THE SLIGHTLY MODERATED BOXING RING Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : THE SLIGHTLY MODERATED BOXING RING

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Lane3 who wrote (12376)	5/8/2002 6:32:47 AM
From: thames_sider	Read Replies (1) of 21057

I think it might even be possible to be tepid on Zionism without being anti-Semitic. I think there may also be a trans-Atlantic difference here. "Zionism" here is understood to be the support of Israel's biblical claims to land - eretz Israel - including the West Bank (or, as Zionists term them, Judaea and Samaria) and chunks of Lebanon, Syria and possibly elsewhere. As far as I'm concerned, that's way less valid than Russia's claim to Alaska. 3000-year-old myth-based religious texts depicting an empire 1000 years previously... as the basis for a modern land claim?? I think not. If you mean it simply as the right of the state of Israel to exist, at a minimum within 1967 borders - hey, different matter. That goes without saying in every circle I know (admittedly I don't exactly move in extreme Muslim circles <g>). It's not debatable and I think that these days you'd see even the EU fight to defend that (the UK obviously...). So if you interpret anti-Zionist as anti-Israel... no wonder you think Europe's anti-Semitic. But the conflation of the two terms by the hawkish right has here done you a big disfavour.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next