You mean: Foreigners should get the Hell [out] of of Pal[e]stine.
<
p>I don’t understand what the point of this diary is beyond a celebration of Typo Day. Call me a doubting Thomas, but I think this is no way to raise Helen.
dont-get-cutesays
The point of this diary was to correct or clarify who exactly Helen Thomas was talking about. I don’t think she was talking about anyone who has lived in Isreal their whole lives, whatever their religion or ancestry is. I think she was talking about foreigners. (and hey, no credit for spelling that one right?)
davessays
kbuschsays
though Isreal might be the homeland of the reality-based community.
You gleaned from Thomas’s comments that she was really upset about recent German, Polish, and American immigrants to Israel? Really?
<
p>TedF
dont-get-cutesays
It’s other people who are wrongly gleaning “the Jews”, which she never said. By mentioning Poland and Germany, she is clearly talking about Polish and Germans.
Nesenoff: Any comments on Israel? We’re asking everybody today, any comments on Israel?
Thomas: Tell them to get the hell out of Palestine. (laughs)
Nesenoff: Oooh. Any better comments on Israel?
Thomas: (still laughing) Remember, these people are occupied and it’s their land. It’s not German, it’s not Polish …
Nesenoff: So where should they go, what should they do?
Thomas: Go home.
Nesenoff: Where is the home?
Thomas: Poland. Germany.
Nesenoff: So you’re saying the Jews go back to Poland and Germany?
Thomas: And America and everywhere else
<
p>So it’s clear she was talking about the “Jews”, and not just the Jews from Poland and Germany, but the Jews from “America and everywhere else.”
<
p>In case you are interested, here are the actual aliyah statistics for 1919-2006.
<
p>TedF
dont-get-cutesays
Thanks for the transcript, and aliyah statistics. I think it’s obvious she’s talking about those aliyah arrivals, and possibly their children, she’s talking about aliyah itself, Zionism and the right of return, the settlements. Not all Jews in Israel emigrated there, right?
Yes, I think she is talking about aliyah, Zionism, and the law of return, which is exactly the problem. There were a small number of Jews living in the Land of Israel before Zionism. Their community was called the Old Yishuv. According to Wikipedia, there were about 25,000 of them. The vast majority of Israeli Jews are either olim (people who made aliyah) or descendants of olim. I doubt whether there is a single Israeli Jew today who is not the descendant of olim. So you and I agree that Thomas is saying that she wants all or very nearly all of the Jews to leave Israel.
<
p>From your comment, I think you have have been under the misimpression that even if the all the Jews who come within the scope of Thomas’s comment left Israel, there would still be a sizeable Jewish community. That’s not so. What she is proposing is the end of Israel as a Jewish state and the departure of all or almost all of its Jewish residents.
<
p>TedF
dont-get-cutesays
She wants the creation of Israel to be considered a failure and for the olim and descendants of Olim to return to their native lands. I think that is a little bit impossible, kind of like all Europeans going home and leaving North America. It is just too late for that, we have to deal with the situation as it is now and move forward. So, with that in mind, we shouldn’t continue to encourage further immigration from Europe to America, or Mexico to the United States, and we shouldn’t encourage further aliyah into the Near East either. And recent arrivals should be encouraged to return home.
I’m not sure, really, what your view is. If you think that Israeli Jews are not going anywhere, what’s it to you whether they continue to encourage aliyah? I’m not talking, now, about the disputes about where Israel’s borders should be, i.e., should none, part, or all of the West Bank, or Gaza, or the Golan Heights, be part of Israel in a final settlement. But within “Israel proper”, however you define it, why shouldn’t aliyah be encouraged? Also, I think your analogies are muddled. Expelling Europeans or Mexicans from North America (in your hypothetical) is sending them back to their ancestral homelands. Israel is the Jews’ ancestral homeland–that’s why it’s called the Law of Return.
<
p>You’re right, though, that we should “deal with the situation as it is now and move forward.” A good place to start would be, say, for Hamas and Hezbollah to recognize the right of Israel to exist and to agree to a two-state solution, as the international community, the Palestinian Authority, and Israel have done.
<
p>TedF
dont-get-cutesays
Not even France. All there ever is, is a pragmatic acceptance of a state’s existence.
<
p>How do you square “we should deal with the situation as it now is and move forward”, with the concept of a right of return to ancestral homes?
<
p>The world is an epic history of people being persecuted and forced out of places, and persecuting and forcing people out of other places.
<
p>I understand people like to connect with ancestral homelands. I have at least four I am proud of, including, tenuously, the Holy Land on my dad’s mother’s side, via the Dutch Jews of New Amsterdam. My dad traced his mother’s family back to the brother of the last Burghermaster of New Amsterdam, and then back into Holland. He even found a map of his gigantic farm, what is now the whole Lower East Side of Manhattan, and records of his owning something like 30 slaves. (Here is a good history of that, though I was under the impression that the Spanish Jews we descended from had been in Holland for a lot longer and had essentially become Dutch before emigrating to the New World).
<
p>But I don’t have any right of return to England, Holland, Scotland, Wales, or Ireland, or back to Saxony or Germany wherever the English, Scottish, and Irish came from before they lived there. Nor do I feel I have a moral obligation to go “home” to any of those places, having been born ten miles away. I’m stuck here, as I should be, and we should move forward.
<
p>I am opposed to travel and moving in general, I don’t approve of vacations or business trips or professional sports teams flying around, or people moving to Florida, the Cape, San Francisco, Worcester (it happens!), or Israel. Especially places that can’t support the local population sustainably, like Israel, Dubai, and the Cape. But once people move, I believe they should stay there and make a home there, and people should make room for them. But if them moving there is causing major problems, then I advocate coming back home. If the situation were more stable in Israel, I would support recent arrivals staying, but I think it’d be be good if some would turn around and go back.
davessays
Then you should not travel. Don’t take vacations. Don’t go on business trips. Don’t move.
<
p>What your views on this subject have to do with anyone else in the world is quite beyond me.
is the practice of screwing up entire regions of the world for corporate resource control. In North America NAFTA created immigration. In Europe the mideast wars created the muslim influx of European countries.
Seriously, has his therapist contacted the Editors, asking them to allow his continued presence?
centralmassdadsays
Such as the creation of immigration by NAFTA. Which means that my grandparents, who emigrated from Ireland between 80 and 110 years ago, didn’t immigrate here after all, but merely came to be residents of New York.
dont-get-cutesays
we say that burning gas creates carbon dioxide, even though there has long been carbon dioxide.
for the Editors to label his posts explicitly racist and bar him. Almost as if he’s speaking in another language or something. Or a private language, like Jodie Foster in “Nell.”
You mean: Foreigners should get the Hell [out] of of Pal[e]stine.
<
p>I don’t understand what the point of this diary is beyond a celebration of Typo Day. Call me a doubting Thomas, but I think this is no way to raise Helen.
The point of this diary was to correct or clarify who exactly Helen Thomas was talking about. I don’t think she was talking about anyone who has lived in Isreal their whole lives, whatever their religion or ancestry is. I think she was talking about foreigners. (and hey, no credit for spelling that one right?)
though Isreal might be the homeland of the reality-based community.
When I was little, I had a t-shirt that said “Israel Is Real.”
<
p>TedF
“South Korea’s got Seoul.”
You gleaned from Thomas’s comments that she was really upset about recent German, Polish, and American immigrants to Israel? Really?
<
p>TedF
It’s other people who are wrongly gleaning “the Jews”, which she never said. By mentioning Poland and Germany, she is clearly talking about Polish and Germans.
Here’s what she said (emphasis mine):
<
p>
<
p>So it’s clear she was talking about the “Jews”, and not just the Jews from Poland and Germany, but the Jews from “America and everywhere else.”
<
p>In case you are interested, here are the actual aliyah statistics for 1919-2006.
<
p>TedF
Thanks for the transcript, and aliyah statistics. I think it’s obvious she’s talking about those aliyah arrivals, and possibly their children, she’s talking about aliyah itself, Zionism and the right of return, the settlements. Not all Jews in Israel emigrated there, right?
Yes, I think she is talking about aliyah, Zionism, and the law of return, which is exactly the problem. There were a small number of Jews living in the Land of Israel before Zionism. Their community was called the Old Yishuv. According to Wikipedia, there were about 25,000 of them. The vast majority of Israeli Jews are either olim (people who made aliyah) or descendants of olim. I doubt whether there is a single Israeli Jew today who is not the descendant of olim. So you and I agree that Thomas is saying that she wants all or very nearly all of the Jews to leave Israel.
<
p>From your comment, I think you have have been under the misimpression that even if the all the Jews who come within the scope of Thomas’s comment left Israel, there would still be a sizeable Jewish community. That’s not so. What she is proposing is the end of Israel as a Jewish state and the departure of all or almost all of its Jewish residents.
<
p>TedF
She wants the creation of Israel to be considered a failure and for the olim and descendants of Olim to return to their native lands. I think that is a little bit impossible, kind of like all Europeans going home and leaving North America. It is just too late for that, we have to deal with the situation as it is now and move forward. So, with that in mind, we shouldn’t continue to encourage further immigration from Europe to America, or Mexico to the United States, and we shouldn’t encourage further aliyah into the Near East either. And recent arrivals should be encouraged to return home.
I’m not sure, really, what your view is. If you think that Israeli Jews are not going anywhere, what’s it to you whether they continue to encourage aliyah? I’m not talking, now, about the disputes about where Israel’s borders should be, i.e., should none, part, or all of the West Bank, or Gaza, or the Golan Heights, be part of Israel in a final settlement. But within “Israel proper”, however you define it, why shouldn’t aliyah be encouraged? Also, I think your analogies are muddled. Expelling Europeans or Mexicans from North America (in your hypothetical) is sending them back to their ancestral homelands. Israel is the Jews’ ancestral homeland–that’s why it’s called the Law of Return.
<
p>You’re right, though, that we should “deal with the situation as it is now and move forward.” A good place to start would be, say, for Hamas and Hezbollah to recognize the right of Israel to exist and to agree to a two-state solution, as the international community, the Palestinian Authority, and Israel have done.
<
p>TedF
Not even France. All there ever is, is a pragmatic acceptance of a state’s existence.
<
p>How do you square “we should deal with the situation as it now is and move forward”, with the concept of a right of return to ancestral homes?
<
p>The world is an epic history of people being persecuted and forced out of places, and persecuting and forcing people out of other places.
<
p>I understand people like to connect with ancestral homelands. I have at least four I am proud of, including, tenuously, the Holy Land on my dad’s mother’s side, via the Dutch Jews of New Amsterdam. My dad traced his mother’s family back to the brother of the last Burghermaster of New Amsterdam, and then back into Holland. He even found a map of his gigantic farm, what is now the whole Lower East Side of Manhattan, and records of his owning something like 30 slaves. (Here is a good history of that, though I was under the impression that the Spanish Jews we descended from had been in Holland for a lot longer and had essentially become Dutch before emigrating to the New World).
<
p>But I don’t have any right of return to England, Holland, Scotland, Wales, or Ireland, or back to Saxony or Germany wherever the English, Scottish, and Irish came from before they lived there. Nor do I feel I have a moral obligation to go “home” to any of those places, having been born ten miles away. I’m stuck here, as I should be, and we should move forward.
<
p>I am opposed to travel and moving in general, I don’t approve of vacations or business trips or professional sports teams flying around, or people moving to Florida, the Cape, San Francisco, Worcester (it happens!), or Israel. Especially places that can’t support the local population sustainably, like Israel, Dubai, and the Cape. But once people move, I believe they should stay there and make a home there, and people should make room for them. But if them moving there is causing major problems, then I advocate coming back home. If the situation were more stable in Israel, I would support recent arrivals staying, but I think it’d be be good if some would turn around and go back.
Then you should not travel. Don’t take vacations. Don’t go on business trips. Don’t move.
<
p>What your views on this subject have to do with anyone else in the world is quite beyond me.
What does a little oil spill have to do with you?
is the practice of screwing up entire regions of the world for corporate resource control. In North America NAFTA created immigration. In Europe the mideast wars created the muslim influx of European countries.
Seriously, has his therapist contacted the Editors, asking them to allow his continued presence?
Such as the creation of immigration by NAFTA. Which means that my grandparents, who emigrated from Ireland between 80 and 110 years ago, didn’t immigrate here after all, but merely came to be residents of New York.
we say that burning gas creates carbon dioxide, even though there has long been carbon dioxide.
for the Editors to label his posts explicitly racist and bar him. Almost as if he’s speaking in another language or something. Or a private language, like Jodie Foster in “Nell.”