But we don't put too much weight on historicity of scripture, do we? The Philisitines (Akkadians, Hittites, and goodness know how many other tribes and nations) vs Hebrews was recorded in detail by one side. Being sacred texts, the chroniclers were most interested in recording God's perspective and relationship. So, if we were to move the Hebrew methodology to present-day Palestine history would start roughly in the 1920's with God commanding the Zionists to kick some arab butt.

In the same sense, the chroniclers of the old testement didn't give a care about the history of Canaan before God commanded the boyz to stake turf. Now if one were to take scripture as historical, then the Hebrews could always exersize a prior claim on any handful of dirt on the planet. Yaweh was their God, not a god of a buncha gentiles.

Dunno where I'm going with all of this except perhaps that I think invoking scripture to settle factual disputes is a misuse of both reason and of scripture.

Aww, being Jewish doesn't give one a pass on being anti-semitic. After all, many arabs are semitic but either muslim or Christian. Also, lots of Jews are not semitic--like the Ethiopean and probably a bunch of northern European Ashkenazim (???????). Also, there are various self-loathing types within any national or ethnic group.

The Zionist rebels in Palestine fit the modern definition of terrorists just fine. Bombing the King David in blatant disregard of civilians was classically terroristic.

B

So then by extraction Bot, would you say that the US supports a regime born of terrorist acts? Getting crazy here, I know.

Yes.

But in diplomacy, the sins of the Fathers are not visited upon their sons.

For example, look at Khaddaffii, the emergent man of peace.

In all this discussion it is good to remind ourselves that Israel and Turkey have the most stable, open, democratic society in that part of the world, warts and all. Telling the truth about their past does nothing to demean what they have accomplished. I hope history will guide them to more productive views of a free society.

B

I may be going out on a limb here, but I suppose it's all a matter of degree to me. Yes, you can call it terrorism, but it did have a specific purpose and from their perspective, it was provoked. I would in no way compare that action to the 1972 Munich Massacre or the random Palestinian acts of violence targeted exclusively at civilians in order to promote terror.

In other words, is it still terrorism if the primary purpose is something other than the promotion of terror?

McNamara, in the Fog of War, admits that Allied fire bombing of Germany and Japan in WW II was terrorism because it was the deliberate bombing of civilians and non-military targets to terrorize the enemy population. So the whole situation of the US condemning Palestine terrorism is the pot calling the kettle black. When the US and Britain were in the same situation, they did the same thing.

This is not to justify it.

Even though I think that there is 'history' in the OT, I wasn't suggesting we use it to settle current territorial disputes. Z was looking for a text which justified a single ethnic nation state. That's essentially what the OT does.

__________________
1977 300d 70k--sold 08
1985 300TD 185k+
1984 307d 126k--sold 8/03
1985 409d 65k--sold 06
1984 300SD 315k--daughter's car
1979 300SD 122k--sold 2/11
1999 Fuso FG Expedition Camper
1993 GMC Sierra 6.5 TD 4x4
1982 Bluebird Wanderlodge CAT 3208--Sold 2/13

Even the principals that created the WWII strategic bombing campaign said that terror was part of their plan. They justified it by saying the Nazi's did it first. That would have been the same argument had the Nazis used gas and it is arguably acceptible in "law". Especially if you win. Interestingly, the results of strategic bombing were analyzed by McClone and others post WWII and they found no appreciable impact on the German will from the bombing. It affected them just as it had the British--made them madder than hell an determined to make the allies pay in blood.

concerning OT, I re-read your posts and completely misunderstood your intent. Probably the first time, right?

Concerning the King David incedent (and there were others), the rules of war indicate that combatants should do everything possible to avoid unnecessary civilian casualties. Targeting a hotel known to be occupied by civilians is pretty bloody awful. Imagine what Al Jazeera or the peace-at-any-price people would say if we did that, even accidentally.

B

Anti-Zionism is not anti-Judism.

http://www.jewsagainstzionism.com/

I was going to ask that we not use ancient texts of dubious origin to justify the social/state order in my initial request for info, but I didn't want to create a loaded question. I still would like to read a rational and objective justification for the state sanctioned primacy of one ethnic/religious class above all others.

I may be poorly informed, but it's my understanding that both the old and new testaments were originally handed down as part of oral traditions, and were not actually transcribed depictions of real-time events, statements and activities.

Again, I want to emphasize that I'm not trying to put anyone on the defensive or 'mix things up'. I honestly would like to understand how this situation can be rationally explained from a public policy perspective.

Some people believe that God is incapable of error; the Bible says it is the word of God written faithfully by men; God told the writers what to write; since God cannot be wrong, neither can the Bible. Therefore, the Bible is perfect in every way and must be understood literally and obeyed perfectly. Any apparent discrepancy or conflict in teh Bible is due to the reader's poor, flawed unfaithful understanding of God's holy word and "Plan".

Substitute Koran for the Bible and you get both sides in the God Damned conflict.

Folks who believe in the inerrancy of holy scripture and the real presence of God in their lives and the reality of heaven and hell would be stupid NOT to follow the literal word of the Bible.

And that's how you get fanatics.

B

Exactly. The Bible is either the word of God or it isn't. If there is a single passage in the Bible that you simply cannot accept, you must discredit the entire work. I've always thought that picking and choosing what to believe from the Bible is the height of religious arrogance.

I was only half-joking when I suggested the OT. No, it wasn't a transcription, but neither is any history so I do think it is a fairly useful book for understanding the general sociological processes related to theories of ethnic superiority.
But, the half-joke was a result of ignorance. I don't know of any book that rationally and objectively argues for the value of a single ethnic state. I can't imagine such a theory devoid of a claim of religious superiority. Can anyone think of a counterexample?
It seems to me to be an impossible ideal to hold in a world of free individual choice. Sexual attraction crosses ethnic lines, so any single ethnic state, unless isolated on an island, will have to forbid sex and love between different ethnic groups. This is hard to enforce and will ultimately undermine the idea of ethnic purity and superiority. (assuming that the political theory is based on a claim to ethinic superiority--perhaps all theories are not)

__________________
1977 300d 70k--sold 08
1985 300TD 185k+
1984 307d 126k--sold 8/03
1985 409d 65k--sold 06
1984 300SD 315k--daughter's car
1979 300SD 122k--sold 2/11
1999 Fuso FG Expedition Camper
1993 GMC Sierra 6.5 TD 4x4
1982 Bluebird Wanderlodge CAT 3208--Sold 2/13

Anti Semitism is where race-hatred disguises itself as politics. If Israel was wiped off the planet, what would change? Oh yeah, some group would define another target of hate. Not enough of that.........................................................

__________________
...Tracy

'00 ML320 "Casper"
'92 400E "Stella"

What bums me about Israeli's is that they, of all people, should have empathy for people unjustly oppressed.

Yeah, I know that there are plenty of evil guys willing to do horrible things against Israel, but there are also many, many good people treated abominably by the Israeli gov. Where can those people turn for justice?

B

Exactly....