The term Judenstadt was coined, or at least first used extensively, by Herzl, was it not .... so, how can it be 'repugnant' .... other than to those on whose lands said Stadt is placed, yes there is that isn't there .... which rather points up the point, doesn't it
Take the religion out, make it a Volkstadt, inclusive, secular, egalitarian ... this will address the 'salient matter', head-on
It is a beachhead to the invadees, this is clear, and this is the 'salient matter' in the circumstance .... on this day in the summer of 1944 the allies hadn't captured very many square kilometres of Normandy, their positions looked then like a speck of land in the whole of Europe .... doesn't take a lot of acreage to make a beachhead that instills a clear sense of menace in the beachheadees
Your argument seems to be, 'well the arabs can just move over, and make room' .... well i advise you, do not try this in British Columbia, it won't work any better than it does on the arabs
'twist the history' - ?? ... michael, an hundred years ago there was no state built around the jewish religion in Palestine, and there were no great problems effecting the Rest of Us coming from that area ..... now, there is in Palestine a state built around the jewish religion, and there are continual problems stemming from the ensuing confrontation ... these are the plain facts of the 'salient matter'
It is entirely possible that muslims might have made better progress breaking the shackles of their own religious bonds without this aggravation of a religion they consider hostile to their own shifting them off their lands ..... take the religion out of the title of the beachhead, and out of its constitution, and you'll be setting them a far better example than you are with the barbed wire and the US-subsidised WMDs et al |
