Playlist For Understanding Israel Deception

[Twentyfirst]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proposals_for_a_Jewish_state

 

Another Zionist deception is that Palestine was the only place for Jews to go as a homeland. Even though the original creators of Zionism considered many other places. It was only when they needed to convince the world that their evil was justified that they claimed it for religious reasons

Uganda and Madagascar were options considered heavily. Others also 

[Twentyfirst]

The more you see this playlist and all the deceptions and the more you talk to these actualized zionists on here the more you realize how much of a joke this entire thread is. Obviously all of zionism is a deception

It's like asking where the deception in Nazism is. Nobody would even have that conversation. It's highly offensive to consider that there was good things or truths about Nazism 

[Breakingthewall]

Just now, Twentyfirst said:

That has nothing to do with Zionism deceiving Jews into thinking that the so called promised land is safe 

Palestinian ethnic group don't have a land of their own, they are a separated people, and have faced a century of oppression. Jews just traded in their suffering for another groups and call it divine 

They have an ancient goal that is the promise land, anything else is irrelevant. They act like any other human group, absolutely selfish. I'm not saying that they are right, just the fact that they have been a nation in exile for 2000 years by an ideology based on returning to the promised land. This is like nirvana for Buddhists or paradise for Muslims. Their religion is the state of Israel, and it is irrelevant whether it is safe or not. Their emotional investment is absolute, and they will never leave.

With every attack on them their resolve is firmer and their goal of greater Israel clearer. Every Israeli death makes them a little more expansionist. They are a people who have maintained their identity for 2000 years in exile, so their determination is beyond question. How to solve this? I don't know, but force doesn't seem like a solution unless you can exterminate them, and for now their enemies can't.

[Twentyfirst]

4 minutes ago, Breakingthewall said:

They have an ancient goal that is the promise land, anything else is irrelevant. They act like any other human group, absolutely selfish. I'm not saying that they are right, just the fact that they have been a nation in exile for 2000 years by an ideology based on returning to the promised land. This is like nirvana for Buddhists or paradise for Muslims. Their religion is the state of Israel, and it is irrelevant whether it is safe or not. Their emotional investment is absolute, and they will never leave.

With every attack on them their resolve is firmer and their goal of greater Israel clearer. Every Israeli death makes them a little more expansionist. They are a people who have maintained their identity for 2000 years in exile, so their determination is beyond question. How to solve this? I don't know, but force doesn't seem like a solution unless you can exterminate them, and for now their enemies can't.

Stop. I sent evidence that you are wrong. Quiet. You guys just play with words 

I owned you with the jews are safe in Middle East deception. And I just owned you with Jews return to their homeland deception. Cry about it

Everyone supports Jews getting land. But those same people who support would not give an inch of their own land. As long as its someone else's its fine

Edited 19 hours ago by Twentyfirst

[Breakingthewall]

Just now, Twentyfirst said:

Stop. I sent evidence that you are wrong. Quiet. You guys just play with words 

Everyone supports Jews getting land. But those same people who support would not give an inch of their own land. As long as its someone else's its fine

I don't support nothing, I exposed facts. The Jews would never have accepted Uganda, Madagascar or Argentina, that is misery for them. Their religion is Jerusalem, and anything else is unacceptable. They have been cooking that up for 2000 years. You don't like it? Well, that's your right, but reality is what it is.

[Twentyfirst]

4 minutes ago, Breakingthewall said:

I don't support nothing, I exposed facts. The Jews would never have accepted Uganda, Madagascar or Argentina, that is misery for them. Their religion is Jerusalem, and anything else is unacceptable. They have been cooking that up for 2000 years. You don't like it? Well, that's your right, but reality is what it is.

There were other options. Its a deception to think the only option is Palestine

No they would have accepted anything because they were desperate. Zionism was only popular after the holocaust before that they weren't even interesting in returning to any homeland. Plus the original zionists didn't believe in religion at all. Like I said. BE QUIET. You dont know what the fuck you are talking about. You are just a brainwashed child and only other idiots will believe the same deception you believe. Smart people understand the inner workings of their mind and don't let ego identity get in the way of that

I'll leave you with that

Edited 19 hours ago by Twentyfirst

[Nivsch]

2 minutes ago, Twentyfirst said:

You guys just play with words 

You are right. "Zionists zionists...."

[Leo Gura]

The original Zionists understood and explicitly said that their goal was to displace the Palestians through trickery and brute force. Israel could only exist at the cost of Palestinian displacement. This was understood and accepted by Israel's founders.

What's shameful is that it is now denied as part of a whitewashing myth-making project.

Edited 19 hours ago by Leo Gura

[PurpleTree]

 

[Topspin715]

9 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

The original Zionists understood and explicitly said that their goal was to displace the Palestians through trickery and brute force. Israel could only exist at the cost of Palestinian displacement. This was clearly understood and accepted.

That's not true.  You are most likely misinterpreting or misrepresenting a line in Herzl's diaries.  Herzl wrote that they would offer a price for land that was so good that the locals would think that they were swindling the Jews.  Essentially the Zionists should make an offer that they wouldn't refuse.  Later on, after Arab riots, massacres, rebellions, and the onset of the Holocaust, Zionists living in the Middle East realized that peaceful co-existence was very unlikely, but you have to look at the historical context to have a real idea of what happened and why.

There's a ton of anti-semitic misinformation and lies on the internet and it requires a ton of deep work to really sift through it and make sense of it all.  Beyond all of that, to understand what played out 100 years ago, you need to understand the geopolitical circumstances and realities of those times to judge.

There were also many different movements within early Zionism, to take a single diary entry out of context, and ascribe it to all "original Zionists" really is foolish.

Edited 19 hours ago by Topspin715

[Nivsch]

16 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Israel could only exist at the cost of Palestinian displacement. This was clearly understood and accepted.

It could be on half of the country but then the war of 48 began.

I think most countries sit on foundations of compromises and conflicts if you go back in time far enough to around their establishment.

Edited 19 hours ago by Nivsch

[Topspin715]

Generative AI tends to be much more accurate and neutral than the vast majority of media sources out there.  My hope is that it will evolve to help us resolve a lot of these very complex problems but time will tell.

 

Did the original Zionists believe that a Jewish state could only exist at the cost of Palestinian displacement?

The views of the original Zionists regarding Palestinian displacement were diverse and evolved over time. Early Zionist thought, beginning in the late 19th century, largely focused on the idea of creating a homeland for Jews in response to rising antisemitism and persecution in Europe. However, the relationship between this vision and the indigenous Arab population of Palestine was a subject of internal debate among Zionists.

Key Points:

Early Zionist Vision:

Theodor Herzl, often regarded as the father of modern Zionism, advocated for the establishment of a Jewish state in Der Judenstaat (1896). Herzl initially imagined a largely voluntary and peaceful process of land acquisition and coexistence with the local Arab population.

Early Zionist leaders believed in purchasing land legally and developing it, assuming that modernization and economic development would benefit both Jews and Arabs.

Labor Zionism and "Hebrew Labor":

As the Zionist movement grew, some factions, especially Labor Zionists, emphasized the idea of "Hebrew labor," which sought to prioritize Jewish workers over Arab workers in Jewish-owned enterprises. This policy implicitly excluded Arabs from the developing economy and created tensions.

Divergence of Views:

Some Zionist leaders, like Ahad Ha’am, were critical of any disregard for the rights and wellbeing of the Arab population. In his writings, Ahad Ha’am warned about the potential hostility that could arise from neglecting the interests of the indigenous people.

Others, like Vladimir Jabotinsky, founder of Revisionist Zionism, argued that the establishment of a Jewish state would inevitably face Arab opposition. Jabotinsky advocated for a "Iron Wall" strategy, asserting that only through strength and determination could Jews secure their position in Palestine.

British Mandate and Growing Tensions:

During the British Mandate (1920–1948), Zionist immigration and land purchases increased, often leading to the displacement of Palestinian tenant farmers. While some Zionists viewed this as a necessary step toward statehood, others sought ways to coexist with the Arab population.

The 1947 UN Partition Plan:

By the mid-20th century, many Zionist leaders accepted the idea of partition as a pragmatic solution. David Ben-Gurion and other mainstream Zionists endorsed the 1947 UN plan, which proposed a Jewish and an Arab state in Palestine. However, this plan was rejected by Arab leaders, and subsequent conflict led to the 1948 Arab-Israeli War and the displacement of hundreds of thousands of Palestinians (the Nakba).

Summary:

While some Zionists may have believed that displacement was inevitable, the movement as a whole did not uniformly advocate for the removal of Palestinians. Early Zionism had a spectrum of views, ranging from peaceful coexistence to pragmatic acceptance of conflict. Over time, as tensions grew and realities on the ground changed, the question of displacement became a significant and tragic consequence of competing national aspirations.

[Twentyfirst]

Every time you guys propagate and spread a lie that has already been debunked a thousand times. You are responsible for the death of innocents. Of so much misery and destruction. Point blank period 

And then you want the entire world to pity you for being victims. And that pity is supposed to make you feel better for lying. What a strange way of life 

Edited 18 hours ago by Twentyfirst

[Topspin715]

26 minutes ago, Twentyfirst said:

Every time you guys propagate and spread a lie that has already been debunked a thousand times. You are responsible for the death of innocents. Of so much misery and destruction. Point blank period 

And then you want the entire world to pity you for being victims. And that pity is supposed to make you feel better for lying. What a strange way of life 

It sounds like you want us to pity you as a victim.  But you won't share with us your background so I am unable to know what to pity.

[Twentyfirst]

1 minute ago, Topspin715 said:

It sounds like you want us to pity you as a victim.  But you won't share with us your background so I am unable to know what to pity.

Top spin is actually a good name for you. You are the best at spinning things in your favor. Except lying to yourself is not really in your favor at all

It's crazy to ask the Palestinians to live with peace among you people. They are such a patient understanding people 

Good luck out there. 

Edited 18 hours ago by Twentyfirst

[Raze]

1 hour ago, Topspin715 said:

That's not true.  You are most likely misinterpreting or misrepresenting a line in Herzl's diaries.  Herzl wrote that they would offer a price for land that was so good that the locals would think that they were swindling the Jews.  Essentially the Zionists should make an offer that they wouldn't refuse.  Later on, after Arab riots, massacres, rebellions, and the onset of the Holocaust, Zionists living in the Middle East realized that peaceful co-existence was very unlikely, but you have to look at the historical context to have a real idea of what happened and why.

There's a ton of anti-semitic misinformation and lies on the internet and it requires a ton of deep work to really sift through it and make sense of it all.  Beyond all of that, to understand what played out 100 years ago, you need to understand the geopolitical circumstances and realities of those times to judge.

There were also many different movements within early Zionism, to take a single diary entry out of context, and ascribe it to all "original Zionists" really is foolish.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1937_Ben-Gurion_letter
 

1937 Ben Gurion letter

Quote

Does the establishment of a Jewish state [in only part of Palestine] advance or retard the conversion of this country into a Jewish country? My assumption (which is why I am a fervent proponent of a state, even though it is now linked to partition) is that a Jewish state on only part of the land is not the end but the beginning.... This is because this increase in possession is of consequence not only in itself, but because through it we increase our strength, and every increase in strength helps in the possession of the land as a whole. The establishment of a state, even if only on a portion of the land, is the maximal reinforcement of our strength at the present time and a powerful boost to our historical endeavors to liberate the entire country"

Quote

must expel Arabs and take their places..."

the first Arab riot was in response to seeing zionists marching the street doing military drills.

From Herzl’s diary in 1895

Quote

We must expropriate gently the private property on the state assigned to us. We shall try to spirit the penniless population across the border by procuring employment for it in the transit countries, while denying it employment in our country. The property owners will come over to our side. Both the process of expropriation and the removal of the poor must be carried out discretely and circumspectly. Let the owners of the immoveable property believe that they are cheating us, selling us things for more than they are worth. But we are not going to sell them anything back."

He’s already discussing trying to push the native population out.

Edited 18 hours ago by Raze

[Raze]

On 1/12/2025 at 8:20 PM, Topspin715 said:

The Israeli War of Independence, what the Arabs call the Nakhba, escalated when the Jewish state was invaded by seven Arab armies in the aftermath of the Arab League Secretary General, Abdul Rahman Hassan Azzam, declaring in 1947 that, were a war to take place with the proposed establishment of a Jewish state, it would lead to "a war of extermination and momentous massacre which will be spoken of like the Mongolian massacre and the Crusades."

To ascribe cause and effect to this conflict literally requires going back over 1,000 years to see where many seeds of the conflict have been planted.  The real obstacles to peace are much less Zionist vs. Palestinian but religious fundamentalism and extremism versus everybody else.

The first fatality of the Arab-Jewish conflict dates back to 1920 in the Battle of Tel Hai and was literally a mistake that has continued to escalate for the last 100 year

 

Quote

The source of the quote was traced by the computer scientist Brendan McKay to an October 11, 1947, article in the Egyptian newspaper Akhbar al-Yom, titled "Arab countries prepare for war" (Arabic: البلاد العربية تستعد للحرب) in a section titled "War of extermination..." (Arabic: ...حرب إبادة), which included the quote, with the added words "Personally, I hope the Jews do not force us into this war, because it would be a war of extermination and momentous massacre ..."[1][2]

The historian Efraim Karsh considers this quote a "genocidal threat".[1] The Israeli historian Tom Segev has disputed Karsh's interpretation, saying that "Azzam used to talk a lot" and pointing to another statement from May 21, 1948, in which Azzam Pasha declared his desire for "equal citizenship for Jews in Arab Palestine".[2]

Saying this quote explains Deir Yassin is nonsense given this context. It was clearly bluster.

The nakba began before the 1948 war. That is the point. It wasn’t that Palestinians fled because of the 48 war, they were being expelled prior to the war and expelled during and after the war in a concentrated plan to change the demographic balance of the country.

Israeli Jews are held to a different standard than everyone else, they do colonization, terrorism, and ethnics cleansing but it isn’t considered war crimes when they do it. Settlements built on occupied land are war crimes according to every international legal body, yet Israel is allowed to continue. 

The conflict doesn’t go back thousands of years and it isn’t about religious fundamentalists vs everyone else.

Palestinians and a Jewish minority lived just fine there prior to Zionism. It was secular zionists who took the country and for a long time it was secular nationalist Palestinians who fought them. Hamas only showed up in the 80s. 

Edited 18 hours ago by Raze

[Leo Gura]

1 hour ago, Topspin715 said:

There were also many different movements within early Zionism, to take a single diary entry out of context, and ascribe it to all "original Zionists" really is foolish.

No. There are extensive quotes of Zionist founders and their plans for ethnic cleansing. I have quoted them extensively in the past.

The cherrypicking of history is actually being done by you.

You need a serious case of not understanding how society forms to even make your arguments. You don't understand what it takes to make a nation. The founders did. They weren't idealistic fools.

Edited 17 hours ago by Leo Gura

[Twentyfirst]

Thats why a funny joke against Zionism is something like this "they dont believe in god, just that god promised them land"

I would love to see an actualized video about how nations and governments are formed. And how one can form their own versus just getting into power of an already existing one 

Edited 17 hours ago by Twentyfirst

[Topspin715]

37 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

No. There are extensive quotes of Zionist founders and their plans for ethnic cleansing. I have quoted them extensively in the past.

The cherrypicking of history is actually being done by you.

You need a serious case of not understanding how society forms to even make your arguments. You don't understand what it takes to make a nation. The founders did. They weren't idealistic fools.

You are oversimplifying things and there was no discussion of ethnic cleansing until the 30s when there were violent clashes.

The world was an extremely different place in those days.  The Europeans had expected the Ottoman Empire to collapse and destabilize the balance of power in Europe in the late 19th century.  They had already been planning to carve up the empire, along with Russia, for themselves.  Eventually the balance of power destabilized which sparked WW1 and later WW2.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_question

Meanwhile, the western powers were in the process of brutally carving up Africa.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scramble_for_Africa

With the painful lessons that we've learned from history, we know not to engage in imperialism or even colonialism anymore, but you have to look at Zionism through that historical lens to understand the social dynamics and morality of that time fairly.