Dear Foxy,

Israel is a marvellous country. It has fought off a coalition of Arab armies, produced a number of Nobel Prize winners, is more democratic than the surrounding countries and made the desert bloom. However, the tragedy is that it was all unnecessary.

Lord Balfour supported the Alien Exclusion Act which kept Jews fleeing czarist oppression out of England. Then he later declared the Balfour Declaration which designated a territory which at the time was part of another country and contained another people as a Jewish Homeland. If he had sympathy for oppressed Jews he would have welcomed those fleeing the Czar into England. Possibly he imagined that Jews would be so grateful to England that they would help guard the approaches to the Suez Canal.

The US did its part by the restrictive immigration act of 1924 which kept many Jews fleeing Nazi Germany out of the United States. The Evian Conference of 1938 continued the process:

https://zionism-israel.com/dic/Evian_conference.htm#:~:text=Evian%20Conference-%20Conference%20on%20Jewish%20%20refugees%20held,Geneva%2C%20since%20Switzerland%20declined%20to%20host%20the%20conference.

“The key issue, generally neglected in accounts of the conference, was greed. The Nazis would not allow Jews to take property out of Germany. The would-be host countries would not admit Jews who did not have any capital.”

Faced with this hostility Jews who could get to Israel made a new country. In many Christian countries Jews were second-class citizens. In Israel non-Jews are second-class citizens. In my opinion Israel in spirit is a goyische country imitating the countries where we were oppressed. However, this is natural. Why should Jews establish a country modeled on those that denied them refuge?

The tragedy is that it was all unnecessary.

Israel was one of the leading fools to sanction gay marriage. They have no credibility on this subject.

Dan

From memory the Zionist Israel plan was around before the Balfour Declaration.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proto-Zionism

Obviously there was a fear that without an alternative as in Greece today there was a risk that large numbers of Hebrew refugees would escape Russia and create ethnic conflict in Britain.

But the British were tapping into something that the Hebrew people themselves wanted.

The Hebrew situation can only be seen through the lense of history- the British role in it is relatively recent.

Dear Canem Malem,

The British role in Palestine goes back a long way.

Barbara Tuchman has written “Bible and Sword”. It recounts the long connection between Britain and Palestine.

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/613788.Bible_and_Sword

"From Barbara W. Tuchman, Pulitzer Prize–winning author of The Guns of August, comes history thru a wide-angle lens: a fascinating chronicle of Britain’s long relationship with Palestine & the Middle East, from the ancient world to the 20th century. Historically, the British were drawn to the Holy Land for two major reasons: first, to translate the Bible into English &, later, to control the road to India & access to Middle Eastern oil. With the lucid vividness that characterize all her work, Tuchman follows these twin spiritual & imperial motives—the Bible & the sword—to their seemingly inevitable endpoint, when Britain conquered Palestine at the conclusion of WWI. At that moment, in a gesture of significance & solemnity, the Balfour Declaration of 1917 established a British-sponsored mandate for a national home for the Jewish people."

You cited https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proto-Zionism

“The central activity of these men was between the years 1860 to 1874, before the Zionist movement established practical (1881) and political Zionism (1896). It is for this reason that they are called precursors of Zionism, or proto-Zionists.”

However, before 1881 and 1896 a non-Jewish author wrote a Zionist novel for the non-Jewish English public. The English was already familiar with what would be later called Zionism.

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

Daniel Deronda is a novel written by Mary Ann Evans under the pen name of George Eliot, first published in 1876. It was the last novel she completed and the only one set in the contemporary Victorian society of her day. The work's mixture of social satire and moral searching, along with its sympathetic rendering of Jewish proto-Zionist ideas, has made it the controversial final statement of one of the most renowned Victorian novelists.

David F said-

"Lord Balfour supported the Alien Exclusion Act which kept Jews fleeing czarist oppression out of England. Then he later declared the Balfour Declaration which designated a territory which at the time was part of another country and contained another people as a Jewish Homeland. If he had sympathy for oppressed Jews he would have welcomed those fleeing the Czar into England. Possibly he imagined that Jews would be so grateful to England that they would help guard the approaches to the Suez Canal.

The US did its part by the restrictive immigration act of 1924 which kept many Jews fleeing Nazi Germany out of the United States. The Evian Conference of 1938 continued the process:"

Answer-

England and the US can't solve all of the world's problems.
It is up to England and the US to decide whether they should accept refugees. Though the UN seeks to take away that power from nations.

The creation of Israel by the British seems to be a fairly humane solution to the long standing and difficult issue the so called "Jewish Question"- where Hebrew's formed sub-cultures within other cultures. Though not an expert this Jewish Question seems a result of the Siege of Jerusalem 70AD due to the Hebrew Roman disagreements.

No other country than England seems to have put up their hand to help.

The US and the UK at different times have helped the Hebrew people- that doesn't mean that this will always be the case.

Issues with Roman tax collectors sometimes led to war. The general policy of Rome was provincial self rule on payment of taxes. Judea apparently caused Rome a lot of trouble- they made them an example. There were many other cultures that were destroyed by Roman disagreements.

The Roman Pan-National influence was perhaps more contemporarily enlightened in a sense than the Chinese of the Warring States Period which amounted to mass slaughter of many cultures and their men, women, and children.

david f.

...* I am a Green, and I know that the people I encounter are “mainly“ interested in the environment...*

Your use of “ mainly” is comical.

Greens are the classic example in politics where wedges are driven deep at the point of divided opinion.

Every man and his dog wish for the preservation of their own environment, so why not a stampede towards the Greens Party?
Answer: Greens hidden political agendas!

As the same every man and his dog are acutely aware, Greens exhibit SFA concern in percentage terms of policy focus on environmental issues, which are usurped by Woke culture shift.

you totally ignored my comment above, on Israel’s stupid in falling over to Woke imperatives of Gay marriage, which was not considered important among the majority of gays themselves.

That’s the example of who are the Greens in reality.

Dan