London's Mayor

[ButterflyMaiden]

Has Ken Livingstone lost the plot ?

 

Immediately after the first bomb atrocity in London, two weeks ago, he was statesman like in his demeanour and drew admiration from all elements of British society.

 

The passage of time (13 days) seems to have been a period of reflection for Mr Livingstone.

 

He gave a interview to Radio 4, which has been posted elsewhere on this forum, in which he maintained his outrage at the London bombers, but,surprisingly, seemed to offer comfort to those involved in terror attacks,including suicide bombers,in Israel.

His comments, which carry weight by reason of his status as London's mayor, have attracted strongly worded criticism from the global media as well as from Governments in Europe and further afield.

For the avoidance of doubt, you should check Mr Livingstone has not been misquoted, he hasn't.

All of this begs the question as to Mr Livingstone's motives.

He does have a long history of making remarks which, rightly or wrongly, have been construed as anti Semitic. He has also made no secret of his animosity towards Israel.

Setting aside the suspicion he may be anti Semitic, does his political stance against Israel justify his overt support for terrorism in that Nation State ?

It does seem to me that Mr Livingstone's position has now become untenable.

His reluctance to criticise terrorist acts in Israel is unlikely to act as a deterrent

to extremist acts elsewhere in the world, including the UK.

Is it time for Ken to go ?

[marcus]

Don't think its time for him to go as yet, or if at all.

 

But his appiontment as Major was a little supprising.

 

Must be difficult

[ian rush]

Don't think its time for him to go as yet, or if at all.

 

But his *appiontment* as Major was a little supprising.

 

Must be difficult

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

He was elected. Just like the Island's MHK's

[Lonan3]

Has Ken Livingstone lost the plot ?

 

Immediately after the first bomb atrocity in London, two weeks ago, he was statesman like in his demeanour and drew admiration from all elements of British society.

 

The passage of time (13 days) seems to have been a period of reflection for Mr Livingstone.

 

He gave a interview to Radio 4, which has been posted elsewhere on this forum, in which he maintained his outrage at the London bombers, but,surprisingly, seemed to offer comfort to those involved in terror attacks,including suicide bombers,in Israel.

His comments, which carry weight by reason of his status as London's mayor, have attracted strongly worded criticism from the global media as well as from Governments in Europe and further afield.

For the avoidance of doubt, you should check Mr Livingstone has not been misquoted, he hasn't.

All of this begs the question as to Mr Livingstone's motives.

He does have a long history of making remarks which, rightly or wrongly, have been construed as anti Semitic. He has also made no secret of his animosity towards Israel.

Setting aside the suspicion he may be anti Semitic, does his political stance against Israel justify his overt support for terrorism in that Nation State ?

It does seem to me that Mr Livingstone's position has now become untenable.

His reluctance to criticise terrorist acts in Israel is unlikely to act as a deterrent

to extremist acts elsewhere in the world, including the UK.

Is it time for Ken to go ?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I think it ought to be said that anti-Zionism is not necessarily the same as anti-semitism. The creaton of a nation state wasn't supported by the entire Jewish community itself apart from anything else.

There has also been a complaint that the new pope was equally selective in his condemnation of terrorist acts - does that mean its time for him to go, too?

[ButterflyMaiden]

I think it ought to be said that anti-Zionism is not necessarily the same as anti-semitism. The creaton of a nation state wasn't supported by the entire Jewish community itself apart from anything else.

There has also been a complaint that the new pope was equally selective in his condemnation of terrorist acts - does that mean its time for him to go, too?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I dont think the Pope has been accused of offering comfort to terrorists or that he has said anything which may have been (mis) interpreted as such.

You are correct. Anti Zionism is not the same as anti Semitism. Ken Livingstone has, rightly or wrongly, frequently been criticised for being anti semitic. His unrelenting stance against Israel, on the other hand, is a matter of record.

[Rog]

I think it ought to be said that anti-Zionism is not necessarily the same as anti-semitism. The creaton of a nation state wasn't supported by the entire Jewish community itself apart from anything else.

There has also been a complaint that the new pope was equally selective in his condemnation of terrorist acts - does that mean its time for him to go, too?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

For Gods Rotweiler to go? He should never have been. A VERY politcal apointment if ever there was but that's not the main point to my post.

 

 

 

Let’s cut to the chase. Never mind calling it ‘anti-Semitism’. Let’s call it what it is. Jew hating.

 

Zionism is absolutely a Jewish thing.

 

It as about the restoration of the Jewish nation state on ( a small part of) the historic lands (Eretz-Israel) of the people of the Tribes of Israel.

 

In fact the current boundaries of the modern Land of Israel are somewhat less than the tradition lands entirely due to the actions of the British government whilst they held the mandate to govern Palestine after the fall of the Ottoman Empire during which they gave away most of what the international community had decided upon to be the Israeli State national lands, but that’s now history albeit a very sore point with people such as myself.

 

To for one moment in time imagine that the claim that ‘Anti-Zionism’ is not the same as Jew Hating’ is utter garbage.

 

Zionism IS Judaism at a national level rather than at a simple religious level. Being a Jew doesn’t mean a person a Zionist (though it should) but apart from the few (VEREY few) gentile supporters who have seen the reality of the situation, being a Zionist certainly does mean the person is a Jew.

 

I am a 100% dyed in the wool Zionist.

 

I may not agree fully with all of the actions of Likud (the conservative party presently in power in Israel) but that’s another matter altogether. It isn’t necessary for a person to be a Likud supporter to be a Zionist though unsurprisingly most are. At the same time not all Zionists are red in tooth and claw arab haters in fact I would suggest that the majority of Zionists are simply concerned with the advancement of the nation of Israel and its contused security.

 

Not all but the majority.

 

So lets once and for all see if the idea that being anti-Zionist doesn’t amount to being Jew hating can be laid to rest.

 

I know that there are more web pages than you could shake a stick at that promote ‘I’m a frummer Yiddle but I’m not a Zionist’ and I know that there are all sorts of articles written in the same vein but when push comes to shove a Jew who claims that he is not a Zionist is missing a fundamental point about what he is claiming to be.

 

So let’s cut the crap. A Zionist IS a Jew. Perhaps not a Likud supporter, but a Jew nonetheless. Declare yourself as being Anti-Zionist and you’re declaring yourself as a Jew Hater. That simple.

[simon]

It as about the restoration of the Jewish nation state on ( a small part of) the historic lands (Eretz-Israel) of the people of the Tribes of Israel.

 

When you say "restoration" - well was there previously a Jewish nation state?

[Rog]

It as about the restoration of the Jewish nation state on ( a small part of) the historic lands (Eretz-Israel) of the people of the Tribes of Israel.

 

When you say "restoration" - well was there previously a Jewish nation state?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Yes.

[Lonan3]

Just to clarify. This is actually taken from an article in the Guardian, but I think it's fairly balanced from the various books on Jewish history I've read.

 

The Political Dictionary of the State of Israel is understandably more garrulous. Its account of Zionism covers three-and-a-half pages, beginning with: "The movement for national revival and independence of the Jewish people in Eretz Yizrael [Hebrew for the land of Israel]. The name Zionism was coined by the Viennese Jewish writer Nathan Birnbaum (1863-1937) in 1885, and is derived from the word "Zion" - one of the biblical names for Jerusalem."

There has always been intense debate about the definition and the nature of Zionism, as the Political Dictionary makes clear. From the first stirrings of the movement in the mid-19th century, there has been constant reinterpretation of what and even where the Jewish homeland should be.

Some believed it should be based on religious principles, others that it should be a secular state. Some argued that there should be no state at all, but rather a Jewish cultural base in Palestine. And others, hungering for an empty land which Jews could call their own, seriously pursued the bizarre "Uganda plan" which envisaged recreating Israel in British East Africa.

The Uganda plan was finally rejected by the seventh Zionist congress in 1905, but the movement continued to be wracked by dissent. In the first world war, some Zionist leaders favoured a pro-British policy, to the dismay of pro-German Zionists in the United States.

Later, as the tempo of Jewish emigration to Palestine picked up, there were fierce disputes about the pace of movement towards nationhood.

Even after the bloody birth of the state of Israel in 1948, Zionism has continued to elude an exact definition. As the Political Dictionary puts it: "Since 1948 Zionism has been broadened to imply the identification of world Jewry with Israel ... Zionism has also given financial, political and moral support to the Jewish state."

To blur matters still further, there have always been Jews who are not Zionist. Many orthodox religious Jews, even in Israel, believe that the creation by man of a Jewish state is an implicit usurpation of God's role.

And there are many liberal Jews, both in Israel and the diaspora, who are distinctly queasy about the 1967 conquest and subsequent occupation and colonisation of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, and who dislike the equation of Zionism with Israeli expansionism.

Anti-Zionism is also an ambiguous term, and of course depends on which view of Zionism is being opposed.

Most Arabs could be considered anti-Zionist because they dislike the very existence of the state of Israel. Others - Jews as well as gentiles - might describe themselves as anti-Zionist because they disapprove not of Israel, but of its policies.

 

(The italics are mine)

[Rog]

I know that there are more web pages than you could shake a stick at that promote ‘I’m a frummer Yiddle but I’m not a Zionist’ and I know that there are all sorts of articles written in the same vein but when push comes to shove a Jew who claims that he is not a Zionist is missing a fundamental point about what he is claiming to be.

 

So let’s cut the crap. A Zionist IS a Jew. Perhaps not a Likud supporter, but a Jew nonetheless. Declare yourself as being Anti-Zionist and you’re declaring yourself as a Jew Hater. That simple.

[ButterflyMaiden]

I know that there are more web pages than you could shake a stick at that promote ‘I’m a frummer Yiddle but I’m not a Zionist’ and I know that there are all sorts of articles written in the same vein but when push comes to shove a Jew who claims that he is not a Zionist is missing a fundamental point about what he is claiming to be.

 

So let’s cut the crap. A Zionist IS a Jew. Perhaps not a Likud supporter, but a Jew nonetheless. Declare yourself as being Anti-Zionist and you’re declaring yourself as a Jew Hater. That simple.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Rog, this is very interesting. I hope you wont be offended if I ask a question or two.

I have met people who make a distinction between "Judaism" as a religion and "Jew" as an identity or race. Is that a legitimate distinction in your opinion ?

I also made a very brief foray onto the net after reading your post and, to my surprise, found numerous websites, purporting to be scripted by Jews, but railing against Zionism. I include a link to an example.Example WebSite

First I should say I have no information as to the credibilty or otherwise of the example I have posted ..it is just that ..an example.

Do you believe these sites are actually what they purport to be ? i.e. are these sites authored by Jewish people or are they authored by right wing organisations as a form of anti - Jewish propaganda ?

Apologies again if you consider this post inappropriate in any way .. I would not like you to think I am being mischievious.

[Lonan3]

I know that there are more web pages than you could shake a stick at that promote ‘I’m a frummer Yiddle but I’m not a Zionist’ and I know that there are all sorts of articles written in the same vein but when push comes to shove a Jew who claims that he is not a Zionist is missing a fundamental point about what he is claiming to be.

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

With respect, Rog - I only used the Guardian summary for convenience and my information/opinion is certainly not limited to 'web pages.' As an (amateur) historian, I would recommend:

Arthur A Cohen, The Natural and Supaernatural Jew (London 1967)

H H Ben Sassoon (ed.), A History of the Jewish People (trans., Harvard 1976)

Howard Sachar, Europe Leaves the Middle East 1936-1954 (London 1974)

Paul Johnson, A History of the Jews (London 1987)

Not a comprehensive list by any means, but fairly informative, I would think.

[Rog]

I know that there are more web pages than you could shake a stick at that promote ‘I’m a frummer Yiddle but I’m not a Zionist’ and I know that there are all sorts of articles written in the same vein but when push comes to shove a Jew who claims that he is not a Zionist is missing a fundamental point about what he is claiming to be.

 

So let’s cut the crap. A Zionist IS a Jew. Perhaps not a Likud supporter, but a Jew nonetheless. Declare yourself as being Anti-Zionist and you’re declaring yourself as a Jew Hater. That simple.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Rog, this is very interesting. I hope you wont be offended if I ask a question or two.

I have met people who make a distinction between "Judaism" as a religion and "Jew" as an identity or race. Is that a legitimate distinction in your opinion ?

I also made a very brief foray onto the net after reading your post and, to my surprise, found numerous websites, purporting to be scripted by Jews, but railing against Zionism. I include a link to an example.Example WebSite

First I should say I have no information as to the credibilty or otherwise of the example I have posted ..it is just that ..an example.

Do you believe these sites are actually what they purport to be ? i.e. are these sites authored by Jewish people or are they authored by right wing organisations as a form of anti - Jewish propaganda ?

Apologies again if you consider this post inappropriate in any way .. I would not like you to think I am being mischievious.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

In strict terms a race is a genetic grouping and as Jews originally were Semitic so a racially pure Jew is a particular race. The gotcha is that Judaism is ‘automatically’ carried down by the Female line alone so there are very few racially pure Jews.

 

Identity is another matter altogether. A Jewish person, any Jewish person is entitled to Israeli citizenship – I myself hold dual nationality..

 

It must also be made clear that being Jewish is NOT a prerequisite to obtaining Jewish nationality however.

 

As regards Jewish people who distance themselves from Zionism – there are many who do.

That is their prerogative. It does not make them any more or any less Jews. There are also many Zionist people who do not approve of the right wing Likud party or the even more right wing extremists.

 

Being Zionist amounts to NOTHING more than promoting the existence of the State of Israel.

 

The assumption that Zionism amounts to rabid right-wing activists who want to kebab all arabs and annex everything is wrong though a few such idiots do exist.

 

Web sites.

 

.There are also a great many web sites that CLAIM to be originated by Jews that slag off Israel yet are not founded by Jewish people but simply part of the propaganda war, much as many anti-islamic web sites are actually set up by non-moslems again for propaganda reasons.

 

There are also a many web sites that ARE set up by Jewish people who se Israel as being immaterial to being Jewish and others who simply deplore what they see being reported as taking place there. .

 

In short as regards the sites in question, some are real, some are not. Some Jews see the existence of Israel as being key to their identity, traditions, and roots, others especially (maybe surprisingly) in the US do not and see being Jewish as little more than a social thing or something that needs no defined home.

 

Put any N Jewish people together and you will get two to the Nth power (at least) of rigidly held opinions.

 

Me? I’m Zionist and generally in support of Likud and their policies. I just hope that hammas can be crushed. The untimely death of arafat (it should have taken place years ago) has seen signs of peace breaking out as arab attacks tail off and that must prove something in itself, and it is only the likes of hammas, the al asqua brigade and other assorted scum that now stand between peace and progress for ALL in the region, or more death and injury.

[Gladys]

In strict terms a race is a genetic grouping and as Jews originally were Semitic so a racially pure Jew is a particular race.  The gotcha is that Judaism is ‘automatically’ carried down by the Female line alone so there are very few racially pure Jews.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Wow, so if the line is carried by the male line it will remain pure?!! I have to say I know very little about Judaism and the Jewish question, but the old saying "it takes a wise child to know its father" has some resonance in this ancient writ of determining your membership of any group!

[Rog]

In strict terms a race is a genetic grouping and as Jews originally were Semitic so a racially pure Jew is a particular race.  The gotcha is that Judaism is ‘automatically’ carried down by the Female line alone so there are very few racially pure Jews.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Wow, so if the line is carried by the male line it will remain pure?!! I have to say I know very little about Judaism and the Jewish question, but the old saying "it takes a wise child to know its father" has some resonance in this ancient writ of determining your membership of any group!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

No, nothing about male line racial purity at all.

 

Simply that being recognised as being a Jewish person does not require both parents to be and that as the Woman is the traditional keeper of the home and so will keep a ‘kosher’ home it is assumed that a child will learn the practical aspects of Jewish life from her.

 

If a Jewish man ‘marries out’ the child can be received into a synagogue, be educated as a Jewish child, attend classes, learn Hebrew, and receive Bar Mitzpha (or Bat Mitzpha if a girl) and so become a Jewish man or woman in every respect.

 

As regards knowing ones own father, I doubt if our lot are any different than any other!

 

All that would be needed would be for the goyim to know the protocols of Yiddish foreplay --- several hours of begging and the promise of a new mink coat!