Interesting clip from FOXNEWS of all places

I am familiar with the group Jews United Against Zionism and I have heard Dovid Weiss speak before, but i was shocked that he would be invited on FOXNEWS, the shining pearl in the otherwise dreary jewelry box of media outlets (can you guys recognize satire?)

Perhaps he makes the point in a way that is accessible to all viewers.

This post is not meant to jump-start another discussion on Israel, but rather to finalize the posts Johnny B, Logipundit and myself had concerning not the two-state solution but a one-state solution.

Click on the link : “Blame Israel”

PS still waiting for comments on the Israeli attack on sleeping Palestinians from my esteemed peers.



10 Responses to “Interesting clip from FOXNEWS of all places”

  1. JohnnyB Says:


    You might want to note that Fox News did have a question mark next to “Blame Israel”.

    I don’t agree that Jews were better off before the creation of Israel. Before the Holocaust they were the upper crust of German society, once the fascist boot came down, and hard. Many of the Russian Jews had been kicked out via pogroms before that (which exacerbated “the Jewish problem in Germany”). Of course you know, Scottie, that Jewish immigration to the UK and the US from Germany pre-war, despite a strong Jewish presence in the upper class at NYC and London at the time. Considering the timing of the creation of Israel, you have to think it was prevalent in their minds, not that they deserve a state because of the holocaust, but that they want to prevent further holocaust. Considering that point in history, and that Palestine was part of the British mandate of the time, why it happened.

    WWII was uniquely violent, but European anti-semitism was not.

    So, yes the good Rabbi points out Jews were happy in Iran (of course many fled to Israel in 1948 anyway, but I digress), many were unhappy throughout the world.

    I even hear stories about Jews in America with one bag packed for Israel in case things start to heat up here. I believe their fear is genuine, if not warranted.

    I see the point of mixing theology and government as a bad idea. Even in the old testament God told them not to have a kingdom (hey any of you got bibles out there?), but they just didn’t listen.

    “You can’t throw a brick through your neighbors window and scream ‘anti-semite’!” Good line.

  2. JohnnyB Says:


    I know the ’48 exile came after the exile of the Palestinians, but again Israel was kind of getting attacked on all sides. They thought they had a 50/50 chance at the time. That doesn’t justify killing Palestinians in their sleep, though, as we all agreed on in principle earlier.

  3. scottie Says:

    some good obervations johnny,
    but realize that one of the central points of the good rabbi was that before zionism was a raging political beast, the arab muslims, christian, jews, and druze lived in relative harmony within the ottoman empire

    i think you would be hard-pressed to find any ethical human being who would morally oppose the choice of jews to flee nazi persecution in europe

    you should read the history of rudolph kastner, a zionist nazi-collaberator, who secured travel for many zionists to israel by helping nazi germany kill many non-zionist jews

    the rabbi made the point , an obvious one in my line of thinking, of saying that pre-israel jews lived in all countries as loyal citizens

    should every victimized group in history be given their own nation?

    native americans should be entitled then to the whole of the USA

    the christians who remained after the stalin-directed genocide should be then entitled to all of mother russia

    the cambodian refugees should be allowed to establish a homeland in nova scotia, the east timorese survivors should be allowed to repopulate germany, the millions of chinese slaughtered by mao have families that should be allowed to occupy new york city

    these scenarios sound far-fetched and ridiculous, but they neatly capture the essence of zionism ; creation of a state meant for one group of people on land occupied by another group, and all because jews were oppressed in eastern europe.

    the message of the rabbi i agree with : people must live together, regardless of their race, religious preferences, or political persuasions.

    The irony is interesting here :

    a christian defending the zionist mission, while the rabbi argues against a nation meant for only jews.

    anyway, thanks for watching the video

    on we march

  4. scottie Says:


    the arab countries that attacked israel in 1948 did it not only because the arab states rejected the creation of israel (because they knew it would be at the expense of the indigneous palestinians) but also because of abdullah in jordan, who had a secret agreement with israel

    this was a big component of the 48 war

  5. JohnnyB Says:


    Uprooting indigenous population is a good point, but balkanization is not unique. Yugoslavia could not survive following the death of Tito, these people just did not get along (thus the term ‘balkanization’), So they divided along ethnic lines. Of course there is Azerbeijan which suffered immensely under the rule of the Turks, who now have their own country. Then there are the former Soviet states.

    I’m rambling, but the current trend is to balkanize along ethnic lines, which is why everybody (including the US if you look at the road map or listen to Condi Rice) except Israel likes the two-state solution. And even Olmert speaks about withdrawal from the West Bank.

    Of course Rabbi Weiss is the exception rather than the rule. I can find Rabbis that are super critical of Israel that nonetheless defend the establishment of a Jewish state. In a hundred years maybe there won’t need to be a wall between Palestine and Israel; for now it seems the best viable option.

    I think in general I am exceptional too, most Americans either don’t care about Israel or feel an uneasy alliance with them (e.g. evangelicals). It’s common to hear college students (believe me I know) say drop a nuke on Israel and be done with them rather than deal with them. After all, most Jews live in NYC anyway. I’ve heard these actual words spoken by students around here.

    Considering the tiny piece of real estate that makes up Israel, and subtracting the Negev desert (which nobody is fighting over), and considering the Jews want it SO badly that they could fight off all their neighbors, I say let them organize their country the way they want. It doesn’t mean I’m not critical or defending all they do, but I will defend certain policies, like the right to return for Jews.

  6. Logipundit Says:

    I’m not supposed to be commenting on Israel outside of the “lovey-dovey” post…but oh well.

    Not to be nitpicky, but what in the hell does Cambodia have to do with Nova Scotia, chinese in NYC, East Timorese with Germany? These analogies are indeed far-fetched and they are also completely irrelevant to Zionism.

    Are you saying that Jews have absolutely no connection with the land of Israel? And do me a favor and define indigenous. Palestinian groups define their right to Jerusalem as granted to them by Islam…while Islam didn’t exist until Jews had already occupied (under various Empires) Israel, including Jerusalem, for a few thousand years.

    The best parallel you cited is that of the Native Americans, which if we were to give them back all of their land and help them establish their own State…THAT might be a more accurate analogy to Zionism…

    But hey…go back far enough and the Jews did indeed take it from someone else…about what…2000 BC? And then they were occupied by every ancient Empire in our history. It’s actually a needless exercise, though, don’t you think to start using terms like “indigenous” in that area of the world?

    It’s a lot easier in North America. It’s pretty damn evident WE weren’t indigenous.

  7. scottie Says:

    thats exactly the point butch

    there is no connection between the historical jews of the bible and modern day israel

    90% of jews in israel today are descendants of khazars, and the khazars converted to judaism (interesting story there) by edict of their leader

    these jews are converts to judaism, and not the descendants of abraham in the bible

    so there is no connection, or a very small one

    assuming for a moment that 100% of israeli jews were in fact descendants of biblical jews, the 2000 year diaspora entitles them to return to their ancient homeland and displace the palestinians???????

    using that argument then, if jews have claim to the land because they occupied it 2000 years prior, then why dont the palestinians have a stronger claim, since they inhabited the land less than 100 years ago ????????????????????????????????

    answer that one bubba

  8. Logipundit Says:

    this part of the IP issue is insanely circular, and you have illustrated that thouroughly.

    You used the term indigenous…which classically (although not always) is defined by the people that were there first. That’s what I was responding to. Jerusalem has been hotly contested for about 1400 years…essentially since the inception of Islam. Go figure. Before that as I pointed out there were about a dozen different claimants.

    Good luck figuring out who the indigenous people were. Palestinians are not indigenous to that land by any definition other than they occupied at the time.

    So who has the most right? Those that are there first, or those that are there now? Or is those that lived there the longest? The answer is classically whoever has the biggest guns (sorry).

    This line of discussion for obvious reasons is unlikely to get us anywhere, which is why we have the other post where we can agree on things. :o)

    Your point that the current Jews in Israel claiming the land have nothing to do with the original Biblical Israelis is a valid one…but if your criteria is that whoever occupies the land has the right to keep it then the Jews in Israel have the right to keep their land, and not be kicked off the map.

    And as has been pointed out (and we have agreed on this point), there is little practical and logical indication that Arab Palestine is going to stop until the Jews have summarily been shoved into the Mediterranean for good.

    Right or wrong…An Israeli has little choice. Jordan, Syria all could potentially be homes for Arab Palestinians. Where is a Jew going to go? New York City? Do they have more of a claim to there than they do Israel?

    Anyway, I indeed see your point, but it simply doesn’t get us anywhere…

  9. scottie Says:

    arabs pushing the jews into the sea?

    palestinians could find homes elsewhere in syria or jordan?

    you cannot expect me to take these comments seriously

  10. Logipundit Says:

    OK don’t then…

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: