just create another injustice.  

Jennifer, you make some interesting points.  At some point in time, we have to let by gones be by gones and accept the result of historical injustice.  However, isn't it a bit hypocritical then, for many Jews to be demanding (and getting) restitution from Germans for property seized during WWII, which happened longer ago than the injustices which they perpetrated against the Palestinians?  I mean, the Swiss Banks are paying out billions to the families of holocaust victims who's accounts were abandoned, and many holocaust victims' families have been aggressively going after museums, governments and private collectors to recover expensive artwork which their families had owned.   But when it comes to property which THEY seized more RECENTLY, we should let that pass because too much time has passed?  I don't think so.

Theodore

[Christian]

Theodore,

While I do question this type of reparations and think it is wrongheaded - it is only hypocritical if you take as fact the idea that Palestinians have suffered equivalent injustice. The Bible teaches that God sets up leaders and we are to be obedient to them (as far as is reasonable). Like it or not Israel is a Country and the Palestinians are under their God given rule. And it can be argued that the war-mongering and rebellion of the Palestinian Muslims is what caused them to be dealt with. They paid a price for lawless rebellion that is no more unjust than telling your child that if you disobey again you will lose privileges and then following through. The Palestinians have relentlessly murdered civilians, were warned of the consequences and paid the consequences and continue to do so for rebellion and anarchy. The Jews need to protect themselves and have every right to do so. They have shown incredible restraint considering the threat they face everyday for the crime of not being Muslim.

If some bullies from the next block over were terrorizing your children, smashing your windows and mutilating your pets indiscriminately and you took measures to protect your family and property that inconvenienced the bullies - such is the bullies problem.

The bottom line is you reap what you sow. The Muslims have sown discord and anti-Semitism in the Holy Land. They raise their children on a diet of lies and hate such as the "Blood Libel" myth and they blow up women and children on a regular basis. How would you respond to these "victims"?

Christian

[Jennifer]

However, isn't it a bit hypocritical then, for many Jews to be demanding (and getting) restitution from Germans for property seized during WWII, which happened longer ago than the injustices which they perpetrated against the Palestinians?  I mean, the Swiss Banks are paying out billions to the families of holocaust victims who's accounts were abandoned, and many holocaust victims' families have been aggressively going after museums, governments and private collectors to recover expensive artwork which their families had owned.   But when it comes to property which THEY seized more RECENTLY, we should let that pass because too much time has passed?  I don't think so.

Individual Jews (some who live in Israel and some who live elsewhere) have sued to have property returned to them.  I doubt seriously that many of these people are living in homes that used to owned by Palestinians.  It's not "the Jews" who stole land from the Palestinians and it's not "the Jews" who are suing museums.  It's individual Jews.  BTW, the Swiss bank accounts were not abandoned.  Survivors were pervented from retrieving the contents of the accounts.  The banks did some fancy accounting to make it seem as if the counts were abandoned but that's not what happened in many cases.  Of course some of the accounts were "abandoned" because the owners all of their family members were killed.  

I'm not that too much time has passed to make this right.  Although of course it's simplistic to be for "justice" and against "oppression" because most wrongs can't be righted either it's been too long or because there's no way to make it right.  Here making it right for the Palestinians would wrong Israelis who didn't participate in the wrong in the first place.  Say for example there's a home in Jerusalem that used to be owned by a Palestian and is now owned by a Jewish family.  We make it right for the Palestinian by giving their home back but we displace the Jewish family.  50% of Israelis are Jews who were expelled from Arab countries so it's very likely that the Jewish family had a home back in Egypt or Iraq that was stolen from them.  We could make it right for the Jewish familyl by returning the Egyptian home to them but we all know that won't happen.  So what will happen is that the Jewish family will be displaced.  Essentially there were two wrongs, the Jewish family lost their home and the Palestinian family lost their home.  If the Palestinian family gets their home back another wrong will occur because the Jewish family will lose their home.  It would only not be wrong if the Jewish family themselves physically stole the home from the Palestinians who is probably not what happened.  So we start with two wrongs and then we fix one of the wrongs (not the other) and cause another wrong so once again we have two wrongs.  

[Yirmiyahu]

This will probably be my last post on this subject.  I just want to give a few final thoughts, and try to cut to what I understand to be the heart of the matter.

In her article, "Zionism and its Impact," Ann Lesch summarizes the fundamental tenets of Zionism, as enumerated at the Paris Peace Conference of February 1919, by Chaim Weizmann, president of the World Zionist Organization:

 1. The movement was seen not only as inherently righteous, but also as meeting an overwhelming need among European Jews.
   2. European culture was superior to indigenous Arab culture; the Zionists could help civilize the East.
   3. External support was needed from a major power; relations with the Arab world were a secondary matter.
   4. Arab nationalism was a legitimate political movement, but Palestinian nationalism was either illegitimate or nonexistent.
   5. Finally, if the Palestinians would not reconcile themselves to Zionism, force majeure, not compromise, was the only feasible response.

In this post, I would like to focus on point #2.

It seems clear to me that at the root of the Zionist defence of the creation of Israel, is the belief that the Jews were spiritually, culturally, and/or racially superior to the Palestinians they displaced.  This is rarely explicitly stated, and in some cases perhaps not even fully consciously believed.  However, this assumption lies at the root of the idea that the Israelis could not have moved to any other place than Palestine.  This belief leads to the idea that Jewish suffering is more significant than the suffering of other peoples, whether Palestinians or Roma or whoever, and that any means necessary to preserve Jewish culture and identity may and will be taken, even if this necessarily leads to the suffering of others.  This view is reflected in a repugnant statement of Rabbi Moshe Levinger, who, commenting the Hebron massacre of 1994, said, "I am sorry for everything that gets killed.  I am not only sorry for dead Arabs.  I am also sorry for dead flies."

The roots of this kind of belief are not hard to discover.  It must be recognized, of course, that the Israelites were in fact the "chosen people" and had a special role in salvation history (though not entirely without parallel, if we are to believe St. Justin Martyr).  At one time, God did in fact give his chosen people a command to drive out those dwelling in the land of Canaan (and "Greater Israel" is a rather larger piece of land than the modern state of Israel).  The Bible, of course, goes on to tell the story of a holy nation which through its disobedience lost its temporal power, and whose true Messiah was rather different from the one they had expeceted.

Dispensationalist Protestants and certain religious Jews believe that the same promises given to Abraham justify Jewish occupation of modern Palestine.  This is where we get statements such as that of Sen. Inhofe: "God appeared to Abraham and said: 'I am giving you this land,' the West Bank. This is not a political battle at all. It is a contest over whether or not the word of God is true."

This, as I began my contribution to the discussion saying, is not the traditional, historical viewpoint of rabbinic Judaism, though even many of the Orthodox have taken up this wholly untraditional concept.  Is also not the traditional Catholic or Orthodox Christian viewpoint, as we are certainly "replacement theologians," though in the former case the concept of "development of doctrine" leaves room for a bit of fudging in this and other regards.  For different reasons, the tradition of Orthodox Judaism and the tradition Orthodox Christianity would each indicate that the divinely granted territorial claims of the ancient Israelites are not applicable to modern Jews as a group.

A second source of the belief in Israeli Jewish superiority over the Palestinians is plain old European ethnocentrism.  According to this view the Palestinians should have welcomed the invaders, who would enlighten them, perhaps gently if they met no resistance, but violently if necessary.  It is a fact that the Palestinians were not a nation state before the arrival of the European Jews, but this is not the real reason they are denied ancestral property and the right to self-determination (and in the 1947 were presented with disingenous offers).  As has been pointed out by others in this thread, many other peoples who were not historically a united national or cultural group have been recognized as a unified people in modern times (the racially, culturally, and religiously diverse Israeli Jews are a prime example).  The real reason that it is considered legitimate to deny the rights of the Palestinians is the simple fact that they are seen as primitive and savage nomads, or backwards village dwellers, just they have been presented by Zionist propagandists.  Forget the fact that the Palestinians, like those of us of a primarily European ancestry, are the heirs of the moral codes of Levantine monotheism and the legal tradition of the Roman Empire; to many a Zionist they are just wogs.

Of course, European Jews believed they must also enlighten the Oriental Jews they brought in to bolster their population.  Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion wrote in 1964 that these Oriental Jews lacked "the most elementary knowledge" and were "without a trace of Jewish or human education."  As Jewish writer Les Levidow notes: "Abba Eban warned that Israel must infuse them 'with an Occidental spirit, rather than allow them to drag us into an unnatural Orientalism'."

Yes, it is true that not even all Israeli Jewish citizens have escaped the effects of the Zionist belief in European Jewish superiority.  Nor have non-Jewish Palestinians who happen to be Israeli citizens escaped the discriminatory policies of the Israeli state.  In many respects, these Israeli Arabs are second class citizens.  Policies tend to be particularly discriminatory when the Likud Party in power, giving the lie to the Israeli insistence that their state is western democracy which protects the opportunities of minorities.

The belief in Jewish superiority is why dead Palestinian children are "collateral damage" and those who kill Israeli children are "terrorists."   This is why Israeli massacres of Palestinian villages are simply the use of "necessary force" but those Palestinian Arabs who bomb buses are "crazed mujahadeen."  This is why I can be called "anti-semitic" for opposing Israeli policies, but I have often heard comments like "We should just nuke all them damned Ay-rabs" from people who are otherwise sensitive and loving individuals (and who don't understand that they are proponents of the "other anti-Semitism").  It is why pointing out that Mossad (Israeli intelligence) probably had at least some advance knowledge of September 11th will in many circles automatically win you the label of "anti-Semite," while on the other hand a Palestinian American friend of mine, on September 11th, was informed of the events that occurred in the following way, in front of a whole university class:

"Didn't you hear?  Some stupid Palestinian blew up the World Trade Center."

As an American citizen, as an Orthodox Christian, I want no part in the sickening enterprise of conquering the Palestinian people.  I do not want my tax money spent to fund Israeli military operations, nor to fund military operations of which the Israeli government is the primary benificiary.

Even our resident Christian Zionist here at www.orthodoxchristianity.net, Jennifer, has admitted that the creation of the state of Israel was "probably wrong," as I believe she put it.  So why force our taxpayers and our soldiers to support injustice?  I don't want any US tax money going to the Palestinian side either.   As Samer has suggested, led the staunch supporters of Palestine or Israel put their money and lives on the line and enlist in the military forces of either side, or at least support them directly from your own pocketbook.

For my part, I will pray, Christian and Sinjin.  I will pray for the health, peace, salvation, and deliverance of all parties involved.  I will pray for God's mercy and his justice.  

And I will speak out against my own government's support of oppressive regimes.  I will support humanitarian and peace organizations which seek safety and health of Israelis and Palestinians.

This has been a good discussion.  I have learned a lot.  My hope is that those who are unfamiliar with these topics will try to learn more, and will prayerfully consider the statements of our own Orthodox and Catholic hierarchs concerning these issues.

[Christian]

I would like to see some evidence of Massacres by the Israeli's. Jenin? That was proven false. But I can point you to at least a dozen masacres by Palestinians this year alone that actually happend. A tempered response to slaughter is not a massacre.

But you are correct. We all should be united in prayer for all sides. So I join with you.

Christian

[theodore]

Theodore,

While I do question this type of reparations and think it is wrongheaded - it is only hypocritical if you take as fact the idea that Palestinians have suffered equivalent injustice. The Bible teaches that God sets up leaders and we are to be obedient to them (as far as is reasonable). Like it or not Israel is a Country and the Palestinians are under there God given rule. And it can be argued that the war-mongering and rebellion of the Palestinian Muslims is what caused them to be dealt with. They paid a price for lawless rebellion that is no more unjust than telling your child that if you disobey again you will lose privileges and then following through. The Palestinians have relentlessly murdered civilians, were warned of the consequences and paid the consequences and continue to do so for rebellion and anarchy. The Jews need to protect themselves and have every right to do so. They have shown incredible restraint considering the threat they face everyday for the crime of not being Muslim.

If some bullies from the next block over were terrorizing your children, smashing your windows and mutilating your pets indiscriminately and you took measures to protect your family and property that inconvenienced the bullies - such is the bullies problem.

The bottom line is you reap what you sow. The Muslims have sown discord and anti-Semitism in the Holy Land. They raise their children on a diet of lies and hate such as the "Blood Libel" myth and the blow up women and children on a regular basis. How would you respond to these "victims"?

Christian

Christian, your logic can lead to many aberrations.  Substitute the words "Black South Africans" for Palestinians, and "White Europeans" for Israel, and you've just written an excellent defense of and justification for Apartheid.  After all those uppity Blacks deserved what they got because they were lawless rebels.  After all, the old South Africa was a country, and the Blacks were under the God given rule of the Whites.

You forget that there is violence and hatred on BOTH sides, and that it essentially started with the brutal seizure of Arab homes and property by colonizing European Jews.  The continued expansion of "settlements" on occupied Arab land continues on the West Bank.  The Israeli government is now reaping what it has sown.  None of the Palestinians I know (quite a few), subscribe to any "Blood Libel" myth, nor do they support those who blow up innocent people.   My parish is a majority Palestinian, and I've heard numerous horror stories from my fellow parishioners about life under Israeli occupation.  The Orthodox Christians of Palestine have suffered greatly under Israeli rule.   There is a cycle of violence perpetuated by evil crazies on both the Palestinian and Israeli side.  Rather than blindly choosing sides, we need to pray for peacemakers on BOTH sides to stop the madness and injustice.

Theodore

[Christian]

Theodore,

South Africa is completely different since the Jews are the ones hated because or their ethnicity. The fact that they are the majority doesn't change the facts. I will leave it at that.

I know (or have known) both Israeli's and Palestian Christians and Muslims. And no doubt the Orthodox Palestinians have suffered. But as a result of their Muslim neighbors actions. But the Orthodox suffer because of the terrorists. The responses are necessary. If you live near Muslims and you look just like them what are you supposed to do if you are an Israeli soldier and rocks are flying from all directions? Calmly ask which kid is Orthodox and which is Muslim. They are in a tough situation but that is always the case in any conflict - innocents suffer. But it is the Muslims who started the uprising and and Hamas contiues to be sheltered by "normal" Palestinians. The uprising is two years old and came after they were offered 98% of everything they demanded. Arafat refused progress, not the Israeli's, so blame him. There was no justification for the uprising other than they did not get all of Israel and "drive the Jews into the sea". It's like saying "those oppressive Israeli's are so mean for not letting us kill them in peace".

There was no country there prior to the partition just a scattered few. It is baloney to say that there was. There was a small number of Jews and Arabs scattered about. They were both offered  their own countries and the local Arabs under pressure from neighboring Muslim countries refused. There was room for everybody who was there. No one was kicked out until they committed acts of war against the new State. The situation was identical in Trans-Jordan (Jordan) so what was different? They were Muslims and not Jews. Those are the facts.

That being said I am not choosing sides. I care about Palestinian children and Jewish children. I am sorry for the Christians being exploited and brainwashed by Arafat who only allows them Palestinian media. So they don't know what is really happening outside of their villages. They just think Israeli tanks roll in to flex their muscles for no good reason having no idea that a bus load of Jewish kids was blown up the day before by a terrorist from their village. For this I am deeply saddened. But this is what really happens. I just happen to think the Israeli's have a right to defend themselves.

I think the peacemakers on the Palestinian side must be Orthodox if there is to be peace (not likely to happen since they are not Muslim). Because those who share a world view with Al-Qaeda (the Muslim Palestinians) have no interest in peace as they have proven that time and time again. Rabin and Barak (even Netayahu) offered major olive branches (land/ half of Jerusalem etc.).

Here is the question everyone should ask themselves: Are we really that eager for another Muslim State? Every single one in existence is an oppressive dictatorship. Why so eager for another? All they have ever done is persecute the Orthodox. Jews have historically always been very kind to Christians after the first century. Be careful what you wish for.

In Peace,

Christian

[Aklie Semaet]

Yirmiyahu,

Thank you so much for your efforts, friend. I know it is frustrating even attempting to debate with people who start off with the chauvinist premise of denying the people hood of the Palestinians and then move on to character assassinations of Arabs in general. I know it is frustrating to be an Orthodox Christian and see a dispensationalist Protestant come into an Orthodox forum and justify racist Zionism with a twisted perversion of the Bible; and advance arguments that even hardened Zionist in Israel are not even trying to argue anymore. You have asked honest and sober questions and people have danced around them with irrelevant analogies. In spite of this frustration I beg that you not leave this forum. You have an interesting perspective and I can tell that we can learn a lot from you on many other, especially more religious oriented questions. Please stay.

Back to the topic. Listen, my fellow true Apostolic Christian, the oppression of the Palestinians is a foregone conclusion for these people. If you refute their arguments they will advance a new one. The bottom line is that in the final analysis Palestinians ain’t getting their land back (from their perspective). A friend who noticed the cyclical methodology of these people as displayed on this thread e-mailed me the following cartoon, please take a second to look at it and reflect what takes place here: http://www.salon.com/comics/tomo/2002/11/18/tomo/index.html


When faced with a situation like this, this is how I consider it. Back in segregation it would be useless for a Black man to argue with a Klansman about the merits of ending segregation, the Klan wanted Black people oppressed and that was it. They didn’t acknowledge their humanity or people hood. In fact, like all oppressors in history including Zionists, they had their own ‘just-so’ once upon a time story of how Black people became oppressed. And of course, as usual, such history (or his-story to be more accurate) completely absolved the modern oppressor from any past wrong doing. At this point action becomes louder than words and it can no longer be about arguing with people who are trying to justify the oppression of others. Now its about what we do; and as you pointed out the most that any American can do is to demand the American government to halt the billions of American tax dollars spent to keep Israel’s military on welfare. We can’t fight the battles for the Palestinians but we can make sure that their oppressor doesn’t have the upper hand because of our money.  

As we know from history, injustice, no matter if it wipes out whole villages and small towns in its attempt to survive, can not stand forever.

As far as the non-comparable Native Americans analogy. The way anyone should evaluate a liberation movement is by looking at what IT is demanding and what IT is saying; both organizations and people on the ground (who may or may not agree with ‘their’ organization). Native Americans (on any significant scale) ARE NOT demanding anyone to step out of their house that was stolen from their ancestors. Even the most radical of Native American political organizations (AIM, American Indian Movement) is simply demanding that treaties be respected and Indian culture, life dignity, and honor be upheld. Some nations have battles with huge corporations and the government over natural resources, I support the Native American side in that struggle. But in areas where there is no claim or struggle, who am I to initiate it or start making demands where the natives are not making the demands?

I know I have singed petitions demanding reparations for Jews, and that is all that I have seen. I know in my town there were no demonstrations at the Polish Embassy demanding a return of stolen Jewish property to Jews so they can move back into their house in Poland; so who am I to go and demand it when they aren’t? If it is not their concern how can it be my concern? If they launch a struggle then they have an ally; but if not then I can not advocate for what they are not.

I can not demand anyone in San Mateo to give up their lands for some Miwok Indian claims primarily because the Miwoks are not demanding that.

The historical dynamics are also different; for Native Americans we are looking at the sad result of a genocide after it already happened. In Palestine we are looking at a genocide as it is happening. I can’t stop what happened in 1790 but I can help to stop what started yesterday and continues today.

The Palestinians are demanding their land back, they are fighting for liberation and that is what we should support. The rules of self-determination dictate that the people decide their destiny, not their well wishers and friends, not their oppressors and for sure not dispensationalist Protestants in America.

Co-signing with your suggested Prayer,

God Bless

[Jennifer]

As far as the non-comparable Native Americans analogy. The way anyone should evaluate a liberation movement is by looking at what IT is demanding and what IT is saying; both organizations and people on the ground (who may or may not agree with ‘their’ organization). Native Americans (on any significant scale) ARE NOT demanding anyone to step out of their house that was stolen from their ancestors. Even the most radical of Native American political organizations (AIM, American Indian Movement) is simply demanding that treaties be respected and Indian culture, life dignity, and honor be upheld. Some nations have battles with huge corporations and the government over natural resources, I support the Native American side in that struggle. But in areas where there is no claim or struggle, who am I to initiate it or start making demands where the natives are not making the demands?

Native Americans are a marginalized people in the US.  They've been reduced to proverty.  They are isolated from the rest of society and plagued with many serious problems.  Just because they don't have a well funded "liberation movement" so college kids can sign petitions and feel better about themselves does not mean that they don't make claims.  The outright theft of the land of Native Americans is well documented.  For example, there was a woman in Oklahoma (whose name escapes me at the moment) who wrote a series of books exposing how major oil companies stole land from Native Americans during the 1920's.  Believe me they make claims and they want their land back and nobody cares.  

I know I have singed petitions demanding reparations for Jews, and that is all that I have seen. I know in my town there were no demonstrations at the Polish Embassy demanding a return of stolen Jewish property to Jews so they can move back into their house in Poland; so who am I to go and demand it when they aren’t? If it is not their concern how can it be my concern? If they launch a struggle then they have an ally; but if not then I can not advocate for what they are not.

Signed some petitions?  Well you've done your part.  Despite what another poster wrote here, there is no serious movement to have property stolen from Jews during the war returned to them.  It would be too catastrophic to European nations that want to pretend that it's not their fault.  Most major German companies used slave labor during the war.  Some Poles and Jews have brought lawsuits against companies like Brayer but nothing significant will come of it because true "justice" would destroy every German company.  Major Japanese companies have the same legacy.  Many wealthy Americans including the Kennedys and the Bushs helped to launder Nazi money during the war.  

[Christian]

Aklie,

You refuse to even acknowledge factual and historical arguments and think that if you accuse someone of being a dispensational protestant (which I am most definately not) that somehow invalidates the facts presented.

If you choose to not look at this objectively and constantly appeal to emotional arguments without even attempting to find the facts (why is that? Hmmm..).

The fact is you are on the side of the radical Muslims in Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Iran, Syria, Yemen and elsewhere who all have state controlled media. That alone should give you pause. Sorry I will agree with the West on this one since we have aaccess to all the facts if one actually cares about the truth.

Your diatribe above is basically saying "I will not be confused with the facts".

Obviously, Jewish lives are cheap. Just remember Jesus was a Jew.

I'm done with this. I hear nonsense spewed. And not even a reasonable attempt at objectivity. This type of hatred and onesidedness does not bode well for Orthodoxy. Christians don't get to pick and choose who we will love and who we will hate. And it is not Christ-like at all.

Christian

[Mor Ephrem]

The fact is you are on the side of the radical Muslims in Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Iran, Syria, Yemen and elsewhere who all have state controlled media. That alone should give you pause. Sorry I will agree with the West on this one since we have aaccess to all the facts if one actually cares about the truth.

We may not have state controlled media in America, but if you seriously think we are getting the whole story from our media on any situation, you are mistaken.  I am sure of this anytime I read one of a number of foreign sources regarding one or the other story and I hear things that aren't spoken of in America.  

I'm done with this. I hear nonsense spewed. And not even a reasonable attempt at objectivity. This type of hatred and onesidedness does not bode well for Orthodoxy. Christians don't get to pick and choose who we will love and who we will hate. And it is not Christ-like at all.

Honestly, I don't see anything here but people talking past each other.  You and those in support of the Israeli position in this matter present your view, with your own facts, and you accuse those in support of the Palestinian position of being in support of radical Muslims, of not being objective, of being hateful and one sided.  But when you (pl.) are presented with the Palestinian side of the story, with its own facts, you ignore these facts or excuse them with something that does not have any relevance to the region, seem awfully onesided yourselves, perhaps hateful of Palestinians and/or their supporters, etc.  In essence, both sides in this conversation are doing what you accuse one side of doing.  Hence, I wonder if the time for this conversation to be locked has come.  

I honestly don't see this going anywhere, and didn't see it going anywhere a couple of pages ago.  If there are those who are interested in this conversation continuing, they may do so, but in a charitable way, and with an effort to understand each other, rather than what has gone on in these four pages.  

Thanks for your participation.

[Tags:]

OrthodoxChristianity.net > Moderated Forums > Free-For-All > Non-Religious Topics (Moderator: Pravoslavbob) > Topic: Jews of the Middle East