Until 1967 religious Zionists in Israel were marginalized both by the secular majority, and by the more visibly religious groups that seemed to offer a more authentic, uncompromising brand of religion.
The Six-Day War of June 1967 resulted in the the capture of East Jerusalem and other territories of the Biblical Land of Israel.
The long-range fate of these territories, and their Arab inhabitants, became a major controversy of Israeli policy makers. From a purely secular perspective, the choice was between the military security that was offered by the expanded borders and the relative demographic stability that would be achieved by excluding their large Arab population from the domain of a Jewish state.
A religious claim provided strong justification for those who wished to hold on to the occupied territories: If the State of Israel was viewed as the unfolding of a Messianic scenario, then the miraculous victory of the Six-Day War was an essential stage in that process. The territories belong to the Jewish people (i.e., the State of Israel) by Divine decree and they may not be handed over to foreign hands.
The issue of territories, viewed in an eschatological context, became the defining feature for broad segments of religious Zionism in the post-1967 era.
Under the spiritual leadership of Rabbi Kook's son Zvi Yehudah Kook, with its centre in the yeshivah founded by the elder Kook, Jerusalem's "Merkaz Harav," thousands of modern young religious Jews campaigned actively against any territorial compromise, and established numerous settlements throughout Judea and Samaria. Many of these settlements, though originally founded illegally, were subsequently granted official recognition by the Israeli government, especially under right-wing regimes.
The most powerful political voice of the movement against territorial compromise became "Gush Emunim" (the Bloc of the Faithful).
However the fundamental policies of Gush Emunim filtered down to the mainstream, particularly to religious educational networks, in which a land-centered nationalism was presented as the highest form of religious virtue, and the histories of Zionism and the State of Israel were viewed as irreversible steps in the unfolding Messianic fulfillment.
The aspirations of Gush Emunim were widely respected by the Jewish public, especially as long as Arab intransigence made the return of the territories a far-off theoretical possibility.
When peace agreements with Egypt (1977) and the Palestine Liberation Front (1993) put the return of occupied lands onto the actual political agenda, Gush Emunim found itself in active opposition to the policies and laws of the State of Israel.
In the '90's mainstream Rabbis were ordering religious Jews to disobey military commands to evacuate occupied lands, and branding Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin a "traitor" to the higher Jewish cause. A follower of these views assassinated Rabin in November 1995.
The Gush Emunim movement, like the secular right-wing parties, was generally vague or ambivalent about the status of the non-Jewish residents of the occupied territories. A more extreme position was taken by Meir Cahane, whose banned racist party "Kach" scorned democracy as an un-Jewish import, and advocated laws that would prohibit sexual and social contact with Arabs, actively calling for the eviction of Arabs from territories that belonged by rights to the Jews.
http://www.ucalgary.ca/~elsegal/363_Transp/Orthodoxy/Gush.html
There you go. My first copy and paste thing without a statement or anything...really.
But...you gotta love those zionists!!!
Seriously! Did my grandparents fight for equal rights for these mother-shaggers? Holy hell.
And yet somehow the western media forgets all the atrocities and mayhem
caused by the Zionists and label freedom fighters as "Terrorists
Fundamentalists & Extremists"
The world forgets how Israel forced its existence in these lands. But if any
one retaliates against the unjust occupation, then they are labelled savage
murderers and their act is world widely condemned.
Wake up world, open your eyes.
Originally posted by PeachyThese "Zionists" are surrounded by Jew-hating Arabs who would love to see nothing short of another Halocaust. That's why they fight foir their lives and kick Arab azz every time the "freedom-fighters" you call the Arabs try to exterminate them. As long as there is a God of Abraham and a powerful United States, Israel will survive. Europe couldn't care less about Israel, even though they where responsible for 6,000,000 Jewish deaths. I am not pro-Israeli either. I don't like my tax money of 3,000,000,000 going to them annually, the unilateralism shown by the U.S. Gov't. There needs to be a peaceful solution to the region because the Jews are going NOWHERE. I want the Palistinians to get their share also.....
And yet somehow the western media forgets all the atrocities and mayhem
caused by the Zionists and label freedom fighters as "Terrorists
Fundamentalists & Extremists"
The world forgets how Israel forced its existence in these lands. But if any
one retaliates against the unjust occupation, then they are labelled savage
murderers and their act is world widely condemned.
Wake up world, open your eyes.
Originally posted by Faith No MoreFirstly, I wasn't talking to you.
1."The Zionists invaded Palestine, don't you understand?"
It wasn't Palestinian land to begin with. Palestine took over the Jewish land. Then lost it, being so weak and helpplees as usuall. The Zionists then tool over the land and let the arabs live in it even though you don't deserve it.
2."Arabs would like to see them exterminated as they want th ...[text shortened]... ive in peace? why seek fight in Israel. You will never take ove Israel. Never.
But I'll reply, so you don’t feel left out..
On your points above;
1, You have no clue. Read history then come and debate. Go on, like a good boy.
2, We are doing something about it. Haven't you heard yet? Hamas won!!
3, Of course makes no sense to you, you need English lessons.
4, As with number 1. If you know your history, you would have known that the British gave Palestine to the Zionists. Look up; Balfour Declaration.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balfour_Declaration_1917
Before this, the Zionists were offered Uganda, ignorant.
5, You denied "rape" but happy to admit "killing" & " torture"? nice.
6, *yaaawn*
7, Advice; use a spell check tool before posting.
Originally posted by kmax87Zionist myth.
if its possible to engage in this debate without going nuts, what exactly would your view or opinion be of Israel making any claim on a region that they were unceremoniously driven from 1936 years ago?
"At the time of Christ the Jewish state was ruled by puppet kings of the Romans, the Herods. When the Jews revolted in 66 AD, the Romans destroyed the Temple in Jerusalem (70 AD). The Bar Kokba revolt between 132 and 135 AD was also suppressed, Jericho and Bethlehem were destroyed, and the Jews were barred from Jerusalem. The Roman Emperor Hadrian determined to wipe out the identity of Israel-Judah-Judea. Therefore, he took the name Palastina and imposed it on all the Land of Israel. At the same time, he changed the name of Jerusalem to Aelia Capitolina. The Romans killed many Jews and sold many more in slavery. Some of those who survived left the devastated country (and established Jewish communities throughout the Middle East) but there was never a complete abandonment of the Land of Israel. That is, there were always Jews and Jewish communities in Palestine, though the size and conditions of those communities fluctuated greatly. "(http://www.palestinefacts.org/pf_early_palestine_brief_history.php)
" In 1099, Palestine was captured by the Crusaders, establishing the Latin Kingdom. Jews were seen by the Crusaders as infidels, as bad as the Muslim occupiers of Jerusalem, and were slaughtered by Christian soldiers along their way to liberate Jerusalem and then thousands in the city when they got there. Following the first Crusade, a Papal Bull was issued in 1119 AD to reinforce St. Augustine's earlier plea, in 427 AD, not to kill the Jews, but to allow them to wander the earth as evidence of their rejection by God. "
Originally posted by Bosse de NageIs there an alternative Islamic myth, because for my part I've accepted these myths as facts for as long as I can remember. For the very least to what extent is the Islamic Temple on the Mount occupying a site that had been the Jews most sacred site and location of the former Solomaic temple and is there some obscure statute of limitations that applies that allows the redevelopment of that site after a period of 600 odd years even though the former temple had proudly stood on that ground for a little over a millenium. Is Islam's right to the site just another example of 'possesion is nine tenths of the law?'
Zionist myth.........
Originally posted by kmax87Mythology is the operating language of politics, every faction having its own bespoke version. For my part, I deconstruct myths as a hobby.
Is there an alternative Islamic myth, because for my part I've accepted these myths as facts for as long as I can remember. For the very least to what extent is the Islamic Temple on the Mount occupying a site that had been the Jews most sacred site and location of the former Solomaic temple and is there some obscure statute of limitations that applies that ...[text shortened]... Is Islam's right to the site just another example of 'possesion is nine tenths of the law?'
The first Israelite temple in Jerusalem was probably built over a Canaanite temple. In any event, it is questionable whether the 1st or 2nd temples (of Solomon and Herod) were really built on the Rock of the Dome. Read this: http://askelm.com/temple/t001211.htm
Remember, the Romans, not the Arabs, destroyed the 2nd temple. The Arabs built one centuries later...
Originally posted by Bosse de NageI not to sure of reading the website,i mean check the url , die mens se hulle's skelm ne...
Mythology is the operating language of politics, every faction having its own bespoke version. For my part, I deconstruct myths as a hobby.
.......Remember, the Romans, not the Arabs, destroyed the 2nd temple. The Arabs built one centuries later...
I did'nt know that there was conjecture that the Dome of the Rock was on another site... too much cbs news over the years with voice-overs while showing file footage of the wailing wall and there was a bbc doco titled "Gods last known address" or some such,may even have been itv ch4 or something, anyway, which promoted the traditional line of the shared site.
yes I do realise that the arabs had nothing to do with the land being unoccupied when they built their temple on it and that they had nothing to do with the former, restored Solomaic temple's demise. damned romans. I suppose they were the US of their day. hey even the architecture of their legislative buildings bears more than a passing resemblance to DC.
But i digress, what would really be interesting to know and i think probably europe may have a few examples, have there been successful reclamations of lands or locations that the Jews could point to as precedent to their claims for complete run over all of Jerusalem.
My understanding of history, is to the victor the spoils and thats that. Though I suppose there would exist a few ultra radical zionist hawks who would not balk at that idea and claim that if that was all it took to establish ownership then the sooner they staked their claim the better.
inspired by the people who brought you vegemite,
could all the aussies please hum along.
We’re happy little Zionist’s as bright as bright can be
we want to claim our old land back for all eternity
we’re growing stronger day by day just you wait and see
Because we love our way of life
we will protect our way of life
we’ve got an atom bomb you see.