posted on Dec, 11 2004 @ 06:43 AM
Allright, I must understand that your knowladge of history is not enough. Well let me refresh your thoughts about the claim that Israel appeared of
nowhere and stole the holy land as seen by the Muslim propoganda.
(This is a long read, however you should read this in order to get rid of the Muslim propoganda ideas).
The Romans (Italy) were those who named the land of Israel as Palestine when it was under their occupation. So this is just another name to the land
of Israel as same as the ancient name- Zion.
The origin of the word "Zionism" is the biblical word "Zion," often used as a synonym for Jerusalem and the Land of Israel (Eretz Yisrael).
Zionism is an ideology which expresses the yearning of Jews the world over for their historical homeland - Zion, the Land of Israel.
The hope of returning to their homeland was first held by Jews exiled to Babylon some 2,500 years ago - a hope which subsequently became a reality.
("By the waters of Babylon, there we sat down and wept when we remembered Zion." Psalms 137:1). Thus political Zionism, which coalesced in the 19th
century, invented neither the concept nor the practice of return. Rather, it appropriated an ancient idea and an ongoing active movement, and adapted
them to meet the needs and spirit of the times.
The core of the Zionist idea appears in the Declaration of the Establishment of the State of Israel (14 May 1948), which states, inter alia, that:
"The Land of Israel was the birthplace of the Jewish people. Here their spiritual, religious and political identity was shaped. Here they first
attained to statehood, created cultural values of national and universal significance and gave to the world the eternal Book of Books.
After being forcibly exiled from their land, the people kept faith with it throughout their dispersion and never ceased to pray and hope for their
return to it and for the restoration in it of their political freedom."
The Foundations of Zionism
The idea of Zionism is based on the long connection between the Jewish people and its land, a link which began almost 4,000 years ago when Abraham
settled in Canaan, later known as the Land of Israel.
Central to Zionist thought is the concept of the Land of Israel as the historical birthplace of the Jewish people and the belief that Jewish life
elsewhere is a life of exile. Moses Hess, in his book Rome and Jerusalem (1844), expresses this idea:
"Two periods of time shaped the development of Jewish civilization: the first, after the liberation from Egypt, and the second, the return from
Babylon. The third shall come with the redemption from the third exile."
Over centuries in the Diaspora, the Jews maintained a strong and unique relationship with their historical homeland, and manifested their yearning for
Zion through rituals and literature.
While Zionism expresses the historical link binding the Jewish people to the Land of Israel, modern Zionism might not have arisen as an active
national movement in the 19th century without contemporary antisemitism preceded by of centuries of persecution.
Over the centuries, Jews were expelled from almost every European country - Germany and France, Portugal and Spain, England and Wales - a cumulative
experience which had a profound impact, especially in the 19th century when Jews had abandoned hope of fundamental change in their lives. Out of this
milieu came Jewish leaders who turned to Zionism as a result of the virulent antisemitism in the societies surrounding them. Thus Moses Hess, shaken
by the blood libel of Damascus (1844), became the father of Zionist socialism; Leon Pinsker, shocked by the pogroms (1881-1882) which followed the
assassination of Czar Alexander II, assumed leadership in the Hibbat Zion movement; and Theodor Herzl, who as a journalist in Paris experienced the
venomous antisemitic campaign of the Dreyfus case (1896), organized Zionism into a political movement.
The Zionist movement aimed to solve the "Jewish problem," the problem of a perennial minority, a people subjected to repeated pogroms and
persecution, a homeless community whose alienness was underscored by discrimination wherever Jews settled. Zionism aspired to deal with this situation
by effecting a return to the historical homeland of the Jews - the Land of Israel.
The history of aliya, much of which was in direct response to acts of murder and discrimination against Jews, provides strong proof for the Zionist
argument that a Jewish state in the Land of Israel, with a Jewish majority, is the only solution to the "Jewish problem."
So let us see if we have this straight. The anti-Zionists (mostly Arabs and Muslims) claim that the Jews have no right to the land of Israel because
before Israel was re-created in 1948, it had been almost 1900 years since the last time that the Jews exercised sovereignty over the Land of Israel.
And the anti-Zionists claim that it is absurd to argue that anyone still has rights to land that was last governed with sovereignty 1900 years ago.
And on what basis do they argue that the Arabs have some legitimate claim to these same lands? On the basis of the claim that the Arabs last exercised
sovereignty over that land 1000 years ago.
You all with me? 1900 year-old-claims are inadmissible. Thousand-year-old claims trump them and are indisputable.
Now let us emphasize that even the thousand-year-old Arab claim is not the same thing as a claim on behalf of Palestinian Arabs. After all, the last
time that Palestinian Arabs held sovereignty over the lands of "Palestine" was ... never. There has never been a Palestinian Arab state in
It is true that Arabs once exercised sovereignty over parts or all of historic Palestine. There were small Arab kingdoms in the south of "Palestine"
already in late Biblical days, and they were important military and political allies of the Jews, who exercised sovereignty back then in the Land of
Israel. After the rise of Islam, historic "Palestine" was indeed part of a larger Arab kingdom or caliphate. But that ended in 1071, when Palestine
came under the rule of the Suljuk Turks. That was the last time Palestine had an Arab ruler. After that, it was always ruled by a long series of
Ottomans, Mamluks, other Turks, Crusaders, British, and - briefly - French. And in any case, why does the fact that Palestine once belonged to a
larger Arab empire make it any more "Arab" than the fact that it also was once part of larger Roman, Greek, Persian, Turkish, or British empires?
Now it is true that historic Palestine probably once had a population majority who were Arabs, but today it has a population majority who are Jews. So
if population majorities are what determine legitimacy of sovereignty, Israel is at least as legitimate as any other country.
So why exactly do the anti-Zionists claim that a thousand-year old claim by Arabs who were never ruled by Palestinian Arabs has legitimacy, while a
1900-year claim by Jews to the land should be rejected as absurd, even though the United Nations granted Israel sovereignty in 1947? The anti-Zionists
say it is because the thousand-year-old Arab claim is more recent than the older Jewish claim. But if national claims to lands become more legitimate
when they are more recent, then surely the most legitimate of all is that of the Jews of Israel to the lands of Israel, because it is the most
The other claim by the anti-Zionists is that Jews have no rights to the lands of Israel (historic Palestine) because they moved there from some other
places. Now never mind that there was actually always a Jewish minority living in the lands of Israel even when it was under the sovereignty of
Romans, Greeks, Arabs, Crusaders, Turks or British. Does the fact that Jews moved to the land of Israel from other places disqualify them from
exercising sovereignty there? The claim would be absurd enough even if we were to ignore that fact that most "Palestinian Arabs" also moved to
Palestine from neighboring countries, starting in the late nineteenth century. But more generally, does the fact that a people moves from one locality
to another deprive it of its claims to legitimate sovereignty in its new abode? Does this fact necessitate the conclusion that they need to pack up
and leave, as the anti-Zionists insist?
If it does, then it goes without saying that the Americans and Canadians must lead the way and show the Israelis the light, by returning all lands
that they seized from the Indians and the Mexicans to their original owners and going back to whence they came. For that matter, the Mexicans of
Spanish ancestry also need to leave. The Anglo-Saxons, meaning the English, will be invited to turn the British isles over to their rightful original
Celtic and Druid owners, while they return to their own ancestral Saxon homeland in northern Germany and Denmark. The Danes of course will be asked to
move aside, in fact to move back to their Norwegian and Swedish homelands, to make room for the returning Anglo-Saxons.
But that is just a beginning. The Spanish will be called upon to leave the Iberian peninsula that they wrongfully occupy, and return it to the
Celtiberians. Similarly the Portuguese occupiers will leave their lands and return them to the Lusitanians. The Magyars will go back where they came
from and leave Hungary to its true owners. The Australians and New Zealanders obviously will have to end their occupations of lands that do not belong
to them. The Thais will leave Thailand. The Bulgarians will return to their Volga homeland and abandon occupied Bulgaria. Anyone speaking Spanish will
be expected to end his or her forced occupation of Latin America. It goes without saying that the French will lose almost all their lands to their
rightful owners. The Turks will go back to Mongolia and leave Anatolia altogether, returning it to the Greeks. The Germans will go back to Gotland.
The Italians will return the boot to the Etruscans and Greeks.
Ah, but that leaves the Arabs. First, all of northern Africa, from Mauritania to Egypt and Sudan, will have to be immediately abandoned by the illegal
Arab occupiers and squatters, and returned to their lawful original Berber, Punic, Greek, and Vandal owners. Occupied Syria and Lebanon must be
released at once from the cruel occupation of the Arabs imperialist aggressors. Iraq must be returned to the Assyrians and Chaldeans. Southern Arabia
must be returned to the Abyssinians. The Arabs may return control of the central portion of the Arabian peninsula as their homeland. But not the oil
Oh, and the Palestinian infiltrators, usurpers and squatters will of course have to return the lands they are illegally and wrongfully occupying,
turning them over to their legal and rightful owners, which would of course be the Jews!
And right after all this, Israel will be happy to implement the Road Map in full!