[wat0n]

Sure:

It's a shame the Wikipedia article's author didn't know about the Katzir case. That doesn't really change the fact that the ruling makes it clear that the Israeli State cannot discriminate people based on religion or ethnicity in managing state land however.

So you do not find anything wrong in this behavior and this is absolutely fine to be done to your synagogues in Europe?

Synagogues that are administered by European Jewish citizens you mean? I would be very much surprised if European governments started to deny their own citizens visas.

Anyway, I don't know if Israel acted correctly in refusing to recognize Theophilos III immediately or not. As I said, there seems to have been an upheaval within the Church on the matter looking at the attempts by both Patriarchs to sue in Israeli courts to get recognition by the Israeli government. Furthermore, even Jordan withdrew recognition of Theophilos III at some point as well, so this wasn't only Israeli behavior anyway.

[noemon]

It's a shame the Wikipedia article's author didn't know about the Katzir case. That doesn't really change the fact that the ruling makes it clear that the Israeli State cannot discriminate people based on religion or ethnicity in managing state land however.

ILA articles on wikipedia are written by Israelis as it is internal Israeli law. It simply means that the Katzir case did not enforce any change in Israeli law practice as it has already been explained to you.

Synagogues that are administered by European Jewish citizens you mean?

So you 're saying that Europeans have every right to freeze the bank accounts of synagogues in Europe if they do not like the Rabbis in the synagogues and force them to be unable to maintain them and this is was done to the Holiest Christian Shrine in the world, the Tomb of Jesus Christ. Good to know.

[wat0n]

ILA articles on wikipedia are written by Israelis as it is internal Israeli law.

You don't really know who wrote the articles, do you? You also don't know if they have an actual expertise in Israeli law even if they are Israeli citizens.

It simply means that the Katzir case did not enforce any change in Israeli law practice as it has already been explained to you.

This is clearly not the case, considering the legal opinion by the Israeli Attorney General Menachem Mazuz on the leasing of land owned by the JNF under ILA administration.

So you 're saying that Europeans have every right to freeze the bank accounts of synagogues in Europe if they do not like the Rabbis in the synagogues and force them to be unable to maintain them and this is was done to the Holiest Christian Shrine in the world, the Tomb of Jesus Christ. Good to know.

No, I'm saying both cases are not comparable.

Furthermore, you also don't know if the Israeli government didn't recognize the new Patriarch because it was opposed to the election of Theophilos III as the new Patriarch of the Church because they "didn't like him" or if there were other reasons for it like, I don't know, maybe that the whole process was a mess (particularly since the PA itself exonerated Irenaios from any wrongdoing).

[noemon]

The case is stated crystal clear and Israeli professors have also confirmed these facts as it has been shown in the other thread:

"The Basic Law: Israel Lands" establishes the principle that Israel Lands are nationally owned, and they can only be leased, not sold. So land buyers are granted only lessee's rights, formally not full ownership rights. Based on this law and several other laws Israel Land Administration was created in 1960. It's an organization supervising the proper use of lands in the public domain and managing some 93% of Israeli lands.

Starting from the beginning of the 2000s there is an ongoing debate including governmental officials whether different issues arising from the national ownership of the land can be solved. On July 12, 2003 and on February 4, 2004 the Constitution, Law, and Justice Committee met as the committee for the Constitution by Broad Consensus to discuss this problem.[1]

One basic issue was the difference in the rights of Jewish citizens and non-Jewish citizens. Palestinians could not purchase land in most Jewish areas. Nor could Palestinians expand their villages as population growth demanded, but Jewish villages could readily expand as needed. These issues have not been addressed in the land reform discussions.

If you take issue with wiki, you are welcome to go and request the edit by providing your sources to the Israeli editors and come back here.

No, I'm saying both cases are not comparable.

Israel froze the bank accounts of the Christian Church Of Jerusalem resulting to the inability of the Church to maintain the Tomb of Christ in the Holy Land. It also prevented access in Israel for the Christian custodians of the Church of the Holy Sepulcher Dancing around this does not change these facts.

[wat0n]

You know what? I agree, we should not dance around the issues. That is, we should not dance around the fact that you insist on ignoring primary sources of the application of Israeli law like Court rulings in this case, and choose to selectively interpret it in a way that goes clearly against the verbatim of the ruling at hand; and we should not pretend one can have a productive debate with someone who shows inability or unwillingness to actually read the sources provided.

So, I won't bother. Have a nice day, noemon.

[Lightman]

Noemon, do you think a mass expulsion occurs any time there is violence against a group? They're very different things. Jews, like many other groups, have been pogromed many times; not every pogrom resulted in them leaving fleeing the area, and even if they did, that's not really the same as a mass expulsion. A mass expulsion is a specific event where a state authority bans an entire group from an area or nation. No one besides you thinks there was a mass expulsion from Corsica, it's fantasy. You specifically claimed - your words are there for everyone to see - that there were mass expulsions from Italy and France, which is historically false. With the exception of Cyprus, a rebellion that occurred in the first century ad, you can't point to any Greek expulsions in the relevant time period.

As I've said multiple times, which you either refuse to acknowledge or refuse to understand, I don't mean to say that nothing bad has ever happened to the Greek people. Obviously not, you were after all occupies by a foreign power for a long time. My point is that within the bounds of Europe, Jews generally faced prejudice and violence that outstripped that faced by most European groups in intensity and commonness. There was no general anti-Greek sentiment throughout European history. I'm not saying that to denigrate the Greeks. K would similarly tell someone who thought the Jews had it worse or as bad as African Americans in the US that they were wrong.

[noemon]

An Israeli Professor of the Hebrew University states explicitly that Israeli law is racist towards non-Jewish Israelis, the wiki page on the Israel Land Authority states that explicitly as well. Some court order advising(not enforcing) the State of Israel to allow 2 single Muslim Israelis to settle in a new exclusively Jewish settlement has supposedly rendered institutional racist discrimination in Israel a thing of the past, despite numerous cases of such discrimination continuing such as the al-Kurd family, the freezing of Christian bank accounts, just to name a few.
Israel discriminated against the Custodians of the Holiest Christian Site in the world resulting to their inability to maintain the Tomb of Jesus Christ.
Europeans have granted Jews equality before the law since the 19th Century. Jews are discriminating in Israel against Christian Europeans and Muslims in the 21st century, Lightman is insisting that his historical suffering is qualitatively superior to Greek historical suffering and that supposedly means something?

What am I or anyone for that matter supposed to make of this, exactly?

What exactly are you expecting from me to say? That...what?

[Crantag]

So if I am pro-Israelis killing Arabs, does not that make me an 'anti-Semite' in the strict sense?

This has always troubled me.

Also, if I am pro-Arabs killing European Jews, doesn't that make me racist against whites but strictly speaking not 'anti-Semitic'?

To be clear, I'm for neither case, and generally oppose any killing.

But the term 'anti-Semite' has been misused as well as abused.

Though needless to say discrimination against Jewish people has occurred to an extent which is notable.

[Lightman]

Noemon, this is what I meant when I said you only think in terms of rights attaching to national communities. You seem utterly unable to acknowledge something I've said multiple times in this thread: that I have no real interest in defending the policies or government of Israel, and feel no real attachment to the state. I am not trying to extract any material political concessions from you or any other European. My purpose in this thread has been entirely historical in nature, to defend against the idea that Jews made up their persecution, or were not particularly persecuted.

I suspect you will continue to talk about Israel, because, again, this sort of thing does not seem to compute for you because you view things only from the perspective of nationalism.

[noemon]

My purpose in this thread has been entirely historical in nature, to defend against the idea that Jews made up their persecution, or were not particularly persecuted.

Then why do you refuse to address all the historical questions posed to you? Why do you draw a line between the persecution of people, when you have admittedly absolutely no historical knowledge of the other's history but you do have the audacity to make judgements on whether Greek suffering qualifies for 'pity'? And what is the point of this distinction? What are you trying to communicate here exactly, can you be explicit?

You have ignored all these arguments that you have been confronted with:

You have a very misinformed perception of history, but before the French revolution, Europeans did not have civil rights for themselves either, they were also subject to the whims of the feudal lords and their vendettas as much as the Jews were. As soon as the Europeans fought for their own civil liberties they extended those liberties to the Jews as well which means that the majority of Europeans have considered the Jews their brothers. The Greeks and French that I know of for sure were subject to the exact same extra-judicial persecution by the authorities as the Jews were and when they managed to break their chains, they broke the chains of the Jews along with their own. So I do not take it all kindly when people do not even recognize basic courtesy to the people that gave them such great respect and recognition.

You do not make sense here. National and ethnic rights apply to national and ethnic communities, if ethnic communities are discriminated then the state discriminating is being racist, you claim that Europeans who provided equal right to ethnic Jews were being antisemitic, while at the same time not taking any issue with the fact that Jews do not grant this courtesy back to Europeans or Muslims. So what are the Israeli Jews by your own logic? And why do you bother with Europeans who have nothing more to give instead of bothering with your own people who have things that they are in fact supposed to give like egalitarianism for example.

I do not see anything different to what the Jews went through, every time a Greek leader chose the wrong side in a fight, the entire community had to pick up and leave, that was standard practice in Europe and applicable to various European populations even co-nationals sworn to the wrong lord.

This statement is false and requires context and citations, where, when by who?

No one besides you thinks there was a mass expulsion from Corsica, it's fantasy.

Fantasy? The Greeks of Corsica were pogromed so many times that they eventually picked up and left for Algeria, they were indeed expelled en mass from Corsica. Are you well in your head? They were also forced to convert and change their surnames.

There was no general anti-Greek sentiment throughout European history.

What do you know about anti-Greek sentiment in western Europe? And why do you think you have any credibility whatsoever to make such a statement when you even deny real historical events spoonfed to you that you were completely oblivious to a day ago? Under what historical education do you make such a statement when you are completely ignorant on Greek history?

The more you continue your denial the more ridiculous you appear in case you have not already noticed. Also speak for yourself and leave other people on their peace. You do not speak for anyone other than yourself. And you are not doing a very good job at that either. Also you have completely failed to address, all the question posed to you.

I suspect you will continue to talk about Israel, because, again, this sort of thing does not seem to compute for you because you view things only from the perspective of nationalism.

You are literally crying about Jewish persecution in the Middle-Ages but you are completely ignoring the fact that Jews are discriminating against the Christan Custodians of the Tomb of Jesus Christ in Israel today. Of course I will keep pointing out your hypocrisy because it is too blatant to let it slide. It's shouting from the rooftops.

[Lightman]

You literally invented mass expulsions from three major European countries to back up fanciful claims about general persecution of Greeks in Western Europe. I have responded to almost all of your points multiple times throughout this thread; I have multiple times expressed sympathy for Greek suffering and contempt for ethnic violence in general. I am not particularly surprised that you choose to read and argue in such an obtuse way, though I am disappointed.

Greeks were not consistently ghettoized, legally barred from many professions, forced to wear identifying clothing, subject to blood libel accusations, or repeatedly expelled from their homes. There may have been isolated incidents of this nature, but they did not define the Greek experience in Europe. For centuries, the vast majority of Jews in Europe were subject to these conditions. This is historical fact.

(Also lol at the idea that I have absolutely no historical knowledge of Greeks. The fact that I don't know about your fantasized expulsions isn't evidence that I don't know about Greek history, it's evidence that your idea of Greek history is largely fictional. The only actually new historical events you brought to my attention were the massacre of Greeks in Cyprus in the first century AD and Mormon hatred of Greeks.)

As enjoyable as this is, I should have bowed out of this conversation several posts ago - I said I would, but your claim about mass expulsions was too outrageous not to respond to.

[noemon]

Since you are both ignoring and repeating your obvious ignorance & denial like a broken record I would like to ask you to answer these very simple questions posed to you.

I gave you real historical examples of Greeks being massacred, pogromed and eventually expelled en mass.

Cyprus, Corsica, Constantinople, Soviet Russia, Turkey, Egypt, Toronto, Nebraska, Corinth and these are off the top of my own head, there are countless other examples. There are forced conversions, forced name changes, historical vilification, literary, cultural, ethnic & religious insults. Somehow all that is a different historical experience in your fantasy but quantification of pain is inherently ridiculous and inappropriate and speaks about your character rather than anything else. You are effectively saying: "My pain was greater and more noble than yours" and what am I supposed to make of and with this fantastical claim? Congratulate you for considering yourself worthier of pity than me?

Suppose I pretend that all these things are as important, and that these sufferings are inferior to your fantastical sufferings, what is the point exactly? What is the conclusion that you are trying to make here? Can you be explicit?

[wat0n]

You are literally crying about Jewish persecution in the Middle-Ages but you are completely ignoring the fact that Jews are discriminating against the Christan Custodians of the Tomb of Jesus Christ in Israel today. Of course I will keep pointing out your hypocrisy because it is too blatant to let it slide. It's shouting from the rooftops.

Oh, come on. If your example of persecution is the fact that Israel took a bit less than a year and a half to recognize a new Patriarch of the Church - a Patriarch whose election was itself polemical within the Church - rather than actual limits on the practice of freedom of religion of their congregants, and compare it with the expulsion of Jews in Europe, then you really need to get a grip. This is even more absurd than your refusal to consider the Israeli Court ruling in the Katzir case, your attempt to claim that the al-Kurd case is an example of discrimination (particularly since the courts were clearly averse to evict them).

And just so you enjoy a taste of your own medicine, as I mentioned there are allegations that ethnic Greeks are overrepresented within the Church, which angers its Arab congregants and, if anything, led to demonstrations against the Church last year.

[ArtAllm]

Since you are both ignoring and repeating your obvious ignorance & denial like a broken record I would like to ask you to answer these very simple questions posed to you.

I have already asked in this forum very simple questions that could be answered with "yes" or "no", but my opponents (radical Zionists) just explained to me that my questions were "hateful".

As Aldous Huxley wrote in his dystopian Novel: "If you repeat a lie often enough it becomes truth".

Truth does not matter, you have to control the media and repeat over and over again what is in your interests, and eventually everybody will agree that this is the truth, and that only haters do not believe in it.



Here is a quote from an old discussion:
Mon Oct 15, 2012 8:54 pm

The answers to all of that is an obvious no, and it can be seen that these theories are wrong from the pro-Israel Lobby's failure to release Jonathan Pollard ...

viewtopic.php?t=143144&p=14088483

Now they have released Pollard, a spy that damaged America more than any other spies.

Israel, the best friend of the USA, sold the American secrets to the USSR during the Cold War, and now they got their spy.

But Wat0n will still tell you that there is no powerful Israel Lobby that controls the USA.

Another example:

Fri Nov 02, 2012

He [Israel Shahak] also made-up an incident dealing with an ultra-Orthodox Jew allegedly refusing to call an ambulance to save the life of a non-Jew in a Jewish holiday and claimed things regarding Halakha that were proven to be wrong.
...
Israel Shahak was a proven liar, see above. BTW, he was a professor of chemistry, which has nothing to do with Jewish theology the last time I checked

viewtopic.php?p=14096683

A year later Ovadia Yosef, the most prominent Israeli Rabbi, who told that non-Jews are like donkeys who were created to serve the Jews, confirmed what Israel Shahak said in his book "Jewish history".

Rabbi Yosef: Treating gentiles violates Sabbath

Shas' leader says religious physicians cannot violate Sabbath in order to save gentiles' lives...

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340 ... 67,00.html

And this racist got the biggest funeral in the history of Israel and was called by Israeli politicians "our great teacher".

But Wat0n is still convinced that Israel Shahak was a liar.

We have in German a good word for this phenomenon: FAKTENRESISTENS! (fact-resistance).

[ArtAllm]

double

[Lightman]

Lol, artallm, your anti-Semitism runs so deep that you think a quote from (unfunny) satirical columnist Joel Stein is proof of an actual Zionist conspiracy to control the world.

[wat0n]

Here is a quote from an old discussion:
Mon Oct 15, 2012 8:54 pm

Now they have released Pollard, a spy that damaged America more than any other spies, Israel, like a good friend of the USA, sold the American secrets to the USSR during the Cold War, and now they got their spy.

Huh? He got released only after serving his full sentence. How is this an example of the so-called lobby succeeding?

But Wat0n will still tell you that there is no Israel Lobby.

No, I will say that it is not nearly as powerful as conspiracy theorists like yourself make it be. And indeed, the Pollard case is a prime example of that.

Another example:


Fri Nov 02, 2012
A year later Ovadia Yosef, the most prominent Israeli Rabbi, who told that non-Jews are like donkeys who were created to serve the Jews, confirmed what Israel Shahak said in his book "Jewish history".

And this racist got the biggest funeral in the history of Israel and was called by Israeli politicians "our great teacher".

But Wat0n is still convinced that Israel Shahak was a liar.

Oh, this again. I recall I mentioned a soon to become Chief Rabbi of the UK issued a responsa, which I actually provided in full, showing that this is not the case, and that Ovadia's position on the matter is far from being universally agreed among Jews, even Orthodox ones.

We have in German a good word for this phenomenon: FAKTENRESISTENS! (fact-resistance).

Indeed, it applies to yourself since you still cannot accept that the pro-Israel camp failed to release Pollard before he served the full term of his sentence, and that you insist on claiming that Israel Shahak should be treated as an authoritative source on Jewish law above major Rabbis themselves.

It's a common trait among conspiracy theorists like yourself though.

[Rich]

What kind of vile and twisted history is that turns Judaic religious followers, or monotheists into the victims of history. Sure Christianity and Islam were vile terrorist bigoted religions, but they were forms of Judaism. Christianity and almost certainly Islam were started by Jews. We pagans have suffered 3000 years of murder, torture and terror at the hands of Judaic religious followers. What have you got on the other side, the Bolsheviks, Spanish civil war anarchists and a handful of Nazi pagans. The Jews only refrained from inflicting terror on non believers during the middle ages because they had no power. Was Jerusalem a centre of tolerance, compassion and human universalism before the Romans took it over? I don't think so.

If Zionists could just to stick to the modern nationalist era, I would have no problem. Jews wanted their own state so they could live in dignity without having to bow to any one else. Nothing unusual about that. Look at all the new forming nations: Poland, the Baltic, Serbia, Bulgaria, yes even the Czechs, you didn't get very far on the nation building front if you weren't prepared to slaughter and terrorise a few (or even not so few) "innocent" people. But spare us dragging in the Middle Ages and Ancient era. I see no evidence that either the Jews or the Christians were treated any worse than the pagans under Rome. Did they have modern liberal rights? no but then who did? The Jews were lucky to survive Medieval Christendom and the lands of Medieval Islam at all. not a privilege given to the Pagans. What the worshippers of Isis Odin or the Morrigan would have given to have got away with ghetoisation and a few pogroms.

[noemon]

Oh, come on. If your example of persecution is the fact that Israel took a bit less than a year and a half to recognize a new Patriarch of the Church - a Patriarch whose election was itself polemical within the Church - rather than actual limits on the practice of freedom of religion of their congregants, and compare it with the expulsion of Jews in Europe, then you really need to get a grip.

Israel froze the bank accounts of the Greek church resulting to their inability to maintain the Tomb of Christ in the Holy Land in the year 2005. Israel forbade to the Greek clergy entry in the country implicitly forcing their expulsion from the Holy Land and their duties in the year 2006.

If you re going to sit here and cry for things done to you(as well as many others) in the Middle-Ages, then with what face do you actually dare to apologize for this kind of despicable behavior today?

This is even more absurd

The only absurd thing here is that you have excused yourself a couple of times, like Rei supposedly leaving the forum, yet you keep coming back with the broken record.

And just so you enjoy a taste of your own medicine, as I mentioned there are allegations that ethnic Greeks are overrepresented within the Church, which angers its Arab congregants and, if anything, led to demonstrations against the Church last year.

The Greek Orthodox Church is not called 'Greek' for no reason, I take it there are numerous Christian churches in the Holy Land for Arabs to join if they don't like the Greek church, there is no compulsion in anything as far as I'm aware of and the only reason the Arabs take issue with the Greeks is because the Greeks are being accused working with the Israelis, not something that you can take issue with. The whole thing is a sham engineered by Israelis to undermine the Church as it is confirmed by the report that you brought forward.

[wat0n]

Yeah right, why would Israel work to undermine the Church if it is adopting a relatively pro-Israel stance? If anything, that is also an argument that undermines your claims that Israel adopted an adversarial stance against it (let alone thst it was motivated by racism) if the very same Patriarch it initially did not recognize is being labeled as being in cahoots with Israel.

I also very much doubt the Patriarch would be thrilled to witness a massive loss of congregants either. If anything I'm pretty sure it would be directly against its interests, though your supremacist attitude suggests you will try to tell yourself that it doesn't.

PS: I also very much doubt the above arguments will change your stance since even posting primary sources won't. I do want to see how you spin this up, however, I want to laugh a bit