On 16 Dec 2025 at 23:05:14 GMT, "Jon Ribbens" <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> >wrote:
On 2025-12-16, Jeff Gaines <jgnewsid@outlook.com> wrote:
"According to these Jews, Zionism and Israel are secular concepts with no >>> basis in Judaism."
https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=2869631306562140
What's your point? It is hardly unheard of for different people
who are nominally members of the same religion to have *wildly*
differing opinions of what that religion teaches.
And doubly so on politics. Quite a good argument against anti-semitic blaming >of Jews in general for Israeli government policy. Or for failing to make a >public statement on the matter.
On 16/12/2025 02:38 pm, s|b wrote:
On Mon, 15 Dec 2025 10:03:56 -0000 (UTC), RJH wrote:
This proposal, or one very like it, has been on the table for some years - >>> it's not just a Trump thing. For example:
https://www.brennancenter.org/media/9268/download
I only read part of it, but this seems to be only about social media.
Nothing about DNA, iris scan, phone numbers, addresses, ...
USA Border control takes a photograph of everyone applying for admission. They
also ask for the USA address at which one will be staying.
In message <mqh01nF3ut9U1@mid.individual.net>, at 00:26:30 on Thu, 18 Dec 2025,
JNugent <JNugent73@mail.com> remarked:
USA Border control takes a photograph of everyone applying for admission. >>> -aThey've been taking photos and a fingerprint at the border since soon-a after9/11.
They also ask for the USA address at which one will be staying.
-aProbably asking for where you are staying for considerably longer than-a that.
I don't understand what you mean.
They have probably (I can't "certainly", because that's a jinx on Usenet) been
asking for the address since long before 9/11.
-aFriends who have been on "touring holidays" and expecting to busk a random
motel each night, clearly in some difficulty providing that.
That's alright. It isn't asked for. First night is sufficient.
Some road-trip people don't even know that.
In message <mqg20cFtl5lU1@mid.individual.net>, at 15:53:48 on Wed, 17 Dec 2025,
JNugent <JNugent73@mail.com> remarked:
On 16/12/2025 02:38 pm, s|b wrote:
On Mon, 15 Dec 2025 10:03:56 -0000 (UTC), RJH wrote:
This proposal, or one very like it, has been on the table for some years - >>>> it's not just a Trump thing. For example:-aI only read part of it, but this seems to be only about social media.
https://www.brennancenter.org/media/9268/download
Nothing about DNA, iris scan, phone numbers, addresses, ...
USA Border control takes a photograph of everyone applying for admission.
They've been taking photos and a fingerprint at the border since soon after 9/11.
They also ask for the USA address at which one will be staying.
Probably asking for where you are staying for considerably longer than that.
Friends who have been on "touring holidays" and expecting to busk a random motel
each night, clearly in some difficulty providing that.
I remember going on a trip to a big conference (which had more attendees than--
hotels rooms in the City) in Las Vegas ~1992 and could only get an advance
booking for the first night. So after that I had to literally drive around for
a couple of hours asking whether hotels/motels had a vacancy. Days 2-4 were
difficult, but I managed to get a room on The Strip for days 5 & 6.
JNugent <JNugent73@mail.com> remarked:
USA Border control takes a photograph of everyone applying for
admission.
-aThey've been taking photos and a fingerprint at the border since
soon-a after 9/11.
They also ask for the USA address at which one will be staying.
-aProbably asking for where you are staying for considerably longer
than-a that.
I don't understand what you mean.
They have probably (I can't "certainly", because that's a jinx on
Usenet) been asking for the address since long before 9/11.
-aFriends who have been on "touring holidays" and expecting to busk a
random motel each night, clearly in some difficulty providing that.
Some road-trip people don't even know that.
That's alright. It isn't asked for. First night is sufficient.
On 17/12/2025 15:53, JNugent wrote:
On 16/12/2025 02:38 pm, s|b wrote:
On Mon, 15 Dec 2025 10:03:56 -0000 (UTC), RJH wrote:
This proposal, or one very like it, has been on the table for some
years -
it's not just a Trump thing. For example:
https://www.brennancenter.org/media/9268/download
I only read part of it, but this seems to be only about social media.
Nothing about DNA, iris scan, phone numbers, addresses, ...
USA Border control takes a photograph of everyone applying for
admission. They also ask for the USA address at which one will be
staying.
For the first night. After that one could be anywhere.-a We have often
moved about, changed hotels or houses, or campsites, on a road trip.
In message <mq8p91FmrskU1@mid.individual.net>, at 21:41:52 on Sun, 14
Dec 2025, Clive Page <usenet@page2.eu> remarked:
On 14/12/2025 15:03, Davey wrote:
On Sun, 14 Dec 2025 14:58:47 -0000 (UTC)Does Usenet News? It's clearly social, and a medium (for younger
Jethro_uk <jethro_uk@hotmailbin.com> wrote:
I have seen suggestions that the new US visa requirements will beAnd what happens if you have no or minimal social media accounts and
asking for details of a travellers spouse, parents social media
accounts.
How does this square with the UKs GDPR requirements ? Is a person
permitted to divulge the social media details (presumably email
addresses and/or usernames) of people without their consent for this
purpose ?
use? Does LinkedIn count as social media?
readers: the rarely-used singular of media), so I guess it must be. But >>getting a 5-year history of one's postings might be a challenge.
As it happens, my Usenet client could provide that trivially. But my >Facebook account wouldn't easily be able to list the tens of thousands
of postings I've made there, or regurgitate the metadata etc of the
hundreds of photos I've posted.
Does LinkedIn count as social media?Does Usenet News? It's clearly social, and a medium (for younger >>>readers: the rarely-used singular of media), so I guess it must be. But >>>getting a 5-year history of one's postings might be a challenge.
As it happens, my Usenet client could provide that trivially. But my >>Facebook account wouldn't easily be able to list the tens of thousands
of postings I've made there, or regurgitate the metadata etc of the >>hundreds of photos I've posted.
It's simple, though not instant, to download your entire Facebook posting >history as a zip file. I've got several copies of mine. It's not entirely >implausible that the US authorities might instruct you to do that and upload >the resulting file to their own servers.
On 16 Dec 2025 23:24:33 GMT, Roger Hayter <roger@hayter.org> wrote:
On 16 Dec 2025 at 23:05:14 GMT, "Jon Ribbens" <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu>
wrote:
On 2025-12-16, Jeff Gaines <jgnewsid@outlook.com> wrote:
"According to these Jews, Zionism and Israel are secular concepts with no >>>> basis in Judaism."
https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=2869631306562140
What's your point? It is hardly unheard of for different people
who are nominally members of the same religion to have *wildly*
differing opinions of what that religion teaches.
And doubly so on politics. Quite a good argument against anti-semitic blaming
of Jews in general for Israeli government policy. Or for failing to make a >> public statement on the matter.
It does, though, provide convenient cover for those who wish to disguise their anti-semitism by claiming to be merely anti-zionist. Which is similar to those who wish to disguise their racism by claiming to be concerned about grooming gangs.
Anti-zionism is a valid political and religious position. There are those
who hold it honestly. But holding it honestly also requires being willing to consider the practical outworkings of it.
There are about seven million Jewish Israeli citizens. If Israel ceased to exist as a nation state, then a very large number of them would want to migrate elsewhere. Even if they didn't want to leave, a Palestinian run
state would almost certainly make it very difficult for them to stay.
If the
anti-zionists get their way, therefore, an immediate consequence will be a massive influx of Jewish migrants into Europe and other Western countries.
On 18/12/2025 13:15, Mark Goodge wrote:
There are about seven million Jewish Israeli citizens. If Israel ceased to >> exist as a nation state, then a very large number of them would want to
migrate elsewhere. Even if they didn't want to leave, a Palestinian run
state would almost certainly make it very difficult for them to stay.
Like the Jews of Israel currently make it "very difficult" for
Palestinians to "stay".
If the
anti-zionists get their way, therefore, an immediate consequence will be a >> massive influx of Jewish migrants into Europe and other Western countries.
No it isn't. There's either the two state solution or a single state
with equitable power sharing. Not easy, but possible, except that
Zionists and Israeli supporters/apologists around the world are too
powerful to allow it to be even attempted.
In message <p978kkt9ceg38u26um5jd5vm5f48n298ip@4ax.com>, at 15:35:30 on
Thu, 18 Dec 2025, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk>
remarked:
It's simple, though not instant, to download your entire Facebook posting >>history as a zip file. I've got several copies of mine. It's not entirely >>implausible that the US authorities might instruct you to do that and upload >>the resulting file to their own servers.
And how do I do that at immigration control at a random US airport, when >I've deliberately not bought my laptop with me.
Can it be done from a mobile phone with the Facebook App on it?
On Thu, 18 Dec 2025 18:21:25 +0000, Max Demian <max_demian@bigfoot.com> wrote:
On 18/12/2025 13:15, Mark Goodge wrote:
There are about seven million Jewish Israeli citizens. If Israel ceased to >>> exist as a nation state, then a very large number of them would want to
migrate elsewhere. Even if they didn't want to leave, a Palestinian run
state would almost certainly make it very difficult for them to stay.
Like the Jews of Israel currently make it "very difficult" for
Palestinians to "stay".
There are two million non-Jewish citzens of Israel. They are not under any particular pressure to leave.
If theNo it isn't. There's either the two state solution or a single state
anti-zionists get their way, therefore, an immediate consequence will be a >>> massive influx of Jewish migrants into Europe and other Western countries. >>
with equitable power sharing. Not easy, but possible, except that
Zionists and Israeli supporters/apologists around the world are too
powerful to allow it to be even attempted.
Those chanting "From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free" are not calling for a two-state solution or a power-sharing solution. They just want a single Palestinian state, with Israel wiped off the map.
Mark
On 16 Dec 2025 23:24:33 GMT, Roger Hayter <roger@hayter.org> wrote:
On 16 Dec 2025 at 23:05:14 GMT, "Jon Ribbens"
<jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> wrote:
On 2025-12-16, Jeff Gaines <jgnewsid@outlook.com> wrote:
"According to these Jews, Zionism and Israel are secular concepts
with no basis in Judaism."
https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=2869631306562140
What's your point? It is hardly unheard of for different people who
are nominally members of the same religion to have *wildly*
differing opinions of what that religion teaches.
And doubly so on politics. Quite a good argument against anti-semitic >>blaming of Jews in general for Israeli government policy. Or for failing
to make a public statement on the matter.
It does, though, provide convenient cover for those who wish to disguise their anti-semitism by claiming to be merely anti-zionist. Which is
similar to those who wish to disguise their racism by claiming to be concerned about grooming gangs.
Anti-zionism is a valid political and religious position. There are
those who hold it honestly. But holding it honestly also requires being willing to consider the practical outworkings of it.
There are about seven million Jewish Israeli citizens. If Israel ceased
to exist as a nation state,
then a very large number of them would want
to migrate elsewhere. Even if they didn't want to leave, a Palestinian
run state would almost certainly make it very difficult for them to
stay. If the anti-zionists get their way, therefore, an immediate
consequence will be a massive influx of Jewish migrants into Europe and
other Western countries.
A key test of whther someone's anti-zionism is genuine, therefore, is
how they would respond to a 21st century diaspora. Anti-zionist Jews, as referenced by Jeff Gaines in the link at the top of this post,
positively want this. They want Israeli Jews to leave Israel and
(re)join their co-religionists in the UK and elsewhere across Europe. It would be a massive boost to the Jewish population of the UK, not merely reversing the long-term decline of Judaism in UK demographics but making
it once again one of the most significant ethnic and religious
minorities. From a British Jewish perspective, that would be very much a
good thing. It would increase Jewish influence in all aspects of British life, including politics, business and the media. And ditto in other
European countries.
But many of those who call for the elimination of the state of Israel
would not want this. Not only would they not want it, they would be
fervently opposed to it. They don't want more Jews in the UK. Because,
quite simply, they don't want Jews. Anywhere.
So if you encounter someone who claims to be anti-zionist, tather than anti-semitic, ask them what they think should happen to Israeli Jews if
the state of Israel ceased to exist. A genuine anti-zionist will welcome
them here.
But if someone wants Israel to cease to exist, but has no
thought or plan or concern for the millions of Jews who will be
displaced, then at the very least they haven't given serious thought to
their anti-zionism. They certainly don't hold it in the same way as
Jewish anti-zionists. And, more likely, their anti-zionism is merely a
cover for an underlying anti-semitism that, for now at least, dare not
speak its name.
On 18 Dec 2025 at 21:11:29 GMT, "Mark Goodge" ><usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote:
On Thu, 18 Dec 2025 18:21:25 +0000, Max Demian <max_demian@bigfoot.com> >>wrote:
On 18/12/2025 13:15, Mark Goodge wrote:
There are about seven million Jewish Israeli citizens. If Israel ceased >>>>to
exist as a nation state, then a very large number of them would want to >>>>migrate elsewhere. Even if they didn't want to leave, a Palestinian run >>>>state would almost certainly make it very difficult for them to stay.
Like the Jews of Israel currently make it "very difficult" for >>>Palestinians to "stay".
There are two million non-Jewish citzens of Israel. They are not under any >>particular pressure to leave.
If the
anti-zionists get their way, therefore, an immediate consequence will be >>>>a
massive influx of Jewish migrants into Europe and other Western >>>>countries.
No it isn't. There's either the two state solution or a single state
with equitable power sharing. Not easy, but possible, except that >>>Zionists and Israeli supporters/apologists around the world are too >>>powerful to allow it to be even attempted.
Those chanting "From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free" are not >>calling for a two-state solution or a power-sharing solution. They just >>want
a single Palestinian state, with Israel wiped off the map.
Mark
Arguably it is a negotiating position from which a two state solution could >emerge; rather like the Israeli government negotiating position; which is >something like: "Not a chance!".
On 16 Dec 2025 23:24:33 GMT, Roger Hayter <roger@hayter.org> wrote:For many of us, "anti-Zionism" is not denying Israel's right to exist,
On 16 Dec 2025 at 23:05:14 GMT, "Jon Ribbens" <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu>
wrote:
On 2025-12-16, Jeff Gaines <jgnewsid@outlook.com> wrote:
"According to these Jews, Zionism and Israel are secular concepts with no >>>> basis in Judaism."
https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=2869631306562140
What's your point? It is hardly unheard of for different people
who are nominally members of the same religion to have *wildly*
differing opinions of what that religion teaches.
And doubly so on politics. Quite a good argument against anti-semitic blaming
of Jews in general for Israeli government policy. Or for failing to make a >> public statement on the matter.
It does, though, provide convenient cover for those who wish to disguise their anti-semitism by claiming to be merely anti-zionist. Which is similar to those who wish to disguise their racism by claiming to be concerned about grooming gangs.
Anti-zionism is a valid political and religious position. There are those
who hold it honestly. But holding it honestly also requires being willing to consider the practical outworkings of it.
There are about seven million Jewish Israeli citizens. If Israel ceased to exist as a nation state, then a very large number of them would want to migrate elsewhere.
On Thu, 18 Dec 2025 13:15:40 +0000, Mark Goodge wrote:
Anti-zionism is a valid political and religious position. There are
those who hold it honestly. But holding it honestly also requires being
willing to consider the practical outworkings of it.
There are about seven million Jewish Israeli citizens. If Israel ceased
to exist as a nation state,
You are assuming that every anti-zionist necessarily insists on the >dissolution of the Israeli nation-state, without any other options being >possible.
So if you encounter someone who claims to be anti-zionist, tather than
anti-semitic, ask them what they think should happen to Israeli Jews if
the state of Israel ceased to exist. A genuine anti-zionist will welcome
them here.
You also seem to assume that all anti-zionists live in Britain. That too
is false.
On Fri, 19 Dec 2025 07:24:33 -0000 (UTC), Handsome Jack <jack@handsome.com> wrote:
On Thu, 18 Dec 2025 13:15:40 +0000, Mark Goodge wrote:
Anti-zionism is a valid political and religious position. There are
those who hold it honestly. But holding it honestly also requires being
willing to consider the practical outworkings of it.
There are about seven million Jewish Israeli citizens. If Israel ceased
to exist as a nation state,
You are assuming that every anti-zionist necessarily insists on the >>dissolution of the Israeli nation-state, without any other options being >>possible.
That's what anti-zionism *means*. Zionism is the political support for the concept of a modern, Jewish nation of Israel in its historic territory. Anti-zionism is the opposite principle and opposing the existence of Israel.
People who call themselves "anti-zionist", but then try to wriggle out of that by claiming that they don't actually want to get rid of Israel, just change it to match their own concepts of what Israel should be, are either misunderstanding what they are talking about or are among those deliberately using "anti-zionist" as a cover for anti-semitism.
On 2025-12-19, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote:
People who call themselves "anti-zionist", but then try to wriggle out of
that by claiming that they don't actually want to get rid of Israel, just
change it to match their own concepts of what Israel should be, are either >> misunderstanding what they are talking about or are among those deliberately >> using "anti-zionist" as a cover for anti-semitism.
Your entire argument here depends on everyone else using "Zionism" and >"anti-Zionism" to mean what *you* want them to mean - and they don't.
It's like trying to argue that "decimate" doesn't mean "destroy all or
most of" and should only mean "destroy one tenth of". Maybe it should,
but it doesn't.
Not even the OED agrees with you:
Zionism, n., 1. Originally: a movement among Jewish people for the
re-establishment of a Jewish nation in Palestine. Later: a movement
for the development and protection of the state of Israel.
On Fri, 19 Dec 2025 10:50:41 -0000 (UTC), Jon Ribbens
<jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> wrote:
On 2025-12-19, Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote:
People who call themselves "anti-zionist", but then try to wriggle
out of that by claiming that they don't actually want to get rid of
Israel, just change it to match their own concepts of what Israel
should be, are either misunderstanding what they are talking about
or are among those deliberately using "anti-zionist" as a cover for
anti-semitism.
Your entire argument here depends on everyone else using "Zionism" and >>"anti-Zionism" to mean what *you* want them to mean - and they don't.
It's like trying to argue that "decimate" doesn't mean "destroy all or
most of" and should only mean "destroy one tenth of". Maybe it should,
but it doesn't.
Well, the meanings of words does change. But in this case, I thuink
that the change in meaning is being driven by a combination of
ignorance and mendacity.
Not even the OED agrees with you:
Zionism, n., 1. Originally: a movement among Jewish people for the
re-establishment of a Jewish nation in Palestine. Later: a movement
for the development and protection of the state of Israel.
Eh? That agrees with me. Originally a movement to create Israel, now a movement to develop and protect Israel. In which case, anti-zionism, now, means being opposed to the development and protection of Israel.
Not even the OED agrees with you:
Zionism, n., 1. Originally: a movement among Jewish people for the
re-establishment of a Jewish nation in Palestine. Later: a movement
for the development and protection of the state of Israel.
Eh? That agrees with me. Originally a movement to create Israel, now a
movement to develop and protect Israel. In which case, anti-zionism, now,
means being opposed to the development and protection of Israel.
That's the opposite of what you claimed above, which was that anti-Zionism has to mean being against the very existence of Israel. Now you've changed your mind and agree that it can mean being against the "development and protection" of Israel - i.e.
the expansionism, the illegal settlements,
the massacre of Palestinians, etc - without being against the existence
of Israel. You've conceded your entire argument.
On 18/12/2025 13:15, Mark Goodge wrote:
On 16 Dec 2025 23:24:33 GMT, Roger Hayter <roger@hayter.org> wrote:For many of us, "anti-Zionism" is not denying Israel's right to exist,
On 16 Dec 2025 at 23:05:14 GMT, "Jon Ribbens"
<jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu>
wrote:
On 2025-12-16, Jeff Gaines <jgnewsid@outlook.com> wrote:
"According to these Jews, Zionism and Israel are secular concepts
with no
basis in Judaism."
https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=2869631306562140
What's your point? It is hardly unheard of for different people
who are nominally members of the same religion to have *wildly*
differing opinions of what that religion teaches.
And doubly so on politics. Quite a good argument against anti-semitic
blaming
of Jews in general for Israeli government policy. Or for failing to
make a
public statement on the matter.
It does, though, provide convenient cover for those who wish to disguise
their anti-semitism by claiming to be merely anti-zionist. Which is
similar
to those who wish to disguise their racism by claiming to be concerned
about
grooming gangs.
Anti-zionism is a valid political and religious position. There are those
who hold it honestly. But holding it honestly also requires being
willing to
consider the practical outworkings of it.
There are about seven million Jewish Israeli citizens. If Israel
ceased to
exist as a nation state, then a very large number of them would want to
migrate elsewhere.
it is denying Israel's right to ignore UN sanctions and to illegally
occupy neighbouring land in an incessant attempt to annex more
territory. A form of Lebensraum. And if you watch the Louis Theroux documentary on The Settlers you see that reputable Israeli politicians support these land-grabs.
On 19 Dec 2025 at 12:15:30 GMT, Jon Ribbens wrote:
Not even the OED agrees with you:
Zionism, n., 1. Originally: a movement among Jewish people for the
re-establishment of a Jewish nation in Palestine. Later: a movement >>>> for the development and protection of the state of Israel.
Eh? That agrees with me. Originally a movement to create Israel, now a
movement to develop and protect Israel. In which case, anti-zionism, now, >>> means being opposed to the development and protection of Israel.
That's the opposite of what you claimed above, which was that anti-Zionism >> has to mean being against the very existence of Israel. Now you've changed >> your mind and agree that it can mean being against the "development and
protection" of Israel - i.e.
No - it's not 'i.e.'
the expansionism, the illegal settlements,
the massacre of Palestinians, etc - without being against the existence
of Israel. You've conceded your entire argument.
Development and protection does not, by most measures mean that little
lot.
On Fri, 19 Dec 2025 07:24:33 -0000 (UTC), Handsome Jack
<jack@handsome.com> wrote:
On Thu, 18 Dec 2025 13:15:40 +0000, Mark Goodge wrote:
Anti-zionism is a valid political and religious position. There are
those who hold it honestly. But holding it honestly also requires
being willing to consider the practical outworkings of it.
There are about seven million Jewish Israeli citizens. If Israel
ceased to exist as a nation state,
You are assuming that every anti-zionist necessarily insists on the >>dissolution of the Israeli nation-state, without any other options being >>possible.
That's what anti-zionism *means*. Zionism is the political support for
the concept of a modern, Jewish nation of Israel in its historic
territory. Anti-zionism is the opposite principle and opposing the
existence of Israel.
People who call themselves "anti-zionist", but then try to wriggle out
of that by claiming that they don't actually want to get rid of Israel,
just change it to match their own concepts of what Israel should be, are either misunderstanding what they are talking about or are among those deliberately using "anti-zionist" as a cover for anti-semitism.
So if you encounter someone who claims to be anti-zionist, tather than
anti-semitic, ask them what they think should happen to Israeli Jews
if the state of Israel ceased to exist. A genuine anti-zionist will
welcome them here.
You also seem to assume that all anti-zionists live in Britain. That too
is false.
I'm not assuming that at all. But the majority of self-professed anti-zionists that you and I are likely to encounter do live in Britain. Because that's where we are.
On 19/12/2025 12:07 pm, Norman Wells wrote:
On 19/12/2025 10:18, The Todal wrote:
On 18/12/2025 13:15, Mark Goodge wrote:
On 16 Dec 2025 23:24:33 GMT, Roger Hayter <roger@hayter.org> wrote:For many of us, "anti-Zionism" is not denying Israel's right to
On 16 Dec 2025 at 23:05:14 GMT, "Jon Ribbens"
<jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu>
wrote:
On 2025-12-16, Jeff Gaines <jgnewsid@outlook.com> wrote:
"According to these Jews, Zionism and Israel are secular concepts >>>>>>> with no
basis in Judaism."
https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=2869631306562140
What's your point? It is hardly unheard of for different people
who are nominally members of the same religion to have *wildly*
differing opinions of what that religion teaches.
And doubly so on politics. Quite a good argument against anti-
semitic blaming
of Jews in general for Israeli government policy. Or for failing to >>>>> make a
public statement on the matter.
It does, though, provide convenient cover for those who wish to
disguise
their anti-semitism by claiming to be merely anti-zionist. Which is
similar
to those who wish to disguise their racism by claiming to be
concerned about
grooming gangs.
Anti-zionism is a valid political and religious position. There are
those
who hold it honestly. But holding it honestly also requires being
willing to
consider the practical outworkings of it.
There are about seven million Jewish Israeli citizens. If Israel
ceased to
exist as a nation state, then a very large number of them would want to >>>> migrate elsewhere.
exist, it is denying Israel's right to ignore UN sanctions and to
illegally occupy neighbouring land in an incessant attempt to annex
more territory. A form of Lebensraum. And if you watch the Louis
Theroux documentary on The Settlers you see that reputable Israeli
politicians support these land-grabs.
Well, Israel did 'win' that territory from an aggressor that rashly
waged war against it.-a War is a time-honoured way throughout history
of acquiring territory, and the fact that is was taken from an
aggressor creates a certain legitimacy.-a Why should it just be given
back?
Indeed. And doubters should look at a map of Germany in (say) 1937 (pre- Anschluss) and then look at the map of today. Germany lost a lot of territory which was undisputedly theirs before WW2. I haven't heard many arguing for it to be restored.
On 19/12/2025 10:18, The Todal wrote:
On 18/12/2025 13:15, Mark Goodge wrote:
On 16 Dec 2025 23:24:33 GMT, Roger Hayter <roger@hayter.org> wrote:For many of us, "anti-Zionism" is not denying Israel's right to exist,
On 16 Dec 2025 at 23:05:14 GMT, "Jon Ribbens"
<jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu>
wrote:
On 2025-12-16, Jeff Gaines <jgnewsid@outlook.com> wrote:
"According to these Jews, Zionism and Israel are secular concepts >>>>>> with no
basis in Judaism."
https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=2869631306562140
What's your point? It is hardly unheard of for different people
who are nominally members of the same religion to have *wildly*
differing opinions of what that religion teaches.
And doubly so on politics. Quite a good argument against anti-
semitic blaming
of Jews in general for Israeli government policy. Or for failing to
make a
public statement on the matter.
It does, though, provide convenient cover for those who wish to disguise >>> their anti-semitism by claiming to be merely anti-zionist. Which is
similar
to those who wish to disguise their racism by claiming to be
concerned about
grooming gangs.
Anti-zionism is a valid political and religious position. There are
those
who hold it honestly. But holding it honestly also requires being
willing to
consider the practical outworkings of it.
There are about seven million Jewish Israeli citizens. If Israel
ceased to
exist as a nation state, then a very large number of them would want to
migrate elsewhere.
it is denying Israel's right to ignore UN sanctions and to illegally
occupy neighbouring land in an incessant attempt to annex more
territory. A form of Lebensraum. And if you watch the Louis Theroux
documentary on The Settlers you see that reputable Israeli politicians
support these land-grabs.
Well, Israel did 'win' that territory from an aggressor that rashly
waged war against it.-a War is a time-honoured way throughout history of acquiring territory, and the fact that is was taken from an aggressor creates a certain legitimacy.-a Why should it just be given back?
On 19/12/2025 12:07, Norman Wells wrote:
On 19/12/2025 10:18, The Todal wrote:
On 18/12/2025 13:15, Mark Goodge wrote:
On 16 Dec 2025 23:24:33 GMT, Roger Hayter <roger@hayter.org> wrote:For many of us, "anti-Zionism" is not denying Israel's right to
On 16 Dec 2025 at 23:05:14 GMT, "Jon Ribbens"
<jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu>
wrote:
On 2025-12-16, Jeff Gaines <jgnewsid@outlook.com> wrote:
"According to these Jews, Zionism and Israel are secular concepts >>>>>>> with no
basis in Judaism."
https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=2869631306562140
What's your point? It is hardly unheard of for different people
who are nominally members of the same religion to have *wildly*
differing opinions of what that religion teaches.
And doubly so on politics. Quite a good argument against anti-
semitic blaming
of Jews in general for Israeli government policy. Or for failing to >>>>> make a
public statement on the matter.
It does, though, provide convenient cover for those who wish to
disguise
their anti-semitism by claiming to be merely anti-zionist. Which is
similar
to those who wish to disguise their racism by claiming to be
concerned about
grooming gangs.
Anti-zionism is a valid political and religious position. There are
those
who hold it honestly. But holding it honestly also requires being
willing to
consider the practical outworkings of it.
There are about seven million Jewish Israeli citizens. If Israel
ceased to
exist as a nation state, then a very large number of them would want to >>>> migrate elsewhere.
exist, it is denying Israel's right to ignore UN sanctions and to
illegally occupy neighbouring land in an incessant attempt to annex
more territory. A form of Lebensraum. And if you watch the Louis
Theroux documentary on The Settlers you see that reputable Israeli
politicians support these land-grabs.
Well, Israel did 'win' that territory from an aggressor that rashly
waged war against it.-a War is a time-honoured way throughout history
of acquiring territory, and the fact that is was taken from an
aggressor creates a certain legitimacy.-a Why should it just be given
back?
It didnt "win" that territory at all. You must be confused.
This has nothing to do with the Six Day War.
I think if you read up on
the subject you can learn a lot. What Israel has been doing is much the
same as the Russians occupying Ukraine, or the Nazis confiscating Jewish homes and land.
The land grabs are illegal.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_occupation_of_the_West_Bank
Here's an Israeli human rights organisation, commenting on the West Bank occupation.
https://www.btselem.org/publications/summaries/200205_land_grab
| Sysop: | Amessyroom |
|---|---|
| Location: | Fayetteville, NC |
| Users: | 54 |
| Nodes: | 6 (0 / 6) |
| Uptime: | 14:30:52 |
| Calls: | 742 |
| Files: | 1,218 |
| D/L today: |
3 files (2,681K bytes) |
| Messages: | 183,842 |
| Posted today: | 1 |