• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Israel ...the land of darkness unto the nations.

rosends

Well-Known Member
Good thing both organizations have thousands of volunteers and employees worldwide, then, as I previously mentioned. Then there's the fact that others with similar knowledge of their inner workings don't claim they're biased against Israel of all countries. Why would they be, anyway? It's not like they don't call out Israel's primary neighbors and enemies on human rights violations in a similarly vocal and direct manner.

Do Israelis who echo the observations of organizations like the UN also have an anti-Israeli bias?
The issue isn't what an individual volunteer believes, but what the official positions of the organizations have historically been, and these have been shown (in both number and content) to be disproportionate and not in line with fact. And others DO say that they are biased against Israel. Two recent former secretary generals of the UN have attacked the UN for anti-Israel bias. Not one. Not some random employee. Two heads of the organization. And if you take a look at the number of resolutions, you will see that, no, many other countries were NOT called out.

And at HRW, it wasn't just the founder and former chairman who criticized the group, but former board members and NGO Monitor also.

But if you want to read Ha'aretz, feel free.
 

Debater Slayer

Vipassana
Staff member
Premium Member
Calling factual history a narrative.
Are you by any chance orange?

"The Shimon HaTzadik tomb and its surroundings, with an area of 17 dunam, was purchased by the Sephardi Community Council and Knesset Yisrael in 1875. Near the neighbourhood is the Cave of the Minor Sanhedrin. The area was subdivided in 1890 for the purpose of establishing a residential neighborhood, and the neighborhood passed to the Sephardi Community Council. at the year 1890 , the Sephardi Jews community in the aria north to the site, on the slope above the area of Shimon HaTzaddik 6 houses for people with Economic difficulties, known as "בתי הקדש שמעון הצדיק" . during that time people started to build private houses in the area, and the rest converted to Agricultural land and olive harvest site.

in the book" ירושלים שכונות סביב לה[1]" kluger describes the construction of the neighborhood:
"In the month of Tishrei 1851, the foundation stone was laid for houses "shelters for the poor and needy, widows and orphans", in the field plot that the heads of the Sephardic community in Jerusalem bought for several years next to the cave in which the holy Tanna north of the Knesset remains. In Hadrat Kodesh, the cornerstone was laid in the presence of the city's rabbis, greats and dignitaries. The money for the construction of these houses was collected by Rabbi Shlomo Suzin in the cities of Gibraltar, Kaza-Blanka, Mazgan, Izomer and Mogador. Being there on a mission including the Spaniards, he volunteered to collect special alms for this purpose without any reward. Rabbi Suzin brought with him a total of 10,000 francs and handed them over the banker ce' Chaim Aharon and Liro, the head of the committee, with these money they began to build several houses. By-laws: The apartments are intended for the poor, by fate, and will be replaced every three years. "

In the year 1916, 13 families lived in the neighborhood; there were 45 persons.

Beside that neighborhood, during the 20th another neighborhood was built named "Nahalat Shimon" , neighborhood purchased by the bankers: Johannes Frutiger, and Yosef Navon. At first the neighborhood was developed by yosef mayuhas and later Nissim Elishar and Bezalel Kopel Kantrowitz Swap with him. Dozens of Jewish families established their homes on the purchased land , and before the 1936–1939 Arab revolt in Palestine (1936) hundreds of Jews lived there. When the riots broke out, the Jews fled the area, but returned to these neighborhoods a few months later.[2 1]

During the 1947–1949 Palestine war residents of the Shimon Hatzadik neighborhood suffered attacks from Sheikh Jarrah residents. On 7 January 1948, three Jews were murdered, and other people wounded by Arab gangs.[2] On 11 February 1948, the British ordered the residents of the "Shimon Hatzadik" and "Nahalat Shimon" neighborhoods to leave their homes out of concern for their lives. On 13 April of the same year, 78 members of Hadassah Medical Centerl staff, patients, members of Hebrew University of Jerusalem and fighters near the evacuated neighborhoods were murdered in the Hadassah medical convoy massacre. Forces of the Palmach rushed to help them but they were repulsed by the British forces during Mandatory Palestine. On Chol HaMoed of Passover holiday, the Palmach Occupied Sheikh Jarrah and the territory of the Jewish neighborhoods. The British forced them to retreat under the reasoning they needed the transport route that passed through the area. The British said they would update the Palmach when they finish transferring their forces through. Later when the British forces left, they only updated the Arabs who rushed and occupied the place, and the area of the neighborhood passed to Jordanian control."

Oh no historical facts.
I bet the Jews are responsible.

None of that contradicts the assertion that evicting people who include ones who weren't even alive at that time was an unjustifiable act. Citing decades-old events to justify evicting current residents is bizarre at best.

You are behaving quite foolish.

128 civilians died as per United Nations. That is a fact.

Israel dropped thousands of bombs on the Gaza Strip. That is a fact.

This means civilians weren't targeted, if they were far more civilians would've died due to Israeli bombing. Unless you are saying Israel is incapable to do that, which would only negate the position of danger from Israel.
They didn't because residents of the Gaza Strip were warned before air strikes and artillery fire to vacate the area. Which most did.

If the residents of the Gaza Strip have a problem with being pulled into the conflicts of Hamas or Islamic Jihad with Israel they should take it upon themselves to remove these individuals from their society and positions of power.
After all they themselves voted them into power.

I'll wait for them to do that.

Shifting the responsibility for the bombings to Palestinians rather than the state with significantly more military, economic, and political power doesn't appear to be realistic or reasonable. Oversimplification probably won't resolve the conflict.

Oh should we do a per 100.000 calculation? That's not going to be much better you know.




Nah the whole persecution stuff is inside your head.
Most Palestinians suffer mostly under the PLO which suppresses them.
They mostly only interact with Israeli border police if they want to venture into Israel for work.

Which I think they shouldn't do. That supporting the oppressor.




Arab Israelis never even encountered the police you genius.
The special status of Arab cities goes back decades.

You, like so many others are incapable of distinguishing Arab Israelis from Arabs in the Palestinian territories.
These are not the same as per Israeli law and are not treated the same.




He said while not disproving anything.

Too much hostility and apparent bitterness here. While I'm unsure whether this is a product of some personal experience or ideological zeal (or anything else), I find it unproductive to try to discuss the issues further when I believe that hostility has replaced or clouded reason and desire for understanding.

Have a nice day. I think I've made all of my points quite clear.
 
Last edited:

Flankerl

Well-Known Member
None of that contradicts the assertion that evicting people who include ones who weren't even alive at that time was an unjustifiable act. Citing decades-old events to justify evicting current residents is bizarre at best.

So is it just Jews who are not eligible for their property or is it everyone?

Also you do realise that between 1948/49 and 1967 there were only 19 years?
Do you think the owners only tried now or in the 80s to get the properties back?

Is 19 years already too long? If not please specify the valid number of years or months.


Shifting the responsibility for the bombings to Palestinians rather than the state with significantly more military, economic, and political power doesn't appear to be realistic or reasonable. Oversimplification probably won't resolve the conflict.

How exactly would you answer to rocket, mortar, fire balloon and infiltration tunnels?


Too much hostility and apparent bitterness here. While I'm unsure whether this is a product of some personal experience or ideological zeal (or anything else), I find it unproductive to try to discuss the issues further when I believe that hostility has replaced or clouded reason and desire for understanding.

Yes you have made your personal anti-Israel standpoint clear.
None of which was in any way new or addressed my points.
You hold the Palestinians to absolutely no responsibility, as you've always have.

It begs the question why you even engage anyone on the topic.
 

Kooky

Freedom from Sanity
You said "in the past 20 years". Nice job moving the goalposts. Was it hard? Were they heavy?
Maybe you have a different opinion, but personally, I consider 20 years a long while.

Thank you.

No. I don't necessarily see immorality in its refusal.
But you continue to be unable to come up with any sensible argument as to why, so you lash out against perceived enemies of Israel instead.
 

Harel13

Am Yisrael Chai
Staff member
Premium Member
Maybe you have a different opinion, but personally, I consider 20 years a long while.
Then I truly have no idea why you even stated that in the first place. And there was I, thinking that bringing info from the last 20 years was relevant to your query. Silly me.
Thank you.
You're welcome.
But you continue to be unable to come up with any sensible argument as to why, so you lash out against perceived enemies of Israel instead.
Seeing as you never understood my argument on this thread, I suppose it makes sense because I haven't yet explained it. But I have on other threads. You were there as well. You have never accepted an ounce of that argument, and since you seem to enjoy moving goalposts, I won't continue delaying you with that. Ta-ta.
 

sun rise

The world is on fire
Premium Member
I've seen you state many times over how you used to be a big supporter of Israel. But as time goes on, I doubt this statement more and more. I don't believe I've ever seen you write anything nice about the country.

I don't dispute that you've not seen me write something positive about Israel but that does not mean I've never written anything positive.

I was very complementary when the current government was formed and expressed hope for a positive change from the prior government there, for example. But obviously you missed that.

And more than once I wrote about my attitude starting to change after 1973 with the growth of the settler movement

You mentioned a Russian oligarch. I have absolutely no idea what or who you're talking about. What I know is that Israel is banning entry to oligarchs at the moment, including docking their yachts and ships in Israeli docks.

That you missed the following story is something you might want to pay attention to:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/03/02/israel-russia-oligarch-yad-vashem-ukraine/

Yad Vashem, Israel’s official Holocaust memorial and museum, is embroiled in controversy after attempting to intervene in planned sanctions against Israeli Russian billionaire Roman Abramovich, owner of the Chelsea Premier League soccer team and a longtime supporter of Russian President Vladimir Putin.

In a letter to U.S. Ambassador Tom Nides, Yad Vashem, together with the country’s chief Ashkenazi Rabbi David Lau and Sheba Medical Center Director Yitshak Kreiss, asked that the United States not sanction Abramovich, a major donor to the memorial and other Jewish causes. They said that sanctioning him would cause harm to Jewish institutions that rely on him for donations, said Yad Vashem Chairman Dani Dayan. He said Abramovich was the museum’s second-largest private donor, after the late Sheldon Adelson and his widow, Miriam.
...
Israel’s ambiguity about the Ukraine invasion was on display Wednesday, when Israeli and German leaders gathered at the Yad Vashem memorial vowing to prevent the loss of life in Ukraine — without publicly mentioning Russia.
 

Harel13

Am Yisrael Chai
Staff member
Premium Member
That you missed the following story is something you might want to pay attention to:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/03/02/israel-russia-oligarch-yad-vashem-ukraine/

Yad Vashem, Israel’s official Holocaust memorial and museum, is embroiled in controversy after attempting to intervene in planned sanctions against Israeli Russian billionaire Roman Abramovich, owner of the Chelsea Premier League soccer team and a longtime supporter of Russian President Vladimir Putin.

In a letter to U.S. Ambassador Tom Nides, Yad Vashem, together with the country’s chief Ashkenazi Rabbi David Lau and Sheba Medical Center Director Yitshak Kreiss, asked that the United States not sanction Abramovich, a major donor to the memorial and other Jewish causes. They said that sanctioning him would cause harm to Jewish institutions that rely on him for donations, said Yad Vashem Chairman Dani Dayan. He said Abramovich was the museum’s second-largest private donor, after the late Sheldon Adelson and his widow, Miriam.
...
Israel’s ambiguity about the Ukraine invasion was on display Wednesday, when Israeli and German leaders gathered at the Yad Vashem memorial vowing to prevent the loss of life in Ukraine — without publicly mentioning Russia.
Thank you.
I knew there was something strange with what you said yesterday. This isn't just a Russian bajillionaire. It's an Israeli one. Now, sure you are free to critique Israel's ambiguous stance on the war - but do you acknowledge that there's a difference between defending a citizen and defending a non-citizen?
 

sun rise

The world is on fire
Premium Member
Thank you.
I knew there was something strange with what you said yesterday. This isn't just a Russian bajillionaire. It's an Israeli one. Now, sure you are free to critique Israel's ambiguous stance on the war - but do you acknowledge that there's a difference between defending a citizen and defending a non-citizen?

Sure but he's he's also a Portuguese citizen and AFAIK still a Russian citizen and referred to as such. So as they say, it's complicated.

But the realpolitik of asking for special dispensation for someone who is apparently still closely tied to Putin is far from idealistic.

As the article made clear: Israel’s official Holocaust memorial and museum, is embroiled in controversy after attempting to intervene in planned sanctions against Israeli Russian billionaire Roman Abramovich, owner of the Chelsea Premier League soccer team and a longtime supporter of Russian President Vladimir Putin.
 

Flankerl

Well-Known Member
It's just the same old rhetoric.

Israel should cut all ties with Russia (which not even EU countries or the US has done) and then deal with a strengthened Syria, Iran and Hezbollah. If possible not by defending itself.

Israel should of course demolish the "Apartheid wall", open its border to all Palestinians and then deal with renewed suicide bombers. If possible not by defending itself.

It's common practice to expect of Israel what you yourself would never do.
 

Shaul

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Israel has taken in more Ukrainian refugees than many countries much larger than itself such as Saudi Arabia or Iran. Israel is the only country that has a policy of accepting any Ukrainian Jew fleeing. Until that changes it is quite valid for Israel to focus on letting them in. But since you think it would be immoral for a country to turn away the Ukrainian refugees you must agree that Israel can settle Ukrainian Jewish refugees in disputed territories too. Thanks.
 

Kooky

Freedom from Sanity
Israel has taken in more Ukrainian refugees than many countries much larger than itself such as Saudi Arabia or Iran.
Is that the kind of moral calculus that drives people's acceptance of Israeli government policies? That a government only needs to be marginally better than the worst and most authoritarian examples of the entire region?

Israel also has taken in far fewer refugees from either Ukraine or the Middle East than almost any country in Europe. In addition, they have taken in almost no refugees from Syria or Iraq, despite neighbouring one of these countries and being very close to the other.

I know it's standard procedure for Israeli politicians to claim the moral high ground on practically every topic in international politics, but the cold, hard facts do not bear this out at all.

Israel is the only country that has a policy of accepting any Ukrainian Jew fleeing.
I'm glad that people are willing to finally admit that the government of Israel discriminates people based on their religion. Now tell me, why do you think it is inherently moral to turn away war refugees from your country because they are Christians or Muslims?
 
Top