"Our statements as a council reflect the majority view of our community."

Regrettably, it seems to me as an outsider that Jews are allowed to say what they like, so long as it conforms to the Zionist view point.

End of story.

There is much conspirational dialect going on about zionism. Is it a fact, that it has connections with the Council of Foreign Relations which is not truly a democratic organisation, and is said to have its roots in a declaration by Cecil Rhodes giving intimation that the future world will be in dire need of a group of international watchkeepers.

From the Council of Foreign Relations is said to have also grown both the Bilderbergers and the Trilateralists, the latter having very strong connections with the US Federal Reserve which as we all know is privately owned.

It is said also that both George W Bush and Tony Blair have been or are still members of the Trilateralists, as well as Henry Kissinger. Also it has been reported that John Howard has attended meetings of the Bilderbergers.

Most political philosophers shy clear of joining these groups, owing to the very fact that they are non-democratic and very elitist, and could be the very reason the UN has been accused of just being their political plaything.

I've never heard the Zionist Council of Victoria endorsing an opinion on limiting Israel's borders to '67, nor have I heard of it condemning the occupation, nor have I heard it accept Palestinain and Arab demands for peace nor a cessation of arrest and detention of Palestinians without trial nor a condemnation of the illegal settlements nor of that invasion in Lebanon nor ... oh well the list is damn near endless and it just shows what Danny and his bunch of numbskulls are all about when he says

'...our representative role (as the Zionist Council of Victoria) requires careful consideration of issues and the views of our affiliates to ensure that our statements as a council reflect the majority view of our community.'

So bloody true. Their non criticism of Israeli policy, it's land stealing and it's war crimes show this lot aren't for peace in the region. They represent the majority view which is wanting a Greater Israel and that the majority believe peace only comes through militarism, occupation, suppression and domination.

Nice one Danny, you own words condemn both your council and your majority as warmongers!

To all.. what was the likelihood of the early Australian settlers and colonialists 'negotiating' with the Aborigines about mutually agreed borders ?

Pretty slim.

Why ? 'power'. We had it..they didn't.

Vk3 I really don't know why you poo poo'd my 'religious bs' as you put it in the other thread. I was giving a far reaching context and philosophical background without which one cannot understand the events in the middle east.

I don't think you appreciated what I was actually saying.

Keith bemoans the lack of discussion about borders, you bemoan the 'zionist veiwpoint' but neither of you really tries to understand it's deeper aspects. All you do is look at the symptoms and then inject a secular western understanding of things into it. That is as brilliant as the USA thinking Democracy can work in tribal Iraq.

VK on the religious bit, I showed that the 'divine mandate' aspect is critical for many Jews. Mainly the orthodox and settlers. If you don't 'get' that, how can you consider ways of exploring solutions ?
If you did understand it, you would quickly realize that the only other solution is one based on power....*clout* if you will.

Failure to understand the concept of "Islamic Waqf" on the Palestinian (hamas) side is the equivalent of not 'getting' the idea of divine mandate on the Jewish side. Both sides DO claim a divine mandate. But they are not the 'COMPLETE' side. They are both minorities.

But the success of any negotiated settlement depends on how much influence these minorities have, and how rigidly they are willing to persue their agenda's.

F.H. enjoy the sun and sand..but keep away from 'ladies' in burkahs ok.... never know what is underneath.

Re this article, does it really matter how representative they are ?
Israel is a democracy, so it boils down to the the available voting power.

BOAZ, I understand it all right. I was just trying to point out the shaky ground on which the Zionist cause is founded.

I can't see that there is any solution to the conflict between the Arab Palestinians and the Zionist Jews, The Jews have all the power and the Arabs have too much angst. Neither side is prepared to concilliate.

That is what this thread is all about. The Zionists "know" that they are right and they don't want to listen to anything contrary. When they complain about anti-semitisn, what they see is just someone who has an alternative point of view.

David

I don't bemoan the lack of discussion about borders.

I think they should be set at the '67 lines without negotiation or discussion of any sort.

The deeper aspects? What? You want the thing settled on the basis that an unprovable biased entity, an Israelite God, gave the land to the Israelites, simply because some ancient Israelite wrote a book, thousands of years ago and claimed it to be the Israelite God's will and testament. Give us a break David. You're simply a misguided fundy nutter, who rambles on about the Palestinian problem, final solutions, camps, deportations and ...well that's how the Jewish Problem was discussed in Nazi Germany...wasn't it? And they claimed your Christian God was on their side too!